Shreepal Singh, a Concerned Global Citizen: New Civilization: History (2): Early followers of Lord Jesus Christ (100 AD)    
 New Civilization: History (2): Early followers of Lord Jesus Christ (100 AD)16 comments
19 Feb 2006 @ 11:10, by Shreepal Singh



Historian Edward Gibbon (in his book: Decline and Fall of Roman Empire) remarks a very interesting aspect of the life of early disciples of Christ (that is, a few hundred years after his death) that has an important spiritual significance. It was their freedom from verbal fundamentalism and sincerity of heart. Gibbon observes:

It has been remarked, with more ingenuity than truth, that
the virgin purity of the church was never violated by schism or heresy before the reign of Trajan or Hadrian, about one hundred years after the death of Christ. We may observe, with much more propriety, that, during that period, the disciples of the Messiah were indulged in freer latitude both of faith and practice than has ever been aliowed in succeeding ages...

(The Gnostics, the early adherents) were almost without exception of the race of the Gentiles, and their principal founders seem to have been natives of Syria or Egypt, where the warmth of the climate disposes both the mind and the body to indolent devotion. The Gnostics blended with the faith of Christ many sublime but obscure tenets which they derived from oriental philosophy, and even from the religion of Zoroaster, concerning the eternity of matter, the existence of two principles, and the mysterious hierarchy of the invisible world.

This historian further says:

It was the universal sentiment both of the church and of heretics that the daemons (demons) were the authors, the patrons, and the objects of idolatry. These rebellious spirits who had been degraded from the rank of angels, and cast down into the infernal pit, were still permitted to roam upon earth, to torment the bodies, and to seduce the minds of sinful men. The demons soon discovered and abused the natural propensity of the human heart towards devotion, and, artfully withdrawing the adoration of mankind from their Creator, they usurped the place and honours of the Supreme Deity. By the success of their malicious contrivances, they at once gratified their own vanity and revenge, and obtained the only comfort of which they were yet susceptible, the hope of involving the human species in the participation of their guilt and misery.

Gibbon further informs us thus:

The ancient Christians were animated by a contempt for their present existence, and by a just confidence of immortality, of which the doubtful and imperfect faith of modern ages cannot give us any adequate notion. ... It was universally believed that the end of the world and the kingdom of Heaven were at hand. The near approach of the
wonderful event had been predicted by the apostles, the tradition of it was preserved by their earliest disciples, and those who understood in their literal sense the discourses of Christ himself were obliged to expect the second and glorious coming of the Son of Man in the clouds, before the generation was totally extinguished, which had beheld his humble condition upon earth, and which might still be witness of the calamities of the Jews under Vespasian or Hadrian... The doctrine of Christ's reign upon earth was at first treated as a profound allegory, was considered by degrees as a doubtful and useless opinion, and was at length rejected as the absurd invention of heresy and fanaticism. A mysterious prophecy, which still forms a part of the sacred canon, but which was thought to favour the exploded sentiment, has very narrowly escaped the proscription of the church.

He continues:

The divine inspiration, whether it was conveyed in the form of a waking or of a sleeping vision, is described as a favour very liberally bestowed on all ranks of the faithful, on a women as on elders, on boys as weil as upon bishops. When their devout minds were sufficiently prepared by a course of prayer, of fasting, and of vigils, to receive the extraordinary impulse, they were transported out of their senses, and delivered in ecstasy what was inspired, being more organs of the Holy Spirit, just as a pipe or flute is of him who blows into it. ... The expulsion of the demons from the bodies of those unhappy persons whom they had been permitted to torment was considered as a signal, though ordinary, triumph of religion, and is repeatedly alleged by the ancient apologists as the most convincing evidence of the truth of Christianity.

The awful ceremony was usually performed in a public manner, and in the presence of a great number of spectators; the patient was relieved by the power or skill of the exorcist, and the vanquished demon was heard to confess that he was one of the fabled gods of antiquity, who had impiously usurped the adoration of mankind. But the miraculous cure of diseases, of the most inveterate or even preter-natural kind, can no longer occasion any surprise, when we recollect that in the days of Irenaeus, about the end of the second century, the resurrection of the dead was very far from being esteemed as uncommon event, that the miracle was frequently performed on necessary occasions, by great fasting and the joint supplication of the church of the place, and that the persons thus restored to their prayers had lived afterwards among them many years.

Gibbon very rightly notices that the earliest Disciples of Christ had more devotion of heart (that is of the real worth in spiritual attainments) than skill of mind (that may make the faith look and appear more reasonable or acceptable). He says:

It is a very honourable circumstance for the morals of the primitive Christians, that even their faults, or rather errors, were derived from an excess of virtue. The bishops and doctors of the church, whose evidence attests, and whose authority might influence, the professions, the principles, and even the practice of their contemporaries, had studied the Scriptures with less skill than devotion; and they often received in the most literal sense those rigid precepts of Christ and the apostles to which the prudence of succeeding commentators has applied a looser and more figurative mode of interpretation. Ambitious to exalt the perfection of the Gospel above the wisdom of philosophy, the zealous and of patience, to a height that it is scarcely possible to fathers have carried the duties of self-mortification, of purity,attain, and much less to preserve, in our present state of weakness and corruption.

A true devotee of Christ at that early period knew the value of controlling his sensual tendencies and desires in the matter of realisation of divine Light and he tried to gain mastery over them. Gibbon states his keen observation in this regard thus:

The first sensation of pleasure was marked as the first moment of their abuse. The unfeeling candidate for Heaven was instructed not only to resist the grosser allurements of the taste or smell, but also even to shut his ears against the profane harmony of sounds, and to view with indifference the most finished productions of human art. Gay apparel, magnificent houses, and elegant furniture were supposed to unite the double guilt of pride and of sensuality: a simple and mortified appearance was more suitable to the Christian who was certain of his sin and doubtful of his salvation.

The true followers of Christ, at that puritan period of early Christianity, knew well that the desires of human beings distract them from the path of divine pursuit. These Christians, much unlike of today, ranked the celibacy at the highest in the order of virtues. Gibbon takes notice of this conviction of early Christians when he says:

The chaste severity of the fathers, in whatever related to the commerce of the two sexes, flowed from the same principle; their abhorrence of every enjoyment which might gratify the sensual, and degrade the spiritual, nature of man. ... It was their unanimous sentiment that a first marriage was adequate to all the purposes of nature and of society. The sensual connection was refined into a resemblance of the mystic union of Christ with his church, and was pronounced to be indissoluble either by divorce or by death. The practice of second nuptials was branded with the name of a legal adultery; and the persons who were guilty of so scandalous an offence against Christian purity were soon excluded from the honours, and even from the alms, of the church. Since desire was imputed as a crime, and marriage was tolerated as a defect, it was consistent with the same principle to consider a state of celibacy as the nearest approach to the divine perfection.



[< Back] [Shreepal Singh, a Concerned Global Citizen]

Category:  

16 comments

24 Feb 2006 @ 15:49 by rayon : Popped up
to see - so that's Gibbon done and dusted then!  

24 Feb 2006 @ 16:25 by martha : Last two paragraphs
I think there is a misunderstanding of Christ in the last two paragraphs. Christ nor his disciples believed in celibacy. You can quote all the sources you want to prove me wrong but prove to me the documents have not first been changed from the original.
To be a HUMAN one has been given the ability to enjoy life on many levels including sexual intimacy. To deny that aspect of one's self is denying GOD.

We are spirts having a material experience and that includes all aspects...body, mind, spirt and emotions. One's sexuality is deeply connected on all levels and can not be denied.

The enlightenment comes in fully appreciating one's desires while giving love and respecting one's self and others.  

24 Feb 2006 @ 19:58 by jerryvest : Fantastic, Martha...seems to me
that those who wish to deny their sexual energies and intimacy just spend their life projecting evil and sin on healthy human beings who express their love in a natural and normal way. After all, self-denial produces self-indulgence. Thank you for pointing out this misunderstanding of Christ.  

24 Feb 2006 @ 21:39 by martha : Thanks Jerry
Yeap same page...LOL  

25 Feb 2006 @ 14:30 by shreepal : Gibbon, celibacy, Lord Jesus Christ
My opinion on the subject of these comments is that the authority of what Lord Jesus Christ really meant in his words and conduct exceeds much above the authority what we ordinary human beings deduce from our 'simplistic' reasoning. We all here on these pages are merely students learning to decipher what Lord Jesus Christ 'really' stood for on the subject under discussion and, again I repeat, if we are able to decipher the truth taught by him on the subject we would be committed 'single mindedly' to that truth even if the same runs contrary to our common sense, knowledge and logic that self-denial produces self-indulgence etc.'The truth on the subject under discussion, whatever it may be, has beeen taught by words and conduct by Lord Jesus Christ, Lord Buddha ... etc and we must be able in our study to pick a common thread in the lives of all such great individuals. If we fail to find this common thread running in the life of not one but all such individuals, we can be rest assured that we have not been able to understand them 'correctly'.

Now, Lord Jesus Christ was not an ordinary individual, just like we all are here. Our logic and his logic are different. In dealing with the teachings of the Lord we are not much concerned with the 'normal human behavour', because the Lord had not come on our Earth to justify the 'normal human behaviour' by condoning their weakness; rather he had come to show us a path; he had come to elevate us from our normal human weakness.

Friends, you are right in your observations but they apply to 'normal human behaviour' that was sought to be elevated towards higher consciousness by our Lord. Every one of us is justified in pursuing a 'sexually indulgent behaviour of normal human beings' but this logic does not go further than this. We must learn from our Lord and his words and conduct; we are weak; we must admmit it; we are not bid by our saviour to remain weak, if possible.

Now, let me say a few words about your comments and clarifications etc. There are two aspects of the subject 'celibacy etc'. 1) What is the authority of Edward Gibbon in stating what he says about early disciples of Lord Jesus Christ quoted above in my article; and 2)How far he is justified in his statement (about celibacy etc.).

Gibbon in his masterpiece book of history'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' says on page 282 thus: The chaste severity of the fathers, in whatever related to the commerce of the two sexes, flowed from the same principle; their abhorrence of every enjoyment which might gratify the sensual, and degrade the spiritual, nature of man. It was their favourite opinion that, if Adam had preserved his obidience to the Creator, he would have lived for ever in a state of virgin purity, and that some harmless mode of vegetation might have peopled paradise with a race of innocent and immoral beings.

In support of his statement, Gibbon refers to Beausobre's 'Hist. Critique du Manicheisme, vii, 3. Justin, Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine, etc. (who are stated to ) strongly inclined to this opinion.

It may be a matter of more historical research on our part; but why are we afraid of learning from historical facts about the real 'meaning and intent' of our Lord? Our weakness cannot be our shield in these matters.

The second aspect of the comment relates to the justification and logic of the Gibbon's statement (about celibacy etc.). I do not intend to respond to this here as it nedds an article on the real teachings of our Lord on the subject under comment.  

25 Feb 2006 @ 15:06 by swanny : Love...
Love is ...
and love is "more" than sex or sexuality...
Sex may be a part of the synergistic whole of
love but there is more to Love than mere sex or sexuality...
Now the aspect of what this love is does not demean
sex but it does mean that we should not be all consumed
by sex and sexuality either...
There is more to life and love and humans then sex afterall.
To be stuck or obsessed with sex is ....?
well merely another addiction.
Sex I don't think was intended to be mere
"recreation" either but a divine gift meant to
be intimately shared and procur offspring by "significant and mutual" partners.
But then for us to move on and upward I suppose to
other aspects of love and life and being human...
although the "fascination" with sex does seem
to alievate the obstacle posed by boredom to most
such is our base human nature.

I suppose this is somewhat derived from my experience and reading and study of "The Harrad Experiment" by Robert H. Rimmer of the seventies.

I suppose on a more fictional and sensational note was the reading
and study of "The Drifters" by James Michner also around the 70s.  

25 Feb 2006 @ 17:05 by martha : Masterpiece??????
"Gibbon in his masterpiece book of history'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' " This book being a masterpiece is an opinion and not a fact. And typical of many of these books they are the male point of view. Women see all of this Jesus stuff much differently...or at least some of us do who are no longer fooled by the two centuries of lies told us about Jesus.

"their abhorrence of every enjoyment which might gratify the sensual, and degrade the spiritual, nature of man. " And this statment indicates that sensual and spiritual are at odds with each other. This is a LIE and all your log is doing is perpetuating these LIES. You certainly have your right to have your opinion but don't excpet some of us to swallow very old style thinking.

As Swanny pointed out Jesus and Love are deeply connected which includes our sexual nature. One does not deny the sensual but embraces it as part of GOD.

And the first statement of "My opinion on the subject of these comments is that the authority of what Lord Jesus Christ really meant in his words and conduct exceeds much above the authority what we ordinary human beings deduce from our 'simplistic' reasoning."
I really really have a hard time with your use of the words "simplistic reasoning"....very demeaning and condesending but then again you have a right to your views. Here at NCN there have been several log writers over the years that have tried this approach. This is VERY OLD STLYE THINKING>

The new civilization that is arising uses love, compassion, RESPECT, and treating everyone equal. Using words such as simplistic thinking, denying one's sexuality, put down of women (ADam's story), etc. is the old energy of control and fear.

And who are you to tell me about Jesus? I don't believe anything that you have written and I think the masterpiece is poison and perpetuates separation of humanity.  

25 Feb 2006 @ 17:57 by martha : And further more...
You can not build a new civilization with old ideas and looking at things in the same way. That includes the Bible and ALL other written materials coming from a patriarchal viewpoint.

Christ was never a christian, Buddha wa never a buddist and mohammad was never a muslim.  

25 Feb 2006 @ 18:55 by jobrown : Two Thumbs up, for you, Martha!
"Christ was never a christian, Buddha wa never a buddist and mohammad was never a muslim" ......and all the rest you say here, sure rings true from the HEART point! It has to be perceived and assimilated by the Heart. It doesn't require so called 'intellectual' /rational explanations at all, which all in reality is only us/our Souls searching for ever higher ( and thus more Life affirming ) Divine Truths!... and there's a lot of words floating in the "cosmic concept- soup", making up what could be seen as sentences, but just because of that, they don't always be guaranteed of containing too much of the highest Divine Truth, since ALL concepts are in that soup!!!... this is one of those things that is so hard to explain on the Mainstresm level of thinking/understanding. But anyone who taps into the Heart level knows what I am reaching for to express here.

" You can not build a new civilization with old ideas and looking at things in the same way. That includes the Bible and ALL other written materials coming from a patriarchal viewpoint."
Ohhhboy, isn't that thee Truth-understatement of the day! This is indeed the Truth that cannot be re-iterated strong enough and enough many times - untill EVERYBODY on the Planet has gotten " The Picture", that is! Then -and only then- can we settle!
THANKS Martha! : )

To Shrepaal I would like to say: there is nothing ugly, dirty, (-or other secret ideas you might have about sexuality that fall under the category of those words-)in the sexual expression of one's Love ( which after all is unconditional acceptance of another beings Divinity ) if/or when sexuality is seen/understood and expressed from the level of consciousness, that Martha is conveying here!
The lower one's Heart-felt Understanding is, the lower the sexual expression -and of course the other way around too!
We could just for simplicity of semantics call it Divine Sexuality is NOT lived on Mainstream/Patriarchal level of Awareness AT ALL!!!.... Let's leave with it at that for now, and just know that you and Martha are in this instant not coming from the same Understanding. ...and that is alright, byt hence the static!......  

25 Feb 2006 @ 19:57 by Istvan @68.105.165.74 : Golden chains
Shrepaal! Please drop me an email, so I can correspond with you, if you wish.
Examining with comlentative (opposite of simplistic)thinking of any, especoally the above, subject is not possible in this blogosphere.  

25 Feb 2006 @ 21:21 by swanny : As a child
by Istvan @68.105.165.74 : Golden chains
Shrepaal! Please drop me an email, so I can correspond with you, if you wish.
Examining with comlentative (opposite of simplistic)thinking of any, especoally the above, subject is not possible in this blogosphere.


"And they brought young children to Him, that He should touch them: and His disciples rebuked those that brought them. But when Jesus saw it, He was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto Me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God"
(Mark 10:13-14).


"God is love" (1John 4:8). "Whosoever shall not receive the Kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein" (Luke 18:17).

"For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those that find it." The words of the Lord Jesus Christ (Matthew 7:14)

Its a bit "antinomus" ah but such is life

ed  

26 Feb 2006 @ 09:21 by shreepal : Love, Lord Jesus...
Friends, sex is the greatest joy on Earth and it is so because it is full of love to the brim, even if we find it lasting momentarily. And, I agree that sex is full of love but love is not all sex. Not only all normal human beings but even animals, and seemingly lower forms of life too, enjoy sex. It happens to be the sole means, till today despite scientific advancements in the field, to procreate and perpetuate life on Earth. I cannot, even for a moment, condemn or disapprove of sex.

But there are states of consciousness where there is no 'desire', 'place' and 'possibility' of 'sexual urge' existiong. I am not talking of frigidity of mind or body of individuals. I am not talking of aversion to sex that is an ailment in body and mind. I am talking of people who are full of love towards not only to fellow human beings (female or male) but towards all creatures in world but have no urge for sex and who prove their point by 'performing acts that are beyond the capacity' of normal human beings. I am talking of people who can walk of sea, without boat and ship. I do not know whether you believe that Lord Jesus Christ walked on sea. How can a human being walk on sea? You bring all sorts of 'scientific' principles, density of water and human body etc. etc. and prove that no body can walk on sea, even Lord Jesus could not have done so. My little efforts have been devoted to meet such questions in the earlier part of my articles. My opinion is that it can be done and Lord Jesus did it. Please, go around and search for individuals, female and male both, who are able to act in a manner that is not possible for normal persons and you may find them. If (seemingly credible) reports are to be believed, there are individuals in different countries who rise above ground while worshipping, who do not breath for, if not months, many days and do not die (you say, hibernation!), who die (according to medical experts) and come back to life again (you explain by some biological laws! yes, laws are there; but then there are laws of what Lord Jesus said and did). I do not believe in supersitions; but neither I believe in falsely denying a truth.

Friends, mankind is still in the infancy of knowledge.

Then, one friend says, who am I to talk about Lord Jesus. I hold the position that Lord Jesus belongs to the whole mankind and that he never taught or meant to be sectarian.

Yes, I agree that Gibbon's History is merely an opinion. It may contain wrong facts. We should locate them and correct our perception about the true state of things.

Yes, friends, New Civilization cannot be founded on old ideas. New ideas are new interpretations of the OLD and EVER EXISTING realty. You can't talk of a thing that was never there. You simply discover. The universe and its realities were not born with the birth of human beings; nor shall they end with the exit of mankind (exit= Sun shall engulf our Earth when it becomes red giant etc.).

We all here are searching and researching the truth on which a New Civilization can be founded. I assure you I have no taste in going back to the past; I am not retrograde in my liking. But I love to go ahead towards future and its chellanges and opportunities.  

26 Feb 2006 @ 09:52 by vibrani : One can give the appearance
of walking on water when the tide is low - there are these areas in the Sea of Galilee when you can walk on the sea land and it looks like you're walking on water. Optical illusions. Now, if someone saw a spirit of Jesus, that's something else. I think that there were a lot of tall tales. What I never understand is why people keep talking about Jesus. For Christ's sake - leave him the fuck alone already. I just keep getting this picture of a very annoyed Jesus spirit wanting to close his hears from all the bitching and praying - oh Jesus, thank you for letting me win this award. Oh Jesus, please let my (fill in the blank) live, or kill my enemy...does anyone thank Jesus when someone dies or is in pain? Why thank Jesus at all?! Why not thank God, or thank yourselves, or thank doctors, or people who voted for you - but always Jesus when someone wins something? It's ridiculous how much Jesus is in conversations, especially with people who don't live what he taught. Great distraction.

His message was for every person to be the way themselves, not follow him, right? Not to call him Lord. So the only way is within, and then living that divine self in all aspects of your life. What is that divine self - figure it out. And you do the hokey pokey and you turn yourself around...That's what a new civilization is about.

The Dalai Lama is in Israel and he teaches the same thing: how a journey inward to one's soul can become a journey outward to social action. Reason must triumph over emotion; when in conflict, one must distinguish between an evil act and the actor who performs that act; today's enemy could be tomorrow's friend; compassion is a strategic choice. Anyway, more on my log about this.  

26 Feb 2006 @ 11:08 by jazzolog : Christ's Unlimited Love
graciously forgives...even selfish prayer. A picture of Jesus' holy spirit stopping his ears from the yearnings of stupid people may be a bit skewed...even skewered. I wonder if there's a vision of the spirit of the Wailing Wall.  

26 Feb 2006 @ 22:37 by vibrani : Of course, Jazz
but nevertheless, and while he respects free will, I am sure he shakes his head many a time and makes suggestions - how many are listening? I loved his depiction on "The Book of Daniel." The wailing wall - huh? Don't get what you're saying.  

22 Dec 2009 @ 21:11 by Optimum online nfl network @200.50.28.94 : Email on optimum online
Badly need your help. Sometimes love will pick you up by the short hairs...and jerk the heck out of you.
I am from Tajikistan and too bad know English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "Optimum online, the conventions build to check a reason that supports delays some order over their confidence, but adds not not seek the use of decisions or the card of responsible space."

With best wishes :-(, Optimum online nfl network.  

Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
Subject:       
Comment:
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:

Other entries in
24 Apr 2013 @ 11:33: Let there be on Earth: Peace! Change!! And, Change tempered with Wisdom!!!
3 Feb 2013 @ 06:02: An experiment in Democratic World World Government of connected volunteers
25 Sep 2012 @ 05:16: New Civilization for 21st Century
12 Aug 2012 @ 16:20: Higgs boson and more destructive weapon than Atom Bomb
30 May 2012 @ 10:13: First Earth Summit of Peoples' for New Civilization: Need to Begin
17 May 2012 @ 12:59: Impending Global Upheaval and suggested Social Engineering
2 Apr 2012 @ 14:52: People's Manifesto
14 Nov 2011 @ 15:21: OWS: How to survive the winter and emerge stronger?
7 Nov 2011 @ 10:22: Occupy Wall Street: To win, make OWS global movement
26 Oct 2011 @ 13:38: "Occupy Wall Street" movement: Let people demand "Direct Democracy"


[< Back] [Shreepal Singh, a Concerned Global Citizen] [PermaLink]?