Why Civilization Needs Jesus
Why Civilization Needs Jesus
(sub-topic: Writing Original Sin out of Christianity)
This has not been adequately explained before, though of course preached a lot.
To preach what can be explained pitches the message to the token level of the preacher. This is why preachers have to either be a fool or think they have a calling
(although people will extend lots of slack to whoever does their best, for doing so).
"Jesus" forgives sin. For "God" worshippers -- those who assume the word has a meaning independently of incarnation -- "believing in Jesus" connects with "reconciliation with God", through the story of sacrifice on calvary paying the price and redeeming the soul from punishment "God" originally attached. These include: 1. Those who worship the Old Testament god "YHWH"; and 2. those who worship what they call "God" through the New Testament but take Jesus as claiming sonship to that deity.
This cannot be supported by the text. Jesus is Jewish on the mother's side only. The most explicit lineage on the Father's side in the New Testament is Hebrews 7: a priest on the order of Melchizedek. This refer to the pre-Abrahamic (non-semitic) priesthood at Salem (later Jerusalem) in Genesis 14.18. "God Most High" here translates "YHWH/ELOHIM". "ELOHIM" connects etymologically with the ancient Sumerian pantheon, and some scholars think Abraham's father, Terah, had been a priest in the temple of Ninurta (son of ENKI) in Kish before migrating west to Ur. The first chapters of Genesis are known to be condensations of their ancient literature, the creation story from the Marduk-Babylonian era (circa 2000 BCE), for instance. Much, much history had elapsed in Egypt and Mesapotamia before the Bible was written and its traceable historical characters appeared. It is far from the only, or best,source of ancient history civilization has, though almost the only continuous one for the last millenia or two. The association of "ELOHIM" with priests Abraham came across at "Salem" is a definite link to the larger-than-Biblical past, therefore a link between the one recognized in Hebrews as Jesus' Father.
"Before Abraham was, I AM," John quotes Jesus as saying (Jn. 8.58) "Whereupon the took up stones to kill him," he goes on to say.
Further, the newly published "Gospel of Judas" explicitly disconnects Jesus from the god his Jewish disciples prayed to; he laughs at them. "And the discipels said to him "Master, Why are you laughing at our prayer. We have done what is right." And he answered and said unto them "I am not laughing at you are not doing this of your own will, but because through doing this your god will be praised." They immediately say: "Master, you are the son of our God." In spite of his having said "your God"; not "ours" or "my". His reply is: "How do you know me?" -- prohibiting them from identifying what they took themselves to be praying to with himself. As to "knowing him", he goes on to say "Truly I say unto you, no generation of the people among you will know me." The word "generation" connotes "starry eons" here, so this could be a prophecy based on a Zodiacal transition from Pisces (the star of Bethlehem he was born under) to Aquarius. (Judas is allowed back in before the end -- kingdom of heaven on earth -- which could correspond to the Anti-Christ of the Revelation; two names for the same phenomenon.)
The Way he taught incorporated forgiveness of sin. The mythic or metaphysical text is one thing, of course, and what he taught was another. It is important to disentangle YHWH from ELOHIM, however, in order to put to rest the notion of "sin" as sexuality. This goes to the dialectic of law and grace. YHWH "created the world", then laid punishment for the act leading to pro-creation onto it, which is remitted in return for blood sacrifice. That is the theological story of the Pentateuch (traditionally, Moses scripture). There is an evolution of the spiritual tradition through the Psalms of David (1000 BC), the Prophets and Babylonian captivity (through 500, to Job, then Christ (for those who followed this line). But the historical mythic metaphysical origin, the actual human roots of this great spiritual tree, go back to Sumerian-Egyptian context. In it, traditions of animal sacrifice abound: the Great White TAURUS Bull at Memphis, to BAAL at Baalbek; the burnt offerings on the altar Noah made of "every clean bird and every clean animal" after landingd the ark, from which "YHWH smelled a soothing aroma." In no other major tradition is there a connection between blood sacrifice, sin, and sexuality. Yet, no piece of literature has dominated human consciousness, I dare say, than the first chapters of Genesis, pertaining to Adam and Eve. This scroll from some Edomite son-in-law (Moses) who led the children of Israel (Isaac, Abraham) out of the land of Egypt (1750 BC?) imprinted the connection between the cosmos, Jesus' Father, and punishment for sex, on many, many generations of the human species that advanced into Modern Europe and America. Those who take the story of his death as the unique fulfillment of the sacrifice idea from the Biblical -- Original Sin -- find in it the completion, and end, of any blood sacrifice required to pay off YHWH for sex (or anything else). Jesus completed that myth without being defined by its metaphysic.
"But what IS "sin" if it's not sex?"
Transgressing a higher, inner law of the spirit, through grace.
The New Testament radically transforms the notion of "sin" by taking "the blood" involved in sexual arousal to a higher level of "oxygen"-satisfaction. In Jungian terms, the enacted drama of salvation is a symbol of transformation. Understanding it is participating in what it was brought to communicate. In Freudian term, it is sublimation: the substitution of a non-sexual object-cathexis of libido, for the instinctual one. This is the way of Catholic priests, saints, and other clerics.
At this turn, "sin" becomes the infraction of an inner law, that is, a consciously self-imposed restriction. This is the mechanism of libidinal development Freud learned. We mature by learning to substitute higher, more differentiated satisfactions of libido for lower ones, thus vitiating the need for sacrifice for them. This is marked as a stage of symbolic development by the inner yielding of ego-self consciousness in participation with the sacrifice for humanity -- the Jesus trip. This became conscious in the 1960's. Defined them, actually. But this is now (2006).
That which is given as "sin" in the New Testament context, is , in the first place, a self-constraint imposed by grace, not force (it is developed from that). That is to say, by something that meets libido ("love") spontaneously, from within, to within. This would be a bond of communication of spirit, originating outside of, but passing through, individual consciousness. In Christianity, the Church represents that mythic/metaphysical symbolic bond. There has always persisted the tradition of an inner, or esoteric Church; a communality amounting to Archetypal identity communicated by the gospel story, overtly celebrated in institutional Churches. For those who have experienced that completion in themselves, no external confirmation is needed. Those for whom an external confirmation is needed have not internally confirmed it for themselves. The Freudian super-ego is the Father of the Christ beyond/in Jesus' body. This is not to say "Freud explained God"; they belong to different token-levels of discourse.
How Time Is Overcome In the New testament.... tbc
What "sin" remains if not sublimated, today.
Time must be depended upon to bring or excuse punishment. It you can "get by with it", you win. This is when "sin" is wrongdoing in time, by particular acts. Post new-Testament "sin" is eternal wrong doing. That is why there can be only one remedy in time. "For if we sin willfully after we have received knowledge of the truyth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries." (Heb. 10.26)
WHAT'S LEFT?
After the sublimated id-constraint is removed
Repressive de-sublimation
At the conscious level, return to the instinctual (sex-death) cathexis: this is desublimation
Decrease in the constraint against instant gratification; "go for it", "be here now -- its all you've got."
At the unconscious level: loss of grace and increased unconscious anxiety about punishment for sexsin.
Both together: More acceptance of sin at the conscious level, more punishment required to atone. The root of the idea is that pleasure deserves punishment. But since that is not just an "idea",but the form of a repetition-compulsion dynamic form of cyclic energy-discharge, it is not "cured" by being "disbelieved". It is a condition, and requires a metaphysical jolt to be corrected.
*******
The key argument, then, is this. Without the consciousness of human sacrifice ending the way of sacrifice, punishment for "original sin" will resume -- with a vigor renewed by despair.
That is one implication of leaving it to time to erase wrong-doing. If what is OK in ultimate terms is what you can get by with until it is forgotten, or obliterated, then there can be no inner peace, only despair of the soul.
*******
Jesus Christ is of mythic metaphysical importance because his story makes conscious and gets rid of the acceptance of sex as sin. One might say it opens another dimension of reality.
(sub-topic: Writing Original Sin out of Christianity)
This has not been adequately explained before, though of course preached a lot.
To preach what can be explained pitches the message to the token level of the preacher. This is why preachers have to either be a fool or think they have a calling
(although people will extend lots of slack to whoever does their best, for doing so).
"Jesus" forgives sin. For "God" worshippers -- those who assume the word has a meaning independently of incarnation -- "believing in Jesus" connects with "reconciliation with God", through the story of sacrifice on calvary paying the price and redeeming the soul from punishment "God" originally attached. These include: 1. Those who worship the Old Testament god "YHWH"; and 2. those who worship what they call "God" through the New Testament but take Jesus as claiming sonship to that deity.
This cannot be supported by the text. Jesus is Jewish on the mother's side only. The most explicit lineage on the Father's side in the New Testament is Hebrews 7: a priest on the order of Melchizedek. This refer to the pre-Abrahamic (non-semitic) priesthood at Salem (later Jerusalem) in Genesis 14.18. "God Most High" here translates "YHWH/ELOHIM". "ELOHIM" connects etymologically with the ancient Sumerian pantheon, and some scholars think Abraham's father, Terah, had been a priest in the temple of Ninurta (son of ENKI) in Kish before migrating west to Ur. The first chapters of Genesis are known to be condensations of their ancient literature, the creation story from the Marduk-Babylonian era (circa 2000 BCE), for instance. Much, much history had elapsed in Egypt and Mesapotamia before the Bible was written and its traceable historical characters appeared. It is far from the only, or best,source of ancient history civilization has, though almost the only continuous one for the last millenia or two. The association of "ELOHIM" with priests Abraham came across at "Salem" is a definite link to the larger-than-Biblical past, therefore a link between the one recognized in Hebrews as Jesus' Father.
"Before Abraham was, I AM," John quotes Jesus as saying (Jn. 8.58) "Whereupon the took up stones to kill him," he goes on to say.
Further, the newly published "Gospel of Judas" explicitly disconnects Jesus from the god his Jewish disciples prayed to; he laughs at them. "And the discipels said to him "Master, Why are you laughing at our prayer. We have done what is right." And he answered and said unto them "I am not laughing at you
The Way he taught incorporated forgiveness of sin. The mythic or metaphysical text is one thing, of course, and what he taught was another. It is important to disentangle YHWH from ELOHIM, however, in order to put to rest the notion of "sin" as sexuality. This goes to the dialectic of law and grace. YHWH "created the world", then laid punishment for the act leading to pro-creation onto it, which is remitted in return for blood sacrifice. That is the theological story of the Pentateuch (traditionally, Moses scripture). There is an evolution of the spiritual tradition through the Psalms of David (1000 BC), the Prophets and Babylonian captivity (through 500, to Job, then Christ (for those who followed this line). But the historical mythic metaphysical origin, the actual human roots of this great spiritual tree, go back to Sumerian-Egyptian context. In it, traditions of animal sacrifice abound: the Great White TAURUS Bull at Memphis, to BAAL at Baalbek; the burnt offerings on the altar Noah made of "every clean bird and every clean animal" after landingd the ark, from which "YHWH smelled a soothing aroma." In no other major tradition is there a connection between blood sacrifice, sin, and sexuality. Yet, no piece of literature has dominated human consciousness, I dare say, than the first chapters of Genesis, pertaining to Adam and Eve. This scroll from some Edomite son-in-law (Moses) who led the children of Israel (Isaac, Abraham) out of the land of Egypt (1750 BC?) imprinted the connection between the cosmos, Jesus' Father, and punishment for sex, on many, many generations of the human species that advanced into Modern Europe and America. Those who take the story of his death as the unique fulfillment of the sacrifice idea from the Biblical -- Original Sin -- find in it the completion, and end, of any blood sacrifice required to pay off YHWH for sex (or anything else). Jesus completed that myth without being defined by its metaphysic.
"But what IS "sin" if it's not sex?"
Transgressing a higher, inner law of the spirit, through grace.
The New Testament radically transforms the notion of "sin" by taking "the blood" involved in sexual arousal to a higher level of "oxygen"-satisfaction. In Jungian terms, the enacted drama of salvation is a symbol of transformation. Understanding it is participating in what it was brought to communicate. In Freudian term, it is sublimation: the substitution of a non-sexual object-cathexis of libido, for the instinctual one. This is the way of Catholic priests, saints, and other clerics.
At this turn, "sin" becomes the infraction of an inner law, that is, a consciously self-imposed restriction. This is the mechanism of libidinal development Freud learned. We mature by learning to substitute higher, more differentiated satisfactions of libido for lower ones, thus vitiating the need for sacrifice for them. This is marked as a stage of symbolic development by the inner yielding of ego-self consciousness in participation with the sacrifice for humanity -- the Jesus trip. This became conscious in the 1960's. Defined them, actually. But this is now (2006).
That which is given as "sin" in the New Testament context, is , in the first place, a self-constraint imposed by grace, not force (it is developed from that). That is to say, by something that meets libido ("love") spontaneously, from within, to within. This would be a bond of communication of spirit, originating outside of, but passing through, individual consciousness. In Christianity, the Church represents that mythic/metaphysical symbolic bond. There has always persisted the tradition of an inner, or esoteric Church; a communality amounting to Archetypal identity communicated by the gospel story, overtly celebrated in institutional Churches. For those who have experienced that completion in themselves, no external confirmation is needed. Those for whom an external confirmation is needed have not internally confirmed it for themselves. The Freudian super-ego is the Father of the Christ beyond/in Jesus' body. This is not to say "Freud explained God"; they belong to different token-levels of discourse.
How Time Is Overcome In the New testament.... tbc
What "sin" remains if not sublimated, today.
Time must be depended upon to bring or excuse punishment. It you can "get by with it", you win. This is when "sin" is wrongdoing in time, by particular acts. Post new-Testament "sin" is eternal wrong doing. That is why there can be only one remedy in time. "For if we sin willfully after we have received knowledge of the truyth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries." (Heb. 10.26)
WHAT'S LEFT?
After the sublimated id-constraint is removed
Repressive de-sublimation
At the conscious level, return to the instinctual (sex-death) cathexis: this is desublimation
Decrease in the constraint against instant gratification; "go for it", "be here now -- its all you've got."
At the unconscious level: loss of grace and increased unconscious anxiety about punishment for sexsin.
Both together: More acceptance of sin at the conscious level, more punishment required to atone. The root of the idea is that pleasure deserves punishment. But since that is not just an "idea",but the form of a repetition-compulsion dynamic form of cyclic energy-discharge, it is not "cured" by being "disbelieved". It is a condition, and requires a metaphysical jolt to be corrected.
*******
The key argument, then, is this. Without the consciousness of human sacrifice ending the way of sacrifice, punishment for "original sin" will resume -- with a vigor renewed by despair.
That is one implication of leaving it to time to erase wrong-doing. If what is OK in ultimate terms is what you can get by with until it is forgotten, or obliterated, then there can be no inner peace, only despair of the soul.
*******
Jesus Christ is of mythic metaphysical importance because his story makes conscious and gets rid of the acceptance of sex as sin. One might say it opens another dimension of reality.
posted by Sid Thomas | 1:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home