Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JohNeo · 09-25-2004, 01:08 AM

There would seem to be a wide valley between "Ruling Spirits" and something akin to things of this world, or the natural order, etc.

In any case, it still begs the question: what's so bad about this world that the spokesman for the son of "the" god has to tell us to ignore it--if it were true that the sovereign god actually created . I know this is far from an original thought, but to say that creation (or the physical universe) is in some way bad would basically mean that gawd's intentions were deceitful or corrupt. Or that there just is no god. This brings back the old worn-out, but ever relevant Problem of Evil argument.

JohNeo

Magdlyn · 09-26-2004, 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohNeo

There would seem to be a wide valley between "Ruling Spirits" and something akin to things of this world, or the natural order, etc.

In any case, it still begs the question: what's so bad about this world that the spokesman for the son of "the" god has to tell us to ignore it--if it were true that the sovereign god actually created . I know this is far from an original thought, but to say that creation (or the physical universe) is in some way bad would basically mean that gawd's intentions were deceitful or corrupt. Or that there just is no god. This brings back the old worn-out, but ever relevant Problem of Evil argument.

JohNeo

I think it is an obvious reference to the influence of the dualism of Zoroastrianism from Persia, which had a profound influence on Judasim in the last few centuries BCE and on into CE.

nature, earth, matter, flesh=bad
spirit, God=good

God made a mistake or things got out of hand when his/her creation was corrupt(ed).

lulay · 09-26-2004, 11:06 AM

I am wondering then what does the human do, having access to knowledge of this patriarchal apppropriation of earlier understanding that didn't denigrate Nature into a 'bad' category?

What has this indoctrination actually done to us?

Is anyone aware of a fear in experiencing a deeper awareness of Nature?

CX · 09-26-2004, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohNeo

what's so bad about this world that the spokesman for the son of "the" god has to tell us to ignore it

If one subscribes to the doctrine of original sin this entire world is corrupt as a result of it. Consequently if one seeks to live a godly life in the image of Jesus and gain salvation one must necessarily divorce oneself from the world. Of additional significance is the belief amongst some that the world is ruled by god's adversary making it inherently evil and prone to leading one away from god. Jesus was, according to NT depictions of him, an ascetic who rejected the social and natural order.

Magdlyn · 09-27-2004, 04:10 AM

Apparently, Matthew thought Satan owned the entire world, as he offers it to the Son of Man himself here:

Mat 4:8 Again, the devil took him [Jesus] to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them;
Mat 4:9 and he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me."

Strike you as weird that Satan offers the world to the son of the one who crreated it? What is going on here?

lulay · 09-27-2004, 04:32 AM

i actually find the a;most constant default in-house style of these forums rude, which is me being ignored...like over my head we have the conformist 'orignally quoted by'' etc etc. errrm nuthin original about that. like try a differnt beginning?

and i must say, altghough i dont agree with everything Carl Jung said, he was spot on the button when he saw that most so-called religious people actually HIDe behind 'religion'....eg., instead of taking the plunge into DIRECt spirituality. what else could explian the relenteless literalism shown here

Clivedurdle · 09-27-2004, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Is anyone aware of a fear in experiencing a deeper awareness of Nature

Most definitely!

I understand a concern for trees was thought in the 1930's to be a sign of insanity.

Deep ecological ideas are often also seen as extreme, when they have not been looked at properly.

"We will return to the dark ages if we build wind turbines..'

Clivedurdle · 09-27-2004, 11:11 AM

And maybe the ruling spirit of the universe is Gaia, the goddess of the earth.

Hmm for xians to be ecologically minded may alo be a heresy against this patriachic religion!

Toto · 09-28-2004, 01:21 AM

I have heard from Earl Doherty, who browses this forum but does not have the time to get into an extended discussion.

He writes:

Quote:

I'm a little surprised that people let the dispute over the meaning of Col. 2:8 and 20 ("ruling spirits of the universe" was offered) die so quickly. Does no one possess the standard Bauer's Greek-English Lexicon. Taking stoixeia as meaning some kind of spirit entities is not confined to the RDV!

Here is some of what Bauer has to say (p. 769 of the 4th edition):

"3. The meaning of st. in "ta stoixeia tou kosmou" Gal 4:3, Col 2:8, 20 . . . is much disputed. Some prefer to take it in sense 1 above, as referring to the elementary forms of religion, Jewish and Gentile, which have been superseded by the new revelation in Christ . . . Others hold that the reference is to the elemental spirits which the syncretistic religious tendencies of later antiquity associated with the physical elements [primary sources quoted] . . . the stoixeia, fire, air, water, earth . . . were sometimes worshipped as divinities. It is not always easy to differentiate between this sense and the next, since heavenly bodies were also regarded as personal beings and given divine honors.
"4. heavenly bodies (Diog. L. 6, 102 ta dodeka stoixeia of the signs of the zodiac . . . )"

The thread author was too readily dismissed (and me as well, by implication, in connection with my reading of 1 Cor. 2:8). "Ruling spirits of the universe" is a valid possible translation. The Translator's New Testament says this in a note to the word in Gal 4:3,9:

"The Greek word stoixeia, here translated 'elemental spirits', literally means 'elements'., It sometimes means the elementary principles of knowledge, as in Heb 5:12, where NEB has 'the ABC'. [Perhaps a little too modern a touch, reflecting 20th century ways of thinking rather than 1st century views and superstitions]. Some translations take it in this sense here, in Galatians. The Greek word can also refer to the physical elements and to the spirits believed by the ancient world to be associated with them or with the heavenly bodies. The [Translator's NT] takes it in this sense. See also Col 2:8,20."

Of course, many would like the 1st century initiators of Christianity to be as sophisticated and enlightened as we in modern times are. It's usually far from the case.

All the best,
Earl

Magdlyn · 09-29-2004, 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doherty

. Others hold that the reference is to the elemental spirits which the syncretistic religious tendencies of later antiquity associated with the physical elements [primary sources quoted] . . . the stoixeia, fire, air, water, earth

Let us not forget the ancient Hebrews worshiped a fire god: YHWH of the volcano and burning bush, whose pillar of fire led them through the desert.

Let us not forget the magical power of water to wash away sin, as in the gospels: with Ioannes of the river.

"Paganism"=Judaism/Xtianity. Only prejudice makes us think otherwise.

09-26-2004, 11:06 AM	#13
lulay Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: manchester, England Posts: 916	so what now? I am wondering then what does the human do, having access to knowledge of this patriarchal apppropriation of earlier understanding that didn't denigrate Nature into a 'bad' category? What has this indoctrination actually done to us? Is anyone aware of a fear in experiencing a deeper awareness of Nature?

09-27-2004, 04:32 AM	#16
lulay Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: manchester, England Posts: 916	dont mean to be rude but..... i actually find the a;most constant default in-house style of these forums rude, which is me being ignored...like over my head we have the conformist 'orignally quoted by'' etc etc. errrm nuthin original about that. like try a differnt beginning? and i must say, altghough i dont agree with everything Carl Jung said, he was spot on the button when he saw that most so-called religious people actually HIDe behind 'religion'....eg., instead of taking the plunge into DIRECt spirituality. what else could explian the relenteless literalism shown here

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

09-25-2004, 01:08 AM	#11
JohNeo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Dallas-Plano-Irving MSA, Texas Posts: 3,376	There would seem to be a wide valley between "Ruling Spirits" and something akin to things of this world, or the natural order, etc. In any case, it still begs the question: what's so bad about this world that the spokesman for the son of "the" god has to tell us to ignore it--if it were true that the sovereign god actually created . I know this is far from an original thought, but to say that creation (or the physical universe) is in some way bad would basically mean that gawd's intentions were deceitful or corrupt. Or that there just is no god. This brings back the old worn-out, but ever relevant Problem of Evil argument. JohNeo

09-27-2004, 04:10 AM	#15
Magdlyn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 2,230	Apparently, Matthew thought Satan owned the entire world, as he offers it to the Son of Man himself here: Mat 4:8 Again, the devil took him [Jesus] to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them; Mat 4:9 and he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me." Strike you as weird that Satan offers the world to the son of the one who crreated it? What is going on here?

09-27-2004, 11:11 AM	#18
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	And maybe the ruling spirit of the universe is Gaia, the goddess of the earth. Hmm for xians to be ecologically minded may alo be a heresy against this patriachic religion!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.