Christian Asceticism, Masochism and Power

koan · Post by **koan** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:06 am

Glaswegian;507068 wrote: I agree.

This is the 'Middle Way' advocated by the Buddha in a nutshell, isn't it? The Buddha argued that 'the extremes of devotion to mere sense-pleasures and devotion to ascetic self-torment' must be avoided. Having experienced both of these extremes for himself he regarded them as 'spiritual dead-ends'.

Dr. Padmasiri de Silva, one of the foremost commentators on Buddhist psychology, writes:

'During the time of the Buddha there were some religious teachers who upheld that the mortification of the body would result in the purification of the soul. The path of self-mortification was one of the methods tried by Gotama for eight long years and rejected, and his [Middle Way] offers a striking contrast to the methods of self-mortification practised by the Jains. The deliberate attempt to live through painful experiences...was condemned by the Buddha, who saw it as the expression of craving and deflected aggression. He also condemned forms of punitive asceticism which required self-inflicted punishments for guilt in the form of penances, considering all violent attempts to deal with the problem of human suffering as lacking in insight and being subject to the delusion of the ego in a subtle form.'

Yet Milarepa, the best known Buddhist Saint, is almost a mirror of St. Simeon Stylites. Labouring before his desired teacher, Marpa, until his back was covered in sores and his bones bruised to nearly broken and still the teacher turned him away. The method adopted that brought him to sainthood as follows:

His daily routine of meditation continued for four years until his supply of flour ran out. This caused him great concern because he had vowed to himself not to return to the world for any reason - but with no food, he was afraid he might die without having attained liberation. He decided to walk about outside the cave in search of some kind of food. Not far from the cave he found a sunny spot with springs of fresh water, an expansive view of the area, with a large quantity of nettles growing all about. He made a soup of nettle broth and found it to be somewhat palatable. This was now to become his sole source of food for some time to come. He continued his meditations on his new diet, but without any nurturing food, his body soon became emaciated and the hair on his body began to take on a greenish tinge from the nettles. He became very weak and often thought of opening the scroll that Marpa had given him for a time of dire need. But he continued to make progress in his meditations.

About this time some hunters chanced to be in the area after failing to find game. When they first laid eyes on Milarepa's pale green form, they fled in terror thinking he was not a man but some kind of evil spirit. But on assuring them he was indeed a human like themselves they lost their fear of him. They demanded that Milarepa share some of his provisions with them as they were out of food but Milarepa told them he had none to share. They did not believe him, so they searched the area and not finding any began to ill treat him. Three of them picked him up several times and dropped him causing him great pain but in his misery he only pitied them and shed tears thinking of the evil karma they were creating for themselves...The meditation continued and Milarepa grew even thinner. The hair on his body took on a more greenish color...

Several more years passed in this way and Milarepa's long lost sister Peta heard tales from hunters that had stumbled across his camp. They informed her that her brother was there and looked on the verge of death from starvation. She was amazed to hear even that he was alive and took the news to Zesay, who had been betrothed to Milarepa in childhood. Between the two they agreed that the sister should first go to see him and find out if the rumors were true.

Approaching the cave, Peta was horrified to see the emaciated green body of her brother, with protruding bones and eyes sunk in his skull. At first she took it to be some strange being or ghost but recognizing her brother's voice, she ran to him crying and bewailing their fate. She expressed to him that they two were the most luckless people in the whole world. At this Milarepa explained that rather he was the most fortunate person in the world because he had attained to transcendent knowledge and Bodhi mind (the internal vision of a Buddha). But his sister felt he was only deluding himself.

source

It is said that just uttering his name can free one from the cruel cycle of rebirth.

So I ask again, should we despise the Buddhist ascetics as well?

koan · Post by **koan** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:35 am

Diuretic;507178 wrote: There is no rebirth. There is birth, life death, oblivion.

Ascetism is a crock.

You may believe so. That's fine.

I'm just saying that the Christians aren't the only ones who believe enlightenment can be had through deprivation and physical punishment.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 3:07 pm

koan:-6

A very interesting story.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 4:01 pm

Glaswegian;505101 wrote: Christianity is born of, and sustained by, human fear and impotence in the face of the terror and uncertainty of life. It holds an almost irresistible appeal for those who lack the stomach or skill to deal with adversity - whether this takes the form of a struggle against the world, against others, or against oneself. In essence it has always been, and remains, a religion for slaves.

The slavishness of the Christian is clearly shown in his attitude towards suicide. The Christian is such a slave in his mind and in his heart that he regards his very life not as his own but as 'the gift of God'. For the Christian, because life itself is the gift of God 'to reject life is to reject God and to frustrate His will'. Furthermore, because the Christian deludes himself that he is created in God's image he believes that to kill God's image via the act of suicide is to kill Him - and this means incurring eternal damnation for his 'soul'. Accordingly, the Christian thinks that suicide is one of the gravest of 'sins' and this accounts for why he clings to life when it is no longer worth having - indeed, why he will even cling to it at the cost of appearing completely abject and contemptible in the eyes of those of a more noble disposition.

We can see just how craven the Christian's attitude towards suicide is by contrasting it with the one exemplified by the ancient Roman.

For the Roman, there were certain conditions under which life was not worth living and when they arose the proper course of action was to put an end to oneself, and to do this with as much bravery and dignity as possible. Instead of recoiling from suicide out of superstitious fear (as the Christian does), the Roman was taught to approach it with equanimity. Thus, for the Roman, death was to be treated almost as a duty - we die not because we are old or ill but because we are alive - and like any other duty it ought to be executed with poise and without complaint. The Roman Stoic philosopher, Seneca, gave the following advice to a younger acquaintance to quell any misgivings he had about suicide:

'There's nothing so very great about living - all your slaves and all the animals do it. What is, however, a great thing is to die in a manner which is honourable, enlightened and courageous.'

In Seneca's view, by choosing to die well and at the right moment an individual vindicated his or her life no matter how long or short its span had been. Death should not be viewed as an invincible foe but rather as our greatest ally for when existence becomes intolerable death is always ready at hand to deliver us from our wretchedness. As Seneca wrote:

'Wherever you look there is an end of evils. You see that yawning precipice? It leads to liberty. You see that flood, that river, that well? Liberty houses within them. You see that stunted, parched, and sorry tree? From every branch liberty hangs. Your neck, your throat, your heart are all so many ways of escape from slavery. Do you enquire the road to freedom? You shall find it in every vein of your body.'

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 8:41 pm

Diuretic;507564 wrote: The strictures against suicide were more likely the co-opting of the church as an ally for the feudal nobel who wanted to stop his vassals from topping themselves when things got a bit ho-hum, I mean who else would grow his cabbages for him?

No, Diuretic. Suicide was proscribed by the Christian Church for a very different reason.

The reason why the Christian Church condemns suicide as a 'mortal sin' has to do with a ghastly episode of human history produced by its own teachings: namely, the mania for self-destruction which these teachings provoked among the Christian rabble in the Roman Empire. (Remember, Diuretic, back then the followers of Christianity were illiterate and uneducated almost to a man and, therefore, highly gullible. Oh, I know. Nothing has changed about Christians ever since with regard to that last quality. It is the sine qua non of their faith.)....

....Anyway, back in the time of the Roman Empire, the Christian Church taught its followers that this world of ours was inherently evil - that it was a vale of tears, a place of sin and temptation, an abode of darkness which was overseen by an inconceivably wicked and cunning ruler - the 'Prince Of This World' - who, by the way, is also invisible....(I swear to God, Diuretic, I'm not pulling your leg! That is, indeed, what the Christian Church taught its followers back then - and still does to this day.) Now, the more powerfully the Christian Church instilled in its followers the idea that this world was evil and that their existence in it was something horrible which had to be endured until death finally released them into eternal glory, the more irresistible the temptation to commit suicide became for these poor, suffering creatures.

But that is not all, Diuretic. The powerful desire to escape from the evil of this world and find peace and refuge in the heavenly kingdom of the 'next world' was only one of the factors which drove the Christian to seek his own annihilation. There were two other important features of the early Christian Church's teachings which also conspired to inflame the Christian believer's death wish - viz. the concept of baptism and the concept of martyrdom.

Although the rite of baptism was immensely important to the Christian it was simply not enough by itself to put his troubled heart and mind at ease in this world. Why? Because baptism only served to wash away the Christian's 'original sin'. It did not protect him in any way from the consequences of the sins he might commit subsequent to being baptised. Therefore, as far as the Christian was concerned, baptism might be a wonderful thing but he was still exposed to the possibility of committing sin as long as he remained alive in the world. Yes, as long as he breathed Hell awaited this anguished wretch. One wrong step, one loose word, one lustful glance....Damn! he just had to get out of life, didn't he? And what better way to get out, Diuretic, than martyrdom....

By the fourth century AD the ideology of martyrdom promoted by the Christian Church had taken a firm hold of its followers in the Roman Empire. The prospect of martyrdom appealed tremendously to the Christian for a range of reasons. Some of these reasons are set out by one writer as follows:

'The Christian Church offered posthumous glory to martyrs: their names would be celebrated annually in the Church calendar, their passing officially recorded, their relics worshipped. Tertullian, the most bloodthirsty of the Church Fathers, who explicitly forbade his flock even to attempt to escape persecution, also proffered them the sweetest of recompenses - revenge - when he wrote: 'No city which shed Christian blood would escape punishment'. The martyrs would peer down from Paradise and see their enemies tortured eternally in Hell. But above all, martyrdom afforded certain redemption. Just as baptism purged away original sin, so martyrdom wiped out all subsequent transgressions. It was as much a guarantee of Paradise to the early Christians as violent death for the sake of their faith is to....'

....the Islamic terrorists of today.

(Post Continued Below)

911 · Post by **911** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:25 pm

Glaswegian;507540 wrote: The slavishness of the Christian is clearly shown in his attitude towards suicide. The Christian is such a slave in his mind and in his heart that he regards his very life not as his own but as 'the gift of God'. For the Christian, because life itself is the gift of God 'to reject life is to reject God and to frustrate His will'. Furthermore, because the Christian deludes himself that he is created in God's image he believes that to kill God's image via the act of suicide is to kill Him - and this means incurring eternal damnation for his 'soul'. Accordingly, the Christian thinks that suicide is one of the gravest of 'sins' and this accounts for why he clings to life when it is no longer worth having - indeed, why he will even cling to it at the cost of appearing completely abject and contemptible in the eyes of those of a more noble disposition.

Who decides who is more noble? Those that are rich and have no troubles? Name someone, anyone who has no troubles.

For the Roman, there were certain conditions under which life was not worth living

When is life not worth living?

and when they arose the proper course of action was to put an end to oneself, and to do this with as much bravery and dignity as possible. Instead of recoiling from suicide out of superstitious fear (as the Christian does), the Roman was taught to approach it with equanimity. Thus, for the Roman, death was to be treated almost as a duty - we die not because we are old or ill but because we are alive

So, we are alive at birth, should our mothers kill us or do we wait until we are ten? Twelve? Forty? -

and like any other duty it ought to be executed with poise and without complaint. The Roman Stoic philosopher, Seneca, gave the following advice to a younger acquaintance to quell any misgivings he had about suicide:

'There's nothing so very great about living - all your slaves and all the animals do it. What is, however, a great thing is to die in a manner which is honourable, enlightened and courageous.'

What is more courageous than living when times are hard? Is that not how we learn and grow? A teenaged boy breaks up with his girlfriend. . . . which one kills themselves, the boy or the girl? Or both?

In Seneca's view, by choosing to die well and at the right moment an individual vindicated his or her life no matter how long or short its span had been. Death should not be viewed as an invincible foe but rather as our greatest ally for when existence becomes intolerable death is always ready at hand to deliver us from our wretchedness. As Seneca wrote:

'Wherever you look there is an end of evils. You see that yawning precipice? It leads to liberty. "Give me liberty or give me death". . . oh sorry, give me death or give me death. Is that right?You see that flood, that river, that well? Liberty houses within them. You see that stunted, parched, and sorry tree? Yet, that tree lives on, does it not?

From every branch liberty hangs. Your neck, your throat, your heart are all so many ways of escape from slavery. Do you enquire the road to freedom? You shall find it in every vein of your body.' Not if you're dead you don't

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 2:26 am

Glaswegian wrote: For the Roman, there were certain conditions under which life was not worth living
911 wrote: When is life not worth living?
When? Well, 911, if you really must know - I become convinced that life is not worth living whenever I read the responses you make to my posts.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 8:47 am

(Post #58 Continued)

The teachings of the early Christian Church fuelled an orgy of self-destruction among its followers in the Roman Empire on a scale which is difficult for us moderns to comprehend, Diuretic. The Roman authorities were literally besieged by Christian mobs clamouring for martyrdom. Let me provide you with a few examples of the suicidal madness which gripped Christian believers back then:

One Roman proconsul who was sick of the sight of Christians daily gathered outside his residence baying for martyrdom yelled back at them in despair: 'Go hang and drown yourselves and give me ease!'

The English poet and preacher, John Donne, writes:

'Christians of those times [in ancient Rome] had grown so hungry and ravenous for martyrdom that they even taught their own children to vex and provoke executioners so that they might be thrown into the fire along with themselves.'

And here is an extract from Edward Gibbon's 'The History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire' which adds a little more detail to the picture:

'The rage of the Christians for martyrdom was enflamed by a frenzy of an extraordinary kind which cannot be paralleled in any country or in any age. [Gibbon, of course, was writing a couple of centuries before 9/11.] Many of these fanatics were so possessed with the horror of life and the desire for martyrdom that they deemed it of little moment by what means or by what hands they perished. Sometimes they rudely disturbed the festivals and profaned the temples of paganism with the aim of exciting the most zealous of the pagans to deadly revenge for having insulted the honour of their gods. They sometimes forced their way into the courts of justice and compelled the judge to give orders for their execution. They frequently stopped travellers on the public highways and induced them to inflict the stroke of martyrdom by promise of a reward. When they were disappointed of every other means they would cast themselves from some lofty rock; and many precipices were shown which had acquired fame by the number of these religious suicides.'

The lust for self-destruction had become so chronic among the Christian Church's followers, Diuretic, that even St. Augustine bemoaned: 'Martyrdom is now the daily sport of Christians'. St. Augustine recognised that the Christian craze for suicide had reached epidemic proportions within the Roman Empire and that a drastic remedy was required in order to put a halt to it. So what he did was assemble arguments which 'proved' that 'suicide was a detestable and damnable wickedness'. (Incidentally, these arguments were not his own but were only a re-working of Plato's and the Pythagoreans' argument that 'life is the gift of God'. I know, Diuretic: there is nothing original about the Christian creed whatsoever. It is just a mishmash of magical Mumbo-jumbo cannibalised from other religions, philosophies, mythologies and superstitions.)

Anyway, St. Augustine held great sway within the Christian Church and his condemnation of suicide was steadily transformed into canon law by a succession of Church Councils, culminating in the one convened in Toledo (693 AD) which decreed that if a Christian so much as attempted to commit suicide then he was to be excommunicated.

THE END

~o0o~

PS

Diuretic - your 'cabbage theory' of suicide is not without its merits. I mean, a plausible argument could be made in support of it. But that's another story....

911 · Post by **911** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:52 am

Glaswegian;508930 wrote: When? Well, 911, if you really must know - I become convinced that life is not worth living whenever I read the responses you make to my posts.

It's a shame that you can't answer one simple honest question.

I guess that if you can't jump into one of your diatribes, it's not worth answering. You want to give your views but you don't wish to discuss them without becoming crass. This is a discussion forum not a podium you stand behind and when finished, walk away without answering the audiences' questions.

We both know that you jump from forum to forum discussing the same tired old manuscripts. When no one answers and you can't belittle them, you move to another forum and try to elevate yourself to a nympho genius status and still you don't discuss.

Let's see if these ring a bell, shall we? Shadowsinthecave.com. . . christianforums.com, shall I go on? :-2

Or are you finally ready to become a member of this classy set of people and truely have a discussion without brow beating someone or slipping into the old "I know you want me, you just can't admit it" style you have going on.

Get off your soap box and mingle or let us know when you are going to jump into that pit of fire and end it all. we die not because we are old or ill but because we are alive. Are you alive?

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:21 am

911:-6

Well put. I refuse to discuss anything with this "gentleman" because he is not interested in serious discussion at all.

Shalom

Ted:-6

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 12:15 pm

A few pages back the mighty G lamented that no one wanted to join him in serious discussion. as of yet he has not posted anything worthy of serious discussion. His posts are virtual hornets nests of straw man arguments, inflammatory language, and a noted lack of logical arguing skills. These posts are not academic or thoughful, they are in fact hate speech, and propagandistic.

Nowhere is this more evident than in this post. Ascetic behavior har been noted in nearly every world religion, it has been evident secularly in atheists (the "starving artist" syndrome) and in militarists and athletes since the dawn of time. Ascetic behaviour is human behavior, not religious. But we are supposed to be moved only about Christian Ascetics, because of their supposed motivations for the same.

Ascetics do what they do for a very simple reason: they do not receive satisfaction from wallowing in their baser tendancies. Sex, gorging on food, being rich, having temporal power feels good... for about ten minutes, then you need to have more, because there is no intrinsic value to what you've just achieved, you've just satisfied your impulses. Being able to devoid yourself from all of this, enables true freedom, and a higher sense of well being, and thats even true if you don't believe in God. Moreover, being able to be a ascetic is really HARD, and not the purview of the weakling that grandmaster G alluded to in the OP.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 12:41 pm

ShawnG:-6

Thanks for the info and good post. I read only a few of this "gentleman's" earliest posts and decided they were not worth reading or responding to so I really couldn't make any further comment. However, I have found the responses of others to his posts humorous and enjoyable.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:11 pm

911;509204 wrote: Are you alive?

Am I alive?

Well, 911, what can I say except this? Would you ever dream of putting that question of yours to someone who was dead?

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:29 pm

Diuretic;509589 wrote: You could be a very sophisticated computer programme

Perhaps I am a sophisticated computer programme, Diuretic. And who knows? - perhaps you are too. Not only that. Perhaps this is true of everyone else. Perhaps they are just sophisticated computer programmes as well. In fact, perhaps the whole of what we call 'reality' is nothing more than a sophisticated computer programme put together by an advanced alien civilization. Perhaps this advanced alien civilization has achieved a level of technological development far superior to our own. This means that their expertise in computing would also be far superior to ours. Perhaps it is so superior that their capacity to construct simulated worlds (and worlds of simulated thought), simulated universes, simulated realities is beyond anything we can imagine in our wildest (simulated?) dreams. Perhaps this world of ours, or rather, this simulated reality which you, me and everyone else might actually 'be' in is just one of an infinitely large number of simulated realities put together by the advanced alien civilization.

Perhaps the particular simulated reality which we are in has been constructed by a youthful member of the advanced alien civilization - say, by one of that civilization's females who is only eighteen years old. Perhaps she has constructed our simulated reality and all that it contains (including ourselves) in order just to amuse herself or as part of an alien homework exercise. Then that eighteen year old alien female, Diuretic, could be thought of as being our 'Creator', couldn't she? She could be thought of as our God.

Now, perhaps the eighteen year old alien female uses herself as the template or 'Platonic ideal' on which she bases all the females that she inserts into our simulated reality (females who, of course, are not real but are only simulations just like all the men and dogs and cats and everything else in it are only simulations). In other words, perhaps she makes all of these simulated females after her own image. Thus, the eighteen year old alien female makes them do all of the things that she does, makes them want all of the things that she wants, makes them like all of the things that she likes, and so on. Perhaps, then, in the reality which the eighteen year old alien female inhabits - which is not simulated like ours but is absolute reality - she also likes to wear high heel shoes, fishnet stockings, a suspender belt and Chanel No.5 just as her simulated female creations do. Now, tell me Diuretic: Is that not a God, or rather, a Goddess worth worshipping! Surely she is more deserving of our adoration than that boring Old Fart in the sky idolised by the Christians....

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:37 am

Diuretic;509736 wrote: G - if that is the case - take me to my Programmer, I want a word or two with them

LMFAO..............I just can't reply with word yet........I'm still being deprogrammed.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:57 am

Diuretic;509736 wrote: G - if that is the case - take me to my Programmer, I want a word or two with them

I can understand why you might feel this way, Diuretic. For example, maybe it's because your Programmer has constructed you as a simulation with hundreds of boils on your back; or maybe it's because your Programmer made a simulated seagull sh*t on your head many years ago as you strolled with a beautiful simulated girl you went out with on a date. And not only that - your Programmer made the seagull drop its guts on you at the very moment the beautiful girl whispered into your ear that you were her hero; or maybe it's because your Programmer has given you simulated breath which smells worse than a Turkish wrestler's jockstrap...and so on. (The possibilities are endless, aren't they?)

Anyway, whatever reason you have for feeling angry with your Programmer you must realise that this anger is itself only part of the programme which your Programmer has written for you - which is to say, it is only part of the programme which is you, Diuretic. This means, of course, that any words you used to express your anger towards your Programmer would be part of the programme as well. Your words of anger would not really be your words, Diuretic, but your Programmer's words - words which your Programmer had programmed you to say. Oh, but why think of these things when it is so much better to get absolutely sh*t-faced drunk! Right, Diuretic? Yes, sometimes the programme which we possibly are can be really great fun....

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:17 am

I think I must be the Jester in my alien programmers prgram. I keep hearing DANCE MONKEY DANCE. Is that what you hear Glas?

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:12 am

YZGI;510044 wrote: I think I must be the Jester in my alien programmers prgram. I keep hearing DANCE MONKEY DANCE. Is that what you hear Glas?
No, YZGI. All that I have ever heard from our Programmer has been roars of laughter. And that was when I asked:

Are you Jesus?

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:15 am

Glaswegian;510121 wrote: No, YZGI. All that I have ever heard from our Programmer has been roars of laughter. And that was when I asked:

Are you Jesus?
Hey nice retort I like you better this way. Oh by the way. You must have asked the wrong one.

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:14 pm

Glaswegian;510121 wrote: No, YZGI. All that I have ever heard from our Programmer has been roars of laughter. And that was when I asked:

Are you Jesus?

Satan would have undoubtedly found that hilarious.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:54 pm

Glaswegian wrote: No, YZGI. All that I have ever heard from our Programmer has been roars of laughter. And that was when I asked:

Are you Jesus?

ShawnG;510319 wrote: Satan would have undoubtedly found that hilarious.
:yh_rotfl

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:40 pm

ShawnG;510319 wrote: Satan would have undoubtedly found that hilarious.
It's okay, ShawnG. I know that you're just being facetious when you say that. I know you don't really believe in Satan. I know that you cannot possibly be so infantile as to believe that he exists.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 4:30 pm

Diuretic;510448 wrote: But hasn't the Great Programmer given me free will?

You mean programmed you to have free will? Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron - 'programmed free will'?

Diuretic wrote: And I still want to see him about that bloody seagull, how'd you know about that anyway? Did he do it to you as well?

Yes, Diuretic. And not just once. But twice! And what's more - the Great Programmer made sure that both of those seagulls had eaten curry before they splattered me. My hair smelled of vindaloo and fish for weeks.

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:38 pm

Glaswegian;510480 wrote: It's okay, ShawnG. I know that you're just being facetious when you say that. I know you don't really believe in Satan. I know that you cannot possibly be so infantile as to believe that he exists.

I'm a Christian Gnostic, I have some pretty interesting views about Satan. I will leave it to the rest of the board as to whom between us is more infantile.

koan · Post by **koan** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:45 pm

ShawnG;510814 wrote: I'm a Christian Gnostic, I have some pretty interesting views about Satan. I will leave it to the rest of the board as to whom between us is more infantile.

:yh_rotfl :-6

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:54 pm

Diuretic;510449 wrote: Nah he works for Microsoft, mine's a Linux programmer....my Programmer's better than your Programmer...nyah, nyah :p

That's open source right? you should download the source code, modify, and redistriblute freely.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:55 pm

ShawnG;510814 wrote: I have some pretty interesting views about Satan.
Perhaps your views about Satan are pretty interesting. But I'll never know unless you share them. Would you like to do that, ShawnG?

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:03 pm

Glaswegian;510834 wrote: Perhaps your views about Satan are pretty interesting. But I'll never know unless you share them. Would you like to do that, ShawnG?

I see no reason to share them, I'm not interested in converting anybody, and I don't feel like having my views mocked by the likes of you. You seem like the studious type that would enjoy a good quest for knowledge, so feel free to explore gnosticism on your own. That is after all the essense of it.

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:15 pm

Diuretic;510843 wrote: Gnostic? As in the Albigensian Heretics type Gnostics? Serious question - not being facile.

Not quite. That was quite a while ago after all,

but fairly similar, it comes from the same roots.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:49 pm

ShawnG;510839 wrote: I see no reason to share them, I'm not interested in converting anybody, and I don't feel like having my views mocked by the likes of you.
It's quite alright, ShawnG. If you feel too embarrassed by your views about Satan to share them then I won't try to force you.

koan · Post by **koan** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:55 pm

Glaswegian;510885 wrote: It's quite alright, ShawnG. If you feel too embarrassed by your views about Satan to share them then I won't try to force you.

It's not about his embarrassment, it's about your predictability. :rolleyes:

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:07 pm

koan;510891 wrote: It's not about his embarrassment, it's about your predictability. :rolleyes:
What do you mean my 'predicktability', koan?

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:08 pm

Diuretic;510868 wrote: Thanks - I read about them quite some years ago and I remember being puzzled as to why the church - Rome - would want to go after them. Even the term "Heretic" is a pejorative, although not in my eyes. I'm now wondering if gnosticism is a threat to the central control exercised by Rome through its empire. I'm referring to the current empire, not the ancient one.

Yes... To both empires actually

It has to do with the creation of the Roman Catholic church and the compilation of the holy bible. The gnostic view is a threat to the foundation of the church's beliefs, and was not tolerated.

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:23 pm

Glaswegian;510885 wrote: It's quite alright, ShawnG. If you feel too embarrassed by your views about Satan to share them then I won't try to force you.

It is indeed good that you would not try to use shame to force me... wait you just did.

oddly, I feel no shame.

would an occultist discuss wicca with a witchhunter?

koan · Post by **koan** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:00 pm

good grief but this is tedious. at least I've given it a shot:

G wrote: Christian Asceticism, Masochism and Power

Throughout the centuries the Christian ascetic has inspired a feeling of fear and wonder in the human herd. The reason why the Christian ascetic is the source of so much awe is because his existence forces us to ask ourselves a question which is profound, if not alarming: viz. What if it were necessary to be like the Christian ascetic? What if we were required to deny ourselves in the way that he does? What if God wanted us to live like that too? Needless to say, this is a dreadful possibility for the sensuous or worldly man to have to confront - the possibility that, in the eyes of God, his whole way of life is morally wrong compared with the Christian ascetic's and therefore utterly damnable.
What is lacking here is a clear definition of what an ascetic is.

A lifestyle pursuing spiritual disciplines, including self-denial like fasting and celibacy, in order to strengthen the spiritual life. Purifying the body is seen as essential for drawing closer to God, especially in times of crisis (like the expected return of Christ). Ascetics tend to separate themselves from society, either as solitaries or in communities.

gbgm-umc.org/umw/corinthians/glossary.stm

deliberate self denial of bodily pleasures, usually food and sex.

faculty.juniata.edu/tuten/islamic/glossary.html

The belief that one can attain to a high intellectual or spiritual level through solitude, mortification of the flesh, and devotional contemplation

www.innvista.com/culture/religion/diction.htm

the doctrine that through renunciation of worldly pleasures it is possible to achieve a high spiritual or intellectual state

austerity: the trait of great self-denial (especially refraining from worldly pleasures)

rigorous self-denial and active self-restraint

wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Asceticism has appeared in both religious and secular settings. The ancient Hebrew sects fasted in order to experience the Holy. The early Greeks undertook a regimen of severe physical discipline to prepare for battle. Stoic philosophers disciplined their will against a life of sensual pleasure to attain spiritual goals. Christian monks eschewed the comforts of the world for the solitude of the desert. ...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism

using an extreme example of an ascetic is rather like using Bin Laden as an example of what Muslims are like. Prophets throughout time, back to Moses but including many others outside of Christianity, have told people to only take what they need and have advised against materialism right up to the present day. We live in a consumer society that needs people to indulge in hoarding and self gratification. The path back is so distant that it does inspire some awe towards those that are able to break the chains of our modern, capitalist training. As far as sexual denial goes, I think it is easily shown that by refraining from sexual activity gives a person greater stores of energy for other endeavours. How far a person takes their withdrawal from the world is dependent on how much they believe it will contribute to what they want to achieve. What you desire is entirely specific to your own idiosyncrasies. If you don't desire spiritual achievement then it may well seem like folly. Likewise, your desires seem like folly to the ascetic.

Now, you would be naive to think that the Christian ascetic turns against his self and forgoes the pleasures of this world purely for the sake of his spiritual development and welfare. As we shall see, Christian asceticism has little to do with spiritual 'purity' but a great deal to do with something altogether mundane. So let's take a peek at what lurks behind the mask of Christian asceticism and its cognates - e.g., Christian 'abstinence', Christian 'unworldliness', Christian 'sacrifice', Christian 'selflessness', Christian 'humility', etc....

What should be noted right away about the Christian ascetic is that it is not enough for him to witness his own turning from the world, his own denial of self, his own suffering. No. He needs others to witness these things as well. Why is this? Well, the reason for this is because the Christian ascetic seeks - either consciously or unconsciously - to induce via the spectacle of his suffering a certain affect in his audience: specifically, a depressive affect (e.g., pity, guilt, existential angst, gloom, self-doubt, self-condemnation, self-loathing, etc.) Thus, the Christian ascetic's suffering is driven by a malign purpose: namely, to undermine the mental and emotional well-being of whoever is unfortunate enough to cross his path and empathise with him. Nietzsche (1994, pp. 49-50) provides the following illustration of how this devious strategy works:

'Observe how children weep and cry, so that they will be pitied, how they wait for the moment when their condition will be noticed. Or live among the ill and depressed, and question whether their eloquent laments and whimpering, the spectacle of their misfortune, is not basically aimed at hurting those present. The pity that the spectators then express consoles the weak and suffering, inasmuch as they see that, despite all their weakness, they still have at least one power: the power to hurt.'
This simply isn't true. If people surround a pillar or cave where an ascetic has chosen to station themselves it is not of the ascetics devising. If they undermine feelings of well being then I don't think the well being existed in the first place. A person at peace with themselves can't be undermined by something so simple. Look around at modern culture. People walk about expressing themselves in every way imaginable. That is their civil right. What you choose to look at, think about or otherwise pay attention to is entirely at your own discrimination.

The Christian ascetic, then, seeks to hurt and incapacitate those individuals who, unlike himself, have no need of pity: viz. the powerful, the noble, the masterful, the vigorous, the stable, the resolute - in a word, the healthy type of individual. Because the Christian ascetic is a weak and decadent type every healthy human being serves as a constant reminder of his own sickly condition. The healthy individual's natural vitality and capacity to live confidently, fearlessly and without remorse are a source of pain to the Christian ascetic, and they inflame his secret spite. Therefore, his ultimate goal is to disable the healthy individual by inveigling the latter to turn against not just himself but life in toto (i.e., 'the earthly realm' - in religio-speak). The Christian ascetic accomplishes this through the spectacle of his own suffering and mortification for the mere sight of him is sufficient to subdue an onlooker's natural energy and lust for life. The Christian ascetic functions as the scarecrow of life for his entire existence is an argument against it: thus, he effectively undermines the healthy individual through sowing seeds of self-doubt in him and by casting a shadow over life in general. By sabotaging the healthy individual in this way, the Christian ascetic obtains 'a kind of pleasure from it for his self-image revives - he is still important enough to inflict harm on others' (Nietzsche, 1994 p. 50). Christian asceticism, then, is a covert means by which the sickly type of human being exerts power over stronger types.
So first the ascetic is receiving fear and wonder, now he is receiving pity. Would you make up your mind?

I watch athletes performing and do not feel poorly because I can't walk a tight rope or qualify for an Olympic team. Again, how one experiences witnessing an ascetic is entirely the subjective experience of the observer. It is a reflection of the observer's own comfort or lack of comfort with themselves.

The Christian ascetic is a weak and malignant type who constitutes a particular sub-species of the Christian genus - an extremely rare variety in whom the spirit of resentment has undergone the most elaborate sublimations. Nevertheless, he provides us with a general insight into the nature of the Christian creed and why it continues to flourish in the 21st century. Thus, the reason why Christianity is still embraced by many people in the contemporary world is because it is a religion for every kind of weakling. It appeals to all those who experience themselves as inadequate in various ways and who find life in this world frightening and overwhelmingly difficult. But there is more to its appeal than just this. For not only does Christianity promise weak types release from themselves, an abode of peace, a shoulder, a bosom...rest: it also promises them vengeance against healthy individuals who live in this world on the basis of their own inner resources and without the aid of that religion's Grand Illusion.
I agree that religion is sought to relieve pain of many types. It has provided many people with comfort that they have been unable to find elsewhere. I don't see what is wrong with that. I've read a lot of religious text and none of them have promised me vengeance. Perhaps one of the things you are noticing is what Chogyam Trungpa speaks of in a book called Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism wherein a spiritual seeker tries to be more spiritual than anyone else and thus gets caught in a trap of the ego. It's something that happens but it is a trap not a goal.

The next bit from the OP deals with the methods Christianity employs to gain power. You suggest catering to weakness. I think it was based on instilling fear. It's a big enough argument to warrant a separate post. You are not original in the concept that Christianity has been organised by power hungry maniacs. Including all those who find use for the words of the bible is like blaming all Americans for George Bush.

ShawnG · Post by **ShawnG** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:13 pm

well, now you did it koan, he'll be here for another week now!