Foul Play at the Heart of Religion

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
Greek word is Presbýteros or Presbuterion (notice the suffixed -terion, means Beast).

This is simply not true. Bad Greek.
The world for "beast" is THERION.
If you're going to produce dilettante theories in theology, you must learn to distinguish between TAU and THETA, which are two completely different letters of the Greek alphabet.
PRESBYTERION is actually PRESBYTER ("elder") with the suffix ION.

Religion is like government or politics. It provides a framework, a scaffolding of sorts to build upon.

But, stay in it too long and you become tainted, puffed up, and corrupted, and like a politician that stayed too long in his cushy office of political ivory towers, the real world (real spirituality) becomes foreign.

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
Greek word is Presbýteros or Presbuterion (notice the suffixed -terion, means Beast).

This is simply not true. Bad Greek.
The world for "beast" is THERION.
If you're going to produce dilettante theories in theology, you must learn to distinguish between TAU and THETA, which are two completely different letters of the Greek alphabet.
PRESBYTERION is actually PRESBYTER ("elder") with the suffix ION.

Heeeey hold on. In modern English we recognise the same word (Therion) in the word Deer (like Bambi and Rudolph the raindeer) which is even a kosher animal, or German Tier (animal/beast in general) and Norwegian Dyr (same as Ger.), but also No. Tyr (comp. No. Tyrefekting-- Bull Fighting) which is more relevant, it means Bull. Words change over time and morphology develops when crossing borders.

The Gr. word «Therion» relates to Thera the ancient name for Santorini and in particular the huge volcano that destroyed the Minoan civilisation (probably the origin of the Atlantis myth) during the Bronze-Age. There are other Greek words that are obviously connected too, like the Gr. verb θερίζω «Therizó» which means to Reap, and also when relating to the Beast, Gr. τέρας «Teras» which means Monster and Latin Terra Earth. Beast of the Earth, «Teras of Terra» for the more schizophrenic title, «Terrors of Terra». It seems to derive from a word relating to nature's potentially monstrous violence, in the shape of exploding volcanoes, monsters of the deep and wild and brutal beasts of the field reaping people and nations like they were vines.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim
So you're saying the bible and all religious text is so boring and long you'll die if you read it? But if you had many centuries to live and all the evidence and all of the tools necessary, it might be fun??

Sorry I got confused at "LIke. How can you read hte most swollen...."

Aside from that, life is so damned disorderly, things just happen, and there doesn't seem any point to so much of what we go through. Sometimes it seems the world's a madhouse. Religion condenses life, gives it order. It has beginnings, middles, ends. And when it's all over, it meant something, by God, maybe not something complex, maybe what it had to say was simple, even naive, but there was meaning. And that gives us hope, it's a medicine.

a reply to: jonnywhite

It started with this guy called Adam's father saying «Don't do the you know, what you and Lilith used to do, eh? Not the tree in the garden business this time, eh? Wink wink, naughtly nought, look a golden goose! Ah, got ya! You know the NOT-thing I taught you and your ex? Well don't do it here, I can't stand the thought of it, I'm sure you'll know one d... woops, anyway, I would have to introduce you to the Grim Reaper, old friend of mine, you know, Death? Bottomline is; you'll have to die to procreate, it's only sensible and fair, eh? It will take your race thousands of years figuring out of eternal life, cures for all diseases and well designing life like I do, you will die long before your descendants will develop the technology and science needed to complete that journey. It's only fair, it's how it is, son.» Or something like that.

Naturally Eve came into Adam's life and they couldn't help themselves, so God threw them out of his garden and left the physical universe never to be seen again, in a puff of smoke. What happened down here since then, there wouldn't be room in the known universe for all the volumes that would have to be written. Still the apex of knowledge, that illuminating flash of insight, or moment of eureka, it is still right here, and it can be taught and learned, there are paths to that light. That spark of insight, that light is a good thing, our sin was to break the rules, as in any given rule, but apparently Adam figured it'd be worth a try anyway. The flash of insight they experienced is the part of us that is divine in nature. The AHA-moment when all the pieces fall into the right slots and the great mystery opens its arms and grants eternal glory for the brightest minds among us and eternal jokes of the less fortunate.

The true Sion is Science.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Utnapisjtim: Hehe, you just earned yourself a star. But jokes aside. As much as I admire Paul for his efforts, seeing how the believers today cheer to and deify these efforts, well, it makes me uneasy. For oh my, did he succeed!

I guess Rome always prevails. No point fighting it, might as well become it and conquer it, reshape it, tame it, I guess Paul was part of the dealio. But his worship among today's Christians is revolting. Using 2000 years old tribal justice and general hearsay and Paul's opinions to inspire modern day justice and morale. It's disgusting.

He took Rome singlehandedly away from paganism (times were changing) and convinced that hierarchy his form of the "Christian" belief was safer (or could be believed as a viable faith doctrine) as was not so steeped in Hebraic tradition. He washed it as we now know as the Gentile *gentle* version (do you understand). Paul was a tool. Your problem seems to be that people cherish him and do not know the truth of his real intentions. He took Jesus's message and created the thing that Jesus LEAST desired; Another Dogmatic Religion (One in HIS NAME no less).

a reply to: vethumanbeing

I think Rome realised that the stories they had were getting old. Simply transposing the Greek gods up a notch giving them new names and making everything slightly bigger, well it wasn't enough, people no longer had faith in the old gods, they were too unrealistic and well, I think the Romans felt slightly ashamed of— or had grown tired of their Jupiter and Victoria and Mithras and the rest of them— as compared to the conceptual One-god of the Hebrews and the renegade (but royalist) rabbi from Nazareth in Palestine who could not die, but survived both crucifixion and the spear, who were more dynamic and yet more powerful and believable. They needed new gods people could believe in and look up to, real gods and heroes of flesh and blood, heroes who taught people to give unto Caesar what's Caesar's, and commanded the little-people to respond to violence with non-violence and forgiveness. Who would gladly take the bullet for anyone and be martyrs for Rome in a new religion that would surely put the spirit back in the legions and maybe even add boloney and wine to the bread in the circus—

They were wrong of course. And the Church was right. The bishops and priests flooded the Empire like a steady rising tide, they would fill every gap and enter into every crack and doorway, until the Bishop of Rome could finally sit down in the seat of Caesar after 400 years with the Empire in ruins below him. The toga clad senators were replaced by scarlet cardinals with origami hats. And business as usual. Even the statue of Victoria (Nike) remained in the Curia.

Paul certainly didn't do all that alone, but it would probably ended quite differently had they not published his ever-complaining correspondence rants on morals, poorly hidden threats and petty self-righteous bs.