Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: YHAOS; Alamo-Girl; spirited irish; little jeremiah; Quix; xzins; P-Marlowe; stfassisi
Your point being that our modern antagonists embrace evil incarnate, whereas their ancient predecessors (as an example, offering the sophists and politicos of ancient Athens) were merely afflicted with an overwhelming power lust.

Yes, dear brother in Christ. That was my point. At least with regard to some of the antagonists.

I hold it for this reason: Dostoyevsky's Grand Inquisitor is qualitatively different than a Napoleon Bonaparte, or a Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Dong (spelling!!!), Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez, et al. (All extraordinarily gifted sophists.)

And all are/were imperialistic system builders. All are evil in that their little "projects" cost an incalculable amount in terms of human suffering, blood, and treasure.

The difference between these mutts and the Grand Inquisitor is this: The mutts do what they do personally, out of perceived self-advantage. The Grand Inquisitor does what he does, quite impersonally, on principle.

Somehow, I feel in my bones that the Grand Inquisitor is the very model of "the mystery of iniquity."

On that last point, I could use a whole lot more light....

Thank you so very much, dear brother, for your outstanding essay/post!

146 posted on 04/25/2010 5:15:18 PM PDT by betty boop (Nil desperandum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies ]


To: betty boop
I hold it for this reason: Dostoyevsky's Grand Inquisitor is qualitatively different than a Napoleon Bonaparte, or a Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Dong (spelling!!!), Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez, et al. (All extraordinarily gifted sophists.)

And all are/were imperialistic system builders. All are evil in that their little "projects" cost an incalculable amount in terms of human suffering, blood, and treasure.

The difference between these mutts and the Grand Inquisitor is this: The mutts do what they do personally, out of perceived self-advantage. The Grand Inquisitor does what he does, quite impersonally, on principle.

Well said, dearest sister in Christ, thank you!

154 posted on 04/25/2010 10:19:04 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]

To: betty boop; YHAOS; Alamo-Girl; little jeremiah; Quix; xzins; P-Marlowe; stfassisi

snip: Your point being that our modern antagonists embrace evil incarnate, whereas their ancient predecessors (as an example, offering the sophists and politicos of ancient Athens) were merely afflicted with an overwhelming power lust.
Yes, dear brother in Christ. That was my point. At least with regard to some of the antagonists.

Spirited: Bettys’ position is emminently sensible in my opinion. Some of our best and brightest thinkers, such as Tolkien and CS Lewis, posit that from the time of the Fall, mankind had been increasingly wandering in the mists of forgetfulness. Thus it was, noted GK Chesterton, that by the the time of the fall of the Greco-Roman civilization, demons walked about openly. By this he means that there were men who had become completely possessed, their souls having been booted out into the void. When Dante writes of the dispossessed soul, he places it in hell, whereupon it laments that a demon is walking about in the world doing evil while ‘in my body.’

It is well known that through the Mystery Religions many men and women had not only come into contact with demons but many of them had familiar spirits (demons). But keep in mind that it was in pursuit of power (psychic abilities) and salvation that the ancients contacted demons. Like today’s New Agers, they naively believed that spirits were both good and bad. This naivety was, and remains, due to the belief that some force within nature or cosmos is the first principle, the ‘cause’ of everything and that all things are one-with the force, be it thought of as divine spirit (pantheism= Stoicism, Hegels’ Dialectic) or nondivine atoms (Epicurus, Lucretius=materialism; Marxs’ Dialectical Matter). The atheist system invented by Buddha combines both pantheism and materialism and is the most refined form of monism.

As noted above, the idea that all things are ‘one with’ nature, absolute spirit, etc. is monism. Monism always leads to the erasure of distinctions: between good and evil, between male and female, between God and Lucifer.

The point here is that the ancients contacted the demonic realm out of ignorance while modern nihilists such as Proudhon, Bakunin, Bauer, Marx, Alinsky, etc. were not ignorant, they did know. Without doubt, they knew. Yet knowing, they nevertheless rebelled against God the Father and lauded Lucifer as the first ‘free thinker.’ Which brings us to bettys’ claim that “our modern antagonists embrace evil incarnate.”


155 posted on 04/26/2010 5:32:35 AM PDT by spirited irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]

To: betty boop; YHAOS; Alamo-Girl; little jeremiah; Quix; xzins; P-Marlowe; stfassisi

Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor is qualitatively different than a Napoleon Bonaparte, or a Hitler,

Spirited: Collectively, the Grand Inquisitor is Nechaev, Bakunin, Proudhon, Marx, et al, and what all have in common is that by their nature they are satanic men, the terrible-willed murderers of God. In that Hitler willfully made a pact with the forces of darkness ( I have that quote somewhere) and Rauschning reports that ‘something’ unseen to all others was terrifying Hitler at night, sending him into gibbering paroxysms of fear, it seems to me that Hitler may well be at the least,a Grand Inquisitor type. And if not, then it appears that the Grand Inquisitor-—the devilish version-—was making ready to ‘collect,’ per the pact entered into by Hitler.


158 posted on 04/26/2010 9:38:16 AM PDT by spirited irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson