Happy Easter!
[NOTE: This is a repost from Easters past. But it still works for me.]
Happy Easter to all my celebratory Christian readers, and to all those who just enjoy the holiday as well!
One year when my son was little, I spent the week prior to Easter blowing out eggs and dying them. Now that he’s grown and away, the eggs are packed away in boxes and stored in parts unknown. If I could get my hands on them I’d photograph them for you, because even all these years later they are beautiful, with dyes both subtle and unsubtle, interesting etched patterns and rainbow effects—definitely one of my finest crafts hours (to tell the truth, I didn’t have so many fine crafts hours, although there was also a gingerbread house we made that was stored in the attic and alas, eaten by small creatures–and not human ones, at that.)
Blown-out eggs are well worth the trouble, and why? Because they last. And nothing eats them. You only have to make them once, and you’re all set. They are a bit fragile, but not so very.
So here’s my Easter present to you (not that you couldn’t find the information yourself)—some instructions for blowing eggs, from a link that has disappeared since I first wrote this post:
First, you’ll need to make a tiny pin hole on each end of the egg. A pin works well, or a wooden kitchen skewer or even the tip of a sharp knife. Gently work the tip of the pin/skewer/knife in a circular motion until a tiny hole appears. Repeat on the other side. Then insert the pin or skewer (the knife will be too big here) far enough into the egg to break the yolk. Use your mouth [blow] to expel the contents of the egg.
And here is a more complex–but perhaps better–way, for those obsessive-compulsives among us.
These aren’t mine, but they’ll have to do as substitute:
A Meaninful and Blessed Easter to all, and again a thanks to our hostess for providing this forum.
He Is Risen!
Like many nonreligious Americans, I celebrate Easter as a secular holiday; an excuse to have a holiday meal, invite family and friends and take part in cultural trappings that surround that holiday (eg, gift-giving at Christmas, colored eggs and Peeps at Easter).
I respect that I live in a country, and in a culture, where a frankly religious holiday may be celebrated in that way by its adherents; celebrated as I do by those of us who simply choose to embrace it as a part of Americana; and safely ignored by those who have some other religious belief or are more strident than I about their nonreligion. Not everywhere is that freedom available.
Happy Easter to all!
Yes Kyndyll G, you are indeed fortunate that you live in a country that embraces Judeo-Christian values so that you can enjoy the freedoms you enumerate. You and Christians alike are fortunate not to live in a society in which slavish adherence to Theocratic dictates may be the only guarantor of life itself; and in which non-believers, whether secular or Christian, are always at risk. Or for that matter in an Atheistic Communist state in which Autocrats invariably rule with an iron fist, and worship of the Supreme Leader frequently replaces traditional religion.
Sadly, we see that as modern and moderate societies abandon their Christian heritage, Secularism becomes a religion in itself. With no higher power than the state, autocratic bureaucracies feel justified in squeezing personal liberties for the common good–or something.
Happy Easter
Lately I’ve been reading again about the Hindu saint, Neem Karoli Baba. He was the guru who transformed Dr. Richard Alpert, ex-Harvard prof and LSD advocate, into Ram Dass.
Ram Dass then wrote “Be Here Now” in 1971 which moved a number of Western hippies (including Steve Jobs) to travel to India to search for Neem Karoli Baba.
The Westerners who found NKB were not Christians or were no longer Christians. They certainly did not make their Journey to the East for Christian reasons.
So they were all surprised that some of the Neem Karoli Baba’s most heartfelt teachings were about Christ:
[Christ] was one with all beings and He had great love for all in the world. He was one with God…
You must accept the teachings of Christ and follow them. Christ said to be like a little child–never think or speak anything that could harm anyone…
He was crucified so that His spirit could spread throughout the world. He sacrificed His body for the Dharma. He never died, He never died. He is Atman [the soul], living in the hearts of all.
–“Miracle of Love” by Ram Dass, p. 353
Happy Easter!
Thanks, Neoneo! (in order to distinguish from (a) the fictional character Neo, aka ‘The One,’ aka ‘Mr. Anderson’, and (b) Neo the cat, who belongs to a former officemate, and who was reputed to have a mean streak noteworthy even by feline standards)
He is risen indeed!
A Charming greeting on Easter among Slavic people is
HE is Risen ! Foregoing mentioning anything else on this Holy Day .
Happy Easter to all.
BTW I watched the movie “Godspell” this morning on the Indie channel. Released in 1973, the year I graduated from college. I had heard of it, but never seen it before. Strange, strange flick, to say the least (and the ‘fashion’ of the day, ugh!).
For some years I attended a progressive Episcopalian church in San Francisco. They did a bang-up, beautiful, hours-long, midnight Easter mass after which we continued the celebration with a great feast.
It was such a big production there were no daytime services on Sunday. Instead we would meet in a nearby park to consume leftovers from the night before, along with whatever additional food members brought.
At one of those picnics I asked some members where they stood on the Resurrection. Only three of seven upheld the Resurrection as a reality — Christ did indeed rise from the dead. Not surprisingly, two of those three were ex-evangelicals. The other four explained the Resurrection as a metaphor for rejuvenation or the truth living on or something.
If you really take it in, the Resurrection is boggling. It makes no sense to the modern scientific mind. Yet it is utterly foundational to Christianity, however surprising that might be to some liberal Christians today.
The early Christians did not rush out into the world to say “Love your neighbor.” Instead they proclaimed, “He is risen!”
I can’t claim I’m a person of faith these days but I acknowledge there is a deep mystery to the Resurrection which is not done with me, nor am I done with it.
The Apostle Paul had quiet a bit of comments on the implications of the question of the Resurrection in 1 Corinthians chapter 15.
Neo, thanks for your continued excellent writing.
jon baker: Yes, the First Corinthians, chapter 15 is the go-to spot in the New Testament for pondering the Resurrection. St. Paul wrote it around twenty years afterward, though he was not a direct witness of the event.
Here’s a mysterious bit for me:
3 The tradition I handed on to you in the first place, a tradition which I had myself received, was that Christ died for our sins, in accordance with the scriptures,
4 and that he was buried; and that on the third day, he was raised to life, in accordance with the scriptures;
5 and that he appeared to Cephas; and later to the Twelve;
6 and next he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still with us, though some have fallen asleep;
7 then he appeared to James, and then to all the apostles.
I love the way Paul tosses off as simple fact that 500 people, besides Christ’s inner circle, saw the Risen Christ. We don’t know anything more about those people except that most were supposed to be alive at the time Paul wrote and apparently he assumed his claim would be believed.
I don’t know what to make of that. There is, of course, more commentary than I know what to do with.
One materialist explanation for the Christ narrative is that it was based on a set of stories, which became taller and taller tales in the telling, until Jesus is walking on water, raising the dead, and returning to life after being crucified. If so, these exaggerations solidified within twenty years or less — not a century or two.
Furthermore, this doesn’t explain the transformation of the apostles from a small, timid group to absolute lions on fire to preach Christ’s gospel in the face of terrible repression, often at the cost of their lives.
Following up on Neem Karoli Baba….
Here’s Krishna Das, an American student of NKB, telling of his experience listening to NKB convey Jesus to Westerners. (While alive, NKB was commonly called Maharaji.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2_GKPXQ1fQ
I get a giggle from Krishna Das saying, “I was born Jewish on my parents’ side.”
At the beginning the motivation for this excerpt is unclear. Krishna Das is refering to a song some people don’t like to hear him sing in concert. The song is a revival tent barnburner, “Jesus on the Main Line (Tell Him What You Want).”
I’ve heard KD sing it and it’s a hoot yet still respectable. He is telling his largely New Age audience, they can’t ignore Jesus. The audience rocks out with the same fervor they bring to KD chanting “Om Namah Shivaya.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NODRDbJ14LI
Huxley, your vivid reminiscences of living in San Francisco and being part of the progressive scene are right out of Tales of the City if perhaps a bit later. I lived and worked in the bay area but was somewhat of an outsider looking in on the menagerie. You were down with it! Ever thought of writing a book?
a progressive Episcopalian church…
Is there any other kind? In San Francisco?
The Other Chuck: Thanks!
Well, there are merely liberal Episcopalian churches in San Francisco.
After I turned to the dark side of conservatism, my rector told me of a small church somewhere in the Marina which was still old-school, upper-crust Republican. Being stubborn, I chose to make my stand with the progs, which didn’t work out well for my faith.
I reached SF in 1982, when the second “Tales of the City” book appeared. It was a great time to be young, footloose and creative.
I loved being part of the progressive scene. I didn’t realize how much community I was risking when I became a red ant in a blue anthill. By the time I left SF last year, I wasn’t part of anything anymore and just had a handful of old, loyal friends.
Boggling enough to keep people fascinated …
Nat Geo article from 2015, referring to Italian research from 2011
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/04/150417-shroud-turin-relics-jesus-catholic-church-religion-science/
Also from a somewhat less impartial source,
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434153/shroud-turin-jesus-christ-blood-relic-sudarium-oviedo
One of the key questions for me concerning Jesus’ sacrifice for our atonement is why does God require such a sacrifice for the reconciliation between Him and mankind?
The Old Testament tells ‘without the shedding of blood their is no remission of sin’. Why?
And the sacrifice must be innocent.
Is it because love is a verb– it requires action? God demonstrated the perfect example of Love. God’s sacrifice was once and sufficient for everyone.
But why can’t that sacrifice be universally applied? Why does it only become active in us when we, in faith, accept the gift?
And is this any harder to accept than the concept of dark energy, without which, the universe doesn’t exist? Is dark energy evidence of the sustaining power of God?
The Bible does say that “…in him all things hold together”.
No idea. One could I suppose try and re-conceptualize – or possibly retreat back to the earliest core idea – of what is meant by sacrifice.
It would perhaps preserve the giving up, or the enduring, of one thing for the attainment of another; but it would not be the equivalent of buying-off or propitiating, exactly. Paul’s athletic training and “race” is a sacrifice, but not a propitiation, it seems.
Of course earlier on, in the case of Abraham, the God of Abraham informed him via what looks like an object lesson exercise, that that is not what He actually ultimately wanted from Abraham in the way of a “giving up”. And as I understand it, the prophets of Israel spent some considerable amount of their time looking forward toward the day when the Ark would not be fetishized and a new sensibility would take its place. And then we arrive somewhat later when the sly legalism of corban is condemned and would no longer be seen as a legitimate substitute for the actual care of parents.
So: If one were to accept the notion of man as having an almost irremediably darkened intellect, constantly subject to confusion and deception, then, in that case, one could make some sense of the notion of a blameless and consecrated “victim” who knowing the likely consequences, who nonetheless walks into world-abattoir in order to effect a change among its denizens; one that will otherwise never come about. In this case, per the hypothesis of a darkened nature, a reconciliation opportunity of sorts is opened up as, or if, a new kingdom is established.
If one reads stories taken from say, the Jesuit Relations, it is remarkable how the self-martyrdom of these priests was conceptualized by them as they exposed themselves to the dangers of living with what we would think of as human devils (if we could free ourselves of the Dances With Wolves, fantasy) in order to “liberate them from what the priests like Isaac Jogues saw as their degradation and bondage.
Fingers, gnawed off, flayed or slowly burned alive … all suffered for the sake of “souls”.
Of course we don’t believe in souls nowadays. Unless of course it is something good or advantageous to have in terms of political discourse. Then, in that case everyone obviously has one. Even progressives, who say they, and we, don’t.
Or maybe not.
I actually have very little interest in theology, and virtually none in the salvation of “communities”; so my open ruminations here are just that, and no more.
Ok, because I was thinking out loud, I felt free to make a possible case concerning the meaning of the idea of “sacrifice” , without worrying about how it fit in or was consistent with any particular Christian dogmas or formulations, be they Billy Graham’s or the pope’s; much less the Baal worshipers of Canaan
But, the nagging thought I should do some checking made me look at a site or two.
In this case, I left Evangelical in the lurch and went Catholic … ultra-conservative, but orthodox Catholic.
It turns out that some of what I said comports with what a pope said. Maybe it’s kind of in the air and I absorbed it through osmosis, though I am sure I had never read this document.
I would warn casual readers, sensitive Jewish readers, or ardent Protestants of the congregational type, against following the link. Save yourself the aggravation. http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/christs-death-as-the-perfect-act-of-worship
The second part of the article takes issue with my take on “propitiation” though what sense Origen meant to convey by it and what DNW had in mind, may have been two different things.
Faith is a gift from God.
It is an error, a profound lack of humility, an arrogance, to require a justification from God in order to believe in the Holy Trinity. Those who say there is a soul in everyman for political reasons, as DNW suggests, make themselves false gods.
Jesus, the Lamb of God, was a sacrifice, just as lambs were sacrificed at the first Passover, which freed Israel from slavery in Egypt. It also ties in with Abraham and Isaac. Sacrifice is a surrender of self to a Higher Power. It may not make sense to us today because sacrifice is not part of our culture. Yet sacrifice can take many forms, many differing acts.
The planet is awash in false gods, and the growth of secularism, ever more immoral and entirely non-sacrificial, is awesome to contemplate.
There is an entire branch of theology called soteriology defined in Merriam-Webster:
theology dealing with salvation especially as effected by Jesus Christ
I was never able to make much sense of that thinking. It struck me as something pasted on after the fact.
All I knew was that I had had an experience while walking the Stations of the Cross on a Good Friday that blasted me open more thoroughly than LSD ever had.
For the next three months I practically didn’t know who I was when I woke up in the morning. Mentally I had to retrace my steps to remember. When I walked by a church, the cross at the top of a spire looked like radio tower for receiving broadcasts from God. It took me a while to settle down.
Catholics call that kind of thing a “consolation.” You are supposed to use it to increase your love for God, then get back to the serious business of faith and good works.
I’m not a Catholic, so it goes into my personal X-Files. It seemed like something big and alive touched me. That account is still open.
Your story sounds a bit like Roy Shoemans. He was the successful yet despondent “Jewish guy” [deliberately airy terminology] from MIT; who, while out for a walk, was brain blasted by an experience he could not comprehend for a year
I think I have linked to him before so I will leave it at the mention his name.
Stumbled – as I mentioned before – across his story while trying to compile commonalities from the less crazy NDE reports on ole Youtube. For some reason his experience showed up on the suggested viewing list … though he was not claiming to have been clinically dead. The guy is so deadpan, so seemingly sincere, that it’s hard to discount the subjective reality of the experience for him.
In other words, he does not seem to be a conscious deceiver.
As for me, I’ll just have to content myself with listening to The Pilgrim’s Chorus from Tannhauser if I wish to provoke occasional feelings of redemption. Over the top or not, it affects many, religious or irreligious, the same way on the first hearing and reading of the lyrics. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MMytsTslNQ
Shows even a bigoted fellow like Wagner can produce something sublime. Though it’s not, as music, one of those effects you can necessarily repeat on demand. LOL
DNW: I followed up on some Roy Shoeman links. Interesting fellow. I completely believe the sincerity of his testimony. Though I don’t believe one must go full Roman Catholic. Never go full Roman Catholic, as Instapundit might say.
I was amused to read Shoeman had some initial spiritual experiences in which he asked God what to do. I’ll be a Buddhist if you want. I’ll be a Hindu if you want. But he was thinking, anything, but please not a Christian.
Well, no disrespect to any Christians reading here. After going to parochial school, 7th-12th grades, I hated Christianity. If I was sure of one thing about myself, I was sure I was not and never would be a Christian.
But then I saw a good/bad movie, “The Messenger,” about Joan of Arc and it captivated me. I started reading about Joan of Arc and the more I read, the weirder it got. Then I asked the question, “What would it be like to have the faith of Joan of Arc?” My life became magical and charged with meaning for two weeks.
From that I decided I had some unfinished business with Christianity. So I started going to a “safe” Episcopal church. By myself I walked the Stations of the Cross on Good Friday as an experiment. What could go wrong? It wasn’t like I was at a revival meeting led by snake handlers.
Then boom!
I became a committed Christian. Unfortunately, under the gun of 9-11, I also became a conservative at about the same time. Being conservative at a progressive Episcopal church is no fun. I often found myself taking on the entire church in the mailing list discussions. Eventually I realized I was wasting my time and theirs. So I left.
I considered finding another church but I was weary and just didn’t. It was a relief to stop trying to be a Christian — it is hard work to be a Christian — and return to my American freethinker self.
I feel a bit guilty sometime, but I figure when God has further instructions for me, He will let know.
Huxley, Have you ever looked into the reports of “The Man in White” appearances to numerous Muslims in the last few years before their conversion to Christianity?
Huxley
The Jesuits are very liberal but – in my experience – they avoid direct political appeals. Homilies based in the Gospel.
I just completely discount the religion-politics nexus. I was shocked to learn how Christian pastors in Iowa are such a political force. Naive of me. Cruz sought them out.
I think it is a GIANT mistake when the Catholic Church endorses open borders. That encourages law breaking.
If one has to be a liberal Democrat to be a Catholic, then it pushes conservatives out.
I sure get embarrassed when I talk about Christianity. I didn’t check to see if anyone had responded to me until tonight.
I don’t know what to make of Christianity. My freethinking self is right. Quite a lot of what passes for Christianity today is standard human BS. Nothing terrible by that standard, but not at all that enlightening either.
However, there is a there there, I can’t deny. If you invoke Jesus, you are taking a chance your life will never be the same.
Will you come and follow me if I but call your name?
Will you go where you don’t know and never be the same?
Will you let my love be shown?
Will you let my name be known,
Will you let my life be grown in you and you in me?
–The Summons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o469PRLdbHU
jon baker: I’m unfamiliar with The Man In White converting Muslims to Christianity.
I googled an article just now and see what you are talking about. It reminded me of the Benjamin Creme people going on about the Maitreya/Christ incarnation who is supposedly alive and living in East End London and about to rescue humanity and usher in some kind of theosophical utopia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Creme
Once you grant God intervenes in human affairs, anything is possible, but that doesn’t mean that anything which is possible is real.
Cornhead: Not sure of your points.
I was just telling a friend how the Jesuits are half-responsible for today’s popularity of the Enneagram, which in verifiable historical terms only goes back to Gurdjieff, the peculiar 20th century, Armenian mystic cum cult leader, who ensnared Ouspensky and Frank Lloyd Wright, and by some accounts was responsible for the death of writer, Katherine Mansfield.
My good Catholic friend goes nuts over the open-borders stuff pushed by the Catholic Church. Yes, there’s the Social Gospel rationalization, but also a naked hope to get immigrant asses in American pews.
A big part of why I didn’t seek a new Christian church was because American churches are almost all either red or blue.
I’m looking for a refuge from the American cultural wars, not an opportunity to be on one front or the other.
If one has to be a liberal Democrat to be a Catholic, then it pushes conservatives out.
Cornhead: I could look it up, but as I recall this is a bet Hillary lost.
I feel a bit guilty sometime, but I figure when God has further instructions for me, He will let know.
And how are you going to figure out whether the command comes from aO, your own fanciful imagination, LSD flashbacks and other marijuana effects, human deception, or Lucifer?
Because if Jesus of Nazareth exists and other supernatural stuff, then so do demons and angels.
The Eastern ascetic tradition undergoes years of fasting and self discipline, in order to personally discern good from evil spirits. Are Leftist pleasure seekers often found in the company of self disciplined, ever improving humans.
That’s the problem with humans. People think that their gospel and knowledge is the truth. Lucifer understands how to work those people.
To understand anti matter, one must understand matter. To understand light, one must understand darkness, even dark matter. To understand who Jesus of Nazareth was, one must under who Lucifer was. The theory of yin and yang. This ascetic tradition is almost unknown in Western eyes, even after the Enlightenment. They have to get high on decadent drugs or watch Hollywood movies or go to India, to get some.
To Brian,
One of the key questions for me concerning Jesus’ sacrifice for our atonement is why does God require such a sacrifice for the reconciliation between Him and mankind?
You should read the Book of Enoch concerning the Genesis line about when the fallen angels transgressed. To aO, not even the angels are pure and trustworthy. Yet angels are supposed to serve mankind, not the other way around. Ever wonder why it said in the 10 commandments that you should not worship other gods. Those other gods were angels placed over humans who wanted to be free thinkers and go their own way. aO accomodated them.
The Old Testament tells ‘without the shedding of blood their is no remission of sin’. Why?
It’s a way for aO to demonstrate the ability to see things of the future without pre determining it. It also prepares his chosen people, the seed of Abraham, for what happens later. Justice requires that imperfect humans will never become the family and loved ones of the aO. They don’t deserve it. Only an intercessor, someone that takes on the debt and punishment who is worthy, can pay the penalty Justice demands. There are certain rules aO cannot violate, such as violating his word or causing evil to happen. This has to do with something later on, concerning space and time.
“And the sacrifice must be innocent.” There would be no point, since the lesson was to teach the Israelis that every time they sinned, an innocent would die as their scapegoat and they would have to kill the animal themselves, which isn’t something people with a conscience can easily do. If killing evil humans would be enough of a punishment, then the Divine Flood would have made it unnecessary to further punish humans. Just go back to eye for an eye.
“But why can’t that sacrifice be universally applied? Why does it only become active in us when we, in faith, accept the gift?”
A spirit did propose that humanity could be saved without any sacrifices. By some accounts, that spirit was Lucifer. His plan was rejected, however, due to it requiring unholy practices. If you don’t accept Jesus of Nazareth’s plan, you are given a fallback which would be Lucifer’s plan, thus you are now his to do with as he wishes. People have free will, so they can choose whatever. But they are sheep, so they have no real idea of what they are choosing. Lucifer guaranteed that he could save all of humanity, so long as he had the power of the creator. He would most likely have made humans with a biological hardwire switch that made them slaves, unable to think or even do anything that is against divine laws.
Jesus knew in Gethsemane exactly what would happen, but Caias and the Jewish judges didn’t have to be the ones that did it. But they chose to do it, just as predicted.
One of the reasons why Lucifer was said to say “Better to rule in hell than serve in Heaven”. That is because to Lucifer, he began to doubt that any of his choices was actually his, since aO already knew about it before hand. That sneaking suspicion that he isn’t actually in control, wore at him, until he just decided to rebel and do his own free thinking thing. As Alinsky and Ayers once might have mentioned, Lucifer was the first Rebel.
Ever hear of Schroedinger’s Cat? The scriptures are testimonies of various holy prophets, who sprinkle a bunch of predictions around, but nobody knows when it will come true until they open the box. And if the cat isn’t dead in the first one, time has a quadrillion more boxes to open.
A spirit as intelligent as Lucifer would naturally begin to believe that aO was merely manipulating him, after all that is what Lucifer would do to the ignorant and pathetic humans after all. One third of the host of heaven believed in the cause of Lucifer, they wanted to be saved irrespective of what they did in mortality. That would be fair, that would be equal, that would be non discriminatory… sound familiar.
And is this any harder to accept than the concept of dark energy, without which, the universe doesn’t exist?
Astronomers, philosophers, and Einstein believed that the universe had always been there. No creation, no end. Einstein’s equations of relativity made it inevitable to show that the universe was expanding. If the universe was expanding, then what caused it to expand? What caused the universe to become a singularity and then expand? They go backwards in time and find that there is a First Cause, before time and space.
Einstein didn’t want to believe it, since he was an atheist. Find out too much about the universe and about humanity, and being an atheist is pretty difficult.
Jewish atheist does not want to find out that Abraham’s Covenant was real and that Genesis is correct. So he tried to redo the equations to make it come out the right way. It didn’t come out the right way, it came out the true way, and here we are. Big Bang Theory. Dark Matter. For an entity to know what is in the future, it has to be independent of our space and time axis or dimension. That is pretty easy, if it was the First Cause of the verse itself, all the physical laws, fine tuning for life, and space/time creation.
Oh btw Huxley, is very likely aO already let you know what you should do in the form of your rector telling you to go somewhere else. But you obeyed your free thinking ways and now you have the consequences of it. Later on, though, you might be thinking that you were abandoned, but if you are as high functioning as you say you are, you can easily retrace your memories and see if those coincidences were actually coincidences.