Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 08-02-2010, 01:04 PM

But Origen was a heretic, not the main defender of the faith.

Chili · 08-02-2010, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

someone has speculated that Origen did not castrate himself

There is of course no end to the writing of books and theses BUT Origen's self-castration is always left untouched by his apologists even though it must have been used as heavy ammunition by the opponents of Origenism - i.e. that he was some kind of freak.

. . . show us yours and I'll show you mine = evidence of heaven on earth, and don't ever think the Church does not know what this is all about if they maintain celibacy in the priesthood.

This same is true with the flat earth argument, which to them is still as flat as it ever was in being a one generation tabula rasa thing while the heavens above are up to one thousand year old, created in the plural therefore and that should tell us enough (Gen.1:1).

Quote:

You'd think thing someone would stand up and contradict the acknowledged truth.

Even if this IMPOSSIBLE CLAIM was somehow contradicted by Origen resurrecting from the grave and becoming a spokesperson for Extenz the list I produce stands on its own. There were a disproportionate number of Christian eunuchs.

This is the ULTIMATE argument against the "Church Fathers invented in a factory" argument. THEY WERE ALL FREAKS. No one would invent a chorus of hermaphrodites to be used as the basis for the defense of the Catholic faith UNLESS IT WERE TRUE.

. . . except that androgynes have 'been around' and hermaphrodites are still trying to get around but will never make it.

My favorite argument here is that on the post resurrection fishing trip when Peter was defrocked because Thomas became a believer (inferred from "a pair of opposites cannot be conceived to exist without the other" as in "no doubt = no faith"), and thus could not catch nothing all night because of 'no faith' left, Jesus told them to cast their nets on the 'other side' of the boat. This then is when Peter put on a new cloak and dove headfirst into the celestial sea to built the Church that Jesus had promised to built and after that Peter 'moved' to Rome where he is and remains untouchable by the so called self proclaimed 'fishers of men.' In short, they haven't got a clue and never will.

Chili · 08-02-2010, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

.... No one would invent a chorus of hermaphrodites to be used as the basis for the defense of the Catholic faith UNLESS IT WERE TRUE.

Your claim is just unadulterated self-serving rhetoric.

Church writers had a chorus that Jesus was resurrected. The resurrection of Jesus MUST be TRUE?

Resurrection is easy if only the ego was crucified after the man was set free. Please note that Pilate looked at 'the man' (repeated 3 times so we would not miss it in Jn.18:21, 38 and 19:5 "Look at the man!" while the Jews kept looking at the Jew (19:7)).

Clearly FRDB, how can you not be raised if they only caused the ego to rapture into oblivion (as in 'go poof' and be gone), and please do not forget that it was a pleasure to the Jesus of John that is made known with "it is finished."

stephan huller · 08-02-2010, 01:26 PM

Toto wrote

Quote:

But Origen was a heretic, not the main defender of the faith

Origen was in some sort of power struggle with Demetrius. Demetrius is portrayed as a married outsider and a complete ignoramus in Coptic historical sources EVEN THOUGH THOSE SAME SOURCES are sympathetic to Demetrius and overtly hostile to Origen. Here is the passage in Severus of Al'Ashmunein:

Quote:

When the patriarch Julian (c. last generation of the second century) was dying, an angel of the Lord came to him in a dream, on the night before his death, and said to him : «The man who shall visit thee to-morrow with a bunch of grapes shall be patriarch after thee.» Accordingly, when it was morning, a peasant came to him, who was married, and could neither read nor write; and his name was Demetrius. This man had gone out to prune his vineyard, and found there a bunch of grapes, although it was not the season of grapes; so he brought it to the patriarch. And the patriarch Julian said to the bystanders : « This man shall be your patriarch: for so the angel of the Lord last night declared to me.» So they took him by force, and bound him with iron fetters. And Julian died on that very day; and Demetrius was consecrated patriarch.

And the grace of God descended upon this man, and he was like Joseph, the son of Jacob; yea, and more excellent than Joseph, for though Demetrius was married, he knew not his wife. And if any should say : «How is it lawful that a patriarch should be married?» we reply that the apostles declare, in their canons, that if a bishop be wedded to one wife, that shall not be forbidden him; for the believing wife is pure, and her bed undefiled, and no sin can be laid to his charge on that account. And the patriarch is but bishop of Alexandria, with a right of primacy over the bishops of the different provinces subject to that city; for he is the successor of Saint Mark, the apostle and evangelist, who had jurisdiction over all Egypt and Pentapolis and Ethiopia and Nubia, through his preaching the gospel in those parts; and therefore the bishop of Alexandria also of necessity has jurisdiction over those countries. But the people were unjust towards this patriarch, Demetrius, saying that he was the twelfth of the patriarchs, counting from Mark, the evangelist, and that all of them were unmarried except Demetrius; and they bewailed his fall. He had a gift from God, which was that when he had finished the liturgy, before he communicated any one of the people, he beheld the Lord Christ, giving the Eucharist by his hand; and when a person came up who was unworthy to receive the Mysteries, the Lord Christ revealed to him that man's sin, so that he would not communicate him. Then he told that man the reason, so that he confessed his offence. And Demetrius reproved him, and said : «Turn away from thy sin which thou dost commit, and then come again to receive the Holy Mysteries.» When this practice had continued a long time, the faithful of Alexandria left off sinning for fear of the patriarch, lest he should put them to open shame; and each one said to his friend or his kinsman : «Beware lest thou sin, lest the patriarch denounce thee in the presence of the congregation.» But some of the people said : «This is a married man. How then can he reprove us, seeing that he has dishonoured this see? For none has sat therein to this day who was not unwedded.» Again others said : «His marriage does not lessen his merits, for marriage is pure and undefiled before God.» But it was God's will to make his virtues manifest, that he might be glorified, and might not leave this great secret unknown. As he said in his holy gospel, by his pure mouth : «A city when it is set on a hill cannot be hidden,» so God made the merits of this patriarch manifest, that his people might increase in virtue thereby. Accordingly, on a certain night, an angel of the Lord came to Demetrius, and said to him : «Demetrius, seek not thine own salvation by neglecting thy neighbour; but remember what the gospel says, that the good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep». Then Demetrius said to the angel : «O my Lord, teach me what thou commandest me to do. If thou wilt send me to martyrdom, I am ready to let my blood be shed for the name of Christ.» Then the angel said to him : «Listen to me, Demetrius, and I will tell thee. The Lord Christ was incarnate only to save his people; and it is not right that thou shouldst now save thine own soul, and allow this people to be filled with scruples on account of thee.» So Demetrius answered : «What is my sin against the people? Teach me, my Lord, that I may repent of it.» Then the angel said : «This secret which is between thee and thy wife; namely, that thou hast never approached her. Now therefore make this known to the people.» But Demetrius said : «I pray thee that I may die before thee rather than that thou shouldst reveal this secret to any man!» Then the angel answered : «Know that the scripture says : He that is disobedient shall perish. Tomorrow, therefore, after the end. of the liturgy, assemble the priests and the people, and make known to them this secret which is between thee and thy wife.» When the patriarch heard this, he marvelled, and said : «Blessed is the Lord, who does not abandon those that trust in him.» Then the angel departed from him.

So on the morrow, which was the feast of Pentecost, the patriarch celebrated the liturgy, and bade the archdeacon give directions to the clergy and the people that not one of them should leave the church, but that they should gather together round the patriarchal throne. The archdeacon, therefore, proclaimed to the congregation : «The patriarch's wish is to speak to you all. Let none of you, therefore, depart without hearing what he shall say.» When they had sat down, the patriarch bid the brethren collect much fuel; and they did so, marvelling thereat and saying : «What is this that the patriarch will do ?» Then he said to them : «Rise and let us pray!» So they prayed, and afterwards sat down. And he said to them : «I beg you out of your love for me, to allow my wife to be present before you, that she may receive of your blessing.» Then they marvelled, and thought in their hearts : «What is this that he does?» And they all said : «Whatever thou biddest us do shall be done.» Then the patriarch commanded one of his servants, saying : «Call my wife, the handmaid of the saints, that she may receive their blessing.» So the holy woman entered, and stood in the midst of the congregation. And her husband, the patriarch, arose, where they could all behold him, and stood by the blazing logs, which had already been lighted, and spread out his cloak, and took burning embers from the fire with his hand and put them in his cloak; and all the spectators were astonished at the quantity of burning fuel in his garment, and yet it was not burned. Then he said to his wife : «Spread out thy woollen pallium which thou hast upon thee.» So she spread it out; and the patriarch transferred the embers to it while she stood there; and he put incense on the fire, and commanded her to incense all the congregation; and she did so, and yet her pallium was not burned. Then the patriarch said again : «Let us pray»; while the embers were blazing in his wife's pallium, which yet was not burned.

You have now heard, my friends, this great wonder. This man had made himself an eunuch of his own free will, so that he was more glorious than those that are born eunuchs; and therefore the fire had no effect upon this saint, nor upon his garments, nor upon those of his wife, because he had extinguished the flames of lust. But now let us abridge our discourse upon this subject, and return to the history, glorifying God for ever and ever. So when the clergy had prayed, they said to the patriarch : «We beg of thy Holiness to explain to us this wonderful mystery.» And he replied : «Attend, all of you, to what I say. Know that I have not done this seeking glory from men. My age is now sixty-three years. My wife who stands before you is my cousin. Her parents died and left her when she was a child. My father brought her to me, for he had no other child than me, and she was the only child of my uncle. So I grew up with her in my father's house, and we dwelt together. When she was fifteen, my parents resolved to many me to her, in order that their possessions might not pass to a stranger, but that we might inherit them. So the wedding was performed, as men do such things for their children; and I went in to her. And when they had left us alone, she said to me : «How could they give me to thee, seeing that I am thy sister?» So I said to her : «Listen to what I say. We must of necessity remain together in this chamber without being separated all our lives, but there must be no further connexion between us, until death shall part us; and, if we remain thus in purity, we shall meet in the heavenly Jerusalem, and enjoy one another's company in eternal bliss.» And when she heard this, she accepted my proposal; and her body remained inviolate. But my parents knew nothing of our compact. Then the wedding-guests demanded the customary proof of the consummation of the marriage, as you know is done by foolish men; but my mother said to them : «These two are young, and the days before them are many.» Thus we kept our purity; and when my parents as well as her parents were dead, we remained orphans together. It is now forty-eight years since I married my wife, and we sleep on one bed and one mattress and beneath one coverlet; and the Lord, who knows and judges the living and the dead, and understands the secrets of all hearts, knows that I have never learnt that she is a woman, nor has she learnt that I am a man; but we see one another's face and no more. We sleep together, but the embraces of this world are unknown to us. And when we fall asleep, we see a form with eagle's wings, which comes flying and alights upon our bed between her and me, and stretches its right wing over me, and its left wing over her, until the morning, when it departs; and we behold it until it goes. Do not think, my brethren and ye people who love God, that I have disclosed this secret to you to gain the glory of this world which passes away, nor that I have told you this of my own will; but it is the command of the Lord, who bade me do it, for he desires the good of all men, and he is Christ our Saviour.»

When Demetrius had finished this discourse, the people all fell upon their faces on the earth, saying : «Verily, our father, thou art more excellent than many of the saints; and God has shewn his mercy towards us in making thee head over us.» And they gave thanks to him, and besought him to forgive their evil thoughts of him. Then he gave them his blessing, and prayed for them; and they dispersed to their own homes, praising God. And after this, Demetrius bade his wife depart to her house.

Have you ever heard, you that listen to me, of such wonders? This holy, father dwelt so long with his lovely and virtuous wife, and yet endured the trial. Where now are the men who are married, and yet commit adultery also, while professing to be Christians? Let them come and listen to the Father Demetrius, the patriarch, saying : «I have known the face of my wife and no more», that they may be ashamed and confounded! O that valiant saint, fighting against his bodily desires! O that miracle! How could his heart remain unmoved when he beheld his wife's beauty, and how could his senses remain unexcited before her loveliness! How wonderful was thy discourse, O thou saint, in thy bridal chamber! The archer whose arrows strike all men, namely Satan, was unable to strike thee. Demetrius said : «I am a man and have a body like all other men, but I will teach you how to answer the suggestions of the Devil. When my heart was troubled by evil thoughts, I remembered the compact I had made with Christ; and if I broke it, I feared that he would reject me in the kingdom of Heaven, before the Father and his holy angels. Moreover, when I saw the beauty and grace of her form, I thought of the corpses lying in their tombs and the foulness of their odour, so to keep myself from strange words, through fear of the fire that is not quenched, and the worm that sleepeth not, in the other world, where none can open his mouth». O my friends, this Father was chosen by God, and in his courage and valour was braver than those that slay lions; as one of the doctors says : «The brave man is not he that kills wild beasts, but he that dies pure from the embraces and snares of women». Blessed is this saint, for his degree is exalted! Like Joseph in the house of the Egyptian woman, when she solicited him on every occasion that she could, so Demetrius fought against his desires every day and night until his battle was finished [i.e. castration], and preserved his chastity and his right faith throughout his life.." [History of the Coptic Patriarchs Book 1.4]

The point here (aside from the similarity of Demetrius's marriage to most people's I know lol) is that Origen wasn't a heretic because he was a eunuch. The castration ritual was orthodox in Alexandria. The story may well be fiction but the attitudes toward self-mutilation are certainly indicative of near contemporary Alexandria views.

Clivedurdle · 08-02-2010, 01:29 PM

Don't forget Augustine!

http://www.transchristians.org/archi...y-christianity

Quote:

Kuelfer: The Practice of Self-Castration in Early Christianity
[Dr. Matt Kuelfer. This is posted without permission because it is no longer online. If Dr. Kuelfer objects, I'll gladly remove it. See Information on Re-publishing. See also our section on Eunuchs.]
Note: the information for this paper was taken from my book, The Manly Eunuch: Masculinity, Gender Ambiguity, and Christian Ideology in Late Antiquity (Chicago, 2001). For notes on sources and further detailed discussions, please refer to the book, especially chapter 8.

Let me begin with an exegetical problem: what did Jesus mean when he recommended to his followers that they "make themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven"? For most, the solution seems simple enough: self-castration here means avoidance of marriage, particularly, the sexual aspects of marriage. This is entirely possible, since the recommendation comes at the end of a lengthy set of problems related to marriage, problems troubling enough that one of the disciples pronounces in desperation: "Then surely it is better to avoid marriage altogether," which prompts Jesus' reply that:

There are eunuchs born that way from their mother's womb, there are eunuchs made so by men and there are eunuchs who have made themselves that way for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.
Now I'm not going to attempt to argue biblical interpretation with a group of scholars and students far more skilled in it than I am. Let me simply say — as I say to those of my students who tell me that they believe only in a literal interpretation of the Bible — that Christians have for so long favored a metaphorical interpretation of the passage that its literal meaning seems absurd, far-fetched, improbable. What I am going to argue today, using my skills as a historian, is that early Christians — many? a few? — understood the passage literally, and castrated themselves as followers of Jesus, because they understood it as a religious imperative: a difficult one, a radical one, but an urgent one nonetheless. "Let anyone accept this who can."

Beyond that simple historial argument, I will try to demonstrate three additional things. First, that those who interpreted this recommendation of Jesus literally condemned during the patristic period, when conservative intellectuals took control of the Christian religion and adapted it to their own cultural concerns. Second, that a "eunuch theology" such as that which might be reconstructed historically from the fragmentary evidence of the practice might still be used by Christians as part of a queer theology of gender erasure. And third, that the image of self-castration remained a popular one, and continued in the Christian tradition long after its official condemnation.....

Chili · 08-02-2010, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

But Origen was a heretic, not the main defender of the faith.

He was a gnostic and not a man of faith . . . but he knew and so did Augustine who later was censored as well.

Toto · 08-02-2010, 01:49 PM

Demetrius doesn't appear to have physically castrated himself, otherwise there would have been no particular lesson for the others in self restraint, based on his sleeping beside his wife without knowing her in the Biblical sense (as Gandhi is reported to have done.)

Origen's castration has been questioned here

Quote:

In 'Kastration und Magenprobleme? Einige neue Blicke auf das asketische Leben des Origenes' (p. 15-34), Markschies provides a thorough Stand der Forschung on the topic of whether or not Origen did in fact castrate himself before moving on to the topic of self-castration in its ancient medical, philosophical and juridical contexts, finally offering the conclusion that the historicity of this particular tradition must be questioned.

cited in

Origen note 11.

Clivedurdle · 08-02-2010, 02:04 PM

Quote:

4. Please advise what the attitude of the Coptic Church is towards FGM. Please provide any recent reports or statements by the Coptic Church on the practice?

An Agence France Presse report from August 2007 states that “the Coptic Patriarch Chenouda III…declared [FGM] had ‘no foundation in the religious texts’ of either Islam or Christianity”:

Religious leaders, usually silent on taboos relating to female sexuality, have also started to speak out against the practice, which many Egyptians believe is a duty under Islam and Christianity. After the death of Shaker, chief mufti Ali Gomaa declared female circumcision forbidden under Islam.

Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi, the sheikh of Al-Azhar university, the top Sunni Muslim authority, and Coptic Patriarch Chenouda III also declared it had “no foundation in the religious texts” of either Islam or Christianity (‘Cairo MPs ponder tougher

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/countr...6fe1cd0,0.html

I think we are showing conclusively that it is part of xian texts and was taken over by Islam which can be understood as a puritan streak.

If only we had not crusaded against the Albigensian Perfect Ones, we might know a lot more about this.

stephan huller · 08-02-2010, 02:07 PM

Am driving again but its not as simple as you make it. The text says he was made a eunuch and then you object to the incompatibility of this understanding as an example of restraint.

The reality is that ancient literature is filled with examples of horny eunuchs. Losing the genitals doesn't in itsel diminish sexual desire.

I think the idea was that it was a sign of an individuals commitment to restraint but it wasn't in itself a magic pill to stop desire. Just read the Golden Ass again.

While I am engaged with another activity the logic I think of the passage was that the flames not burning their flesh is the proof that they had returned to the adamantine state of Adam (who happens to have also been a eunuch).

By your logic Christianity would be offering nothing new. There were always eunuchs in the world. They would have already conquered their sexuality if it was just a matter of lopping off your balls.

It wasn't that simple. Ancients knew that hence the remarkable example of the eunuch Demetrius and his wife

stephan huller · 08-02-2010, 02:43 PM

And just as a side note, Clement of Alexandria discusses Matthew 19:12 at length in Book III of the Stromata. It begins:

The Valentinians, who hold that the union of man and woman is derived from the divine emanation in heaven above, approve of marriage. The followers of Basilides, on the other hand, say that when the apostles asked whether it was not better not to marry, the Lord replied: "Not all can receive this saying; there are some eunuchs who are so from their birth, others are so of necessity." And their explanation of this saying is roughly as follows: Some men, from their birth, have a natural sense of repulsion from a woman; and those who are naturally so constituted do well not to marry. Those who are eunuchs of necessity are those theatrical ascetics who only control themselves because they have a passion for the limelight. [And those who have suffered accidental castration have become eunuchs of necessity.] Those, then, who are eunuchs of necessity have no sound reason for their abstinence from marriage. But those who for the sake of the eternal kingdom have made themselves eunuchs derive this idea, they say, from a wish to avoid the distractions involved in marriage, because they are afraid of having to waste time in providing for the necessities of life.

and that later he cites the passage in full:

Concerning the words, "Not all can receive this saying. There are some eunuchs who were born so, and some who were made eunuchs by men, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven; let him receive it who can receive it,"

I happen to think that the distinction here between (b) and (c) is that someone has to voluntarily submit to the Christian practice of castration coupled with baptism as described in LGM 1 of Secret Mark.

In other words, if you can't get it up by nature, Christianity won't help you. If you were made a eunuch before receiving Christ, good night and good luck. But if you choose to voluntarily submit to our secret baptism ritual which begins with self-castration well then the eternal kingdom will be theirs.

Notice the wording of Secret Mark:

And after six days Jesus told him what to do, and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God.

And before someone objects to the wording shamayim in Aramaic means both "God" and "heaven"

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-02-2010, 01:04 PM	#41
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	But Origen was a heretic, not the main defender of the faith.

08-02-2010, 02:07 PM	#49
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Am driving again but its not as simple as you make it. The text says he was made a eunuch and then you object to the incompatibility of this understanding as an example of restraint. The reality is that ancient literature is filled with examples of horny eunuchs. Losing the genitals doesn't in itsel diminish sexual desire. I think the idea was that it was a sign of an individuals commitment to restraint but it wasn't in itself a magic pill to stop desire. Just read the Golden Ass again. While I am engaged with another activity the logic I think of the passage was that the flames not burning their flesh is the proof that they had returned to the adamantine state of Adam (who happens to have also been a eunuch). By your logic Christianity would be offering nothing new. There were always eunuchs in the world. They would have already conquered their sexuality if it was just a matter of lopping off your balls. It wasn't that simple. Ancients knew that hence the remarkable example of the eunuch Demetrius and his wife

08-02-2010, 02:43 PM	#50
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	And just as a side note, Clement of Alexandria discusses Matthew 19:12 at length in Book III of the Stromata. It begins: The Valentinians, who hold that the union of man and woman is derived from the divine emanation in heaven above, approve of marriage. The followers of Basilides, on the other hand, say that when the apostles asked whether it was not better not to marry, the Lord replied: "Not all can receive this saying; there are some eunuchs who are so from their birth, others are so of necessity." And their explanation of this saying is roughly as follows: Some men, from their birth, have a natural sense of repulsion from a woman; and those who are naturally so constituted do well not to marry. Those who are eunuchs of necessity are those theatrical ascetics who only control themselves because they have a passion for the limelight. [And those who have suffered accidental castration have become eunuchs of necessity.] Those, then, who are eunuchs of necessity have no sound reason for their abstinence from marriage. But those who for the sake of the eternal kingdom have made themselves eunuchs derive this idea, they say, from a wish to avoid the distractions involved in marriage, because they are afraid of having to waste time in providing for the necessities of life. and that later he cites the passage in full: Concerning the words, "Not all can receive this saying. There are some eunuchs who were born so, and some who were made eunuchs by men, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven; let him receive it who can receive it," I happen to think that the distinction here between (b) and (c) is that someone has to voluntarily submit to the Christian practice of castration coupled with baptism as described in LGM 1 of Secret Mark. In other words, if you can't get it up by nature, Christianity won't help you. If you were made a eunuch before receiving Christ, good night and good luck. But if you choose to voluntarily submit to our secret baptism ritual which begins with self-castration well then the eternal kingdom will be theirs. Notice the wording of Secret Mark: And after six days Jesus told him what to do, and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And before someone objects to the wording shamayim in Aramaic means both "God" and "heaven"

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.