Patriarch Pavle and Public Transportation

Patriarch Pavle was often referred to by some as a "walking saint" based on his simple lifestyle and humility. Whereas bishops around the world are often wrongly criticized for the cars they drive and despite the fact that every bishop in Serbia owns a car to travel around their diocese, he did not. When asked why he never obtained an automobile, he replied: "I will not purchase one until every Albanian and Serbian household in Kosovo and Metohija has an automobile."

Below are two other stories regarding the way Patriarch Pavle preferred to travel:

The deacon of Patriarch Pavle of Serbia once learned the following lesson while in Belgrade as they were going to a church in Banovo Brdo.

He asked the Patriarch: "With what shall we go, with a car?"

"No, with the bus!" said the Patriarch emphatically.

"But the bus is always crowded and the heat is esphyxiating. It is not even nearby."

"This is how we are going", said the Patriarch.

"Your Holiness", said the deacon in an effort to convince him otherwise, "it is summer time and the people are going swimming to the small island of Tsigalia and the majority of people are nearly naked. It isn't right?"

"Father", said the Patriarch silently, "each person sees whatever he wants."


The residents of Belgrade frequently saw the Patriarch in the streets, on the train and on the bus. One day as he was walking to the bus, a Mercedes of the latest model pulled up next to him. It was a priest of one of Belgrade's richest churches.

The driver of the Mercedes told the Patriarch as he was getting on the bus: "Your Holiness, please allow me to take you wherever you want."

"Father, to whom belongs this fabulous car?"

"It is mine, Your Holiness."

"Stop right there immediately!" said the Patriarch. He got down off the bus, went over to the priest, blessed him with the sign of the Cross, and told him: "May God protect you!"

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

GUIDELINES FOR ALL ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS

By Metropolitan Philaret Voznesensky, the New Confessor (+1985)

Metropolitan Philaret's sermons and advice to his spiritual children were always characterized by the simplicity in all his words which paralleled his action; there was never anything artificial about him. "Be, and not merely appear to be"—-this testament of his famous namesake was incarnated in His Eminence throughout his earthly presence.

1. Remember, you are a son (daughter) of the Orthodox Church. These are not empty words. Remember the commitment this entails.

2. Earthly life is fleeting; one is hardly aware of the swiftness of its passing. Nevertheless, this transient life determines the eternal destiny of your soul. Do not forget this for a moment.

3. Try to live piously. Pray to God in church, pray to God at home—fervently, with faith, trusting yourself to God's will. Fulfill the holy and saving precepts of the Church, Her rules and commandments. Outside the Church, outside obedience to Her, there is no salvation.

4. The gift of words is one of God's greatest gifts. It ennobles man, lifting him above all other creatures. But how this gift is now misused by a corrupt humanity! Safeguard this gift and learn to use it as befits a Christian. Do not judge, do not speak idly. Avoid, like fire, bad language and seductive conversation; do not forget the words of our Lord and Saviour: "By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned" (Mt 12:37). Do not indulge in lying. Holy Scripture sternly forewarns: "The Lord shall destroy all them which speak a lie" (Ps. 51:4).

5. Love your neighbor as yourself, according to the Lord's commandment. Without love there is no Christianity. Remember, Christian love is SELF-SACRIFICING, and not egocentric. Do not miss an opportunity to show love and mercy.

6. Be meek, pure and modest in your thoughts, words and deeds. Do not imitate the profligate. Do not take their example, and avoid close acquaintance with them. Have no unnecessary dealings with unbelievers - unbelief is infectious. Observe meekness and propriety always and everywhere; avoid becoming contaminated by the shameless habits of today's world.

7. Fear vanity and pride; run from them. Pride caused the highest and most powerful angel to be cast down from heaven. Remember, 'thou art earth and to the earth shalt thou return...' Deeply humble yourself.

8. The fundamental task in life is to save one's soul for eternity. Keep this as the most essential task, the main concern of your life. Woe to those whose indifference and neglect bring their souls to eternal ruin.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Ten Swine Flu Lies Told by the Mainstream Media

The mainstream media is engaged in what we Americans call “bald faced lies” about swine flu. It seems to be true with this issue more than any other, and it became apparent to me recently when a colleague of mine — a nationally-syndicated newspaper columnist — told me their column on natural defenses for swine flu was rejected by newspapers all across the country. Many newspapers refused to run the column and, instead, ran an ad for “free vaccine clinics” in the same space.

The media, it seems, is so deeply in bed with the culture of vaccinations that they will do almost anything to keep the public misinformed. And that includes lying about swine flu vaccines.

There are ten key lies that continue to be told by the mainstream media (MSM) about swine flu and swine flu vaccines.

Lie #1 – There are no adjuvants used in the vaccines

I was recently being interviewed by a major U.S. news network when the reporter interviewing me came up with this humdinger: There are no adjuvants being used in the swine flu vaccines, he said!

I assured him that adjuvants were, indeed, a crucial part of the vaccine recipe, and they were being widely used by drug companies to “stretch” the vaccine supply. It’s no secret. But he insisted he had been directly told by a drug company rep that no adjuvants were being used at all. And he believed them! So everything being published by this large news network about swine flu vaccines now assumes there are no adjuvants in the vaccines at all.

Lie #2 – The swine flu is more dangerous than seasonal flu

This lie is finally starting to unravel. I admit that in the early days of this pandemic, even I was concerned this could be a global killer. But after observing the very mild impact the virus was having on people in the real world, it became obvious that this was a mild flu, no more dangerous than a seasonal flu.

The MSM, however, continues to promote H1N1 swine flu as being super dangerous, driving fear into the minds of people and encouraging them to rush out and get a vaccine shot for a flu that’s really no more likely to kill them than the regular winter sniffles. Sure, the virus could still mutate into something far worse, but if it does that, the current vaccine could be rendered obsolete anyway!

Lie #3 – Vaccines protect you from swine flu

This is the biggest lie of all, and the media pushes it hard. Getting a vaccine, they insist, will protect you from the swine flu. But it’s just flat-out false. Even if the vaccine produces antibodies, that’s not the same thing as real-world immunity from a live virus, especially if the virus mutates (as they often do).

As I pointed out in a recent article, statistically speaking the average American is 40 times more likely to be struck by lightning than to have their life saved by a swine flu vaccine. (http://www.naturalnews.com/026955_swine_flu_vaccines_flu_vaccines.html)

Lie #4 – Vaccines are safe

And how would any journalists actually know this? None of the vaccines have been subjected to real-world testing for any meaningful duration. The “safety” of these vaccines is nothing more than wishful thinking.

The MSM also doesn’t want you to know what’s in the vaccines. Some vaccines are made from viral fragments grown in diseased African monkeys. If that sounds incredible, read the true story here:

http://www.naturalnews.com/026779_swine_flu_patents_vaccines.html

Lie #5 – The vaccine isn’t mandatory

You hear this lie all the time: The swine flu vaccine shot is voluntary, they say. But it’s not true if you’re an employee at a place where vaccines are being mandated. Millions of Americans are now being told by their employers that if they don’t get vaccine shots, they will be effectively fired from their jobs. It’s especially true with health care workers, day care employees and school teachers.

Lie #6 – Getting a vaccine shot is a good bet on your health

In reality, a vaccine shot is far more likely to harm you than help you. According to one viral expert, the actual mortality rate of the swine flu virus is estimated to be as low as .007 percent.

(http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE58E6NZ20090916)

That means H1N1 swine flu kills less than one person in 100,000. Even if the vaccine works, let’s say, 10 percent of the time, you’d have to vaccine one million people to prevent one death from swine flu.

And in vaccinating one million people, you would inevitably harm or kill several people, simply from the vaccine side effects! Your net risk of death is increased by getting a swine flu vaccine.

Lie #7 – The vaccine isn’t made with “attenuated live virus”

When the swine flu vaccines were first being announced several months ago, they were described as being made with “attenuated live virus.” This was directly mentioned in CDC documents, among other places.

This term apparently freaked out the American news consumer, and it has since been all but erased from any discussion about vaccines. Now, journalists will actually argue with you and insist the vaccines contain no attenuated live viruses whatsoever.

Except they’re wrong. The vaccines are, indeed, made with “attenuated live viruses.” That’s how you make a vaccine: You take live viruses, then you weaken them (“attenuate”) and inject them into people.

Lie #8 – Wash, wash, wash your hands (to avoid exposure)

This idea of washing your hands a hundred times a day is all based on the assumption that you can avoid exposure to the swine flu virus. But that’s impractical. The virus is now so widespread that virtually everyone is certain to be exposed to it through the air if not other means. This whole idea of avoiding exposure to the swine flu virus is nonsense. The conversation should shift to ways to survive exposure via a healthy immune system.

Of course, hand washing is a very good idea in a hospital setting. Recent news reveals that doctors are too busy to wash their own hands, resulting in the rampant spread of superbugs throughout most large hospitals in first world nations.

Lie #9 – Children are more vulnerable to swine flu than adults

This is just a flat-out lie, but it makes for good vaccine sales. Vaccines are right now being targeted primarily to schoolchildren.

But the truth is that swine flu is extremely mild in children. “It’s mildest in kids,” says Dr Marc Lipsitch of Harvard University. “That’s one of the really good pieces of news in this pandemic.” Reuters actually had the guts to report this story, but most of the larger media outlets are still reporting that children are the most vulnerable.

Lie #10 – There is nothing else you can do beyond a vaccine and Tamiflu

This is where the media lies by omission. The mainstream media absolutely refuses to print just about any story that talks about using vitamin D, anti-viral herbs or natural remedies to protect yourself from swine flu. In the MSM, there are two options and only two: Vaccines and Tamiflu. That’s it. No other options exist in their fictional reality.

Why is the mainstream media so afraid to print the truth these days? Why can’t reporting on swine flu see the light of day… literally, with a mention of sunlight and vitamin D? Apparently, Big Pharma has such a tight grip on mainstream newspapers that no true story on swine flu can ever make it past the editor’s desk.

Killing stories, deceiving the public

It must really be depressing to work for the mainstream media. Even the reporters I know can’t stand it. The truth, they admit, rarely makes it into print.

Over the last few years, I’ve had a couple of job offers from large media outlets. They want to pay me a six-figure salary and stick me behind a desk where they can control what I report. Needless to say, I routinely reject those offers. If I can’t write the truth like I do here on NaturalNews.com, there’s no point writing at all. In too many ways, the mainstream media has become little more than a corporate mouthpiece, whoring itself out to the highest bidder / advertiser.

It’s no fault of the frontline reporters who actually work there. For the most part, they agree with what I’m saying. It’s the fault of the profit-oriented corporate mindset where news is about selling newspapers rather than actually informing the public.

Important news stories get killed every day in the newsrooms across America. They get killed not because they are poorly investigated or poorly written, but because they upset advertisers and corporate string pullers who shape the news and reject any stories that threaten their own financial interests.

Here in 2009, the distorted reporting on the swine flu vaccine has been one of the greatest media frauds ever perpetrated. The media has in every way contributed to the widespread ignorance of the American people on the subject of vitamin D and natural immune-boosting defenses that could reduce swine flu fatalities. Rather than informing readers, the MSM has made it a point to keep the people stupid, and in doing so, the media has failed its only mission and betrayed the very audience is claims to serve.

Source: http://www.naturalnews.com/027055_swine_flu_vaccines

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Fifty Philosophers Who Converted to Christianity

On November 17 we celebrate the memory of 50 philosophers and rhetors who were converted to Christianity from Paganism following a debate with the wise Katherine of Alexandria, whose memory is celebrated on November 25. At this time the emperor Maximinus was himself in Alexandria for a pagan feast day and ordered its citizens to offer a sacrifice to the idols. Katherine refused and the emperor sought her conversion. Because of her God-given wisdom the emperor was unable to persuade her so he called for 50 of the most learned men. The emperors plan backfired. Following their conversion they were immediately martyred for their new Christian faith. Seven days later St. Katherine also was brutally martyred for her Christian faith.

Below is the account of the debate between St. Katherine of Alexandria and the 50 philosophers and rhetors who sought to persuade her to deny her Christian faith, as recounted by St. Dimitri Rostov:

The Emperor commanded that Katherine be brought before him. Entering his presence, she prostrated herself, rendering him due homage. Then she said boldly, "Know, 0 Emperor, that you have been led astray by the demons, for the idols you serve are lifeless and subject to corruption. Great is the shame of the blind, foolish men who worship such vile things! Accept the words of your wise philosopher Diodorus, who says that your gods were once impious men and that because of the notable deeds they worked during their lifetime, the people raised up pillars and statues in their honor. Later generations were unaware of the intention of their forefathers, who erected these things only as memorials. Counting the statues as worthy of reverence, the people began to worship them as gods. Know also that the famed Plutarch of Cheronea considered that your gods were not divine, and reviled them. Believe the words of your teachers, O Emperor, and do not make yourself guilty of the perdition of many souls. In this way you may escape the eternal torment that awaits you. Come to know the one, true God, Who is ever-existent, unoriginate, and immortal, and became man in the last times for our salvation. By Him kings reign and nations are ruled, and the whole world is sustained. He created and upholds all things by His word, for He is the almighty and all-good God, Who has no need of your sacrifices and takes no delight in the slaughter of innocent beasts but commands only that we steadfastly keep His commandments."

Hearing this, the Emperor was greatly enraged, remaining speechless for a long time. Unable to reply to Katherine’s words, he said only, "Leave us now to offer sacrifice, and we will hear you at another time."

After his vile festival had come to an end, the impious Emperor commanded that Katherine be brought to his palace. He said to her, "Tell us, maiden, who you are, and repeat what you said before."

"I am the daughter of one of the previous emperors," the saint replied, "and my name is Katherine. Formerly I was engaged in the study of rhetoric, philosophy, geometry, and the other sciences, but now I have abandoned these things as vain and useless and have betrothed myself to the Master Christ, Who said through the prophet, 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and do away with the understanding of the prudent'."

The Emperor marvelled at Katherine’s wisdom, and seeing how fair she was, imagined that she was not the daughter of mortal parents but some goddess born to the deities whom he worshipped. He could not believe that a maiden of such indescribable loveliness could be the child of earthly parents, and wounded by her beauty, began to speak lustful words to her. The saint perceived that the Emperor’s thoughts had turned to iniquity, and said to him, "The demons whom you revere as gods lead you astray and tempt you with foolish desires. But I know that I am mere dust and earth. God has created me in His image and likeness, adorning me with comeliness so that the people might marvel at the bounty of the Creator, Who has deigned to bestow wisdom and beauty upon what is corruptible and worthless."

Katherine’s words annoyed the Emperor, who said, "Say no evil of the gods, for their glory is immortal!"

"If you wish to dispel the darkness and gloom of the deception that has ensnared you, understand that your gods are nothing, and come to know the true God. The mere sound of His name or the sight of His Cross traced in the air suffice to drive away and destroy your gods. If you wish, I shall prove to you the truth of my words," declared Katherine.

Afraid to be overcome and put to shame by the maiden’s bold and wise words, the Emperor replied, "It is not proper for the Emperor to dispute with women. Instead, I will assemble learned philosophers to debate you. Thus you will learn how groundless are your speculations and accept our beliefs."

The Emperor commanded that the holy virgin be kept under close guard and immediately sent the following decree to every city in his dominions: "The Emperor Maxentius to all the learned philosophers and orators in the lands under my rule: Hail! Come to me, all you who serve the most wise god Hermes and call upon the Muses as patrons of erudition, and stop the mouth of a certain learned maiden who has appeared as of late and mocks our gods, calling their histories myths and fables. Come, that you may display your knowledge of the wisdom of the ancients, be acclaimed by men, and receive from me gifts as rewards for your labors!"

Fifty chosen rhetoricians, skilled in debate and mighty in declamation, assembled in Alexandria. The Emperor addressed them thus: "Prepare yourselves diligently and carefully to contend with the maiden and to prevail in dispute with her concerning the gods. Do not be slack in your efforts because it is with a woman that you debate, but make every effort to overcome her as though she were the mightiest of opponents and the wisest of orators. Display all your learning, for I have tried her and found her to be wiser than Plato; strive your best in debate against her, sparing no exertion. If you prevail over her, I will bestow upon you rich gifts, but if you are vanquished, you shall be rewarded only with a bitter death."

One of the most learned and renowned of the orators answered the Emperor, saying, "Have no fear, O Emperor, for although the maiden may possess a keen mind, it is not possible that she has attained the highest degree of learning or perfection in rhetoric. Command her to stand before us, and you will see her quickly put to shame by the mere sight of such an assembly of philosophers and rhetoricians."

Hearing the philosopher’s declaration, the Emperor grew calm and was filled with joy, hoping that the vile, boastful tongues of his orators would prevail over the divine wisdom of the meek maiden. He straightway ordered that the saint be brought before him, and a great multitude of people assembled in the arena, eager to witness the debate. Before the messengers arrived, the archangel Michael came from heaven and said to the saint, "Fear not, 0 maiden chosen by the Lord! The Lord shall add to your wisdom even greater wisdom, and you will prevail in debate over fifty orators. Through you they and many others shall come to believe and receive the crown of martyrdom."

When the messengers arrived, they took Katherine and led her before the Emperor and the philosophers, to be made a spectacle unto all. The vainglorious philosopher who answered the Emperor immediately began to boast before Saint Katherine and asked, "Is it you who shamelessly and foolishly reviles our gods?"

"It is I," the saint answered meekly. "But I do not revile them shamelessly and foolishly as you say. I speak the truth gently and lovingly, proclaiming that your gods do not exist."

"The great poets refer to our divinities as ’the most high gods,’" said the orator. "How then can you insolently blaspheme the deities that have bestowed upon you wisdom and permitted you to taste of their sweet gifts?"

Katherine replied, "It was not your gods but my God, Who alone is true, that vouchsafed me wisdom; for He is Himself Wisdom and Life. He who fears Him and keeps His divine commandments is indeed a true philosopher. However, the deeds of your gods and the stories that are told of them are truly worthy of laughter and ridicule, and are full of deceit. But tell me, which of your great poets called your deities gods, and what did they say concerning them?"

The orator answered, "First of all, the most wise Homer prayed to Zeus, exclaiming, ’0 most glorious Zeus, thou great god, and ye other immortal gods!’ The renowned Orpheus likewise gave thanks unto Apollo, crying, ’O son of Leto, thou who loosest thine arrows from afar! Mighty Phoebus, who lookest down upon all and rulest over mortals and immortals, 0 sun that soarest on wings of gold!’ Thus do the most eminent and celebrated of the poets refer to the gods, speaking of them as immortal. Therefore, do not be deceived, nor worship the Crucified One as God, for the wise men of old never called Him a god, nor indeed did they know of Him."

"But did not your Homer say in another place that Zeus, the greatest of your deities, was a liar and a wicked deceiver, and that other gods, Hera, Poseidon, and Athena, would have bound him had he not fled?" said Katherine. "Your books are full of similar things which show your gods to be disreputable. Although it is not fitting that vain, disrespectful enquiry be made concerning the Crucified One (since He is the true God, the Maker of heaven and earth, the sea, sun, moon, and stars, and the whole race of man), yet because you say that none of the teachers of antiquity confess Him to be God, I shall bring forth testimony to refute you, thus confirming the truth. Hear how the most wise Sybil witnesses to His divine Incarnation and saving Crucifixion: ’In the latter times One shall come Who will take on flesh, but without sin. He shall destroy the corruption of the incurable passions by the boundless omnipotence of His divinity, and the unbelieving people will hate Him. Upon a high place shall He be hung, as though He were worthy of such a death.’ Hear also how your Apollonius, compelled by Christ’s power, speaks the truth, although unwillingly, confessing Him as the true God. He says, ’He Who dwells in the heavens constrains me to speak. He is the triune light, the God Who undergoes suffering (although His divinity does not suffer), for He is both mortal according to the flesh and a stranger to corruption. He is at once God and a man Who endures all things at the hands of mortals: the Cross, revilement, and burial.’ Thus spoke Apollonius concerning the true God, Who is coeternal and of one essence with Him Who begot Him. He is the source, the root, the fount of every blessing; He it is that brought the world from nothingness into being and continues to uphold it. Consubstantial with the Father, He became man for our sake and walked on the earth, instructing, teaching, and benefiting men. He also submitted to death for us, to abolish our former condemnation and to vouchsafe us the sweetness and blessedness that were once ours. Then, having opened for us the gates of paradise, closed by evil, He rose on the third day and ascended into heaven, from whence He came. He sent down the Holy Spirit upon His disciples, and they went about preaching His divinity, in which you also, 0 philosopher, ought to believe, so that you may become His true servant. For He is merciful and summons all who have sinned, saying, 'Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.' Believe, then, your own teachers and gods, Plato, I say, Orpheus, and Apollonius, who although unwillingly, plainly confessed Christ to be God."

Hearing the wise Katherine say these things and much else besides, the philosopher was amazed and fell silent. The Emperor saw that his champion had been vanquished and left speechless, and commanded the other rhetoricians to enter into dispute with the holy virgin, but they refused, saying, "We are unable to withstand the truth. If the most learned of our number was overcome and silenced, what can we hope to accomplish?"

The Emperor was moved to wrath and ordered that a great fire be prepared in the middle of the city to burn alive all the philosophers and orators. When they learned of the sentence pronounced upon them, they fell at the saint’s feet, beseeching her to pray for them to the one true God so that He might forgive them the sins they had committed in ignorance and deem them worthy of Holy Baptism and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The saint responded joyfully, "Truly you are blessed, for you have abandoned darkness and come to know the true Light! Having forsaken an earthly emperor, subject to corruption, you have come unto the King of heaven, Who knows no corruption. Believe firmly that the fire with which the impious threaten you shall serve as your Baptism and be a ladder leading you up to heaven. In that fire you will be cleansed of every defilement of flesh and spirit, and you will be presented pure and radiant as the stars before the Lord of glory, Whose beloved friends you shall become."

While saying this, Saint Katherine traced over each of the philosophers and orators the sign of Christ’s sacred Cross. Full of hope and gladness, they went joyfully to their martyrdom. It was the seventeenth day of the month of November when the soldiers cast them into the fire. That evening, pious Christians collected their bodies, which remained whole: even their hair was untouched by the fire. Many turned to the truth because of this miracle, and the relics were reverently buried in a fitting place.

The Emperor could think of nothing but how he might bring Saint Katherine to accept his impious beliefs. Unable to accomplish this through philosophic debate, he sought to lead her astray by flattery and deceit....

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Mount Athos Featured in "National Geographic"

[For the beautiful photo gallery accompanying this article, see here.]

Called to the Holy Mountain:
The Monks of Mount Athos

By Robert Draper

The holy peninsula of Mount Athos reaches 31 miles out into the Aegean Sea like an appendage struggling to dislocate itself from the secular corpus of northeastern Greece. For the past thousand years or so, a community of Eastern Orthodox monks has dwelled here, purposefully removed from everything except God. They live only to become one with Jesus Christ. Their enclave—crashing waves, dense chestnut forests, the specter of snowy-veined Mount Athos, 6,670 feet high—is the very essence of isolation.

Living in one of the peninsula's 20 monasteries, dozen cloisters, or hundreds of cells, the monks are detached even from each other, reserving most of their time for prayer and solitude. In their heavy beards and black garb—worn to signify their death to the world—the monks seem to recede into a Byzantine fresco, an ageless brotherhood of ritual, acute simplicity, and constant worship, but also imperfection. There is an awareness, as one elder puts it, that "even on Mount Athos we are humans walking every day on the razor's edge."

They are men—exclusively. According to rigidly enforced custom, women have been forbidden to visit Mount Athos since its earliest days—a position born out of weakness rather than spite. As one monk says, "If women were to come here, two-thirds of us would go off with them and get married."

A monk cuts his ties from his mother but gains another: the Holy Virgin Mary (who, legend has it, was blown off course while sailing to Cyprus, stepped foot on Mount Athos, and blessed its pagan inhabitants, who then converted). He forms an intense bond with his monastery's abbot or his cell's elder, who becomes a spiritual father and, in the words of one monk, "helps me find my personal relationship with Christ." The retirement or death of these eminences can be difficult for the younger monks. Conversely, a young man's decision to return to the world may also be wrenching. "Last year one left," recalls an elder. "He didn't ask for my opinion," he adds, his voice betraying a fatherly hurt, "so it's just as well that he's gone."

Christian monks (derived from the Greek root monos, or "single") first began forming collective refuges, or monasteries, in the Egyptian desert in the fourth century. The practice spread across the Middle East and into Europe, and by the ninth century hermits had arrived on Mount Athos. Since that time, as civilization has grown more complex, the reasons for distancing oneself from society and turning to monasticism have multiplied. Indeed, after two world wars and communism reduced the monastic population to 1,145 in 1971, the past decades have seen a rebirth. A steady influx of young men—often with college degrees, a number from the former Soviet bloc—has dramatically increased Mount Athos's ranks to nearly 2,000 monks and novices, while Greece's entrance into the European Union in 1981 made the peninsula eligible for EU preservation funds.

"There are 2,000 stories here—everyone has their own spiritual walk," says Father Maximos, whose own walk began in Long Island as a teenage devotee of edgy musical artists like Lou Reed and Leonard Cohen, and who later became a theology professor at Harvard before resigning to "live my life closer to God."

Many such journeys begin uneasily. An Athens boy sneaks away from his household, and when his brother comes to Mount Athos to fetch him, the boy warns, "I'll just escape again." A Pittsburgh grocer's son stuns his parents with his decision—which, two years later, he acknowledges may be temporary, saying, "I mean, who knows what God has planned?" If the aspirants appear unready, their spiritual father will urge them to go back. Otherwise, the candidate will be tonsured under candlelight: The abbot cuts a tiny cross out of the hair on his scalp, bestows him with the name of a saint, and a monk is born.

Their stories hardly end when they enter Mount Athos. A wayward hippie from Australia named Peter is now Father Ierotheos, an accomplished baritone chanter at the Iviron monastery. Father Anastasios learned to paint here and now exhibits his work in places as far-flung as Helsinki and Granada, Spain. Father Epiphanios took it upon himself to restore the ancient vineyards of Mylopotamos, and today he exports excellent wine to four countries, in addition to publishing a cookbook of monks' recipes in three languages.

For better or for worse, the monastic brotherhood consists of men who finally cannot help but be who they are, fleshed out beneath their robes. Some are independent by nature and opt to live on their own in countryside cells. Some are small-minded—and indeed, as one monk says, "monastery life can be absolutely consumed with pettiness." However, the very best of them do not merely radiate goodwill but seek out where it's most needed. Father Makarios of the Marouda cell near Karyes is such a man, freely bestowing on strangers his spare coat, his spare room, all of the money in his pocket. "With real faith," the 58-year-old monk with animated green eyes says, "you have freedom. You have love."

The monasteries are anything but monolithic. The seaside Vatopediou monastery is rich with Byzantine treasures and ambition—among its monks is a full-time music director—while the decidedly agrarian Konstamonitou monastery embraces a rustic lifestyle free of electricity or donations from the European Union. ("You cannot be ascetic with all these easy things," observes one of its elders.) The monks of Mount Athos did not leave behind their human audacity, attested to by the glorious positioning of Simonos Petras, a monastery suspended high over an infinite seascape as if clinging to heaven's ladder. Some monks, however, commit to the hermitic barrenness of raggedy huts along the cliffs of Karoulia.

Still others opt for zealotry. Such is the case for the residents of Esfigmenou, a thousand-year-old monastery long tormented by pirates and fires and repressive Ottomans, but now a victim of its own radicalism. Having renounced the Ecumenical Patriarchs' policy of dialogue with other Christian denominations and hung out a banner proclaiming "Orthodoxy or Death," the Esfigmenou brotherhood has been cast out by Mount Athos's ruling body, known as the Holy Community. It now subsists on outlaw defiance and donations from sympathetic corners of the outside world. "We'll continue our struggle," declares its renegade abbot. "We place our hope in Christ and the Holy Mother—and no one else."

To leave Mount Athos for whatever reason is, in local parlance, to "go out into the world." Of course, the peninsula remains affixed to Earth, and some 2,000 secular laborers share it with roughly the same number of monks. Mount Athos has been part of Greece since 1924. Its local governance resides in Karyes, the dusty capital and depot where shipments from the outside world and newly arrived Eastern Orthodox pilgrims are deposited. (Visitors must apply for a special permit; the Holy Community admits roughly a hundred males for up to four days at a time.)

As the junction between the fixed and the transient, Karyes teems with incongruities: a monk lumbering down the stone pavement with a gnarled cane in one hand and a Nike tote bag in the other; shops selling candles, rosaries, and bottles of ouzo. The police force headquartered here handles the occasional public intoxication or shoplifting case. In addition, the Holy Community—the world's longest continually functioning parliament—resides in Karyes. Its members pore over matters as large as relations with the EU and as small as who will rent a particular store. Every change on Mount Athos represents a risk that must be weighed.

Mount Athos has survived by bending where it must, though never without fretfulness. St. Athanasios, who founded the Megistis Lavras monastery in 963, infuriated the hermits by introducing audacious architecture into an otherwise rustic landscape. Roads and buses, then electricity, then cell phones have all been sources of angst. The latest encroachment is the Internet. A few monasteries have conducted ever so timid forays into cyberspace—ordering spare parts, communicating with lawyers, obtaining scholarly research. "It's a great danger to be connected to the outside world," cautions one monk. "Most of the monks weren't even informed about 9/11."

The outside world creeps ever closer. Mount Athos's newest monks have college educations, laptops, and little experience with raising chickens. Yesteryear's mules have mostly been replaced by vans and Range Rovers. Worries persist that the European Union donations will continue only with strings attached—such as the insistence that women be permitted to visit the peninsula. In these ways Mount Athos cannot elude mortal preoccupations.

Yet the brotherhood proceeds as it always has: inchwise, turned ever inward, glorying in the unseen—"digesting death," in the words of one of its preeminent scholars, Father Vasileios, "before it digests us." 

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Atheist Admits Human Mind Cannot Be Explained by Darwinian Mechanisms

Thoughtful atheists admit that Darwinism cannot account for the human mind. In a recent edition of The Philosophers Magazine atheist Raymond Tallis writes:

"Consciousness makes evolutionary sense only if one does not start far enough back; if, that is to say, one fails to assume a consistent and sincere materialist position, beginning with a world without consciousness, and then considers whether there could be putative biological drivers for organisms to become conscious. This is the only valid starting point for those who look to evolution to explain consciousness, given that the history of matter has overwhelmingly been without conscious life, indeed without history. Once the viewpoint of consistent materialism is assumed, it ceases to be self-evident that it is a good thing to experience what is there, that it will make an organism better able so to position itself in the causal net as to increase the probability of replication of its genomic material. On the contrary, even setting aside the confusional states it is prone to, and the sleep it requires, consciousness seems like the worst possible evolutionary move.

"If there isn’t an evolutionary explanation of consciousness, then the world is more interesting than biologists would allow. And it gets even more interesting if we unbundle different modes of consciousness. There are clearly separate problems in trying to explain on the one hand the transition to sentience and on the other the transition from sentience to the propositional awareness of human beings that underpins the public sphere in which they live and have their being, where they consciously utilise the laws of nature, transform their environment into an artefactscape, appeal to norms in a collective that is sustained by deliberate intentions rather than being a lattice of dovetailing automaticities, and write books such as The Origin of Species. Those who are currently advocating evolutionary or neuro-evolutionary explanations of the most complex manifestations of consciousness in human life, preaching neuro-evolutionary aesthetics, law, ethics, economics, history, theology etc, should consider whether the failure to explain any form of consciousness, never mind human consciousness, in evolutionary terms, might not pull the rug from under their fashionable feet."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Darwinizing of Religion Continues

Nov 9, 2009
Creation - Evolution Headlines

In an ongoing series for the Year of Darwin in Science magazine,[1] Elizabeth Culotta wrote an article with the Darwinesque title, “On the Origin of Religion.”[2] The editor’s summary acknowledges that “No consensus yet exists among scientists,” but sought the only answer in Darwinian terms: “in the past 15 years, a growing number of researchers have followed Darwin’s lead and explored the hypothesis that religion springs naturally from the normal workings of the human mind. This new field, the cognitive science of religion, draws on psychology, anthropology, and neuroscience to understand the mental building blocks of religious thought.” Building blocks – there’s a suggestive phrase right out of origin-of-life labs.

Culotta began with a Darwin imprimatur. “To Charles Darwin, the origin of religious belief was no mystery. ‘As soon as the important faculties of the imagination, wonder, and curiosity, together with some power of reasoning, had become partially developed, man would naturally crave to understand what was passing around him, and would have vaguely speculated on his own existence,’ he wrote in The Descent of Man.” Culotta acknowledged that “Darwin’s scientific descendants” are not quite so sure,” but we can trust them, because “potential answers are emerging from both the archaeological record and studies of the mind itself.”

Here’s a quick rundown on those potential answers. Evolutionary sociologists are studying the propensity of humans to infer agents acting when things happen. Evolutionary archaeologists are looking for clues of symbolic behavior. Cognitive neuroscientists are looking for parts of the brain that tend toward “purpose-driven beliefs” that might be “a step on the way to religion.” Evolutionary psychologists investigate “theory of mind” explanations that see people attributing mental states to others and to things. Evolutionary anthropologists consider the social aspects of sharing beliefs in gods to develop social cohesion. It’s Darwin’s game from start to finish.

Each discipline seeks to explain their piece of the religion puzzle in adaptationist, progressive terms. The psychologists, for instance, reason that if people from childhood onward develop a tendency to see the natural world acting in a purposeful way, “It’s a small step to suppose that the design has a designer.” Stewart Guthrie sees the invisible hand of Darwin in primitive man’s thinking processes. “Guthrie suggested that natural selection primed this system for false positives, because if the bump in the night is really a burglar—or a lion—you could be in danger, while if it’s just the wind, no harm done.” The anthropologists find other ways to see religion as adaptive: “By encouraging helpful behavior, religious groups boost the biological survival and reproduction of their members.”

Here, though, Culotta admitted others see such explanations as little more than just-so storytelling. She quoted Pascal Boyer cautioning, “It is often said that religion encourages or prescribes solidarity within the group, but we need evidence that people actually follow [their religion’s] recommendations.” Speaking of evidence, which is supposed to elevate science above other forms of explanation, she admitted to large gaps. For instance, she said there is “a yawning gap between the material evidence of the archaeological record and the theoretical models of psychologists.” The archaeologists have a hard time inferring beliefs from artifacts, and the psychologists are crying, “we need more evidence.” What about the cognitive scientists? They try to get at the roots of innate tendencies vs. learned beliefs, but they are crying for more evidence, too: “I haven’t seen lots of empirical evidence that you can get from there to religious beliefs,” said social psychologist Ara Norenzayan. Culotta’s last sentence, quoting Norenzayan again, amounted to a promissory note admitting to gaps in evidence: “In the next 10 to 15 years there’s likely to be quite a transformation, with a lot more evidence, to give us a compelling story about how religion arose.”

-------------------
1. Intro, “On the Origin of Religion,” Science, 6 November 2009: Vol. 326. no. 5954, pp. 784-787, DOI: 10.1126/science.326_784.
2. Elizabeth Culotta, “Origins: On the Origin of Religion,” Science, 6 November 2009: Vol. 326. no. 5954, pp. 784-787, DOI: 10.1126/science.326_784.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

2012: Six End-of-the-World Myths Debunked

Around Globe
Posted by Ivica Miskovic
Monday, November 16, 2009

The end of the world is near—December 21, 2012, to be exact—according to theories based on a purported ancient Maya prediction and fanned by the marketing machine behind the soon-to-be-released 2012 movie.

But could humankind really meet its end in 2012—drowned in apocalyptic floods, walloped by a secret planet, seared by an angry sun, or thrown overboard by speeding continents?

And did the ancient Maya—whose empire peaked between A.D. 250 and 900 in what is now Mexico and Central America—really predict the end of the world in 2012?

At least one aspect of the 2012, end-of-the-world hype is, for some people, all too real: the fear.

NASA's Ask an Astrobiologist Web site, for example, has received thousands of questions regarding the 2012 doomsday predictions—some of them disturbing, according to David Morrison, senior scientist with the NASA Astrobiology Institute.

"A lot of [the submitters] are people who are genuinely frightened," Morrison said.

"I've had two teenagers who were considering killing themselves, because they didn't want to be around when the world ends," he said. "Two women in the last two weeks said they were contemplating killing their children and themselves so they wouldn't have to suffer through the end of the world."

Fortunately, with the help of scientists like Morrison, most of the predicted 2012 cataclysms are easily explained away.

2012 MYTH 1

Maya Predicted End of the World in 2012

The Maya calendar doesn't end in 2012, as some have said, and the ancients never viewed that year as the time of the end of the world, archaeologists say.

But December 21, 2012, (give or take a day) was nonetheless momentous to the Maya.

"It's the time when the largest grand cycle in the Mayan calendar—1,872,000 days or 5,125.37 years—overturns and a new cycle begins," said Anthony Aveni, a Maya expert and archaeoastronomer at Colgate University in Hamilton, New York.

The Maya kept time on a scale few other cultures have considered.

During the empire's heyday, the Maya invented the Long Count—a lengthy circular calendar that "transplanted the roots of Maya culture all the way back to creation itself," Aveni said.

During the 2012 winter solstice, time runs out on the current era of the Long Count calendar, which began at what the Maya saw as the dawn of the last creation period: August 11, 3114 B.C. The Maya wrote that date, which preceded their civilization by thousands of years, as Day Zero, or 13.0.0.0.0.

In December 2012 the lengthy era ends and the complicated, cyclical calendar will roll over again to Day Zero, beginning another enormous cycle.

"The idea is that time gets renewed, that the world gets renewed all over again—often after a period of stress—the same way we renew time on New Year's Day or even on Monday morning," said Aveni, author of The End of Time: The Maya Mystery of 2012.

2012 MYTH 2

Breakaway Continents Will Destroy Civilization

In some 2012 doomsday prophecies, the Earth becomes a deathtrap as it undergoes a "pole shift."

The planet's crust and mantle will suddenly shift, spinning around Earth's liquid-iron outer core like an orange's peel spinning around its fleshy fruit.

2012, the movie, envisions a Maya-predicted pole shift, triggered by an extreme gravitational pull on the planet—courtesy of a rare "galactic alignment"—and by massive solar radiation destabilizing the inner Earth by heating it.

Breakaway oceans and continents dump cities into the sea, thrust palm trees to the poles, and spawn earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, and other disasters.

Scientists dismiss such drastic scenarios, but some researchers have speculated that a subtler shift could occur—for example, if the distribution of mass on or inside the planet changed radically, due to, say, the melting of ice caps.

Princeton University geologist Adam Maloof has extensively studied pole shifts, and tackles this 2012 myth in 2012: Countdown to Armageddon, a National Geographic Channel documentary airing Sunday, November 8.

Maloof says magnetic evidence in rocks confirm that continents have undergone such drastic rearrangement, but the process took millions of years—slow enough that humanity wouldn't have felt the motion.

2012 MYTH 3

Galactic Alignment Spells Doom

Some sky-watchers believe 2012 will close with a "galactic alignment," which will occur for the first time in 26,000 years (for example, see the Web site Alignment 2012).

In this scenario, the path of the sun in the sky would appear to cross through what, from Earth, looks to be the midpoint of our galaxy, the Milky Way, which in good viewing conditions appears as a cloudy stripe across the night sky.

Some fear that the lineup will somehow expose Earth to powerful unknown galactic forces that will hasten its doom—perhaps through a "pole shift" (see above) or the stirring of the supermassive black hole at our galaxy's heart.

Others see the purported event in a positive light, as heralding the dawn of a new era in human consciousness.

NASA's Morrison has a different view.

"There is no 'galactic alignment' in 2012," he said, "or at least nothing out of the ordinary."

He explained that a type of "alignment" occurs during every winter solstice, when the sun, as seen from Earth, appears in the sky near what looks to be the midpoint of the Milky Way.

Horoscope writers may be excited by alignments, Morrison said. But "the reality is that alignments are of no interest to science. They mean nothing," he said. They create no changes in gravitational pull, solar radiation, planetary orbits, or anything else that would impact life on Earth.

The speculation over alignments isn't surprising, though, he said.

"Ordinary astronomical phenomena are imbued with a sense of threat by people who already think the world is going to end."

Regarding galactic alignments, University of Texas Maya expert David Stuart writes on his blog that "no ancient Maya text or artwork makes reference to anything of the kind."

Even so, the end date of the current Long Count cycle—winter solstice 2012—may be evidence of Maya astronomical skill, said Aveni, the archaeoastronomer.

"I don't rule out the likelihood that astronomy played a role" in the selection of 2012 as the cycle's terminus, he said.

Maya astronomers built observatories and, by observing the night skies and using mathematics, learned to accurately predict eclipses and other celestial phenomena. Aveni notes that the start date of the current cycle was likely tied to a solar zenith passage, when the sun crosses directly overhead, and its terminal date will fall on a December solstice, perhaps by design.

These choices, he said, may indicate that the Maya calendar is tied to seasonal agricultural cycles central to ancient survival.

2012 MYTH 4

Planet X Is on a Collision Course With Earth

Some say it's out there: a mysterious Planet X, aka Nibiru, on a collision course with Earth—or at least a disruptive flyby.

A direct hit would obliterate Earth, it's said. Even a near miss, some fear, could shower Earth with deadly asteroid impacts hurled our way by the planet's gravitational wake.

Could such an unknown planet really be headed our way in 2012, even just a little bit?

Well, no.

"There is no object out there," NASA astrobiologist Morrison said. "That's probably the most straightforward thing to say."

The origins of this theory actually predate widespread interest in 2012. Popularized in part by a woman who claims to receive messages from extraterrestrials, the Nibiru doomsday was originally predicted for 2003.

"If there were a planet or a brown dwarf or whatever that was going to be in the inner solar system three years from now, astronomers would have been studying it for the past decade and it would be visible to the naked eye by now," Morrison said.

"It's not there."

2012 MYTH 5

Solar Storms to Savage Earth

In some 2012 disaster scenarios, our own sun is the enemy.

Our friendly neighborhood star, it's rumored, will produce lethal eruptions of solar flares, turning up the heat on Earthlings.

Solar activity waxes and wanes according to approximately 11-year cycles. Big flares can indeed damage communications and other Earthly systems, but scientists have no indications the sun, at least in the short term, will unleash storms strong enough to fry the planet.

"As it turns out the sun isn't on schedule anyway," NASA astronomer Morrison said. "We expect that this cycle probably won't peak in 2012 but a year or two later."

2012 MYTH 6

Maya Had Clear Predictions for 2012

If the Maya didn't expect the end of time in 2012, what exactly did they predict for that year?

Many scholars who've pored over the scattered evidence on Maya monuments say the empire didn't leave a clear record predicting that anything specific would happen in 2012.

The Maya did pass down a graphic—though undated—end-of-the-world scenario, described on the final page of a circa-1100 text known as the Dresden Codex. The document describes a world destroyed by flood, a scenario imagined in many cultures and probably experienced, on a less apocalyptic scale, by ancient peoples.

Aveni, the archaeoastronomer, said the scenario is not meant to be read literally—but as a lesson about human behavior.

He likens the cycles to our own New Year period, when the closing of an era is accompanied by frenetic activities and stress, followed by a rebirth period, when many people take stock and resolve to begin living better.

In fact, Aveni says, the Maya weren't much for predictions.

"The whole timekeeping scale is very past directed, not future directed," he said. "What you read on these monuments of the Long Count are events that connected Maya rulers with ancestors and the divine.

"The farther back you can plant your roots in deep time the better argument you can make that you're legit," Aveni said. "And I think that's why these Maya rulers were using Long Count time.

"It's not about a fixed prediction about what's going to happen."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

On Piety and Respect Toward the Venerable Fathers

Excerpts from the sayings and deeds of the Holy Fathers:

- The fathers of earlier times were pious, careful and strict. They were unconcerned about their outward appearance, their face and hair, caring not whether their face or hair looked good. Their rasos were short. They kept their heads down with piety and respect and avoided a direct gaze at anyone's face. They were shy. They did not converse or laugh. In the church they wore slippers.

- Once the monk Modestos had a new pair of shoes that made a noise when he was walking. The other monks called to him and asked that he wear the new shoes when he was at home and the old ones in church.

- "We were afraid to look up at the elderly fathers" an ascetic said, meaning that there was fear, respect and piety towards them. "It used to be so. How is it now? O what times these are!"

- Elder Antonios the Kafsokalyvitan was a perfect example of order and exactness in Hagiorite rules. He was a pious monk, simple and humble. He was always uttering "God bless," or "may it be blessed," or "through the prayers of our Holy Fathers." He always wore his raso. All the elders remember him with nostalgia.

- Once we asked an ascetic who was over eighty years old to tell us something that would benefit us, about the fathers of the past. He then replied laconically: "What can I tell you? The past fathers were different. They were pious."

- There was a blessed group in Vigla's hut of the Three Holy Children. The pious elder M. from Kerasia told me all about this group. Their elder Dositheos was very strict. The most senior subordinate to him was the monk Agathodoros. The most pious of all was Father Akakios, who had a beard which reached to his waist. He predicted his own death, and most of the time he had tears of joy in his eyes. When there was a visitor he would sit down with his hands crossed. The were all reverent and silent. Only the elder would speak. "A dead person does not do anything," they would say. Until the elder told them to do so, they would not offer any thing to their guests. They knew nothing of anger. They judged no one. They were filled with inner prayer, joy, happiness. Even in their sleep they saw Christ.

- On the eve of a monk's tonsure, the ever memorable hegumen Gabriel ate olives. For that reason, the tonsure was postponed, as he told us. He should have eaten plain bread, as he did the following day, even though it was the Feast of the Annunciation.

- Even though the seventy-nine year old Dionysian monk Nikephoros was dying, suffering as he was from asthma and myocarditis, he refused to take a bit of milk or fish during the Great Fast. "If I ate, Elder," he said "would I not die? I thank you for your fatherly love, but for sixty years now I have not spoiled a Great Lent. It does not feel right to do it now. A little bit of soup made with oil is good enough for me. Give me the Mystery of Holy Unction, for in five or six days I an departing to the Lord."

- Venerable Elder lakovos of Dionysiou was famous for his piety. The ever memorable hegumen Gabriel and Father Lazaros told us all about his admirable life. One year while Elder lakovos was typikaris, during a feast day his fellow monks offered him a glass of wine after the meal in the wine cellar of the trapeza, which they call "spolokanis," but he refused. They insisted, but he kept telling them that it would be harmful to him. They accused him of pride. Finally the simple elder, who was very exact in his monastic rules, to prove to them that they were pressuring him because of the devil, picked up the glass full of wine with his left hand and made the sign of the cross over it with his right. Immediately the glass shattered, and before everyone's eyes, all the wine poured out of it. Elder lakovos explained that while he was being pressed to violate his rule and drink the wine, he could see the devil in the glass, boldly making fun. It was then that he realized that the devil was behind the brothers' supposed kindness.

- There are monks who feed spiritually on saints' lives. They constantly communicate with the saints. They talk with them. They feel the presence and activity of all the saints of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic triumphant Church They are scholars of saints' lives, experts in chanting, in typikon, in feasts and vigils, in miracles. Such was the most simple Elder Theoktistos from Dionysiou, who was bent over by years of ascetic labour.

- There is no pilgrim to the Monastery of St. Dionysios who will not be taken willingly or unwillingly by Theoktistos to visit the cell of St. Niphon and venerate the icon of Christ on the wall there. With child-like love and piety, Theoktistos will draw the visitor to this icon, which had been revealed to St. Niphon in a vision. He will also bring him to the nearby cell of St. Nikodemos.

- Because Elder Theoktistos is from Epiros, he especially favours Epirotan saints — all of them, of course. He reads the saints' synaxaria every day, being careful not to miss even one, not even any of the neomartyrs. He is willing, meek, and never angry about working at any task.

- I remember when Elder Lazaros was still living, he who worshipped the divine Name of Christ and said always the Jesus Prayer. He had the junior Father Theoktistos under his protection, because the latter was tested by many who scolded him, thinking him either stupid or crazy. But this simple monk would endure these tests with rare patience, rejoicing at all his sufferings. Elder Lazaros once told me in confidence that he knew a monk, who is still living, out of whose hands wild birds would come and eat. I think I understand whom he meant.

- Always there were, and there still are, ascetic Hagiorite monks who keep strictly all the typikon, all the fasts, all the vigils, all the traditions. Such a one was Father Neophytos. He celebrated in New Skete's huts. His constant desire was to liturgize. Once Deacon Seraphim, one of the Abrahamite fathers, fell asleep during a vigil. Father Neophytos would not allow him to participate in the Liturgy. He said to him the same thing he would have said to any of the clergy: "Father, you cannot celebrate in the Liturgy because you slept during the vigil, and you have not read the prayers before Holy Communion."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Who Wrote the Gospel of Matthew?

Who wrote the Synoptic Gospels? Their titles bear the names of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, but did those men actually draft them? Modern scholarship has called this previous assumption into question, with some going so far as to say that the men whose names adorn the books were long since dead.

Ground Rules

When writing on a controversial subject such as this, some ground rules are in order for this discussion to show my approach towards an objective conclusion.

First, while false attribution was not unheard of in the early Christian community (the Gospel of Thomas, not part of the canon, is an example of this), it is unfair for biblical critics to simply make the assumption that the canonical Gospels were misattributed and shift the burden of proof to those who hold to traditional authorship.

Second, anti-supernaturalism as a bias must be set aside. An example of this is the assumption that Matthew (or at least the 23rd chapter) had to be written after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, because Jesus simply could not have prophesied the destruction of the Temple. The author of Matthew had to put that in later.

An even more glaring example of this is the belief among literary scholars that mythic traditions take one or two generations to evolve, thus an assumption is made that the Gospels, which proclaim Jesus’ deity, must have been the byproduct of this evolution. Ergo, the Gospels were written and compiled at least a generation or two after Jesus’ life. Such an assumption is philosophical and prejudicial.

With these concerns in mind, let us then proceed with an objective mind.

The Gospel Sources

The early Christian tradition, articulated by many but most notably by the famed theologian Augustine, is that the Synoptic Gospels were written in the order in which they now appear in the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Post-Enlightenment scholarship challenged this assumption, and today mainline and liberal scholars embrace the view that Mark was the first Gospel written.

In addition, mainstream biblical scholars hold that Mark based his Gospel on a source document known as “Q.” There is absolutely no evidence for any Q document, but literary analysis of the Synoptic similarities along with Jewish rabbinical tradition (namely the practice of keeping records of rabbinical teachings) support the hypothesis. New Testament scholars have since added two additional sources: “L” and “M” – for which, once again, there is no hard evidence. These are assumed to be strains of mainly oral tradition.

The authors of Mark (first) and then Matthew and Luke are assumed to have utilized these various sources in putting together their Gospel accounts.

Matthew

Who wrote the Gospel that first appears in the New Testament canon, the Gospel of Matthew? Doubts about Matthew’s authorship stem largely from the fact that New Testament scholars now widely believe that Mark was written first. Would Matthew, an actual eyewitness of Jesus’ life, rely on the writing of Mark, who was not an eyewitness?

This skepticism, of course, assumes that Matthew primarily utilized Mark, yet this theory of Synoptic Gospel inter-connectivity has never been conclusively established, certainly not to a degree that would have the author of Matthew actually dependent on Mark’s Gospel. Thomas Jefferson utilized George Mason’s Virginia Constitution when writing the Declaration of Independence, but utilization does not equate to absolute reliance. No historian would argue that Jefferson was helpless in his task of authoring America’s independence document absent Mason’s handiwork. Accordingly, even if Matthew had Mark’s Gospel at his disposal, it hardly discredits the notion that the apostle himself wrote the Gospel of Matthew.

The strongest evidence attesting to Matthew’s authorship is the fact that four ancient sources, not counting the title itself, specifically attribute the Gospel to Matthew, the disciple of Jesus. Those sources are Papias of Asia Minor, Irenaeus of Gaul, Pantaenus, and Origen of Alexandria and Caesarea, all significant leaders or writers in the early Christian community. Moreover, the Gospel of Matthew was in wide circulation in the early church, and was circulated as an account written by Matthew, with no apparent question or contestation.

Confronted with this very strong evidence from ancient history, Matthew, the disciple of Jesus Christ, is the author of the first Gospel in the New Testament canon.


Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?

Traditionally, the universities of the western world have taught that the Gospel of Matthew was not the first Gospel written, that it was written in Greek, and that it was authored after 70 A.D.

However, as more and more discoveries have been made, those assumptions have been shown to be stone cold wrong.

As researchers are looking into the writings of the early church leaders, they are finding that not only was the Gospel of Matthew most definitely the first Gospel written (almost certainly before 50 A.D.), but that it was originally written in Hebrew!

Just check out what some of the early church writers from the first few centuries of the church have to say on this matter:

Origen (Eusebius, H.E. 6.25.4) "As having learnt by tradition concerning the four Gospels, which alone are unquestionable in the Church of God under heaven, that first was written according to Matthew, who was once a tax collector but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who published it for those who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew language."

Papias (Eusebius, H.E. 3.39.16) "Matthew collected the oracles (ta logia) in the Hebrew language, and each translated (or interpreted) them as best he could."

Irenaeus (Adv. Haer. 3.1.1) "Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome and laying the foundations of the church."

Eusebius (H.E. 3.24.6) "Matthew had first preached to Hebrews, and when he was on the point of going to others he transmitted in writing in his native language the Gospel according to himself, and thus supplied by writing the lack of his own presence to those from whom he was sent."

Epiphanius (ca. 315-403), bishop of Salamis, refers to a Gospel used by the Ebionites (Panarion 30. 13.1-30.22.4). He says it is Matthew, called "According to the Hebrews" by them, but says it is corrupt and mutilated. He says Matthew issued his Gospel in Hebrew letters. He quotes from this Ebionite Gospel seven times. These quotations appear to come not from Matthew but from some harmonized account of the canonical Gospels.

There is also early testimony that Bartholomew, one of the twelve apostles, carried a Hebrew copy of the Gospel of Matthew to India. Two of the earliest Church historians, Eusebius and Origen, wrote about this. "It is reported," wrote Eusebius, "that among persons there who knew Christ, (Pantaenus) found the Gospel according to St. Matthew (which had arrived ahead of Pantaenus by more than a century). For Bartholomew, one of the apostles, had preached to them, and left them (in India) the writing of Matthew in the Hebrew language which they had preserved." In his ground-breaking book, A History of Christianity in Asia, Princeton scholar and author Samuel Moffett reveals that Pantaenus, a church historian and missionary who traveled to India in 180 A.D., discovered the copy of the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew that Bartholomew had taken with him. Read here for more.

There is a similar tradition that the Apostle Barnabas, the follower of the Apostle Paul, also carried with him and was buried with an early version of the Gospel of Matthew. According to tradition, it was through Barnabas that Matthew's Gospel was transmitted and maybe even translated into Greek. Barnabas primarily taught the Jews in Cyprus and it is said in his Acts that he used the Gospel he received personally from Matthew not only to teach, but to work miracles as well. The Acts of Barnabas even mention a probability that Matthew wrote his Gospel in at least two documents, a narrative of miracles and one of doctrines. If this is true it may have been Barnabas that compiled the documents of his fellow apostle. At his death the supposed writer of the Acts of Barnabas, John Mark, saved Matthew's Gospel and hid it away in the tomb of Barnabas. In 478, during the reign of the Emperor Zeno, archbishop Anthemios of Cyprus announced that the hidden burial place of Barnabas had been revealed to him in a dream. The saint's body was claimed to have been discovered in a cave with a copy of the canonical Gospel of Matthew on its breast; according to the contemporary account of Theodoros Lector, who reports that both bones and Gospel book were presented by Anthemios to the emperor. Severus of Antioch examined this Gospel around the year 500, seeking to find whether it supported the piercing of the crucifed Jesus by a spear in Matthew 27:49 which some taught (it did not). According to the eleventh century Roman historian Georgios Kedrenos an uncial manuscript of Matthew's Gospel, believed to be that found by Anthemios, was then still preserved in the Chapel of St Stephen in the Imperial Palace. If this uncial version is Barnabas' copy, then we can assume he translated it into Greek. If not, Barnabas may have been buried with the original Hebrew version. Of course, there is a possibility that he had a Greek version written by Matthew. Read here for more.

This information further confirms that Matthew, an eyewitness to the miracles and events of Jesus' ministry, was indeed the author of the first Gospel and verifies both the Jewishness and early date of the first Gospel.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Egypt's Copts Facing Persecution

IRI Nnews
November 12, 2009

Cairo, Egypt - A new report on religious freedom in Egypt says Coptic Christians, who make up about 10 percent of the 80 million population (CIA factbook), face major rights violations and are being increasingly persecuted.

The quarterly 36-page report (see Arabic version) by independent rights organization the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR), said the government denies Copts the right to build churches or pray at home.

It said the homes of some Copts, particularly in southern Egypt, were demolished or closed because the government suspected them of being clandestine churches, and that physical attacks against Copts had continued over the past three months, with at least three losing their lives.

According to EIPR, there are an average of four attacks against Copts every month; there have been 144 attacks nationwide over the past three years.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

An Atheist Defends Religion

New Book Blasts Attacks by Unbelievers

By Father John Flynn, LC

ROME, NOV. 15, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The Catholic Church is one of the greatest forces for evil in the world, at least according to atheist Richard Dawkins. This is just the latest of many volleys by him against religion and God.

His remarks were published Oct. 23 on the religion section of the Washington Post's Web site, when he was asked to comment on the move by the Catholic Church to facilitate the entry of Anglicans.

The polemics over religion raised by the spate of books and commentaries in recent years continues to flow freely. A recent debate in London on the motion that the "Catholic Church is a force for good in the world," attracted over 2,000 people, the Catholic Herald reported Oct. 23.

Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens, who argued the negative case, enjoyed a substantial win over their opponents -- Ann Widdecombe, a conservative party parliamentarian, and Archbishop Onaiyekan of Abuja in Nigeria -- obtaining 1,876 votes against 268.

Another recent example comes from Australia columnist where Catherine Deveny put God on the psychiatrist's couch and proclaimed that: "God has narcissistic personality disorder."

In her Sept. 2 article published by the Age newspaper, Deveny asserted that God suffers from "feelings of grandiosity," and an "obsession with fantasies of success," along with being "devoid of empathy," and "behaves arrogantly."

The atheists' offensive has in its turn given rise to numerous books defending God and organized religion. An interesting turn in the debate comes from a book just published by someone who does not believe in God, but still defends religion.

Better off

In "An Atheist Defends Religion: Why Humanity is Better Off with Religion Than Without It," (Alpha Books), Bruce Sheiman offers a new perspective to the contest between believers and atheists.

The "God question" can't be resolved to the satisfaction of the contending sides, he states but what Sheiman does set out to do is to consider the value of religion itself. He does not seek to prove God exists, but defends religion as a cultural institution.

Regarding his personal views, Sheiman explains that he is not a person of faith, but he does not "stridently repudiate God." He describes himself as an "aspiring theist" because "religion provides a combination of psychological, emotional, moral communal, existential, and even physical-health benefits that no other institution can replicate."

The best way to convincingly dismiss the case for atheism, he explains in his introduction to the book, is not by arguments that seek to prove the existence of God, but to demonstrate the enduring contribution of religion.

"Religion's misdeeds may make for provocative history, but the everyday good works of billions of people is the real history of religion, one that parallels the growth and prosperity of humankind," Sheiman affirms.

One way that religion benefits us is by giving our lives meaning, Sheiman notes. We are aware we live in a world of great power and potentiality, but in contrast to animals that just live in a utilitarian relationship with the world, humans are aware that this world exists apart from ourselves.

Sheiman then recounts some examples of how primitive societies sought to give sense to their lives in the midst of the wider world by means of religion. Their myths and rituals helped those peoples to connect the mortal realities to the eternal and spiritual.

In the modern world science has in many cases replaced religion in terms of explaining the world and the universe, but Sheiman points out, while we can accept what science says about how the universe works, this does not explain to us what it means for our lives.

In other words, how the world works is not the same as why the world works. In our drive to discover what Sheiman terms lowercase truth -- facts and knowledge -- we have sacrificed uppercase truth -- meaning and purpose.

Moral nature

Another aspect of religion is morality. It's clear that people can be moral without religion, Sheiman affirms, but it's also evident that religion makes people good. In fact, he asserts, humans exhibit ethical behavior that goes well beyond the explanatory power of group cohesiveness.

Sheiman cites research that demonstrates how religious activity is associated with greater social interaction. Just as religion builds community, so too does it foment morality, he adds.

It does this through an understanding that moral action is the path to a union with God and that we have some sort of moral contract whereby doing good means we participate in the highest good

Intrinsic to all religions is a belief in goodness, both that of the divine and that of humanity, Sheiman explains. Atheists often lack an understanding of religious morality, he argues. It's not a simple reward/punishment system. "The most cynical see in religion a blind obedience to moral authority and an oppressive behavioral-control system," he commented.

While some religious adherents exhibit an authoritarian orientation, this can also be the case for just as many non-religious people, Sheiman maintains. For most people God is seen as a loving father, and the moral high ground to which humans aspire, he asserted.

One contribution of religion to society that Sheiman highlights is the Christian notion that humans are made in the image of God. Since humans are meant to share in the divine nature they are to be respected as children of God.

Such a view leads to countless acts of sacrifice and compassion every day, he comments. In fact, sociological studies reveal that religious people are more caring and compassionate than their non-religious peers and give more money to charity. This practice is not restricted to a particular religion, Sheiman points out.

Religion also provides a solid foundation for moral behavior through an adherence to absolute values. By contrast, Sheiman notes, without religion people can have a morality, but if the moral precepts are man-made they become fallible and insubstantial, a function of personal opinions or even calculating self-interest.

This leads him to comment that our minds are called to something more than a relative truth. As humans we strive to find the first cause and if moral imperatives do not depend on God then they are not absolute and remain relative.

Science by itself cannot lead to a moral culture, he continues. "Right and wrong do not come from physics or biology," he states.

"Religion thus becomes the most important cultural and institutional source of ethical principles precisely because it is felt to be above human caprice," he adds.

Progress

In another chapter of the book, Sheiman relates how religion was behind the Western world's progress in such fields as democracy and freedom, and science and technology.

Over time if we have grown as a civilization it has been at least partly because of religion, he argues. While this does not absolve religious leaders for their destructive acts it does lead us to conclude that overall religion has had an overall positive impact, he concludes.

The alternative conclusion is that we would be further along in our progressive trajectory without religion. This is implausible, Sheiman maintains, as historians cannot identify any other cultural force as robust as religion that could have carried civilization along.

Sheiman also criticizes the selective reading of history by some atheists, who are only too quick to attribute the most negative aspects of history to religion, while rarely conceding the debt civilization owes to religion.

A believer could well reply to Sheiman that his faith in God does not depend on some kind of profit and loss accounting of history or his personal life. Nonetheless, at a time when many atheists denigrate churches and faith as totally irrational and negative, Sheiman's book serves as a useful antidote to such a superficial and irrational attack on belief.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Darwinism: The Ideology Behind Marxism and Teenage Nihilism

Where Chairman Mao and Teenage Nihilists Got Their Motivation

Nov 12, 2009
Creation - Evolution Headlines

What propelled Mao Zhedong to become the biggest mass murderer in world history? Let a professor of Chinese history answer the question. James Pusey (Bucknell U), writing in Nature this week for a series on “Global Darwin,”[1] was explaining the vacuum left by the collapse of the reform movement in the early 20th century. A “group of intellectuals” found Marxism attractive. It was the fittest ideology:

"Many tried to fill it: Sun, Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kaishek) and, finally, the small group of intellectuals who, in indignation at the betrayal at Versailles, found in Marxism what seemed to them the fittest faith on Earth to help China to survive.

"This was not, of course, all Darwin’s doing, but Darwin was involved in it all. To believe in Marxism, one had to believe in inexorable forces pushing mankind, or at least the elect, to inevitable progress, through set stages (which could, however, be skipped). One had to believe that history was a violent, hereditary class struggle (almost a ‘racial’ struggle); that the individual must be severely subordinated to the group; that an enlightened group must lead the people for their own good; that the people must not be humane to their enemies; that the forces of history assured victory to those who were right and who struggled.

"Who taught Chinese these things? Marx? Mao? No. Darwin."

The ideology that led Mao to murder 77 million of his own people began with a view of nature that values struggle and fitness over the individual. Though acknowledging that the political currents in China were complex, with reformers like Yan Fu and Sun Yat-sen incorporating Darwinian principles without radical revolution, Pusey placed the worldview that empowered Marxist ideology squarely at the feet of Darwin. Darwin was Mao’s ideological mentor.

Darwinian ideas can produce murderous results in individuals, too. The Sunday Times Online printed an article that described the Darwinian motivations behind some of the serial killers of recent memory. “The naturalist [Darwin] outraged the church, prompting a bitter debate that still sets creationists against evolutionists,” Dennis Sewell wrote. “Now a sinister link has emerged between his work and the recent spate of high-school killings by crazed, nihilistic teenagers.”

Despite Darwin’s personal reputation as an “amiable Victorian gent,” Sewell continued, he “has been fingered as a racist, an apologist for genocide, and the inspiration of a string of psychopathic killers.” The shooters at Columbine High School, for instance, saw themselves as eliminators of the weak. Harris wore “Natural Selection” on his T-shirt the day of the shooting spree. Many other artifacts gathered afterwards, described in the article, uncovered the boys’ fascination with “survival of the fittest.”

In 2007, detectives intercepted a school shooting in Pennsylvania. They “discovered that their suspect often logged on to a social networking site called Natural Selection’s Army,” the article says. Sewell discussed a personality cult around Harris and Klebold in certain chatrooms and websites, including a computer game that lets the player act out the massacre. “Natural Selection” apparel is hot with these aficionados, and “‘Natural Selection’ is the name of a popular computer game in which competing teams attempt to annihilate one another – a sign that Darwin’s term is still associated by many teenagers with sudden and extreme violence.” Another case is the killing spree in 2007 in Finland by Pekka-Eric Auvinen, who declared in his manifesto before the event that he was a social Darwinist wanting to weed out the unfit. In his words: “It’s time to put natural selection and survival of the fittest back on track.”

Sewell acknowledged that Darwin himself would have been horrified by all this. He knows that other great figures have been used by murderers as their inspiration. Still, he was not ready to let the bearded old man off the hook. “One conclusion implicit in evolutionary theory is that human existence has no ultimate purpose or special significance.... Darwin also taught that morality has no essential authority, but is something that itself evolved,” he continued. These simple (and simplistic) ideas are certainly accessible to disturbed adolescents who feel nothing stops them from taking natural law into their own hands. And Darwin himself wrote in 1881, “Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world.”

Sewell is author of the book The Political Gene: How Darwin’s Ideas Changed Politics. His Times article was published on the Science page, not the Opinion page. On page 2, he continued supporting his premise that Darwin’s views feed into the nihilism behind high school shootings – and political genocides – because it destroys all moral restraint. One particular example shows this is not an isolated interpretation. He said, “Cheerleaders celebrating Darwin’s 200th birthday in colleges across America last February sang ‘Randomness is good enough for me, If there’s no design it means I’m free’ – lines from a song by the band Scientific Gospel.” With a gospel like that, no wonder some go beyond the mere abandonment of sexual mores taught by their parents. “But wackos such as Harris and Auvinen can just as readily interpret it as a licence to kill.” Sewell ended by pointing out that we cannot begin to address the issues when presented only with a “bowdlerized account of Darwin’s work” – i.e., a sanitized version portraying Darwin as a scientific saint. He said, “The more sinister implications of the world-view that has come to be called ‘Darwinism’ — and the interpretation the teenage nihilists put on it – are as much part of the Darwin story as the theory of evolutions [sic].”

---------------------
1. James Pusey, “Global Darwin: Revolutionary road,” Nature 462, 162-163 (12 November 2009).

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

My Twisted Life as a Scientologist

Mandy Mullen at an anti-scientology rally

... and how I kicked the 100-pound parasite off my back

By MANDY MULLEN
November 15, 2009
People

The Church of Scientology is under fire for a spate of recent defections and bizarre teachings, including the idea that humans are infested with the souls of dead space aliens. MANDY MULLEN, 20, a shop assistant from Old Bridge, NJ, joined Scientology last year when the religion claimed it could fix her spinal disorder, Scoliosis. But, she tells The Post, it did nothing but destroy her finances and mess with her mind — forcing her to break free a few months ago . . .

“Your face makes me want to puke.”

“You look like a big dufus sitting there.”

For two straight hours, I sat in a chair, not allowed to move a muscle or blink, staring into the eyes of the man slinging insults at me.

I was in a TR — or Training Routine — at the Church of Scientology on West 46th Street in Midtown Manhattan, a session that cost $150.

The process was called “auditing.” Ultimately, it was supposed to make your IQ skyrocket and give you greater confidence and control in life. At one point, the church brass even told me that Scientology — the religion founded by L. Ron Hubbard in 1952 that offers spiritual rehabilitation — could straighten my spine, which has been curved with Scoliosis since I was born.

I discovered Scientology one year earlier while I was surfing the Internet in Old Bridge, NJ, where I live with my parents. I came across a web forum called 4chan, where dissenters of Scientology plan protests outside of the church.

I had never been a spiritual or religious person — I was raised Christian but never went to any sort of church. Still, I only lived two hours away from the Midtown headquarters, and I was curious. I thought, “why are all these people protesting? It sounds so cool!”

So I checked it out myself. At Scientology headquarters I was led into a Basic Course Room in the basement where I met a woman who told me I had to buy a $150 class on Communications.

I told her I wanted to think it over. I was 19 and I worked at a convenience store after school and I said that my mom would freak out if I came home $150 poorer.

That’s when she tried to intimidate me.

“Mommy doesn’t want you to do it,” she said in a teasing baby voice. “Are you going to hang on Mommy’s apron strings for the rest of your life?” The class was an investment that would make me a better earner in the future, she said.

I realized that she wasn’t going to let me leave until I paid for the course. I was literally shaking.

That’s the way they work — they don’t want you to pause and consider things critically, a mode they call “in think.” They don’t give you time to be “in think” and question their practices

But their tactics worked. I paid the fee and started my training.

The International Association of Scientologists regularly came to town to throw lavish fundraisers for members of the church. The minimum fundraising quota was always $500,000 and they would reach it in under two hours. Staffers would charge through the congregation yelling at people to donate. “This is your planet and all you care about is your money!” they yelled. “You should be giving every last dollar! If you don’t give your money you’re a Suppressive Agent!”

At one rally I saw a grown man break down in tears. “I’ve donated so much money that I’m broke. I have nothing left. You took all my money,” he pleaded.

One of the church leaders glared at him and yelled, “I know you’re holding out and that makes you a Suppressive Force!”

Meanwhile, I was moving up the ranks inside the church — I graduated from newbie to the “Academy” level and spent $1,000 for four courses.

In Academy, all the students sit in a classroom reading works by L. Ron Hubbard and filling out worksheets. In class, you’re not allowed to yawn — that means you’ve misunderstood a word that you read. If you lean over in your chair, you have to make a clay “demo” of one of the Hubbard theories.

Because I have Scoliosis, it always looks like I’m leaning. “Mandy, get the Play-Doh!” the teachers would bellow at me.

When I told my parents I was taking Scientology courses, they were horrified. But I lied to them about how much money I was spending there. I said it was all complimentary while, in fact, I was throwing thousands — all my savings and earnings — at the church.

For the leaders of the church, my parents posed a big problem. One leader, who was assigned to me, said I had to separate from my family because members could not be in the presence of those who criticize Scientology, even if they’re parents, children or a spouse. But I said I didn’t have enough money to move out and support myself.

My leader, however, could never see the other side. Once I told him that I’d looked at the Web site of the protesters against Scientology but I didn’t agree with them — I loved the church. He flew into a rage. “That’s like saying I don’t burn n- - - ers, I just like to party with the KKK!” he said.

A few months ago I met with an ethics officer of the Scientology police, and told him about my worries, including the man crying at the fundraiser. “I’m seeing a lot of things I don’t like here,” I said.

His response was that every church needed money to run. We kept arguing until he slammed his fist down and told me: “You’re too open-minded to be a Scientologist.”

At that moment I got up and walked out the front doors — into the noise and daylight of Manhattan. Right outside, clustering on the sidewalk, was a group of Scientology protesters. Without a moment’s hesitation, I joined them.

When I turned around I saw my leader, staring at me with a look of pure concentrated rage.

But I’m not afraid of them. My father’s a police officer and that means that they’ll leave me alone. Deserting the church is like having a 100-pound parasite pried off your back. I may be broke but I finally feel free — because I have a mind of my own.

— As Told To Annie Karni

Tweet

Share on Tumblr