If The Great Divorce is not Lewis' best book it is his second best. This short but sweet book puts sinners and the righteous in perspective better than I had ever seen before. Lewis treats sin appropriately not just as immoral or bad, but straight up selfish and stupid.
The first bit that caught my attention was when he exits the bus and wrote, "It gave me a feeling of freedom, but also of exposure, possibly of danger, which accompanied me through all that followed." At first it is like being a person living in sin and walking into a group of friends who all know of your sin. Though, it is different for his character when he mentions the danger. The danger is simply the judgment. This is prominent in many lives; minus the feeling of judgment. The exposure is embarrassing at first but we get use to it and begin to joke about it as if the sin is no big deal. This is just one of the many ways we hold on to our "precious sins".
Why are we so reluctant to give up our sins? It is either insanity or very near it since we pepeat the same actions expecting a different result. Simply, it is that we are unaware of the poor results we get. We are thinking only for ourselves and our ideas of what is good; ignoring the destruction it brings to others and our own hearts. It creates a terrible chain reaction where we voluntary and involuntary at the same time dig ourselves deeper into our holes.
Consequently, a remedy lies in realizing that we did not create ourselves and so therefore have no right to anything.
12/20/2010
12/16/2010
Tacitus, Eulogy for Agricola
45
Agricola did not live to see the senate-house under siege, the senators surrounded by a cordon of troops, and that one fell stroke which sent so many consulars to their death, so many noble ladies into banishment or exile. Only a single victory was credited as yet to Carus Mettius; teh four walls of the Alban fortress still kept Messalinus's bellow from reaching our ears; and Massa Baebius was still a prisoner in the dock. But before long we senators led Helvidius to prison, watched in shame the sufferings of Mauricus and Rusticus. and staind ourselves with Senecio's innocent blood. Even Nero used to avert his eyes and, though he ordered abominations, forbore to witness them. The worst of our torments under Domitian was to see him with his eyes fixed upon us. Every sigh was registered against us; and when we all turned pale, he did not scruple to make us marked men by a glance of his savage countenance - that blood red countenance which saved him from ever being seen to blush with shame.
Happy indeed were you, Agricola, not only in your glorious life, but in your timely death. We have the testimony of those who heard your last words that you met your fate with a cheerful courage. You seemed glad to do your best to acquit the emperor of blood-guiltiness. But your daughter and I have suffered more than the pang of a father's loss: we grieve that we could not sit by your sick bed, sustain your failing strength, and satisfy our yearning for your fond looks and embraces. We should surely have received some last commands, some words to be engraved for ever on our hearts. It was our own special sorrow and pain that through the accident of our long absence we lost him four years before his death. All, more than all, dear Father, was assuredly done to honour you by the devoted wife at your side. Yet some tears that should have been shed over you were not shed; and, at the last, there was something for which dying eyes looked in vain.
46
If there is any mansion for the spirits of the just, is, as philosophers hold, great souls do not perish with the body, you may rest in peace! May you call us, your family, from feeble regrets and unmanly mourning to contemplate your virtues,for which it were a sin to mourn and lament! May we honour you in better ways - By our admiration and our praise, and if our powers permit by following your example! That is the true honour, the true affection of souls knit close to yours. To your daughter and widow I would suggest that they revere the memory of a father and a husband by continually pondering his deeds and sayings, and by treasuring in their hearts the form and features of his mind, rather than those of his body. Not that I would forbid likenesses of marble or of bronze. But representations of the human face, like that face itself, are subject to decay and dissolution, whereas the essence of man's mind is something everlasting, which you cannot preserve or express in material wrought by another's skill, but only in your own character. All that we loved and admired in Agricola abides and shall abide in the hearts of men through the endless procession of the ages; for his achievements are of great renown. With many it will be as with men who had no name or fame; they will be buried in oblivion. But Agricola's story is set on record for posterity, and he will live.
12/07/2010
Of Snow -
For the season of damned slick, or honorable influence.
Obtrusive and draped all over,
With pure regulation I'm kept,
To work in my stead moreover,
I thank thee, for now I have slept.
Though, I prithee, melt quickly away,
As I will venture away from home.
But, to petition you, an act risque,
A god may be with deeds foreknown.
If a second hand god had made it,
to endure thy shiver is well.
The experts mind, you've played it,
They saying you wont, you fell.
Obtrusive and draped all over,
With pure regulation I'm kept,
To work in my stead moreover,
I thank thee, for now I have slept.
Though, I prithee, melt quickly away,
As I will venture away from home.
But, to petition you, an act risque,
A god may be with deeds foreknown.
If a second hand god had made it,
to endure thy shiver is well.
The experts mind, you've played it,
They saying you wont, you fell.
11/27/2010
"Lest We Forget" Truth
Farther, and farther I am stretching and hurting my brain, hoping that my hand will begin to write subconsciously. I have obtained probable cause that I have gone insane since I have attempted this method more than once; each time thinking in my head, "This could be it! I might discover myself and all of my potential!" Who else am I kidding but myself? I am so plainly and obviously not of that kind, to write spur of the moment some master piece after having played an hour long game of tonsil hockey with the muse of literature. How unqualified I am that I do not even know her name! In short, all that I am is a middle class citizen, with a desire for knowledge, falling short of obtaining most of it. I really have no right to be great in any sense of the term. "Oh, but I have written a poem with my heart!" Says I.
Verily, unto say,
I've begotten a miserly play!
Quick, ask me why I think Shakespeare is good. "Because", I continue, "He wrote with his soul." As if William Shakespeare's soul was prone to produce good things. Shakespeare was a genius of poetry just as engineers are geniuses in mathematics. He knew exactly how to write, and did not treat each of his works as if it were his only child. I would consider Shakespeare having sold out when he wrote A Midsummer Nights Dream. Though I am sure he took pride in his plays, but after some time he could not have been proud of Titus Andronicus.
'I'll speak no more but "Vengeance rot you all!"'
So, what did Shakespeare do at which I failed myself? Was it his ambition that made him succeed? But "noble" Evan Gunn says, "I am ambitious, and see where that has gotten me." Shakespeare knew his equations just as Pascal knew his, and I sit here suggesting that I am allowed to write whatever I want. Well, I suppose freedom of the will would grant me that privilege, but I dare not say that my jumbled mess of words qualify as literature, or God forbid good literature.
So what have I left myself with? I cannot write well because I have not learned the appropriate equations. What have I left the rest of the world with? The objective truth (that is objectivism) has slowly crept its way to reside as an elephant in the corner of the room that is my brain. It sits there not saying anything while making uncomfortable faces that by themselves cannot be ignored. It would be a sorry sight to have the elephant start speaking out to the world to remind it of the fallacies it makes. Oh, the heartbreak the world would have to choose between classical music and rap music for which one is better. If that day comes there will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth. Luckily, this elephant is soft spoken, but it is still an elephant.
What has relativism done for me personally? It has given me countless open doors that could potentially lead to success. What does it take away? It removes my understanding of art and proceeds to relieve me of my claim to knowing greatness or ever knowing what greatness is. If art is relative it turns its followers into idle bohemians afraid of truth. Being told that your poem was undoubtedly, poorly written is such a painful experience; and so rather we claim no absolute truth about poetry, which frees us up to stand pigeon toed at a precipice shouting in tones of weasely ignorance that our poem was good. Soon after our misguided declarations we fail to search for that which really is absolutely true, because Heaven forbid we make anyone (me) feel bad. We will only continue to dig ourselves deeper into ruts of the mind only creating tripe at the bottom since we have made no effort to improve. "But this is my signature writing style, that no one should change." I say while stamping my foot and pointing my pudgy finger at the accuser. This is childish thinking spurred by a mother or an admiring aunt fawning when you played Heart and Soul. Are you so sure that your style of writing even falls under the definition of poetry/literature? Is this not why we go to school to be taught correct definitions to our world. When a teacher marks you down do you relatively object and say, "I thought it was the right answer!" The world will cut you no slack just because you think you are great.
We must at least reach a definition for all forms of art. As with music I claim that the shreiking tones of howler monkeys is the best form of music, I am almost automatically proven wrong, because of the agreed upon definition of music. Howler monkeys do not agree with the definition. If you think it does you become unable to communicate with others; forcing yourself into musical loneliness.
Have I gone to far yet? You may have ventured on your own train of thought by now and may be realizing the faults you have made in your truth claims. "There is no absolute truth!" says you with an absolute claim of truth. So, there is absolute truth; then where does it come from? Does absolute truth come from the insane? It kind of sounds like the Greek myth of the prophetess Cassandra who was always right but no one would ever listen to her. How do we know that the next homeless person we see shouting that "the end is nigh" isn't right. This may seem a bit shallow, but it is required that the homeless person bring some evidence or proof to the table. That is why we never take a conspiracy theorist seriously. Otherwise it is in our nature to believe that the pattern we have been living will continue on forever and ever, amen. Besides, that would be a most cruel and undesirable existence. why would it be such a way?
On that note, why would we call that cruel in the first place? It so clearly disagrees with any ethical code that any sane person abides with. Though, it cannot be cruel because you said so or even if the majority said so. A majority of Germany agreed with Hitler. It appears that we need an authority to tell us what is virtuous, morally acceptable and ethical. A judgment must be passed for anyone to make claims about ethics or even the small things like beauty, writing or music. I myself would suggest that you go find someone to be your judge or hold yourself as the infallible truth bearer.
Where was I going with this? Oh, I recall that I am not the source of all poetical knowledge. After all I did not invent poetry.
Verily, unto say,
I've begotten a miserly play!
Quick, ask me why I think Shakespeare is good. "Because", I continue, "He wrote with his soul." As if William Shakespeare's soul was prone to produce good things. Shakespeare was a genius of poetry just as engineers are geniuses in mathematics. He knew exactly how to write, and did not treat each of his works as if it were his only child. I would consider Shakespeare having sold out when he wrote A Midsummer Nights Dream. Though I am sure he took pride in his plays, but after some time he could not have been proud of Titus Andronicus.
'I'll speak no more but "Vengeance rot you all!"'
So, what did Shakespeare do at which I failed myself? Was it his ambition that made him succeed? But "noble" Evan Gunn says, "I am ambitious, and see where that has gotten me." Shakespeare knew his equations just as Pascal knew his, and I sit here suggesting that I am allowed to write whatever I want. Well, I suppose freedom of the will would grant me that privilege, but I dare not say that my jumbled mess of words qualify as literature, or God forbid good literature.
So what have I left myself with? I cannot write well because I have not learned the appropriate equations. What have I left the rest of the world with? The objective truth (that is objectivism) has slowly crept its way to reside as an elephant in the corner of the room that is my brain. It sits there not saying anything while making uncomfortable faces that by themselves cannot be ignored. It would be a sorry sight to have the elephant start speaking out to the world to remind it of the fallacies it makes. Oh, the heartbreak the world would have to choose between classical music and rap music for which one is better. If that day comes there will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth. Luckily, this elephant is soft spoken, but it is still an elephant.
What has relativism done for me personally? It has given me countless open doors that could potentially lead to success. What does it take away? It removes my understanding of art and proceeds to relieve me of my claim to knowing greatness or ever knowing what greatness is. If art is relative it turns its followers into idle bohemians afraid of truth. Being told that your poem was undoubtedly, poorly written is such a painful experience; and so rather we claim no absolute truth about poetry, which frees us up to stand pigeon toed at a precipice shouting in tones of weasely ignorance that our poem was good. Soon after our misguided declarations we fail to search for that which really is absolutely true, because Heaven forbid we make anyone (me) feel bad. We will only continue to dig ourselves deeper into ruts of the mind only creating tripe at the bottom since we have made no effort to improve. "But this is my signature writing style, that no one should change." I say while stamping my foot and pointing my pudgy finger at the accuser. This is childish thinking spurred by a mother or an admiring aunt fawning when you played Heart and Soul. Are you so sure that your style of writing even falls under the definition of poetry/literature? Is this not why we go to school to be taught correct definitions to our world. When a teacher marks you down do you relatively object and say, "I thought it was the right answer!" The world will cut you no slack just because you think you are great.
We must at least reach a definition for all forms of art. As with music I claim that the shreiking tones of howler monkeys is the best form of music, I am almost automatically proven wrong, because of the agreed upon definition of music. Howler monkeys do not agree with the definition. If you think it does you become unable to communicate with others; forcing yourself into musical loneliness.
Have I gone to far yet? You may have ventured on your own train of thought by now and may be realizing the faults you have made in your truth claims. "There is no absolute truth!" says you with an absolute claim of truth. So, there is absolute truth; then where does it come from? Does absolute truth come from the insane? It kind of sounds like the Greek myth of the prophetess Cassandra who was always right but no one would ever listen to her. How do we know that the next homeless person we see shouting that "the end is nigh" isn't right. This may seem a bit shallow, but it is required that the homeless person bring some evidence or proof to the table. That is why we never take a conspiracy theorist seriously. Otherwise it is in our nature to believe that the pattern we have been living will continue on forever and ever, amen. Besides, that would be a most cruel and undesirable existence. why would it be such a way?
On that note, why would we call that cruel in the first place? It so clearly disagrees with any ethical code that any sane person abides with. Though, it cannot be cruel because you said so or even if the majority said so. A majority of Germany agreed with Hitler. It appears that we need an authority to tell us what is virtuous, morally acceptable and ethical. A judgment must be passed for anyone to make claims about ethics or even the small things like beauty, writing or music. I myself would suggest that you go find someone to be your judge or hold yourself as the infallible truth bearer.
Where was I going with this? Oh, I recall that I am not the source of all poetical knowledge. After all I did not invent poetry.
11/20/2010
The Golden Saying of Epictetus IX
If a man could be thoroughly penetrated, as he ought, with this thought, that we are all in an especial manner sprung from God, and that God is the Father of men as well as of Gods, full surely he would never conceive aught ignoble or base of himself. Whereas if Caesar were to adopt you, your haughty looks would be intolerable; will you not be elated at knowing that you are the son of God? Now however it is not so with us: but seeing that in our birth these two things are commingled--the body which we share with the animals, and the Reason and Thought which we share with the Gods, many decline towards this unhappy kinship with the dead, few rise to the blessed kinship with the Divine. Since then every one must deal with each thing according to the view which he forms about it, those few who hold that they are born for fidelity, modesty, and unerring sureness in dealing with the things of sense, never conceive aught base or ignoble of themselves: but the multitude the contrary. Why, what am I?--A wretched human creature; with this miserable flesh of mine. Miserable indeed! but you have something better than that paltry flesh of yours. Why then cling to the one, and neglect the other? -Epictetus
How stupid are you? Let me answer for you: Very. The conceit and ignorance even among believers can be quite astonishing when it comes to things to be prideful of. We deal with this when we have too much pride or are so self abasing we refuse to be lifted up. Why would we forget who it was we came from? Who is our kin? The Father. Although we admittedly screw up which is naturally pushing God away from us we may still remember than that God would like to be close with you since he made you.
Why should we trifle over points of connection we have to those of fame and power when we can claim direct points of connection to divinity. If you compare the two side by side we just look like morons.
Why this dwell on this misery, for we are "Miserable indeed!" Who are you to stay sulking in the corner as if God has not given you your very life. Buck up and remember your place, though you deserve less take the gift and use to his glory you knucklehead.
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; -Genesis 1:26
And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. -Ephesians 4:30
then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words. -Thessalonians 4:17-18
How stupid are you? Let me answer for you: Very. The conceit and ignorance even among believers can be quite astonishing when it comes to things to be prideful of. We deal with this when we have too much pride or are so self abasing we refuse to be lifted up. Why would we forget who it was we came from? Who is our kin? The Father. Although we admittedly screw up which is naturally pushing God away from us we may still remember than that God would like to be close with you since he made you.
Why should we trifle over points of connection we have to those of fame and power when we can claim direct points of connection to divinity. If you compare the two side by side we just look like morons.
Why this dwell on this misery, for we are "Miserable indeed!" Who are you to stay sulking in the corner as if God has not given you your very life. Buck up and remember your place, though you deserve less take the gift and use to his glory you knucklehead.
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; -Genesis 1:26
And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. -Ephesians 4:30
then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words. -Thessalonians 4:17-18
Evan G. Wilson - On Beauty
What is the objectivity of Beauty? That last statement presumes that there is no relative truth to beauty since it is the epitome of irrational thought to suggest that A is also not A.
Moving on, how do we find objective truth to that which is good beauty and not beauty. The power of definition is our bridge to telling others that they are wrong. It has been said before that he who makes the definitions wins the argument.
I have simply brought this up to explore what kind of definitions for beauty people have made for themselves.
-Beauty is that which is aged.
-Beauty is that which is new.
-Beauty is achieved through a concept.
-Beauty is catchy.
-Beauty is anything that makes me sad.
-Beauty is anything that makes me happy.
-Beauty is communism.
-Beauty is capitalism.
-Beauty is man.
-Beauty is nature.
-Beauty is fun.
-Beauty is conventional.
-Beauty is the Ubermensch.
For all to know, none of these are beauty. Try again. Though, I would like people to tell me what their idea of Beauty is. Shoot.
Moving on, how do we find objective truth to that which is good beauty and not beauty. The power of definition is our bridge to telling others that they are wrong. It has been said before that he who makes the definitions wins the argument.
I have simply brought this up to explore what kind of definitions for beauty people have made for themselves.
-Beauty is that which is aged.
-Beauty is that which is new.
-Beauty is achieved through a concept.
-Beauty is catchy.
-Beauty is anything that makes me sad.
-Beauty is anything that makes me happy.
-Beauty is communism.
-Beauty is capitalism.
-Beauty is man.
-Beauty is nature.
-Beauty is fun.
-Beauty is conventional.
-Beauty is the Ubermensch.
For all to know, none of these are beauty. Try again. Though, I would like people to tell me what their idea of Beauty is. Shoot.
9/23/2010
Evan G. Wilson - On Truth
In today's culture. inclusive of the Christians, we have a knack for over using, devaluing and demeaning our words, that once before meant so much. A quick and easy example is the word "awesome". We use it so lightly and frequently; likely as an attempt to make ourselves appear as though we are really that great. Consequently, we aren't that great and we have become posers by the mere suggestion in the usage of the word " awesome". But I am not in writing to make the distinction between the Grand Canyon and yourself. I have sited this despicable and frequent misuse of language so that we may venture to the lesser known (and just as despicable and frequent) misuse of the word "Truth"
You may be thinking right now, "Gunn, are you suggesting that our culture is confusing truth with falsehoods?" No, that is not what I mean to say, though it would be easy to argue. I am in belief that we have forgotten the magnificent definition of truth and the great concept that it is. I find in even our remotely shallow sub-cultures, that when they hear the word "truth" they only think, "not the lie". Although, they are correct to think so, they are only putting truth in their life one small step above a falsehood. Like I had mentioned before they have forgotten it's complete definition. Truth as an idea should be regarded as something so much more significant and grand. I see it as the relationship between God and man. When we admit and repent of our sins we have acknowledged how small and trivial we are compared to God, which is vast beyond our minds. We don't look at Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, as some virtuous pagan that did not say anything we didn't agree with. We know Christ as God and never having wronged his fellow human. With truth it is treated as a virtuous pagan or a collection of truisms.
DISCLAIMER: I do not suggest we start worshiping truth as a god. Besides, why should we worship truth when we already worship the highest truth bearing agent, void of false witness. ". . . .But no pleasure is comparable to the standing upon the vantage ground of truth." How great truth is! It not just the information preferred over the false information; it is the clear and only option that gives no excuse for doubt, for who would suggest that you argue against truth. A man given small and simple truths may become a correcter of the trivial, but the man given ultimate truth becomes a leader and perhaps sage. Those with absolute truth appear as though they were working a mojo or clairvoyance, that he may not be able to explain himself.
We who are short of truth only look as fools, with suggestions of our own realities or preconceived notions. It really is too bad when people are not set out to find absolute truth. It comes down to whatever most convenient reality set before them agrees with their relative truth.
You may be thinking right now, "Gunn, are you suggesting that our culture is confusing truth with falsehoods?" No, that is not what I mean to say, though it would be easy to argue. I am in belief that we have forgotten the magnificent definition of truth and the great concept that it is. I find in even our remotely shallow sub-cultures, that when they hear the word "truth" they only think, "not the lie". Although, they are correct to think so, they are only putting truth in their life one small step above a falsehood. Like I had mentioned before they have forgotten it's complete definition. Truth as an idea should be regarded as something so much more significant and grand. I see it as the relationship between God and man. When we admit and repent of our sins we have acknowledged how small and trivial we are compared to God, which is vast beyond our minds. We don't look at Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, as some virtuous pagan that did not say anything we didn't agree with. We know Christ as God and never having wronged his fellow human. With truth it is treated as a virtuous pagan or a collection of truisms.
DISCLAIMER: I do not suggest we start worshiping truth as a god. Besides, why should we worship truth when we already worship the highest truth bearing agent, void of false witness. ". . . .But no pleasure is comparable to the standing upon the vantage ground of truth." How great truth is! It not just the information preferred over the false information; it is the clear and only option that gives no excuse for doubt, for who would suggest that you argue against truth. A man given small and simple truths may become a correcter of the trivial, but the man given ultimate truth becomes a leader and perhaps sage. Those with absolute truth appear as though they were working a mojo or clairvoyance, that he may not be able to explain himself.
We who are short of truth only look as fools, with suggestions of our own realities or preconceived notions. It really is too bad when people are not set out to find absolute truth. It comes down to whatever most convenient reality set before them agrees with their relative truth.
9/18/2010
Magnus Est Morte
In honor of my Grandmother, on the day she went to see the Lord.
Fulfill your days, don't tread in fear,
Brace for troubles to come.
Though wisdom grim, be what we hear,
Take it faith, with skip and hum.
That depressive word! construct with fire,
Shall futility be futile itself?
We cannot encase, protect or put higher;
But tangibles put on thy shelf.
Evasion! thy useless and pre-bent tips,
We wager zero to many in prolonged fight.
Lay down your soul, forgetting your fits,
What matter thy Condition, so the heart be right.
By Evan Gunn Wilson
Brace for troubles to come.
Though wisdom grim, be what we hear,
Take it faith, with skip and hum.
That depressive word! construct with fire,
Shall futility be futile itself?
We cannot encase, protect or put higher;
But tangibles put on thy shelf.
Evasion! thy useless and pre-bent tips,
We wager zero to many in prolonged fight.
Lay down your soul, forgetting your fits,
What matter thy Condition, so the heart be right.
By Evan Gunn Wilson
8/07/2010
Francis Bacon - Of Atheism
I had rather believe all the fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind. And therefore, God never wrought miracle, to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it. It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion. For while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity. Nay, even that school which is most accused of atheism doth most demonstrate religion; that is, the school of Leucippus and Democritus and Epicurus. For it is a thousand times more credible, that four mutable elements, and one immutable fifth essence, duly and eternally placed, need no God, than that an army of infinite small portions, or seeds unplaced, should have produced this order and beauty, without a divine marshal. The Scripture saith, The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God; it is not said, The fool hath thought in his heart; so as he rather saith it, by rote to himself, as that he would have, than that he can thoroughly believe it, or be persuaded of it. For none deny, there is a God, but those, for whom it maketh that there were no God. It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man, than by this; that atheists will ever be talking of that their opinion, as if they fainted in it, within themselves, and would be glad to be strengthened, by the consent of others. Nay more, you shall have atheists strive to get disciples, as it fareth with other sects. And, which is most of all, you shall have of them, that will suffer for atheism, and not recant; whereas if they did truly think, that there were no such thing as God, why should they trouble themselves? Epicurus is charged, that he did but dissemble for his credit's sake, when he affirmed there were blessed natures, but such as enjoyed themselves, without having respect to the government of the world. Wherein they say he did temporize; though in secret, he thought there was no God. But certainly he is traduced; for his words are noble and divine: Non deos vulgi negare profanum; sed vulgi opiniones diis applicare profanum. Plato could have said no more. And although he had the confidence, to deny the administration, he had not the power, to deny the nature. The Indians of the West, have names for their particular gods, though they have no name for God: as if the heathens should have had the names Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, etc., but not the word Deus; which shows that even those barbarous people have the notion, though they have not the latitude and extent of it. So that against atheists, the very savages take part, with the very subtlest philosophers. The contemplative atheist is rare: a Diagoras, a Bion, a Lucian perhaps, and some others; and yet they seem to be more than they are; for that all that impugn a received religion, or superstition, are by the adverse part branded with the name of atheists. But the great atheists, indeed are hypocrites; which are ever handling holy things, but without feeling; so as they must needs be cauterized in the end. The causes of atheism are: divisions in religion, if they be many; for any one main division, addeth zeal to both sides; but many divisions introduce atheism. Another is, scandal of priests; when it is come to that which St. Bernard saith, non est jam dicere, ut populus sic sacerdos; quia nec sic populus ut sacerdos. A third is, custom of profane scoffing in holy matters; which doth, by little and little, deface the reverence of religion. And lastly, learned times, specially with peace and prosperity; for troubles and adversities do more bow men's minds to religion. They that deny a God, destroy man's nobility; for certainly man is of kin to the beasts, by his body; and, if he be not of kin to God, by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature. It destroys likewise magnanimity, and the raising of human nature; for take an example of a dog, and mark what a generosity and courage he will put on, when he finds himself maintained by a man; who to him is instead of a God, or melior natura; which courage is manifestly such, as that creature, without that confidence of a better nature than his own, could never attain. So man, when he resteth and assureth himself, upon divine protection and favor, gathered a force and faith, which human nature in itself could not obtain. Therefore, as atheism is in all respects hateful, so in this, that it depriveth human nature of the means to exalt itself, above human frailty. As it is in particular persons, so it is in nations. Never was there such a state for magnanimity as Rome. Of this state hear what Cicero saith: Quam volumus licet, patres conscripti, nos amemus, tamen nec numero Hispanos, nec robore Gallos, nec calliditate Poenos, nec artibus Graecos, nec denique hoc ipso hujus gentis et terrae domestico nativoque sensu Italos ipsos et Latinos; sed pietate, ad religione, atque hac una sapientia, quod deorum immortalium numine omnia regi gubernarique perspeximus, omnes gentes nationesque superavimus.
8/01/2010
The Golden Saying OF Epictetus, VII
What saith Antisthenes? Hast thou never heard?— It is a kingly thing, O Cyrus, to do well and to be evil spoken of. -Epictetus
Therefore we ourselves boast of you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions which you are enduring. 2 Thes. 1:4
Steadfastness is a very important thing to keep in mind, though it is commonly ignored. The reason being is that in this nation we live, we have inherited kingly lifestyles. Sure, we work hard, but that was inherited from the fall of man. Otherwise, we live very, very comfortably.
Occasionally, we might get into less than desirable positions. Some huge temptations for us is to doubt our faith, or shake our fist at God saying, "I didn't deserve this!" Why do we not think we deserve pain? There is no reason to think this way, and it sprouts from this supposed right to living luxuriously.
This is where Epictetus' stoicism comes in. What he is speaking of is receiving false repute. If you really had good lifestyle then it really should not matter to you what others might say. We will get insecure and act as if there accusations of us were true. It strings back to one of the primary points of stoicism which is contentment. We must be content with our surroundings, because we really don't deserve anything more in the first place. The world does not owe you anything. Be content.
Therefore we ourselves boast of you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions which you are enduring. 2 Thes. 1:4
Steadfastness is a very important thing to keep in mind, though it is commonly ignored. The reason being is that in this nation we live, we have inherited kingly lifestyles. Sure, we work hard, but that was inherited from the fall of man. Otherwise, we live very, very comfortably.
Occasionally, we might get into less than desirable positions. Some huge temptations for us is to doubt our faith, or shake our fist at God saying, "I didn't deserve this!" Why do we not think we deserve pain? There is no reason to think this way, and it sprouts from this supposed right to living luxuriously.
This is where Epictetus' stoicism comes in. What he is speaking of is receiving false repute. If you really had good lifestyle then it really should not matter to you what others might say. We will get insecure and act as if there accusations of us were true. It strings back to one of the primary points of stoicism which is contentment. We must be content with our surroundings, because we really don't deserve anything more in the first place. The world does not owe you anything. Be content.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
