Breaking the cycle; the Eschaton as Liberation - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

An atheist-free area for those of religious belief to discuss religious topics.

Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. Religious topics may be discussed here or in The Agora. However, this forum is intended specifically as an area for those with religious belief to discuss religion without threads being derailed by atheist arguments. Please respect that. Political topics regarding religion belong in the Religion forum in the Political Issues section.
#15155333
I have with this thread hopefully begun a conversation about how radical even the most traditionalist and conservative interpretations of Monotheism are regarding Time, and the conception of how Time as we know it coming to an End is the most liberating and progressive insight ever in the history of mankind.

Time in the true Pagan conception is eternal in duration, and cyclic, with the same basic events happening over and over again, a rigid Fate which even the gods themselves much less mortal men cannot change in the slightest. Man is always what he is and cannot change his nature or have his nature changed. The social order rises and falls from perfection to failure and degeneration back to perfection again and then another fall, on in an infinite series. in an eternal universe with finite human souls, reincarnation and transmigration of souls makes sense, and only do so under that system. Again, a Wheel that basically cannot be escaped (the issue of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism and the Dharmic religions will be discussed in this thread).

But in the Monotheist religions, whether a particular one is true or false, all have the idea that Time is not Cyclic but Linear, and the Cosmos is not eternal, but has a beginning, a middle, and an end. That events have a meaning which leads to a culmination towards the end of time as we know it, and are therefore unrepeatable and unique. This means that persons are unrepeatable and unique. All these factors are Liberation to adherents of Monotheistic religions, but are precisely that cyclic failure and degeneration to keen Pagan minds throughout history.

With this in mind, there are therefore two ways to perceive and interpret events of the past and present and future, looking at the same events very different reactions and actions can be elicited from different people.
#15155467
late wrote:Time is an illusion.

It's better to call it Space/Time, but that still kinda misses the point. Time is a function of the curvature of Space.


I'm speaking more of the philosophical notion of Time in it's linear and cyclic aspects, and the spiritual liberation from the philosophical notion of Time.

Not so much speaking of the General Theory of Relativity (which came about in response to the alleged null result of the Michaelson-Morely Interferometer experiment from 1887 on and the Sagnac experiments, etc...) and the Special Theory of Relativity (in which Einstein snuck the ''Aether'' back into the Cosmos as the ''Cosmological Constant'').

As St. Augustine wrote; “What then is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I want to explain it to a questioner, I do not know”
#15155488
annatar1914 wrote:
I'm speaking more of the philosophical notion of Time in it's linear and cyclic aspects, and the spiritual liberation from the philosophical notion of Time.

Not so much speaking of the General Theory of Relativity (which came about in response to the alleged null result of the Michaelson-Morely Interferometer experiment from 1887 on and the Sagnac experiments, etc...) and the Special Theory of Relativity (in which Einstein snuck the ''Aether'' back into the Cosmos as the ''Cosmological Constant'').

As St. Augustine wrote; “What then is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I want to explain it to a questioner, I do not know”



Science has an old habit of eating parts of philosophy alive.
#15155517
late wrote:Science has an old habit of eating parts of philosophy alive.


Real Science and real Philosophy do no such thing, because they are not in conflict. ''Philosophy'' being the ''Love of Wisdom'', and Science being ''the state of knowing a systematized knowledge as an object of study''.

All of which is not particularly germane to the subject of this thread, but it is important however if we are to determine if we're on the same page, if we're to have a discussion on the thread's topic.

If I recall correctly you are personally quite informed about the work of Friedrich Nietzsche, who was pretty much the modern embodiment intellectually of the pagan worldview which I described in my first post, so it seems that this thread would be a good one for you to take part in. It's in the ''Spirituality'' sub-forum, so it is primarily intended for discussion of the spiritual ramifications of these varied concepts of Time.
#15155550
So, by way of personal testimony, what I believe (and since this is the right subforum for it) is that God has decreed that while He is outside Time, by His ineffable love for His creatures He has condescended to become Man, and therefore experiences not only simultaneity of events, but also duration of sequential events, and therefore linear time is important, the time we experience. And not only that, by His promise of His return, His Second Coming, He will bring these particular moments of evil intertwined with good to an end forever for creation, and divide them.

Therefore the expectation of the future brings joy to the Monotheists known as Christians, because it is hoped we will live in goodness with God and His Saints and Angels, happy and at peace forever, no more evil and sadness. The future is literally beyond description, not because any irrationality of this hope, but because we simply cannot truly and fully imagine a world without evil while in this world.

Such a person as has this hope for the future, based in love and trust in God, shining outwards to all other people, is going to live differently than someone who truly does not have this expectation, For He Who rose from the dead has conquered death by His death, and will raise us all on the Last Day. Some to eternal life, (and some to eternal condemnation and disgrace as they so choose);



Victory. Lasting and decisive, with the old self destroyed and the new self born within us coming into being.
#15155576
annatar1914 wrote:

Real Science and real Philosophy do no such thing, because they are not in conflict. '




Traditional philosophy starts with a discussion of how we come to know the world.

Science has been studying perception and cognition since the 1800s. You could measure the output in megatons. Ignoring that work is absurd and childish.

While some philosophers still do that, Rorty did not. One of the things he was famous for was saying philosophy had to change, to accommodate that knowledge.

When scientists started doing philosophy of science, in the 1980s, they expressly rejected the language and traditions of philosophy.

Academic theologians were talking about "Leaps of Faith" a century ago. They had to, after the traditional language became obsolete.

But, I admit I usually stay out of this forum. I spend a lot of my time correcting mistakes, and a fair amount of that time goes to correcting your mistakes. My annoyance led me to make a mistake. Since the whole purpose of the forum is irrational, there's no point in my being here.

Btw, it's not actually monotheistic. You've got angels and demons and other stuff. Which means it's not just one guy. Mono means one, for most of us.
#15155583
Science and Philosophy don’t have to be in conflict if one just views them as different ways of expressing the same idea. They are able to fill in each other’s gaps. I don’t know why it has to be one or the other :hmm:
#15155585
ness31 wrote:
Science and Philosophy don’t have to be in conflict if one just views them as different ways of expressing the same idea. They are able to fill in each other’s gaps. I don’t know why it has to be one or the other :hmm:



Perhaps because they have been in conflict since the beginning of science..
#15155615
late wrote:Traditional philosophy starts with a discussion of how we come to know the world.

Science has been studying perception and cognition since the 1800s. You could measure the output in megatons. Ignoring that work is absurd and childish.

While some philosophers still do that, Rorty did not. One of the things he was famous for was saying philosophy had to change, to accommodate that knowledge.

When scientists started doing philosophy of science, in the 1980s, they expressly rejected the language and traditions of philosophy.

Academic theologians were talking about "Leaps of Faith" a century ago. They had to, after the traditional language became obsolete.

But, I admit I usually stay out of this forum. I spend a lot of my time correcting mistakes, and a fair amount of that time goes to correcting your mistakes. My annoyance led me to make a mistake. Since the whole purpose of the forum is irrational, there's no point in my being here.

Btw, it's not actually monotheistic. You've got angels and demons and other stuff. Which means it's not just one guy. Mono means one, for most of us.


@late

One God, as the Object of Worship. Everything and everyone else is a created being or thing, created by Him.

See, there are many things you and I could possibly say, which would not add up to much in sum because at the end of the day ultimately we'd still be talking about Persons, and Relations, or we'd instead engage in speaking an artificial language, an false epistemology, that shuts out and avoids any talk or understanding of Persons and Relations. But our consciences know better. At least that's one of the conclusions I came to when I held beliefs much as you did decades ago.

So having created this thread and speaking about this understanding, which is not ''irrational'' but rather ''supra-rational'', and based on entirely different premises from the modern trend and therefore reaches entirely different conclusions, I shall carry on with this discussion of Time, which has also begun the process of it's redemption.

Speaking from a more secular perspective, such ''philosophy'' as became current in the XXth century was deliberately pushed and favored as it was dishonest and ironically irrational, seeking because of Marxism and it's own dynamic teleology (plus other progressive beliefs) to end any true notion of purpose and meaning altogether. A desperate firebreak of nihilism that attempted to cover up a multitude of questionable thoughts and activities. And equally as un-necessary as what it fought and much more senseless.

We have this Time, and while we don't get it back, we do have it within us if we're humble enough to enter into personal relations with Wisdom Himself (if we are true Philosophers; ''lovers of Wisdom''), and therefore experience a joy that cannot be taken from us. But we have to try to experience this personal relation first. Once you do, then you know and understand with a reason that goes well beyond our natural and finite human understanding;




#15155630
annatar1914 wrote:

Speaking from a more secular perspective, such ''philosophy'' as became current in the XXth century was deliberately pushed and favored as it was dishonest and ironically irrational...



While it would have been fun to mock the other part of that paragraph, I will add only this: Rorty was strongly anti-Communist. But since you don't know anything about him...

Anyway, speaking of things you don't know about, there has been something of an intellectual evolution. It's a number of things that have come together, Rorty talks about it far better than I could. Google Rorty and Derrida, that might do it if you want to check that out.

You might say the result was an intellectual humility.

You might consider adopting that, you certainly need it.
#15155639
@late ;

While it would have been fun to mock the other part of that paragraph, I will add only this: Rorty was strongly anti-Communist. But since you don't know anything about him...


You assume a great deal. Not holding too much stock in a person's writings is not a lack of awareness of what they're saying. Or not saying, as the case is. Richard Rorty is not the issue here anyway...

Anyway, speaking of things you don't know about, there has been something of an intellectual evolution. It's a number of things that have come together, Rorty talks about it far better than I could. Google Rorty and Derrida, that might do it if you want to check that out.


More sophistry, as far as i'm concerned. A person can say many things, but living it is quite another, as i've noticed with Atheists. Dogmatically expounding on their Nihilism, etc... Because if you were right, what I say or anyone else says would not matter in the slightest.

You might say the result was an intellectual humility.


On the contrary, it's the exhibition of the height of intellectual arrogance; ''not only are you wrong, the very reason which you employ to explain reality is only provisional and contingent''.... Except the dogmatic certitude that understanding of reality is provisional and contingent. :roll:

You might consider adopting that, you certainly need it.


Malicious words which are rich in ironic projection, as we see that you are here on a sub-forum which you admitted yourself you had no reason to be on, dedicated as it is to; ''discuss religion without threads being derailed by Atheist arguments''... It is clear that your only purpose is malice, posting out of what appears to be a fit of personal aversion to what is being said by myself. I actually humbled myself and gave you an opportunity to take part, given your knowledge of Nietzsche which would actually be a valid contribution rationally speaking, but instead you continue to try to shit on this thread. And I'm the one who needs ''intellectual humility''? And you don't address what I say directly but make personal attacks? You should honestly be ashamed, I'm actually ashamed for you.

But I don't let such petty meanness get me down and I forgive you out of my love for you and God's love for you, for you don't really know what you're saying, you really don't. I have a joy which cannot be taken away from me, a joy which I wish you and everyone else had also, brother. You still can have it in full, there's still time.

#15155661
So anyway, let's look back at what I wrote, starting this thread;

annatar1914 wrote:I have with this thread hopefully begun a conversation about how radical even the most traditionalist and conservative interpretations of Monotheism are regarding Time, and the conception of how Time as we know it coming to an End is the most liberating and progressive insight ever in the history of mankind.

Time in the true Pagan conception is eternal in duration, and cyclic, with the same basic events happening over and over again, a rigid Fate which even the gods themselves much less mortal men cannot change in the slightest. Man is always what he is and cannot change his nature or have his nature changed. The social order rises and falls from perfection to failure and degeneration back to perfection again and then another fall, on in an infinite series. in an eternal universe with finite human souls, reincarnation and transmigration of souls makes sense, and only do so under that system. Again, a Wheel that basically cannot be escaped (the issue of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism and the Dharmic religions will be discussed in this thread).

But in the Monotheist religions, whether a particular one is true or false, all have the idea that Time is not Cyclic but Linear, and the Cosmos is not eternal, but has a beginning, a middle, and an end. That events have a meaning which leads to a culmination towards the end of time as we know it, and are therefore unrepeatable and unique. This means that persons are unrepeatable and unique. All these factors are Liberation to adherents of Monotheistic religions, but are precisely that cyclic failure and degeneration to keen Pagan minds throughout history.

With this in mind, there are therefore two ways to perceive and interpret events of the past and present and future, looking at the same events very different reactions and actions can be elicited from different people.


If there are basically two sorts of people then who differ in among other things, the consciousness or otherwise of progressive linear time that has a beginning, a middle, and an end, how did this change come about?

I hold personally to the idea that there have always been Monotheists who were people of the expectation, who looked to the future in hope, and that there have always been Pagans from the beginning, who have no particular teleological expectation for the future. And these different hopes and loves build different cultures; everyone can see that Athens was different than Rome or Jerusalem, Jerusalem being more infused with the expectation of deliverance by God than the others.

Over time when among many the original eschatological hope in linear time faded, some transferred that purposeful hope for the future onto a better society made by human hands and efforts.
#15155714
ness31 wrote:So, why does monotheism equate to a linear view of time? I mean, Ezekiel speaks of a wheel within a wheel WITH eyes...not very linear to me ;)


@ness31

Lol, oh yes, the ''Ophanim'', or ''Wheels'', forget which of the Choirs of Angels corresponds to them, pretty cool :)

But I'm very glad you asked this question about the equation of Monotheism and a Linear view of time. It seems that it shouldn't necessarily equate at first glance, but I think it is the case with any revealed Monotheistic religion, true or false. I believe that it has something to do with the Sovereignty of God and His Will being done throughout His Creation, and the battle of Good versus Evil, the Cosmic War which leads to the defeat of the forces of Darkness.

In Christianity in particular this relation between the linear movement of history to it's apocalyptic climax is rather pronounced and yet also intimately human, as it is the triumph of the Son of Man, the God-Man Jesus Christ, the final and lasting triumph and vindication of Him and all His Saints and Martyrs and Confessors who will reign in glory with Him forever. If Christians are not Linear minded in their future expectations, (saying in the Creed or Symbol; ''.... We look for the Resurrection of the Dead and the life of the World to Come...''), then what exactly are we doing if we're not waiting, looking to the future?

Speaking of the Last Days;

Христос с учениками из храма выходит
Пред крестною смертью своей.
С глубокою скорбию, прощальными словами
Учил Он любимых друзей.

- Скажи нам, Учитель, последнее слово
Пока еще с нами живешь,
Скажи нам, Учитель, когда это будет,
Когда мир судить ты придешь?

- Услышите войны и разные слухи,
Восстанет народ на народ,
И будут болезни и глады и моры,
И братская кровь потечет.

Уменьшится вера, угаснет надежда,
В сердцах охладеет любовь.
И многие люди тогда соблазнятся,
Прольют неповинную кровь.

Увидите мерзость, стоящую в храме,
То знайте, что суд при дверях,
И вид запустения будет пред вами,
Держите светильники в руках.

В эти минуты поищете смерти,
Но смерть от людей убежит.
И кто в это время находится в тюле
Пускай он домой не спешит.

И скажут: падите, сокройте нас горы
Но горы на них не падут,
И солнце померкнет, и месяц и звезды
С небесного свода спадут.

Увидят Христа в небесах лучезарных,
Он будет, как солнце, сиять.
Невеста его воскрешенная Церковь
Там радостно будет взирать.

За ней вслед восстанут толпы и народы -
От края до края земли,
И вся содрогнется земная природа
Пред страшным престолом Судии.


Christ with his disciples leaves the temple
before his death on the cross
With deep sorrow, with parting words
He taught his beloved friends.

Tell us, Master, the last word
While you are still living with us
Tell us, Master, when will it be
When you come to judge the world.

Hear wars and different rumors
The people
will rise against the people And there will be sickness and famines and pestilences
And brotherly blood will flow

Faith will
diminish , hope will fade away In hearts love will grow cold
And many people will then be tempted To
shed innocent blood.

You will see the abomination standing in the temple,
Then know that the judgment is at the door
And the sight of desolation will be before you
Hold the lamps in your hands

In these minutes, look for death,
But death will run away from people
And who is in the field at this time
Let him not rush home

And they will say fall, hide us the mountains,
But the mountains will not fall on them
And the sun will darken and the moon and the stars
will fall from the firmament

They will see Christ in the radiant heavens
He will shine like the sun
His Bride, resurrected before
There will joyfully look

Crowds and peoples will follow her,
From edge to edge of the earth
And all earthly nature will tremble
Before the terrible throne of the judge.
#15155717
ness31 wrote:So, why does monotheism equate to a linear view of time? I mean, Ezekiel speaks of a wheel within a wheel WITH eyes...not very linear to me ;)


(1) Monotheist religions tend towards a final ending. At least, this is how the Abrahamic religions in the West work.

(2) The explanations for Ezekiel one actually do not say that the wheels described here have anything to do with the way the universe works in terms of time.

The first few centuries describe these as visions of God or of other things. Check out this blog entry.
#15155718
Verv wrote:(1) Monotheist religions tend towards a final ending. At least, this is how the Abrahamic religions in the West work.

(2) The explanations for Ezekiel one actually do not say that the wheels described here have anything to do with the way the universe works in terms of time.

The first few centuries describe these as visions of God or of other things. Check out this blog entry.


Well said, and a good article link!

I note too a quote from St. John Crysostom in the article;


“Whenever God is going to reveal some sight beyond all expectation to his servants, he leads them out of the cities to a place free from tumult.”


Yet another reason to leave the City, in our expectation.
#15155723
annatar1914 wrote:Time in the true Pagan conception is eternal in duration, and cyclic, with the same basic events happening over and over again, a rigid Fate which even the gods themselves much less mortal men cannot change in the slightest. Man is always what he is and cannot change his nature or have his nature changed. The social order rises and falls from perfection to failure and degeneration back to perfection again and then another fall, on in an infinite series. in an eternal universe with finite human souls, reincarnation and transmigration of souls makes sense, and only do so under that system. Again, a Wheel that basically cannot be escaped (the issue of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism and the Dharmic religions will be discussed in this thread).

But in the Monotheist religions, whether a particular one is true or false, all have the idea that Time is not Cyclic but Linear, and the Cosmos is not eternal, but has a beginning, a middle, and an end.

Well, I think Pagan conceptions coexisted with monotheism in Europe. For example, if you read the poems of the Carmina Burana, which Carl Orff put to music in the 1930s, the well-known piece, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, speaks of fortune as a wheel.

Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi wrote:O Fortuna
velut luna
statu variabilis,
semper crescis
aut decrescis;
vita detestabilis
nunc obdurat
et tunc curat
ludo mentis aciem,
egestatem,
potestatem
dissolvit ut glaciem.

Sors immanis
et inanis,
rota tu volubilis,
status malus,
vana salus
semper dissolubilis,
obumbrata
et velata
michi quoque niteris;
nunc per ludum
dorsum nudum
fero tui sceleris.

Sors salutis
et virtutis
michi nunc contraria,
est affectus
et defectus
semper in angaria.
Hac in hora
sine mora
corde pulsum tangite;
quod per sortem
sternit fortem,
mecum omnes plangite!


It's also mentioned in Fortune Plango Vulnera.

Fortune Plango Vulnera wrote:Fortune rota volvitur:
descendo minoratus;
alter in altum tollitur;
nimis exaltatus
rex sedet in vertice
caveat ruinam!
nam sub axe legimus
Hecubam reginam.


late wrote:While some philosophers still do that, Rorty did not. One of the things he was famous for was saying philosophy had to change, to accommodate that knowledge.

He also roundly condemned religion in a manner that ultimately denied that modern democracy evolved from Christians, Jews, and had roots in Greco-Roman traditions that had their own polytheistic religions.

Richard Rorty wrote:There are credentials for admission to our democratic society [...]. You have to be educated in order to be a participant in our conversation So we are going to go right on trying to discredit you in the eyes of your children, trying to strip your fundamentalist religious community of dignity, trying to make your views seem silly rather than discussable. We are not so inclusivist as to tolerate intolerance such as yours.


late wrote:Since the whole purpose of the forum is irrational, there's no point in my being here.

Still stuck on your vanity, eh? Pi is irrational, is it not? The square root of -1? i? Love is irrational as well.

annatar1914 wrote:If there are basically two sorts of people then who differ in among other things, the consciousness or otherwise of progressive linear time that has a beginning, a middle, and an end, how did this change come about?

Well, the Book of Genesis puts God outside of time for all practical purposes, but suggests that a void did in fact exist. So God is effectively filling the void--creating physical matter, or filling the void if you will. It's these things that have a beginning and end.

annatar1914 wrote: the God-Man Jesus Christ, the final and lasting triumph and vindication of Him and all His Saints and Martyrs and Confessors who will reign in glory with Him forever.

Ahh... but forever implies no end. The end beginning and end appears to be physical, not metaphysical.
#15155724
I swear this sub forum is cursed! I wrote my reply and it vanished. Having these types of discussions is mentally taxing and now I’m expected to write it all out again? :hmm:

So here’s the short version of what I said-

The Bible is a tool and it allows for a non linear understanding of time. It’s the very essence of Scripture. It’s gone from papyrus, to print to paperless.

My personal belief is that we can experience the past and the future whilst being in the present. It has little to do with fashion and architecture and more to do with air quality and how well you decipher deja vu.

As for Ezekiel, what can I say? I saw the word wheel and cyclic one too many times in this thread and that’s what my mind jumped to :lol:

I reckon if I try hard enough, I can make it work ;)

The safe zones are not safe. Misusing humanitarian[…]

Voting for this guy again would be a very banana-[…]

The photo in the article showing tunnels supposed[…]

The tail has been wagging the dog.. Israel is a[…]