Archive for Augustine

“Born in Sin”

Posted in Atheism, Atheist, Christianity, history, life, random, religion with tags , , , , , , on July 10, 2009 by chouck017894

From the depths of antiquity the great no escape clause dreamed up by pretenders of religious knowledge has been that all life is “born in sin.”  The selling of “sin” has been a major part of Christian doctrine, with sexual magnetism cast as an especial reason for heaven’s rejection of one’s personal expression.

In life forms, including the human species, there are amoral elements encoded and blended in DNA and RNA that establish the physical sensory patterns.  These senses are not the evil or accursed condition of “inherited sin” that western religions have chosen to portray them.  The sensate nature imprinted in life forms is simply a part of the physical attributes by which material-energy conditions are confronted, experienced and qualified by individual awareness.

Life is energized out of amoral properties and is therefore guiltless when an energy-form identity is taken on, which means that life forms cannot be “born in sin.”  This is not to say that life cannot be born into conditions considered sinful.  There is irony in this, for a higher percentage of sinful conditions are most often directly linked to the intimidating interpretations that are inflicted from man-conceived and self-serving religious practices, not to the amoral elements encoded in the pattern of one’s biological nature.

Christianity owes its concepts of “born in sin” or “inherited sin” from the befuddled “saint” Augustine (354-430), who just happened to have converted to the Christian movement from the Gnostic sect Manicheanism that taught the concept of “original sin.”  Gnosticism regarded all things of the flesh as sinful, which is why they denied that god’s son and savior of man would have come in the flesh.  As all converts to any faith system tend to be, Augustine was adamant in his analysis of what constituted holy truth and fervently promoted the idea that man’s salvation from being born in sin could be achieved only through the grace of god.  This stance meant that free will could not be a factor in one’s salvation–a doctrinal arrangement that positioned the church as the only authority through which one could recieve god’s forgiveness and pardon. 

Augustine’s driving ambition to impose his interpretation upon the Christian corporate-style setup did not go unquestioned.  To a British monk named Pelagius (353-420?-430?), the idea that one was tainted with sin from birth did not match the declared efficacious grace of the maker.  It was a sane understanding that sin is not an infirmity of nature.  Pelagius taught that each person was born with free will, and asserted that man’s will is capable of spiritual good with divine aid being unnecessary.  Pelagius taught that every child is born in a state of innocence and that every person’s perseverance in virtue depends upon themselves.  This understanding, however, allowed the church too little power over each person’s life and thus threatened to cut into their potential material profits.

And so “saint” Augustine attempted vigorously to have Pelagius condemned by the church, but was for awhile unsuccessful.  This only added to Augustine’s divine detestation and he called upon political connections to persecute Pelagius—for god’s sake, of course.  Thus at several synods held between 412 and 418 Augustine managed to have Pelagius condemned and finally banished from Rome.  In 431, after Pelagius had died and could no longer defend himself, the Council of Ephesus confirmed the condemnation of  Pelagius.  With the chains of sin then firmly attached to man’s means of birth the church claimed itself to be the only means of a person being absolved of sin.

John the Baptist, myth of

Posted in Astronomy, Atheist, Bible, Christianity, culture, history, life, random, religion with tags , , , , , , , , , on June 10, 2009 by chouck017894

June 24–or Midsummer day–is alleged in Christianity to be the birthday of John the Baptist.  The date was a contrived arrangement instigated by Pope Gregory I (540?-604), who is called “the Great” because his pontificate was marked by fervor in propagating Christianity.  The conversion of Britain was begun under his direction and carried out by Augustine in 597, for example.  Gregory was passionately opposed to Paganism, introduced numerous changes in the liturgy of the mass, and is credited with revision of church music, better known as Gregorian chant.

The reason for Gregory’s passion for contriving a birth date for the unproven predecessor of Jesus was due to the Pagan’s midsummer festival which always coincided with the summer solstice and which was in honor of the Chaldean, Syrian, and Phoenician messiah Tammuz.  In his zeal for gathering Pagans into the Christian fold, Gregory had sent emissaries all across Europe, and the midsummer festival in honor of Tammuz was found to be lovingly favored nearly everywhere.  So entrenched was this yearly festival with its curious rites which engaged the minds of men that Gregory could not allow the season to pass without instigating some counter incentive for Christian purpose.  He was faced with the problem of what could the Christian faith business offer as enticement.

Gregory was divinely shrewd, counseling his subordinates (such as Augustine) that if Pagans were to be lured into the church the wisest policy was to make an effort to meet the Pagans half-way.  The answer to the dilemma was to incorporate the festival activity into the calendar of Christian holy events.  Of course it was impossible to retain an honor to Tammuz or Bel, but nothing in the myths of Jesus Christ could be linked as occurring specifically around the summer solstice period.  O what to do?

Then divine inspiration struck.  Since the birth of the Savior was honored at the time of the winter solstice, and John the Baptist was said to be  born before Jesus’ birth, was it not reasonable that the summer solstice was the birth time of his forerunner?  Hallelujah!

The Vatican think-tank had to contrive a link with Pagan thought though.  The link was discerned hiding in Pagan Mysteries:  there, after  Tammuz had been slain, he reappeared to the faithful under the name Oannes, and the name used in sacred language adopted by the Roman Church for John was Joannes!  Double Hallelujah!

Thus the Pagan festival of June 24 was made to cohabit with Christian ideas under the label festival of Joannes–Nativity of St. John–which, not so subtly, begins exactly as the Chaldean festivities.

The Pagans were not really fooled by all this jockeying.  They remembered that the name John was also  part of the church promotion of Christmas, with the feast of  “Saint John” the disciple (a personification of light) celebrated on the 27th of December immediately after the winter solstice.   Because retaliation from the church could be harsh, even deadly, the heathens and Pagans mockingly spoke of the year being divided “from John to John.”

“Father” of Christian Theology

Posted in Atheist, Bible with tags , , , , , , , on March 30, 2009 by chouck017894

A thin veneer of eroticism covers not only a number of O.T. myths but also spread an ugly scar over the early Christian movement. Much of that is traceable to Augustine (born 354 CE), often referred to as “The Father of Christian Theology.” It was “saint” Augustine who, around 386, figured out a means of luring spiritual seekers into a sacred scam: his inspiration was to turn each seeker against themselves by making them feel guilty about being imbuded with sexual desires or being grateful for physical blessings.

The caliber of this “saint’s” divine inspiration is displayed in his statement that all humans are born between feces and urine. Instead of accepting this means of embodiment as part of “intelligent design,” Augustine seized upon this perceived godly goof to startle and stampede the gullible into chains of guilt.

In other words, Augustine used suggestive anti-life propaganda, such as in his Confessions and his major work The City of God, to achieve respect and power for himself. It was a cunning scheme of inventing problems and disharmony where they need not exist.

Before switching over to the young struggling Christian movement, Augustine had been a Manichaean auditore, one of two classes of Manichaean disciples. As noted in my book Time Frames and Taboo Data: A History of Mankind’s Misdirected Beliefs, the clergy of the Manichaean sect were organized similarly to the Christian ministry and the sect condemned marriage and sexual indulgence of any type. This undoubtedly contributed to Augustine’s saintly interpretations. From his Manichaean involvement Augustine construed the doctrins of “sin,” divine grace, and predestination. With additional input by “saint” Jerome (c.340-420), who also preferred the perverse titillation of guilt-fear and lamentation to thoughts of creation’s unity, “sin” became enshrined as the main theme in the Christian message to the world.

And Augustine, like the religious fanatics of today, expressed his devotion to the Lord and Savior with outbursts of hatred for all the Creator’s diverse expressions of life. For example, the Gnostics, the seekers and keepers of truth and wisdom in his time, Augustine chose to portray as enemies and waxed indignately, “The enemies thereof I hate vehemently; O that thou wouldst slay them with thy two-edged sword!” Obviously he paid no attention to the early teachings that were attributed to Jesus, such as love one another.

Augustine always inferred that God kept him posted on everything, even of the inhabited areas of planet Earth. Thus he said authoritatively, “It is impossible there should be inhabitants on the opposite side of earth, since no such race is recorded in Scriptures among the descendants of Adam.”

This “Father of Christian Theology” demonstrates the depth of pretention that is still the hallmark of Christian extremists. He would, for example, declare with fundamental certainty that “…all diseases of Christians are to be ascribed to demons; chiefly do they torment first-baptized Christians, yea, even the guileless new born infant.”

Such is the “saintly” wisdom that is being clung to by fundamentalists and claimed as revealed truth and holy word.