| |
|
Mary_Magdalene
both in the canonical
New Testament and in the
New Testament apocrypha, as a devoted
disciple of
Jesus. She is considered by the
Roman Catholic,
Eastern Orthodox, and
Anglican churches to be a
saint, with a
feast day of
July 22. She is also commemorated by the
Lutheran Church with a festival on the same
day. The Orthodox Church also commemorates her
on the
Sunday of the Myrrhbearers, which is the
second Sunday after
Pascha (Easter).
Mary Magdalene's name
identifies her as being "of
Magdala" — the town she came from, on the
western shore of the
Sea of Galilee Mary Magdalene is often
referred to as a
prostitute, but she was never called one in
the New Testament. Mary Magdalene is honored as
one of the first witnesses of the
Resurrection of Jesus, and received a
special commission from him to tell the Apostles
of his resurrection (John
20:11–18 Because of this, and because of her
subsequent missionary activity in spreading the
Gospel, she is known by the title, "Equal of
the Apostles."
The French tradition of
Saint Lazare of Bethany is that Mary, her
brother Lazarus, and Maximinus, one of the
Seventy Disciples and some companions,
expelled by persecutions from the
Holy Land, traversed the
Mediterranean in a frail boat with neither
rudder nor mast and landed at the place called
Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer near
Arles. Mary Magdalene came to Marseille and
converted the whole of Provence. Magdalene is
said to have retired to a cave on a hill by
Marseille, La
Sainte-Baume ("holy cave", baumo in
Provencal), where she gave herself up to a life
of penance for thirty years. When the time of
her death arrived she was carried by angels to
Aix and into the oratory of
Saint Maximinus, where she received the
viaticum; her body was then laid in an
oratory constructed by St. Maximinus at Villa
Lata, afterwards called St. Maximin.
In 1279, when
Charles II, King of Naples, erected a
Dominican
convent at La Sainte-Baume, the shrine was
found intact, with an explanatory inscription
stating why the relics had been hidden.
In 1600, the relics were
placed in a sarcophagus commissioned by
Pope Clement VIII, the head being placed in
a separate
reliquary. The relics and free-standing
images were scattered and destroyed at the
Revolution. In 1814, the church of La
Sainte-Baume, also wrecked during the
Revolution, was restored, and, in 1822, the
grotto was consecrated afresh. The head of the
saint now lies there and has been the centre of
many pilgrimages.
Other religions, especially
Christian Mysticism and many New Age faiths,
venerate Mary Magdalene as the Bride of Christ,
an avatar of Sophia, and even the Co-Messiah
with Jesus Christ, or simply combine all three.
A group of scholars, he most familiar of whom is
Elaine Pagels, have suggested that for one
early group of Christians Mary Magdalene was a
leader of the early Church and maybe even the
unidentified
Beloved Disciple, to whom the Fourth Gospel
commonly called
Gospel of John is ascribed. Further
attestation of Mary of Magdala and her role
among some early Christians is provided by the
gnostic,
apocryphal
Gospel of Mary Magdalene which survives
in two
3rd century Greek fragments and a longer
5th century translation into
Coptic.
Karen King
of
Harvard Divinity School has observed, "The
confrontation of Mary with Peter, a scenario
also found in The
Gospel of Thomas,
Pistis Sophia, and The
Greek Gospel of the Egyptians, reflects
some of the tensions in second-century
Christianity. Peter and Andrew represent
orthodox positions that deny the validity of
esoteric revelation and reject the authority of
women to teach." (introduction,
The Nag Hammadi Library) Mary Magdalene
appears with more frequency than other women in
the canonical Gospels and is shown as being a
close follower of Jesus. Mary's presence at the
Crucifixion and Jesus' tomb, while hardly
conclusive, is at least consistent with the role
of grieving wife and widow. The idea that Mary
Magdalene was the wife of Jesus was popularized
by books like
The Jesus Scroll (1972),
Holy Blood, Holy Grail (1982),
The Gospel According to Jesus Christ
(1991),
The Woman with the Alabaster Jar (1993),
Bloodline of the Holy Grail: The Hidden Lineage
of Jesus Revealed (1996), and
The Da Vinci Code (2003) |
|
Jefferson_Bible
|
|
Fathers of NeoPlatonism |
|
Ammonius Saccas
(birth unknown death ca. 265 AD) is a founder of
Neoplatonism and the teacher of Plotinus. Little
is known of the teacher other than both
Christians (see
Eusebius,
Jerome,
and
Origen)
and pagans (see
Porphyry
and
Plotinus)
claim him a teacher and founder of the
Neoplatonic system. Porphyry stated in On the
One School of Plato and Aristotle, that Ammonius'
view was that the philosophies of Plato and
Aristotle were in harmony.
Eusebius
and
Jerome
claimed him as a Christian until his death,
whereas
Porphyry
claimed he had renounced Christianity and
embrace pagan philosophy. |
| Plotinus |
|
Plotinus
(Greek: Πλωτῖνος) (ca. 205–270) was a major
Egyptian[4]
philosopher of the ancient world who is widely
considered the father of Neoplatonism. Much of
our biographical information about him comes
from Porphyry's preface to his edition of
Plotinus' Enneads. While he was himself
influenced by the teachings of classical
Greek,
Persian
and
Indian philosophy
and
Egyptian theology,[5]
his metaphysical writings later inspired
numerous
Christian,
Jewish,
Islamic
and
Gnostic
metaphysicians and mystics over the centuries.
Plotinus taught that there is a supreme, totally
transcendent "One", containing no division,
multiplicity or distinction; likewise it is
beyond all categories of being and non-being.
The concept of "being" is derived by us from the
objects of human experience, and is an attribute
of such objects, but the infinite, transcendent
One is beyond all such objects, and therefore is
beyond the concepts that we derive from them.
The One "cannot be any existing thing", and
cannot be merely the sum of all such things
(compare the Stoic doctrine of disbelief in
non-material existence), but "is prior to all
existents". |
| Porphyry |
|
Porphyry
(Greek: Πορφύριος, c. A.D. 233– c. 309) was a
Syrian[4]
Neoplatonist philosopher. He wrote widely on
astrology, religion, philosophy, and musical
theory. He produced a biography of his teacher,
Plotinus. He is important in the history of
mathematics because of his Life of Pythagoras,
and his commentary on Euclid's Elements which
was used by Pappus when he wrote his own
commentary. [1] Porphyry is also known as an
opponent of Christianity and defender of
Paganism; of his Adversus Christianos (Against
the Christians) in 15 books, only fragments
remain. He famously said, "The Gods have
proclaimed Christ to have been most pious, but
the Christians are a confused and vicious sect." |
| Iamblichus |
|
Iamblichus,
also known as Iamblichus Chalcidensis, (ca. 245
- ca. 325, Greek: Ιάμβλιχος) was a
Syrian[4]
neoplatonist philosopher who determined the
direction taken by later Neoplatonic philosophy,
and perhaps western philosophical religions
themselves. He is perhaps best known for his
compendium on Pythagorean philosophy. In
Iamblichus' system the realm of divinities
stretched from the original One down to material
nature itself, where soul in fact descended into
matter and became "embodied" as human beings.
The world is thus peopled by a crowd of
superhuman beings influencing natural events and
possessing and communicating knowledge of the
future, and who are all accessible to prayers
and offerings. Iamblichus had salvation as his
final goal (see
henosis).
The embodied soul was to return to divinity by
performing certain rites, or
theurgy,
literally, 'divine-working'. Some translate this
as "magic", but the modern connotations of the
term do not exactly match what Iamblichus had in
mind, which is more along the lines of religious
ritual. |
| Proclus |
|
Proclus
Lycaeus (February 8, 412 – April 17, 485),
surnamed "The Successor" or "diadochos" (Greek
Πρόκλος ὁ Διάδοχος Próklos ho Diádokhos), was a
Greek Neoplatonist philosopher, one of the last
major Greek philosophers (see Damascius). His
set forth one of the most elaborate, complex,
and fully developed Neoplatonic systems. The
particular characteristic of Proclus' system is
his insertion of a level of individual ones,
called henads between the One itself and the
divine Intellect, which is the second principle.
The henads are beyond being, like the One
itself, but they stand at the head of chains of
causation (seirai or taxeis) and in some manner
give to these chains their particular character.
They are also identified with the traditional
Greek gods, so one henad might be Apollo and be
the cause of all things apollonian, while
another might be Helios and be the cause of all
sunny things. The henads serve both to protect
the One itself from any hint of multiplicity,
and to draw up the rest of the universe towards
the One, by being a connecting, intermediate
stage between absolute unity and determinate
multiplicity. |
|
| |
|
Neoplatonism, Gnosticism & Atheism
The idea that genuine knowledge requires us to
penetrate the veils of illusion goes back two and a half
millennium to Plato. How we can make any sense of the famous
Myth of the Cave, which seems to identify reality with the
unchanging and the eternal.
Gnosticism
is a term created by modern scholars to describe a collection of
religious groups, many of which thought of themselves as
Christians,
which were active in the first few centuries
AD.[1]
There has been considerable scholarly controversy about exactly
which groups to describe with this term. Sometimes it is used
narrowly to refer only to religious groups such as
Sethians and
Archontics
who may have used it as a self-designation. Sometimes it is used
a little more broadly to include groups similar to Sethians, or
influenced by them such as followers of
Basilides or
Valentinius
and later the
Paulicians.
Sometimes it is even used broadly enough to cover all groups
which heavily emphasized
gnosis, in
which case it would probably include
Hermetics
and
Neoplatonists
as well. One distinct, if questionable, attempt to define
Gnosticism since Nag Hammadi has been to limit it to groups that
used the term gnostikoi, even though early Platonists and
Ebionites
also used the term and are not considered to be Gnostics.
Contention
Scholarship on
Gnosticism has been greatly advanced by the discovery and
translation of the
Nag Hammadi
texts, which shed light on some of the more puzzling comments by
Plotinus and
Porphyry on
the Gnostics. More importantly, the texts help to distinguish
different kinds of early Gnostics. It now seems clear that "Sethian"
and "Valentinian"[2]
gnostics attempted "an effort towards conciliation, even
affiliation" with late antique philosophy
[3],
and were rebuffed by some Neoplatonists, including
Plotinus.
Plotinus considered his opponents "heretics"[4],"imbeciles"
and "blasphemers"
[5]
taking all their truths over from Plato[6].
Coupled with the idea expressed by Plotinus that the approach to
the infinite energy which is the One or
Monad
can not be though knowing or not knowing.
[7][8]
Although there has been dispute as to which gnostics Plotinus
was referring to it appears they were indeed Sethian.
|
Neoplatonists |
|
Plotinus (Greek: Πλωτῖνος) (ca. AD 205–270) was a major
philosopher of the ancient world who is widely
considered the father of Neoplatonism. Much of our
biographical information about him comes from Porphyry's
preface to his edition of Plotinus' Enneads. His
metaphysical writings have inspired centuries of Pagan,
Christian, Jewish, Islamic and Gnostic metaphysicians
and mystics. |
|
Christopher Hitchens |
|
Contributing
Editor at Vanity Fair and author of the book, "god is
not Great: How Religion Poisons Everythin |
The
sharp-tongued British-born critic and provocateur called
Mother Theresa "the Ghoul of Calcutta." He was early and
loud in denouncing "Islamic fascism."
He documents the ways in which religion is a man-made
wish, a cause of dangerous sexual repression, and a
distortion of our origins in the cosmos. With eloquent
clarity, Hitchens frames the argument for a more secular
life based on science and reason, in which hell is
replaced by the Hubble Telescope’s awesome view of the
universe, and Moses and the burning bush give way to the
beauty and symmetry of the double helix. He was named
one of the world’s “Top 100 Public Intellectuals” by
Foreign Policy and Britain’s Prospect. Christopher
Hitchens lives in Washington, D.C.
and became an American
citizen.
in 2007 |
"That's part of what I'm criticizing
in this book -- the presumption that faith is a virtue."
Christopher Hitchens
"It's only in the United States that there's a
constitution that separates the church from the state."
Christopher Hitchens
"It's part of a change in the zeitgeist. I think
there're a lot of people, very great number of people
... who are fed up with religious bullying and coercion
and clerical lecturing and with the damage being done to
civilization by faith. They want to find a way of
pushing back at it." Christopher Hitchens
"Religion comes from the terrified infancy of our
species. ... [It] is innately coercive as well as
innately incoherent. Because it's man-made, there's an
infinite variety of it for them all, and these sects
proceed to quarrel among themselves, religious warfare
having being one of the great retardances of
civilization of the time we've been alive and very much
to this day." Christopher Hitchens
"You can believe in God, be a deist, as Thomas Jefferson
was for example, ... but not believe in religion. ...
Religion means that you claim that you know God's mind."
Christopher Hitchens"I'm not
even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist; I not
only maintain that all religions are versions of the
same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches,
and the effect of religious belief, is positively
harmful."
I leave it to the faithful to
burn each other’s churches and mosques and synagogues,
which they can always be relied upon to do. When I go to
the mosque, I take off my shoes. When I go to the
synagogue, I cover my head.
|
Faith is the surrender of the
mind; it's the surrender of reason, it's the
surrender of the only thing that makes us
different from other mammals. It's our need to
believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our
reason, our yearning to discard that and put all
our trust or faith in someone or something, that
is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed
virtues, faith must be the most overrated. |
|
Penn & Teller:
Bullshit!, Season 3, Episode 5: "Holier Than
Thou" {2005-05-23} |
|
I have
been called arrogant myself in my time, and hope
to earn the title again, but to claim that I am
privy to the secrets of the universe and its
creator — that's beyond my conceit. I therefore
have no choice but to find something suspect
even in the humblest believer. Even the most
humane and compassionate of the monotheisms and
polytheisms are complicit in this quiet and
irrational authoritarianism: they proclaim us,
in Fulke Greville's unforgettable line, "Created
sick — Commanded to be well." And there are
totalitarian insinuations to back this up if its
appeal should fail. Christians, for example,
declare me redeemed by a human sacrifice that
occurred thousands of years before I was born. I
didn't ask for it, and would willingly have
foregone it, but there it is: I'm claimed and
saved whether I wish it or not. And if I refuse
the unsolicited gift? Well, there are still some
vague mutterings about an eternity of torment
for my ingratitude. That is somewhat worse than
a Big Brother state, because there could be no
hope of its eventually passing away.
In any case, I find something repulsive about
the idea of vicarious redemption. I would not
throw my numberless sins onto a scapegoat and
expect them to pass from me; we rightly sneer at
the barbaric societies that practice this
unpleasantness in its literal form. There's no
moral value in the vicarious gesture anyway. As
Thomas Paine pointed out, you may if you wish
take on a another man's debt, or even to take
his place in prison. That would be
self-sacrificing. But you may not assume his
actual crimes as if they were your own; for one
thing you did not commit them and might have
died rather than do so; for another this
impossible action would rob him of individual
responsibility. So the whole apparatus of
absolution and forgiveness strikes me as
positively immoral, while the concept of
revealed truth degrades the concept of free
intelligence by purportedly relieving us of the
hard task of working out the ethical principles
for ourselves.
You can see the same immorality or amorality in
the Christian view of guilt and punishment.
There are only two texts, both of them extreme
and mutually contradictory. The Old Testament
injunction is the one to exact an eye for an eye
and a tooth for a tooth (it occurs in a passage
of perfectly demented detail about the exact
rules governing mutual ox-goring; you should
look it up in its context [Exodus 21]).
The second is from the Gospels and says that
only those without sin should cast the first
stone. The first is a moral basis for capital
punishment and other barbarities; the second is
so relativistic and "nonjudgmental" that it
would not allow the prosecution of Charles
Manson. Our few notions of justice have had to
evolve despite these absurd codes of ultra
vindictiveness and ultracompassion.
Judaism has some advantages over Christianity in
that, for example, it does not proselytise —
except among Jews — and it does not make the
cretinous mistake of saying that the Messiah has
already made his appearance. However, along with
Islam and Christianity, it does insist that some
turgid and contradictory and sometimes evil and
mad texts, obviously written by fairly
unexceptional humans, are in fact the word of
god. I think that the indispensible condition of
any intellectual liberty is the realisation that
there is no such thing.
"Homer, Ovid,
Horace, and Virgil treat complex ethical
conflicts better than the Old and New
Testament." |
| "Hitchens talks about all the
evil 'religion' does but has no arguments
against my god" |
|
Reverend Al
Sharpton |
| I liked and enjoyed this
book, and recommend it to anybody who is
interested in the subject. Like everything
Christopher writes, it is often elegant,
frequently witty and never stupid or boring.
I also think it is wrong,
mostly in the way that it blames faith for so
many bad things and gives it no credit for any
of the good it may have done. I think it
misunderstands religious people and their aims
and desires...
It is astonishing, in one so
set against the idea of design or authority in
the universe, how often he appeals to mysterious
intuitions and "innate" knowledge of this kind,
and uses religious language such as "awesome" –
in awe of whom or what?
Or "mysterious". What is the
mystery, if all is explained by science, the
telescope and the microscope? He even refers to
"conscience" and makes frequent thunderous
denunciations of various evil actions. .........
He even suggests that the
atheist Soviet tyranny was itself a form of
religion. You can’t win against this sort of
circular absolutism. Yet he has this absurdly
backwards. Religious and unbelieving people have
both done dreadful things, and the worst of them
have committed their murders and their tortures
in the belief that they were doing good.
Nothing is proved by either
side in this argument, by pointing to the
mountains of skulls piled up by evil atheists,
and evil theists. What they have in common is
that they are human, and capable of the sin of
pride.....
We are in the process –
encouraged by Christopher – of abolishing
religion, and so of abolishing conscience, too.
It is one of his favourite
jibes that a world ruled by faith is like North
Korea, a place where all is known and all is
ordered.
On the contrary, North Korea
is the precise opposite of a land governed by
conscience.
It is a country governed by
men who do not believe in God or conscience,
where nobody can be trusted to make his own
choices, and where the State decides for the
people what is right and what is wrong.
And it is the ultimate
destination of atheist thought. |
|
PETER HITCHENS [brother of
Christopher] |
| He is also occasionally
guilty of crassness. For example: “In the very
recent past we have seen the Church of Rome
befouled by its complicity in the unpardonable
sin of child rape, or as it might be phrased in
Latin form, no child's behind left.” Hitchens
squanders a lot of trust with that vulgar lapse:
readers suddenly catch sight of him chortling at
his desk and it’s not pretty, or funny, and it
impugns his seriousness elsewhere. |
|
Matt Buchanan,
in the course of an otherwise rave review in the
Sydney Morning Herald |
|
"Do yourself a favor and skip the Dawkins and
Harris; they're smug, turgid, and boring, with
all the human feeling of a tax return. Read
Hitchens instead. Test your faith severely or
find a champion for your feelings, but read
Hitchens. It's a tendentious delight, a caustic
and even brilliant book. And with the title
alone, he takes his life in his hands, which
right there has got to be some proof of his
thesis. And so, thank God for Christopher
Hitchens." |
|
—Esquire |
Richard Dawkins review of the Chris
Hitchens book tour on timesonline.co.uk
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens
|
At the same time, there is probably no atheist
(be it a Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, or Hindu atheist) who has
never wondered about whether there is more beyond us. Or even
just a question mark. Philosophical discussions between
believers and unbelievers have never been more necessary than
now when religion is being used so terribly as a pretext (or
cause?) for violence. Hitchens's book reminds us that for such
discussions to take place, there has to be some disarmament on
both sides. The members of the religious camp have to cease
treating secularists as less moral than themselves—the atheists
have to stop thinking that believers are less intelligent. |
"Religion ends and philosophy begins, just as alchemy
ends and chemistry begins and astrology ends and
astronomy begins."
--- Christopher Hutchins |
 |
|
richarddawkins.net
|
| A Web site of "atheist celebrities"
lists, among others, Woody Allen, Richard Avedon, Marlon
Brando, Jodie Foster, Jack Germond, Christopher Hitchens,
Jack Nicholson, Penn and Teller, and Gore Vidal. |
|
Agnostic |
| An atheist, like a
Christian, holds that we can know whether or
not there is a God. … The agnostic suspends judgment,
saying that there are not sufficient grounds either for
affirmation or denial. |
| |
|
What would Jesus Do? |
 |
Jesus Without The Miracles
Thomas Jefferson's Bible and the Gospel
of Thomas
ERIK REECE / Harper's Magazine v.311,
n.1867 1dec2005
The of Gospel of Thomas presents a
portrait of Jesus so at odds with the canonical Gospels,
if one wants to argue, as I do, for the primacy of this
version of Christianity, then one must date Thomas
closer to its source—the talking Jesus—than any of the
other four Gospels.
it is time we inverted Pascal's famous
wager to say not that we should believe in heaven
because we have nothing to lose but rather that we
should believe first in this world, because in losing it
we may lose everything. And if we can somehow live
justly, modestly, with generosity and compassion, we
have everything to gain. Perhaps we do not have to wait
for the kingdom of God.
source |
 |
| Perhaps no figure in biblical
scholarship has been the subject of more controversy and
debate than Mary Magdalene. Also known as Miriam of
Magdala Mary Magdalene was considered by the apostle
John to be the founder of Christianity because she was
the first witness to the Resurrection. In most
theological studies she has been depicted as a reformed
prostitute the redeemed sinner who exemplifies Christ's
mercy. |
During a recent ecumenical gathering, a secretary rushed
in shouting, "The building is on fire!"
The METHODISTS gathered in the corner and prayed.
The BAPTISTS cried, "Where is the water?"
The QUAKERS quietly praised God for the blessings that
fire brings.
The LUTHERANS posted a notice on the door declaring the
fire was evil.
The ROMAN CATHOLICS passed the plate to cover the
damage.
The JEWS posted symbols on the doors hoping the fire
would pass.
The FUNDAMENTALISTS proclaimed, "It's the vengeance of
God!"
The EPISCOPALIANS formed a procession and marched out.
The CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS concluded there was no fire.
The PRESBYTERIANS appointed a chairperson who was to
appoint a committee to look into the matter and submit a
report.
AND the UNITARIANS shouted "everyman for himself" |
|