h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Excuse me, but I for one DID NOT expect Jesus to return at the dawn of the year 2000. Yet again it was the usual crack-pot types who predicted that.
I should expect to see Jesus at the 'end of the world' - whatever form it takes. He also said he'd return at a time when no-one was expecting.

Then you all should be cynical atheists like me and not even question whether Jesus will come down. Then no-one will expect him and the mighty long-haired, donkey-mounted man shall come down once again.
Ok, serious question now. Do you expect him to come down through pregnancy or as a full grown man?

a) I AM a cynical athist like you (some of the time).
b) I don't think He's comng back - I think He has too much sense.
c) I seem to have temporarily misplaced my Bible, but i'm pretty sure He was meant to decend from heaven as a full grown man.

I expect him to return as he was when he left (i.e. thirty-ish). Or maybe I won't be able to see him as a human, but as light... how could I say?

Oh yeah, why do you think he was long haired? Because of the 'traditional' conception?

Well, the easiest way to mock a group is by taking the piss of the most extremist, traditionalist, materialist part of the group. In Judaism it's the Hassidic. In Christianity it's the long haired man on a donkey and the grey bearded god. In animal rights protestors it's those who throw paint and are fruitarian.
As you see, this is the easiest way to mock - making cynical sarcastic/ironic remarks about the most extremist part of the group.
I just ridicule the story of Jesus' birth as I want to shake peoples view. How could Mary be a virgin if Jesus had an elder brother??? And is it THAT likely Jesus is the Son of God (caps)?
I see anyone that believe in the bible as literally as that as slight extremists. I do not believe the messiah will be/was sent as a human but as a thought or feeling and probably to the many, not the one. All this falls apart as I am atheist but that's another story...

Ah, a misunderstanding.
She is dubbed the 'Virgin' Mary because Jesus was not concieved by a man (Joseph). That's why he planned to divorce her, because he thought that she'd been having it off with another guy.

Cool! So the devine COULD have been her excuse for a bit on the side! lol! You've made my day

Or better yet she was a very quick thinker 'cos in her time being caught out or even suspected of adultery was a terminal situation therefore a bit of earnest belief and some very quick convincing of Joseph in the visit by an angel could have been the greatest 'stay of execution' achieved by a woman next to Sherazade ...and probably more inspired story telling......or I could be wrong

Ah, Keeza, I like your attitude. It's a thought I've had often myself. Could you imagine, though, the ultimate horror of being doomed to live your life in a fib the likes of which was poised to change the course of history?

Well prehaps it was a bit more that like all little 'white' lies -these things have a nasty tendancy to snowball and grow.Mary probably didn't have any idea at the time that this whole thing was going to take on a life of it's own.Did the guy who shot Archduke Ferdinand actually do so 'cos he was wanting to starting a World War at the time ....most likely not.He motives were quite narrow and specific at the time.
Some of the most significant events in both history and nature...like the difference between a good joke and a bad ...are purely a matter of timing and circumstance.There is a theory that JC was actually the blending of a number of people who lived around the time and that the whole groundswell of Christianity was more a case of commonsense principles being espoused at a favourable time and the human need for labels and leaders built up this concept we have today of Christianity...but that is only a theory & OTOH - Ripley the cat is a pretty good one too

Ripley has been looking over you all (as omniprescent deities are prone to) and would like to remind you that we will be celebrating the first Decade in five years time. Yes, it only seems like yesterday that the Universe was created and already we have a chance to stand by the banks of the Thames... or in Times Square... or on the Champs Elysses... or at a good vantage point on Circular Quay, Sydney. And see the dawn on a brand new Decade.

There will be fireworks, of course. Rejoice.

Ripley has also given birth to four kittens but one died for our sins. The other three will spread the words of Ripley. Mieow, mrrrawl and prrrrrrr...

Felicitations to mother Ripley..is this her first litter? I was just wondering if the gospel according to Ripley was as reported...or should that be purrrported....i.e Eat , sleep and good personal hygiene ?

Purrrrported. Yes, Ripley liked that because she's a benevolent cat. This is her third and last litter. Nine cats before in two litters... so there are twelve disciples of Ripley.

"If I couldn't lick my genetalia I =would= leave the house." (Ripley)

In response to billypilgrim's query, you were right, it was Constantine that made the decision to make Christianity the One Religion. (I would have answered before, but you made the point four weeks ago and I only discovered h2g2 a week ago).

If you read my entry on The Council Of Nicea, either from my page or the link from The Historical Society which Mustapha has been kind enough to do, you will see that I have outlined some of Constantine's reasons and motives for taking this action. I feel sorry for the people that were / are unlucky enough to live in places where they sweep this sort of thing under the carpet. You ask them to accept this religion and then you don't tell them the things that The Church did in the name of religion...

Ever heard of the Donation Of Constantine? This is a letter that says that The Church of Rome should have absolute authority in secular matters because St. Peter, successor to Jesus as head of the Church, passed this authority on to the Bishop of Rome. It is now universally accepted to be a very poor eighth century forgery, and even the Roman Catholic Church admit that. But have they given up the rights conferred to them by this fake? You don't need me to tell you the answer.

Just before you stop reading and start attacking this entry, please note that I am deeply religious. I am extremely ashamed to have been brought up as a Christian, in any form, because the more I look into the things they have done, the more I realise how little they have to do with actual faith, religion and worship. If I have to give my brand of faith a name, then I'd call it Hermeticism. I seek to know the mind of God, and in that I don't need a whole load of mediators. Imagine The Church's horror that a religion exists that doesn't need vicars and priests, and bishops and deacons, and popes and archbishops, or even a purpose built building to worship in. Hermiticism was ancient when the Pyramids were built, and yet how many people have heard of them or know what they are about? Why do you suppose there is so little mainstream knowledge about Hermeticism?

One more rhetorical question to ask before I really start waffling.Why do you suppose Pope Leo X, the pope that dubbed Henry VIII 'The Defender of the Faith', went on record as saying, "It has served us well, this myth of Christ."?

Oh, someone new has joined us!!! And, CD4, since you posted wa-aaa-yyy up near the top (and it took me a while to find your post!!--but no harm done, as you replied in the logical place in the forum), I have taken the liberty to move your entry down here to the bottom, thusly:

*******************

"Subject: I blame Constantine
In response to billypilgrim's query, you were right, it was Constantine
that made the decision to make Christianity the One Religion. (I
would have answered before, but you made the point four weeks
ago and I only discovered h2g2 a week ago).

If you read my entry on The Council Of Nicea, either from my page
or the link from The Historical Society which Mustapha has been
kind enough to do, you will see that I have outlined some of
Constantine's reasons and motives for taking this action. I feel sorry
for the people that were / are unlucky enough to live in places where
they sweep this sort of thing under the carpet. You ask them to
accept this religion and then you don't tell them the things that The
Church did in the name of religion...

Ever heard of the Donation Of Constantine? This is a letter that says
that The Church of Rome should have absolute authority in secular
matters because St. Peter, successor to Jesus as head of the
Church, passed this authority on to the Bishop of Rome. It is now
universally accepted to be a very poor eighth century forgery, and
even the Roman Catholic Church admit that. But have they given up
the rights conferred to them by this fake? You don't need me to tell
you the answer.

Just before you stop reading and start attacking this entry, please
note that I am deeply religious. I am extremely ashamed to have
been brought up as a Christian, in any form, because the more I
look into the things they have done, the more I realise how little they
have to do with actual faith, religion and worship. If I have to give my
brand of faith a name, then I'd call it Hermeticism. I seek to know the
mind of God, and in that I don't need a whole load of mediators.
Imagine The Church's horror that a religion exists that doesn't need
vicars and priests, and bishops and deacons, and popes and
archbishops, or even a purpose built building to worship in.
Hermiticism was ancient when the Pyramids were built, and yet how
many people have heard of them or know what they are about? Why
do you suppose there is so little mainstream knowledge about
Hermeticism?

One more rhetorical question to ask before I really start waffling.Why
do you suppose Pope Leo X, the pope that dubbed Henry VIII 'The
Defender of the Faith', went on record as saying, "It has served us
well, this myth of Christ."? "

*********************


Let me start by saying that I checked out your homepage, and you know more about the history of the Church than I do. But, I've never been one to be intimidated by superior knowledge, so let me give this a try.

I was (as you may know from reading this forum) raised Catholic. I started to realize that the Church was as much a political body as a religious one from a very young age, and it didn't take me long to realize that in religion, as in politics, power corrupts. Personally, I think that most of what the Bible tells us is myth in the purest sense of the word: metaphorical stories meant to illuminate deaper truths. Unfortunately, the political body of the Church has warped these truths to meet its own ends for so long that the original intent behind the teachings of Jesus (and those who came before) has been lost. Show me where, in organized religion today, you see any sign of the peace and love and tolerance shown by Christ? How many really religious people out there (and by that I mean religious in the conventional sense of the word) are seen socializing with prostitutes and the "unwashed masses" the way Jesus did? Oh, yes, as a charitable endeavor, they will visit hospitals and prisons and the like. But I'm talking about real socialization, the kind that matters, the kind that can make a difference in people's lives.

I have found that very few people really know the history of their own religion. One cannon seperate the political history of the Church (the Crusades, witch trials, forced conversion of people of other faiths, etc) from its theology, as they are intricately entwined. Indeed, it is a fundamental premise of Christianity that we are meant to go out and spread the word. And all of the above atrocities resulted from the spreading of the word.

Well, I'll stop rambling now, and go check out that article on Constantine.

I thought I'd put a link to your article: http://www.h2g2.com/A246610


Just wanted to add a few things. In ancient religions, it was common for the lover of the great goddess to be sacrificed every fall, and to be resurrected every spring. The idea of the trinity, as well, dates back to the ancient Goddess cultures, where the goddess was shown as an old crone, a young woman, and... and... well, memory fails, but you can check out Merlin Stone's "When God Was A Woman" for some of the answers.

The Holy Spirit is often seen as a last-ditch effort by the Church to feminize the new religion, with it's male gods and noticeable lack of a goddess. And your list of virgin births is interesting. To it may I add the idea that in most ancient religions, there was some sort of Earth-Mother who gave birth to the gods. And the "heathens" that were destroyed for having sex in the temples? Well, that dated back to an ancient time when sex wasn't seen as something to feel guilty for, and many of those acts were actually ritual ceremonies to celebrate the Goddess and her gifts.

One last point (which I may have already made). The "Begats" at the beginning of the Old Testament serve a purpose as well. Before that, many cultures were matrilineal, as maternity was (and is) always known, while paternity was (and is) often in doubt. It would be interesting to see how many heirs to empires were not actually fathered by the ruler who preceded them. But regardless, as humanity came to understand the concept of conception, there was an effort made to take the power of creation away from the goddesses (where it often lay in ancient religions) and give it to the male gods, and finally to one male god.

The feminist in me has reared its head.

To billypilgrim; thanks for taking the time to read and more importantly think about my entry. I was feeling cynical when I wrote the forum entry, and I could have been more constructive and less harsh than I was. I get passionate about my God - it's just in my nature. I get passionate about religion, history, football, pizza...

Your comments about the Goddess are interesting. I am sure in my heart and my head that there was a time when women were revered as the height of creation, as God's finest work. And, the women I have to work with notwithstanding!, I still do. It's so disappointing that the situation has come around that sometimes that the family dog has a higher standing in the household than the mother.

Like you mentioned, sex was once a sacred act, an act of celebration of the female, who was expected to participate and enjoy as much as the male. Sex is an alchemical metaphor to do with transformation, but to say too much on this subject would be to give away the details of a guide entry I am planning to do. I'll keep you posted.

(By the way, you probably can't tell from my gender neutral nickname, but I am a 29 year old male).

As promised above, billypilgrim, I have done an entry that covers the degradation of women and the reasons for it in slightly more detail. It isn't the reason for the entry, but there are oints in it I think you'll appreciate, and you'll definitely find something to comment on... I guess that applies to anyone that's interested in Christianity and the church.

It's available as ever from my homepage, or otherwise its details are A248230: Alchemy.

I await comments with interest!

Witch hunts were hardly restricted to Catholics. They were fervently pursued by Protestants such as the Puritans.

To CD4--- I read your article and found it very interesting. There is more to it than that, though... early religions usually placed the power of creation in the hands of goddesses, not gods. Makes sense; before we understood conception, it was probably thought that women were soley responsible for bringing about new life. So women were revered and feared. But that is a long and little-documented version of events, as these things happened mostly before recorded history, and what written records there were were mostly destroyed in wars and things....

And to GargleBlaster: I agree about the witches. I mentioned in a previous posting that one of the biggest lies of modern times is that those burned as witches WEREN'T witches, but were simply midwives or promiscuous women or what have you. But the fact is, many of them WERE witches, if by witch you mean one who practices the ancient religions of Paganism (we'd call them "Wiccans" now). Even in Salem, MA, those girls sat around listening to tales told by a Hatian nursemaid, who almost certainly (considering her background) was schooled in "the black arts."

What better way to quelch a conflicting religion than to make its practice punishable by death?

The Christians among us will say "Ah, but they're not REALLY Christians, if they burn people. It says nothing about burning people in the bible." But, to turn your back on your religions own history, to dismiss it out-of-hand by saying that those who practice its finer points are true believers, and those who use it to judge or manipulate or control are NOT true believers, is to leave the future open for more of the same. Those who do not know their own history are doomed to repeat it...

I consider myself an atheist, and I can say that I have yet to meet a Christian who does not give me a look of horror when I say that. Yet do I look at THEM with horror when they tell me they ARE Christian? Despite the fact that theirs is a history of persecuting people with beliefs such as my own. Despite the fact that theirs is a history of suppressing women, of writing the word "obey" into wedding vows, of making it impossible for women to leave lying or cheating or abusive husbands by making divorce (until recently) nearly impossible. Despite a history of destroying whole cities, of murdering women for practicing the ancient ways.... yet it is myself and people like me who are looked at in horror. This is the most difficult thing for me to understand. For a religion that allegedly teaches peace and love, I have seen very little of either in its history.

I recently read an excerpt from a new history book, which explains how, in the early 1900's, thousands of children from poor Catholic families in New York city were, for all intents and purposes, kidnapped by Protestants and packed on trains to be sent to the growing American West and be raised by "good" Protestant families.More than 100,000 children were taken this way (they were supposedly "orphans", but many, in fact, were not). Of course, in response, Catholics started their OWN "orphan" trains.... But still, all this is less than 100 years ago. Peace and love? I think not.