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

Thanks Adelaide: I agree with you - I also like St Paul. I spy Matholwch having a joke, and rather a good one too...

Astro-logica

An interesting list of quotes, which seem to highlight a certain Sado-Masocistic aspect. I prefer the Buddist ideas that Life=Suffering, and 'the middle way' leads to enlightenment.

I find it hard to believe that a god either indfferent or compassionate would have any investment in 'pain', it all sounds like endorphin addiction to me.

Hi Andrew S,

"The Constitutions were completely replaced by the Statutes in 1982. I note that the Statutes have been published on the same website, so they should be aware that they are using an out-of-date document. Perhaps they don't care."

An out of date document? Far be it for any person interested in a religious debate to refer to an out of date document.

F

"...it is...a fact of history that St. Paul and his successors added to,..., or imposed upon, or substituted another doctrine for...the plain...teachings of Jesus..."
H.G. Wells (1866-1946)

"The conversion of Paul was no conversion at all: it was Paul who converted the religion that has raised one man above sin and death into a religion that delivered millions of men so completely into their dominion that their own common nature became a horror to them, and the religious life became a denial of life."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

Inevitably I have been doing a bit of reading and in addition to the above quotes I have also encountered some other interesting bits of info re the validity of new testament texts.

I have accepted on face value the assertion that current texts are 99.5 percent accurate in comparison with early manuscripts. It seems this is in dispute, one source I found asserted that for the gospels, acts and relevations there are variant readings for approx 50% of verses, and that for the Epistles there are variant readings for 25% of verses.

Many of these variations are reportedly serious ones, The best example seems to be the last few verses of Mark, which in the oldest complete manuscript ends with the words 'and they were afraid' (Codex Sinaticus)and has no resurection narrative at all. And the earliest Manuscript which does include this dates from as late as the 9th century, and in many which even then do include it, scribes add a Gloss which indicates that many sources ommit it.

I have also encountered an assertion that an important verse from John which almost defines the 'trinity' and which is the only outright statement in the NT doing so, (Some other verses can however be read to imply this) does not appear in early manuscripts either.

The number of partial manuscripts from the 4th and 5th centuries which is usually estimated at arround 5000 is a more tenuous collection than I imagined, less than 60 could be described as even approaching completeness, and most are less than 4 sides of parchement (A folio) some (Especially the earliest e.g. Rylands) account for no more than a few verses.

I have also discovered that only 7 of the Pauline epistles have a relatively undisputed authorship, i.e. Romans, I and II Corinthians Galatians, Philipians, I Thessalonians and Philemon.

Given my earlier commentaries the issue of 'tone' in the writings of the new testament raises questions which cannot be resolved purely by reference to the text, not only do we have the superficial tone, but the potentially more illuminating deeper psychological tone but also the potential 'smoothing,' 'spinning,' rewriting' or downright forgery of texts to 'keep them on message.' Politics was as much a part of the church from day one as it would be later and continued to be throughout the history of the Church.

I also recently learned that at the council of Nicia 235 (I think) an Arian Majority was overturned by Constantines threat to banish those who did not sign the Creed which has become such a central tennent of the church, quite appart from the rather unexpected discovery that less than a 1/4 of the bishops attended and later recanted the creed including the much cited church historian Eusebius. Also It surprised me to discover that less than 20% of romans were Christian at that time I had thought that there was close to a majority of Roman Christians, but apparently not so.

I'm probably boring some one so I should wrap up for now

Nicea deffinately not 235, 325 more like. Sorry.

Fathom: point taken! Although this one was officially abrogated.

Hi SD:

The ascetic tradition in the Catholic (and Orthodox) church pre-dates the concept of masochism by a long way, and has very different motives. That's apart from usually being expressed differently - e.g. fasting or the hair-shirt (or, in the Bible, sackcloth and ashes). It is strange to most people now, but it was misrepresented in the sequence of quotes.

Hi SD (again):

There's a good explanation of the Council of Nicea here: A958494 (on Arianism). The Council of Nicea gave us the Nicene Creed. I think the doctrine on Jesus as both true God and true man was agreed by most of the bishops present, with two opposed.

On the other hand the books of the New Testament were not defined at Nicea. Lists of canonical books exist from prior to that date, e.g. the Muratorian Fragment. But the question was not officially settled until the Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397). These were local affairs, but the Canon passed into general use as the council decisions were approved by the Bishop of Rome.

Andrew S

True in the development of a philosophical ideology Sadism/masocism is clearly 18th century (Attached as it is to the person of the Marquis De Sade), but I dont think that the aesthetic tradition is that far removed.

Masocism specifically has in more recent years been associated with the release of endorphins into the brain, and many individuals who self harm (another sub category) report that following self injury there is a sense of well being and warmness.

Certainly there is good medical evidence that after prolonged starvation the associated death of brain cells and the flooding of the brain both with endorphins and neurotransmitters such as seretonin produces not only a sense of euphoria but can also be responsible for halucinations.

Self denial/injury as a religious practice is not confined to Christianity of course, but I believe it is practiced for the same reasons.

I would argue that there are aspects of the development of christianity, which are related both to historical Theme, the term Masocism has come to represent, and to the theme the term Sadism has come to represent.

Not only were members of the early church subjected to Sadistic attacks from Roman authority and reading the Martyrdom of Polycarp he responded as a typical Masocist might be expected to, but the church also exacted its own Sadistic impulses on others over the centuries, e.g. the inquisition.

Personaly I believe the history of the church seems riddled with good examples of co-dependant relationships between persecutors and the persecuted, the aesthetic tradition would seem difficult to adequately dissentangle from this, and in the case of some of the 'saints' the two seem almost to co-exist within the same individual.

e.g. St Francis in his early life he was certainly prone to take pleasure in the suffering of others, not to mention his tendency to be indulgent, in his later life all of this becomes turned inward on himself and I would argue takes pleasure from inflicting suffering on himself.

Real believers will take issue with me I know, but I am convinced that the Stigmata experienced by st Francis were self inflicted.

This doesnt mean that I dont think he did some good and important things in his life, he certainly shook up the churches Heierachy which was no bad thing. But then I have met Nurses, Doctors, Psychologists and social workers who have long term permanent relationships in which sado-masocistic fantasies are played out in ways which seem all too real to me.

The Difficulty with Nicea is that not only was Constantine forced to resort to the threat of Banishment to obtain agreement (My understanding is that 17 bishops dissented at Nicea and were banished as threatened, but I will do some double checking) But after they went home many of those who had agreed to the creed recanted. Constantine went so far as to excomunicate Arius, but was forced to reinstated him about 10 years later as so many of the Bishops had recanted the Nicean Creed.

The Creed was only properly accepted about 60-100 years later, but for broadly similar reasons to those Constantine originally intoduced it for.

SD, I don't see it as sado-masochistic at all. SM people obtain pleasure from their games, which have the sole purpose of sexual pleasure. I doubt if that is the purpose here. Or, at least, not the declared one.

What I do see is an extreme ascetisism. I see the christian God portrayed as a life of denial, based on the simple truth that our bodies and senses are inclined towards sensual pleasure and sexual gratification, unless blocked by trauma, injury or deliberate intent. I see a gift free of morality being labelled as 'bad' and, because it is so strong within the human makeup, extreme measures having to be taken to overcome our natural tendencies. And why? Because some god has said so?

That seems an awaful waste and shame.

"Politics was as much a part of the church from day one as it would be later and continued to be throughout the history of the Church."

In your litany, you forgot to mention how the books which today make up the NT came to be chosen and why, and why others were cast aside, who made the choice etc. For anyone interested in Christianity research into that, as well as the things you mention, is enlightening.

"Not only were members of the early church subjected to Sadistic attacks from Roman authority and reading the Martyrdom of Polycarp he responded as a typical Masocist might be expected to, but the church also exacted its own Sadistic impulses on others over the centuries, e.g. the inquisition."

I don't see that either of these can be laballed as Sadistic or masochistic, partly on the grounds I have already put forward (see above a couple of messages) but also because I would question that the Romans' severity was attached to a world view on punishment and the treatment of people which was not confined to the romans but which was predominant in most of the cultures not merely of that time period, but of later ones.

It is our own culture (Western European), probably dating from, say, 17th or 18th century, which is out of steps with that of preceding cultures. And our 21st culture would be revolted by some of the things permitted by our earlier generations of the last few centuries, let alone the centuries before it, or the cultural practices and punishments meted out by recognised governments in other places in the world today.

Thanks SD. It's true, there was a lot of wavering between councils. My impression is that the councils themselves, when they were held, all went in the same direction. To my mind there is a fairly clear line of continuity from Nicea (325) to Constantinople (388), Ephesus (431) and through to the Council of Chalcedon (451), which could be regarded as the terminus point.
Maybe I'm biased.

<>
Just one point, SD - it's never been a popularity contest!

<>

Which I am sure you know, SD, has nothing to do with any church!

Re Sadism

Sadism is I believe a complicated concept to disentangle, not least because it is so strongly associated with the (Not particularly well written) writings of one individual.

Appart from the debate about DeSade as a revolutionary reputedly on the side of the poor? The Sexual element of his writings have come to dominate interpretation of the area of Sadism/masocism.

Personally I believe the Sexual aspect is a red herring, Sadism/masocism is fundamentaly about power, there may well be a sexual element to this, but I am inclined to believe that the pleasure derived has a broader base. (Old Fraud would argue that all pleasure has sex at its root, I would disagree) For most Sadists the pleasure is the thought of creating a powerful and overwhelming feeling in another person (Something they may well feel they were deprived of in their relationship with their parents)For the Masochist the pleasure derives from feeling powerless (probably derived from wanting responsibility taken away, people who have had to take on too many resposibilities too early in their lives often fall into this category)

Interestngly it has been argued that a true Sadist would find a true Masocist Abbohrent, since there would be no pleasure to be gained from someone who takes pleasure in suffering pain.

I do not think that this then excludes the co-dependent relationship, e.g. serial co-dependency seems to highlight the issue best: the woman physically abused by her partner, who leaves him and within weeks is in a relationship with an equally abusive partner.

I do not believe the sexual aspect is necissary for sadism and masochism to be present. I also believe that Sadism and Masochism represent a pattern of distortion in human relationships, and which are therefore frequently present as an element of many cultures.

The difference in Christianity (And I believe Hinduism) is for me that extreme self denial is co-dependantly linked to the extreme persecution which is wrapped up with church history, both from within the church and from the outside.



Popularity Contest

I would not have thought about it as a popularity contest exactly, more that somehow I had recieved the impression that Christianity had grown quickly to the point where it was the majority religion and that Constantine was to some extent following a cultural development. The fact Christianity was still a minority religion makes me even more suspicious of Constantine's motives.



The selection and development of the Canon.

This is an interesting area, there seem to me to be two distinct schools of thought.

Church Tradition seems to argue that there were true Gospels which were written down and that there were heretical gospels which had to be suppressed to prevent the faithfull from being led astray, there was an ongoing debate over several centuries about the inclusion or exclusion of certain other books with orthodox and so called heretical views bouncing arround all over the place. (I keep meaning to read the shepard of Hermas, which was a disputed text for several centuries.)Eventualy a canon of texts became an accepted version which was enshrined in church 'law' The tennet which supports the church identification of a 'lawful' text is based on a claimed (and nominaly traceable) descent from an apostle (Apostolic authority) through their presbyters.

The alternative view argues that there were independant verbal traditions all accross the anchient Roman Empire, that were eventually written down and became the 'gospels' used by certain churches. Modern Scolarship contends that there were two types of early gospels, sayings gospels and and acts gospels, or put another way: what Jesus said and what Jesus did. By the middle of the second century AD many of these gospels were written down and 6 in particular had the names of apostles attached to them. There were others, including Hebrews, Nazoreans(These two may be different names for the same gospel but that is by no means certain), Egyptians and others including Mary (Magdalane).

In the Roman church The Gospels of Peter and of Thomas were dismissed as heretical, as were Hebrews, Nazoreans Egyptians and Mary. They were however used for 3 or four centuries as traditional texts by various churches, who had no doubt of their authenticity.

The canon in rome was therefore developed on the assertion that the authority of Paul and his followers (and to a far lesser extent Peter)was more legitimate than the authority of others in more distance parts of the empire.

The 'authority' for the gospels and the letters is usually based on references made to them by early church fathers, e.g Clement, Ignatious, polycarp ect, those who support the position of Paul are usually held as more authoritative by the church than those who don't.

The scism between Rome and Gnosticism was fairly fundamental and the use in the letters to Timothy of the greek word 'Gnosis' is taken by some as a hint that these letters were written or possibly addapted to challenge the so called 'Gnostic' Heresy. This was the point that many books were excluded from the canon, accusations about false gospels and false teachings fly arround willy nilly , to the accompanyment of accusations of sexual impropriety.

The church at Lyons seems to have been particularly involved in this argument. (Nb Lyons was a new roman town circa 70 ce, and incidentaly most of the Herodian dynasty settled there following the Judean war circa 66-74) a bishop of Lyons who's name escapes me for the moment wrote tract against Heresies which was very influential.

Thats probably enough for now except to say that the argument about the canon went on for the best part of 5 centuries, and in the end it seemed to be the texts that 'authority' within the church seemed to aprove of most which got to be included.

Along the way what to me seems a simple but powerful truth got lost, i.e. there are many different points of view and we all develop our own understanding as we go. i.e. Personal Gnosis, not dependant on the authority of others.

See 'The Shepherd of Hermas' @ http://www.nazirene.org/shepherd_of_hermas.htm

Alji

Just to say, I've read The Shepherd of Hermas, it's nothing to write home about - it resembles a New Age-y self help book more than anything else! It would have been excluded as far as I can tell, because there's limited room, and it's not vital, or vitally inspiring!

I actually have a text but haven't built up the determination to actually read it more than a cursory skim. I have been trying to build up a database of all the texts I have managed to get hold of but there are just too many, and other more mundane things like 'work' keep getting in the way. Idealy I would like to catalogue, all the alternate views about provenance and authority as well as construct all the appropriate links between documents, really it would be a job for a whole team of researchers.

Funnily enough another of my projects is a collection of all the recordings, video and scripts of a certain Jimi Hendrix into chronological order and thats another huge piece of work, what I have been able to achieve gives some amazing insights into how his musical sensibilities developed. I'd particularly love to get hold of the 40 odd versions of Voodoo Chile he recorded for Electric Ladyland. Which Chas Chandler thinks are identical, from the few I have heard the one on the album was definately the best.