Lucifer: A Theosophical Magazine. Volume I. September 1887-February 1888.Various
Religion
Lucifer: A Theosophical Magazine. Volume I. September 1887-February 1888.
Various
Theosophy -- Periodicals
I will but offer one or two specimens of the more serious and
fundamental contradictions in the _olla podrida_ of teaching
assigned to Jesus. The teaching of the alleged founder of
Christianity in the Gospel according to Matthew (ch. xix. 12), is
that of the Saboi, the self-mutilators, who are still extant as the
Russian Skoptsi[27] and who emasculate themselves to save their
spermatic souls, as Origen is reputed to have done. Jesus is made to
say, “_There are Eunuchs which made themselves Eunuchs for the
Kingdom of Heaven’s sake_. He that is able to receive it, let him
receive it.” And then in the opening verses of the very next
chapter, the same teacher says, “_Suffer little children and forbid
them not, to come unto me; for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven_.”
But those who became Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake could
not be suffering the little children to come unto him or to them.
They would be forbidding them to come at all. If the Kingdom of
Heaven be _such_ as the children of Eunuchs it must be non-extant.
As Hood’s deaf shopman said of the crackers going off, there were so
many reports he did not know _which_ to believe.
-----
Footnote 27:
Of whom there are large colonies along the Black Sea and the coast
of Imeretia and Poti.
-----
And where is the sense of talking so much nonsense about the “Golden
Rule” or the Divine humanity on behalf of one who carried on the
blindest warfare against human nature itself? Who declared that “_If
any man come to me and hate not his father and mother, and wife and
children, and brothers and sisters, and his own life also, he cannot
be my disciple_” (Luke xiv. 26). And who promised that every
follower of his who “_left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife,
or children, for the Kingdom of God’s sake should receive manifold
more in the present and in the world to come life everlasting_.”
Well may the grateful Musselman cry in his adorations, “_Thank God_
OUR _Father has no Son!_”
But, I do not charge these contradictory sayings and teachings to
any personal character. The collectors are but making use of the
_Kurios_, the Lord of the pre-Christian Mythos, the mystical Christ
of the Gnostics, as a puppet to represent them and their divers
doctrines. They make the human image of a God of Love to be the
preacher of everlasting punishment, and the bearer of a fan with
which he fans the fires of hell; a false foreteller of that which
never came to pass, and the forerunner of a fulfilment which did not
follow. In short, they make this Marionette Messiah dance to any
particular tune they play.
Jesus is posed as the original revealer of a father in Heaven,
whereas the doctrine of the Divine Fatherhood was taught in three
different Egyptian Cults during some four thousand years previously.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account