Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’ve had a reply from Adrian Thatcher, former head of Theology and Philosophy at the College of St Mark and St John. I’ve not reproduced his comments exactly – they’ve been edited for convenience. Any comments I have to make on his comments will be in italics.
The section of Mark’s gospel is almost certainly not the original ending to the gospel. Most of the ancient manuscripts end at verse 8. Every verse from 16:9-20 is taken from one of the other canonical gospels, and the reference to Mary Magdalene is thus dependent on Luke 8:2.
As far as the exegesis goes, he comments that the Greek language just wasn’t used in such a precise and determined way. He considers it unwise to have any exegesis hinge on this, especially considering that the language of demon possession may be largely metaphorical anyway. Fair comment on language, and it is true that almost all religious language is figurative; what the demon-possession metaphor might be referring to is open to debate of course. What is really needed is an analysis of how exorcism stories are used in the gospels. Having said that, and I think you’ll agree Simon, I don’t think accounts of exorcism can be so easily explained away. I fear that Adrian, like so many theologians, has bought into the materialist paradigm.
Adrian does point out that several English translations render Luke 8:2 in the passive case – “Mary of Magdala, from whom seven demons had come out…”, thereby avoiding the suggestion that Jesus actually exorcized them. I find this a curious comment, and one that I am taking up with Adrian. If the Greek is trying to avoid the suggestion that Jesus had exorcised Mary, what exactly is it suggesting?
Just a quicky, as I feel like my ‘satanic’ comment might have been misunderstood. I don’t think there is anything evil about the occult/psychic work, whatever you want to call it. I wouldn’t be on this forum if I did! And I agree with Yuri about satanism being more of a Christian heresy than anything else.
Re psychic protection, Yuri – I like your style! It may well be that the strength of your own “faith” (for want of a better word) does the trick just fine. I have been toying with the idea that the various methods of protection reinforce ones own self-belief – an aid to faith if you like, as well as aid in creating a mental frame of mind conducive to psychic/spiritual work. But then again, Simon’s story might be saying that we do need a boost from time to time.
Simon, your story is the kind of thing many of my co-religionists would sieze on to show that the “occult” (whatever that is) is satanic. As it involves drugs as well that’s a double-whammy! So, did clawing your way into consecrated ground work? Or are you still possessed?
I suppose the moral is to use protection. I am curious as to the different methods of protection people employ and views on their effectiveness. I am familiar with the “cone of power”, the kabbalistic cross and the lesser banishing ritual of the pentagram, as well as a variety of Christian protections such as the sign of the cross, caim prayers, variations on St Patrick’s breastplate and plain ol’ prayers (I won’t bore anyone with the details of these unless asked – they aren’t particularly special). Of course, it could be argued that the kabbalistic cross and pentagram ritual are Judeo-Christian as they invoke Hebrew god-names and angelic forces. Hmmm, a potentially interesting discussion on the distinction between religion and magic in there somewhere.
Yuri, re your comment on using contextual methods, do you have any nice examples? What you say reminds me of the Thelemic redactions of the pentagram rituals, where the Hebrew divine names are replaced with Thelemic names. I suppose you could do the same with any other mythos, though I guess you would need to think about it beforehand to get your correspondences right (and you always need to know which way is north!). The cone of power seems fairly mythos-neutral as it doesn’t invoke anything except light, which is perhaps why Andrew Collins seems to use it in his books a lot.
I’m not trying to over-compicate things, I’m just nosey about what people are doing.
Otherwise I agree with Simon on the benefits of alcohol, both as social lubricant and mind-relaxant. I have never used any other drug however, unless people want to discuss the uses of paracetamol.
Just to update on this, the tutor I asked re the translation wasn’t able to help, though she did comment that where an unusual word is used it is often understood to indicate the presence of an oral source. However, as luck would have it, my wife has had to have dealings with my retired tutor (who does know NT Greek), and he is allegedly quite happy for me to ask him questions – so I have. Failing that I do have a name of someone at the University of Exeter. With any luck we might have something on this soon.
I thought I had better check on what I said about the Mesopotamian thing, if only for my own satisfaction. I read the stories properly this time and the myth that I meant is Etana (I was probably confusing Etana and Adapa because in both the hero makes a journey to heaven – my memory is so bad). Etana is the first king of Kish after the flood. In the Old Babylonian Version (OBV), which is the oldest known version dating to sometime just after the beginning of the 2nd millenium BCE, it mentions the crown, headband, sceptre and staff as the tokens of kingship laid up in heaven before the high god Anu. The crown and headband apparently combine to form a single headpiece – the band circling the head and the crown sitting on top, presumably covering the head.
The later Standard Version doesn’t have those lines but does refer to the crown, headband, sceptre and throne. I gather that the OBV mentions both groups within a few lines of each other, but I can’t be sure about that.
The Etana story also refers to the creators of the four world regions, which are mentioned just before the four tokens of kingship. To my mind this suggests (though obviously it doesn’t prove) a relationship between each region and one of the tokens. If so it makes a nice piece of comparative mythology with the four treasures of the TdD.
I’m sure Andrew Collins must have mentioned Etana in Ashes of Angels, as it sits nicely with his theories (it has a tree with an eagle (=vulture?) at the top and serpent at the bottom, and what reads to me like a shamanic voyage of Etana to heaven on the back of the eagle). Etana is one of the few stories attested in art; ancient cylinder seals have been found showing Etana on the eagles back (I got this from Stephanie Dalley in ‘Myths from Mesopotamia’), which I guess might show the antiquity of the story. If there is some kind of relationship between these Mespopotamian and Celtic myths then perhaps the idea of the grail hallows go back a long, long way.
Edit – I don’t know what anyone thinks about the old Heritage material that Andrew Collins and Graham Phillips put together donkey years ago, but regarding links between Etana and the Celts, copies of Etana were found at Amarna. For what it’s worth.
Having just read about the use of various plants to gain access to the otherworld, I am wondering if anyone here has used or knows of someone else who has deliberately used mild-altering substances (trying to use a neutral term) for questing purposes?
Also, do people think alcohol has a positive or negative effect (or neutral effect) when engaged in questing; I would guess that if you can’t stand up that is probably negative, but I’m interested if anyone has an opinion on the use of modest amounts of drink.
Hello Stuart,
When you say you astral travel do you mean as in out-of-body-experience apparently in the physical realm, or as in visionary treks around otherworldly realms? Or both even (assuming they are to be distinguished, which is by no means certain)?
From your comment about it being frightening and exciting it sounds like your astral travels are involuntary. Would you care to say a little more to satisfy my voyeurism? Have you acquired knowledge in your travels that has been useful in what I laughingly call ‘normal’ consciousness?
Regards,
Michael
Yuri said:
Quote:the ‘veil’ between the worlds was almost nonexistent and that our ancient ancestors were able to communicaate with other beingsthese beings are possibly the origins of pantheons of gods, nephilim or whatever dawn of human being theory you want to talk about I’ve just read a fascinating interview with Graham Hancock in connection with his new book Supernatural. It’s in Sub Rosa, freely available as a pdf from here:
http://subrosa.dailygrail.com/index.html
It seems to be a book about the Otherworld and human contact with it. I gather that GH’s thesis is that about 40,000 years ago human beings started using various plants to experience alternate states in which they entered other realms of being and interacted with the denizens therein; this helps push human evolution and we begin demonstrating behaviour such as artistic and religious impulses (for example, early cave paintings are the attempts to depict the experiences of altered states).
The common experiences of people geographically and chronologically separated lead GH to believe that the psychedelic realm is not just all in the mind, but has some independent existence, and he connects it to faery lore, modern ‘alien abductions’ and sacred places (this is in the interview anyway, I haven’t read the book – I’ll add it to my ever-growing list of things to read when I get time) amongst other things.
Quote:that in many ways, this world , is the ‘movie’ MATRIXI like the Hindu description of this world being Maya – illusion. This doesn’t mean that our world doesn’t really exist; an illusion is real enough, it just isn’t what it appears to be. So far as I can tell the Gnostic myths which speak of the world as the creation of a blind demiurge are about the deceptiveness of material existence. Unlike what many of the Gnostics seemed to believe however, I don’t see material existence as something intrinsically negative; I suspect that it is our own minds and the world-views we weave that have put in place the deception, and I think that materiality is also open to transformation.
There is a reference in Mesopotamian myths to emblems or tokens of kingship. I checked quickly and in the myth of Adapa or Etana (I’ve forgotten which already!) these are numbered at four – after the flood they are in heaven and have to descend once more to the earth to re-instate kingship. They are the crown, the sceptre, the tiara and the shepherd’s crook. Different from the treasures of the Tuatha de Danann, but there does appear to be an underlying common theme: the return of kingship to earth with the four tokens and the arrival of the TdD in Ireland with the four treasures.
Also important in a lot of Mesopotamian myths is the Tablet of Destiny: possessing it grants control over the cosmos (something like that anyway) and it is linked with kingship, or at least kingship amongst the gods. In the Enuma Elish Marduk wins the Tablet of Destiny from Kingu and fastens it to his breast, thus securing his position as king over the gods. Sounds similar to the Stone of Destiny.
Thanks Adamastor, nice pics. It looks nothing like I imagined; as though one expects to find a church to be a building with a tower and so-on, and discovering it’s just a converted hall.
Hi Simon,
I don’t get any of the editing buttons on Submit News that I get when posting on the Forums. I manually used the url tags from the forums, but they are just being posted as text. It just looks untidy more than anything else.
Regards,
Michael
Yuri, I was doing some tidying at the weekend (my ‘pile it high’ filing system was beginning to break down again) and stuck in my pile was a Fortean Times from a month ago, maybe two months ago. It had a really interesting article on what you might call the Icelandic Otherworld.
I don’t know if you saw it at all, but most Icelanders believe in a variety of otherworld beings, to the extent that even the authorities take it seriously. The most commonly encountered are the hidden people, who appear to be just like us and live like us, but occupy what seems to be a parallel world that touches on our own. They also have faeries and what-not, but it’s these hidden people that are most encountered, and when I say encountered I don’t just mean sightings (how would you know they weren’t ‘one of us’?) but interactions. It appears that these interactions mostly happen when someone is in trouble. I hadn’t heard anything like these stories before, and wonder if there are similar stories from elsewhere; or is it just Iceland that is linked to the world of the hidden people?
If you didn’t see it I might be able to send it to you if you’re interested. PM if you like.
Hi Adamastor, that link was interesting. I didn’t realise that Crowley lifted the idea for his own Abbey of Thelema directly from Rabelais’ story. That’s what it looks like anyway.
Does anyone know what happened to the site of Crowley’s Abbey?
On a completely personal note, I think South African wines are gorgeous. I never remember the labels, but you can always trust them.
Adamastor, why don’t you say a few things about yourself and what you’re interested in and/or what you’re up to in the ‘Let me introduce myself’ section of the forums.
Regarding the notion that Jesus had an inner group of disciples that were distinct from the twelve apostles, I have had the following barmy idea (apologies if anyone else has already thought of this):
Jesus apparently appointed 12 apostles to symbolically represent the 12 tribes of Israel (never mind for now what the 12 tribes represent), and I think this is confirmed by Matthew 19:28 where Jesus says to the Twelve “you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” Among these 12 there are three who appear to be especially favoured; Simon Peter and James and John the sons of Zebedee. But are these three really Jesus’ inner core?
Further to the discussion on the icon beasts in the Icon Trail thread I have been looking at the arrangement of the tribes around the tabernacle (the portable sanctuary that preceeded the first temple – never mind whether it’s legendary or not). This is described in Numbers 2 and 3. The 12 tribes of Israel are encamped in specific positions around the tabernacle. However, Levi’s tribe is separate from this arrangement, the tribe of Joseph being divided into the two tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh to keep the number at 12. The tribe of Levi is divided into various clans according to the sons of Levi who are encamped directly around the tabernacle, having special responsibility for it. Aaron’s sons (from whom the priesthood descends) are on the east, along with Moses.
In terms of symbolism, if the 12 apostles were appointed to represent the 12 tribes, then at least it would make symbolic sense if there was an inner group that was appointed to represent the Levites around the tabernacle. It would also make sense if this group was based in or around Jerusalem, and Bethany is only a very short distance from Jerusalem. If Lazarus really was related to the High Priestly family that would make even more sense. What this inner group might be privy to is up for discussion, as is whether there really was an inner group at all (but I hope I’ve shown that the idea might not have been entirely alien to Jesus’ mind).
If there was an inner group, did James the brother of Jesus belong to it? I find it interesting that the early church is based in Jerusalem rather than Galillee (Jesus’ headquarters seemed to have been Capernaum), and that the head of the Jerusalem church isn’t one of the 12 but James. The Jerusalem church only loses its special position after 70 CE when Jerusalem is destroyed by the Romans.
I had to email another one of my old theology tutors about another matter and asked her about the translation (she can read Greek, but used to say she always had problems with Greek capitals – which is a problem in NT studies because all the documents were written entirely in capitals!). I don’t think she will dismiss it without looking at it or deferring to someone more knowledgeable, she is very broad minded. I remember having an in-class discussion where we discussed Mary Magdalene as possibly being the apostle to the apostles (something to do with the Gospel of Mary I think).
Obviously I can’t guarantee that she will come back to me on this.
Whatever the translation, the comment certainly seems intended to draw attention to Mary M. If the standard translation is the correct one, then was it intended to be a character assasination, and if so then one has to ask why it was felt necessary to do this. But the standard translation might also have a positive meaning – 7 being a perfect number, perhaps it means that Mary M had been perfectly ‘cleansed’ from all evil?
As an aside, the section of Mark’s gosple from verse 9 is universally (or near as dammit) acknowledged to be a later addition to the gospel, the original either ending at verse 8 or having a lost ending. So the reference in Mark 16:9 might be dependent upon Luke 8:2, even though Luke’s gospel is itself dependent upon Mark. It still begs the question why both authors/editors wanted to include this detail.
