Any Application of Epicurean Theology to the Christan God(s)

Quote from Cassius

you might be interested in would be DeWitt's "St Paul and Epicurus"

Carlos García Gual, a prominent translator of ancient Greek to Spanish and professor in ancient philosophy in Spain, signals in his book "Epicuro" (2021, ALIANZA), p. 110, that Epicurus uses the Greek term "sarx" (flesh) instead of the usual "soma" (body), which we encounter also in Saint Paul.

I understand that Christian Writers scanned the whole Ancient Greek Philosophy for useful concepts and terms. We see this also in modern religious expression, e.g. on a technological level, like the use of Power Point, Pay Pal for donations, sophisticated webpages with flashy design. You have to adapt to your markets...

Hey beasain I failed to see the connection to technology, but would love to, can you please elaborate?

@Root304 i feel very much identified with your journey, being a dad myself, and for a period of time similar to what you've said; also, was very involved in Christianity, being lightly brought up in it by family, in Catholicism actually, and having gone to school pre university to only Catholic schools.

I had been on the fence for a while but Epicurean Philosophy has helped me to completely ditch it, for myself, but I do struggle with the thoughts of my children missing some of the good things that were thrown away "like the child with the bathwater", but time and again I fail to be able to pin point what these are.

I do find that my older child is benefitting from me trying to help him understand the world rather than thinking magically, but also I worry it will make him an odd child in a very religious society like the one my family lives in. He's definitely not going to catholic school, and I found a school that is more in line with humanism values, so there's hope there.

I have hopes of someday being able to reconcile some Christian stuff with epicureanism, having been experienced in the former and trying to learn as much ad I can from the latter, in a wat I could help others like us navigate more easily out of that unpleasantness of they are feeling it. I sort of think some of the teachings of Jesus have been stolen and changed to fit the magical and idealist thinking of religion, but that there may be teachings of his in line with Epicurean Philosophy.

Anyway, wanted to chime in to let you know I feel you, and would love to know more about your journey too.

Quote from camotero

. I sort of think some of the teachings of Jesus have been stolen and changed to fit the magical and idealist thinking of religion,

Are you familiar with Thomas Jefferson's Bible editing?

Jefferson Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Quote from camotero

I do find that my older child is benefitting from me trying to help him understand the world rather than thinking magically, but also I worry it will make him an odd child in a very religious society like the one my family lives in. He's definitely not going to catholic school, and I found a school that is more in line with humanism values, so there's hope there.

I have no expertise in this subject whatsoever, so take this with that caveat. And I would not send a child to a religious school, all things being equal. But I question whether many "public" schools are any better. I would think the end result is that parents have to devote a lot of attention to "deprogramming" whatever is being taught to their children. An Epicurean "home schooling curriculum" for young people (or for any age ) would be highly desirable and ought to be a long term goal.

Quote from Cassius

An Epicurean "home schooling curriculum" for young people (or for any age ) would be highly desirable and ought to be a long term goal

Hmm... I'm gonna have to push back on Cassius's comment a little there. I'm skeptical of homeschooling of any ilk. I'm sure some parents who do homeschooling can do a satisfactory job, but it always struck me as insular and isolating. School is both educational as well as social. I'm not going to sugarcoat the school experience, especially in adolescence it can be hard! But my entire family are products of a public education. We turned out okay (I think).

And Epicurus did rail against the indoctrination of his day, παιδεία. But he also taught in the Garden. No doubt to groups and individuals.

But education doesn't *stop* with formal instruction. Parents do need to be involved with their children. Encourage creativity and curiosity. Foster what brings the children pleasure. Take pleasure in seeing your children experiencing fun.

Parenting is HARD. There are times where it is a pain! But, to me, this is a classic example of experiencing pain for future pleasure. Seeing one's children grow to curious, kind adults is a pleasure.

But to wind back to Cassius, I could see a "Sunday School" curriculum being helpful. Some kind of supplemental home study. But it shouldn't necessarily be imposed on one's children. It should ideally be organic. Get them out into nature. Encourage them to use their senses. Explore! Get them to ask questions. Find evidence-based material answers. Make it fun! Make it pleasurable!

Quote from Don

But to wind back to Cassius, I could see a "Sunday School" curriculum being helpful. Some kind of supplemental home study.

Right! Supplemental home study is the main thing I was thinking about, at least for most of us. As usual, depends on the context and what options are available.

Quote from Don

But it shouldn't necessarily be imposed on one's children.

I agree with that and the rest of the paragraph as well. But to some extent we do make lots of choices for our children, so choosing to address the subject shouldn't be ignored. An interesting example to include in a discussion of that would be the example of "Hedea" in "A Few Days In Athens" who seems to stand for the position that formal instruction might not be necessary, but perhaps that is a very unusual case.

Quote from Don

Are you familiar with Thomas Jefferson's Bible editing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible?wprov=sfla1

There is an interesting historical connection between Epicurean philosophy and (heterodox) Christianity at the intersection of the American Revolution. While Colonial religion was dominated by the evangelism of the First Great Awakening, a notable group of critics (including Ethan Allen, a founder of Vermont, Thomas Young, organizer of the Boston Tea Party, and, of course, Thomas Jefferson, who re-wrote the Bible) represented a piety apart from religion.

Rather than dispense with Christianity altogether, some of these individuals sought to re-orient the narrative of Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ into the narrative of Jesus of Nazareth, a simple moral reformer in ancient Judaea. They generally rejected the Epistles and Revelation in their entirety, and saw Christian Churches as being subversive political institutions that repeatedly changed their doctrines to accommodate political interests.

At the same time, critics of Christianity heavily employed religious language that evangelists have cited to support the "American is a Christian Nation" argument. A closer reading of that language, and the philosophical context in which it was written, however, shows that "God" and "Creator" refer to "Nature" and never to "Jesus". Even so, many of these critics glorified the historical figure of Jesus of Nazareth as the most morally "perfect" figure in history.

Nonetheless, these critics stand in contrast with the Christian authorities of the time (most notably the Catholic Church), so they are not great examples of typical Christians (if Christians at all). They derived their positions from a line that begins with De Rerum Natura, and grows through Hobbes, Spinoza, Locke, and then eventually American Revolutionaries like Jefferson who held on to some aspects of Christianity after applying an Epicurean critique.

If one is intending to interface with Christianity in a way that does not completely dismiss the tradition while maintaining an Epicurean position, Jefferson's approach seems appropriate.

Quote from Cassius

Right! Supplemental home study is the main thing I was thinking about,

That's what I suspected. Nonetheless, figured I'd go off on homeschooling.

Quote from Cassius

to some extent we do make lots of choices for our children

Fully agree! When it comes to some choices we make, it's best to make it as organic as possible though. Let the children be participants instead of captives. Make the pedagogy experiential and interactive instead of the "sage on the stage."

Nate thanks for that reference:

Quote from Nate

Thomas Young, organizer of the Boston Tea Party,

Back when I was researching that period years of go I started with Paine's Age of Reason and from Paine and found Ethan Allen's book (Reason the Only Oracle of Man) which is a little rough compared to Paine). I also found Elihu Palmer's "Principles of Nature" and the writings of Thomas Cooper.

But I never found a reference to "Thomas Young." Do you know if he wrote anything worth reading? Probably this list of books here deserves a thread of its own for people who would like to research and cite "Founding Fathers" of the USA for reference in advocating Epicurean viewpoints. Even if they were "deists" or didn't mention Epicurus specifically I can imagine this kind of material being useful to lots of people. I didn't orginally consider it but of course now in retrospect I should include Frances Wrights AFDIA in that list too.

This is the section I need to reorganize and expand that has this kind of material already:

1700's - 1800's

Quote from Cassius

But I never found a reference to "Thomas Young." Do you know if he wrote anything worth reading? Probably this list of books here deserves a thread of its own for people who would like to research and cite "Founding Fathers" of the USA for reference in advocating Epicurean viewpoints. Even if they were "deists" or didn't mention Epicurus specifically I can imagine this kind of material being useful to lots of people. I didn't orginally consider it but of course now in retrospect I should include Frances Wrights AFDIA in that list too.

Thomas Young was an intellectual mentor to Ethan Allen and perhaps a more devoted contributor to the Lucretius-inspired group of Colonial "Deists" than his contemporaries. I recently read about him in Nature's God: The Heretical Origins of the American Republic by Matthew Stewart. It is a dense read, but very informative, and I recommend it.

Young's fellow citizens regularly accused him of being "a man of no morals," an "infamous character," and, of course, an "infidel." And Young--this is perhaps the most unusual thing about him--regularly responded with daring public confessions in which he let it be known, in so many words, that if with such terms his antagonists meant to identify him a deist, then they were right. Rushing to his defense after one assault on the doctor's unacceptable creed, his fellow members of the Boston Committee of Correspondence marveled that on his journey through life he had accumulated many friends of high character notwithstanding the fact that "uniform throughout, he appears in all places to have declared his sentiments on all subjects, natural, civil, and religious." The thing about Young, everyone agreed, was that he could not keep his mouth shut. When he died, the nation he served found it convenient to forget such a troublesome individual. Let him now face the consequence in the afterlife whose reality he so blasphemously denied, they said, and they moved on.

Young's philosophical oeuvre is not large or systematic, and it is sometimes obtuse, as one might expect from a self-taught medicine man moonlighting as a global revolutionary. Yet its neglect turns out to be the most damaging of the many unfortunate consequences of his omission from the history books. In the uncomfortably personal confessions he committed to print, Young tells us what it was like to come of age as a deist in prerevolutionary America. In his sundry philosophical treatises, he articulates a form of deism that is substantially more radical than that which has traditionally figured in the stories America tells itself about its philosophical heritage. And he makes clear that, at least in his own mind, this radical philosophy was the axis on which the Revolution turned. For him, the project to free the American people from the yoke of King George was part of a grander project to liberate the world from the ghostly tyranny of supernatural religion. (Ibid. 22-23)

Mathitis Kipouros,

So my point was that where in the past they copied philosophical concepts even from materialists, now they copy high tech systems to upgrade their marketing strategy.

For me it is strange to see how much high tech is used by religious groups that adhere to a literal interpretation of the Bible. I would think that in their purity they ban all technology that is not mentioned in the Bible, but they use the same high tech marketing technics as ordinary industries.

I was in dialogue with such a group, and as they speak in Bible citations they had their iPads with hypertext, even the children!, while I tried to find it as quickly as possible in my Bible.

Maybe my comment was not that important...

Quote from Nate

Nature's God: The Heretical Origins of the American Republic by Matthew Stewart. It is a dense read, but very informative, and I recommend it.

Added to my Good Reads "Want to read" list! Thanks!

Labelling Thomas Young as more radical increases the odds he was affirmatively Epicurean. We need to investigate and find out what texts are available!

FYI

Thomas Young (American revolutionary) - Wikipedia

In the music, does it have words to it? There is lots of religious music I like but would choke on the words that accompany it.

Quote from Cassius

In the music, does it have words to it? There is lots of religious music I like but would choke on the words that accompany it.

LOL... That's why I did this: https://www.epicureanfriends.com/wcf/index.php?…wall/comment196

Quote from Root304

...lots of fun reciting some words, building a fire, doing some simple witchery and leaving offerings and libations out. ....So I'm going to build a festival calendar around Eikas, intermixed with Solstices and Equinoxes, and draw from folklore traditions and what other things might interest my community of Friends to build a sort of hearth religion.

This sounds interesting, a very eclectic take that you created for your own enjoyment.

And yet when you say "witchery" does this include some Wiccan hopes that one can influence the material world in a supernatural way? In my own studies of Wicca, I have come to see it as "the other side of the coin" with regard to Christianity. Both believe that there is a supernatural essence which can be influenced - one through prayer to God, the other through ritual and worship dedicated to pagan Goddesses (and perhaps somewhat similar to Ancient Greek religion).

Yet Epicurus teaches that the gods live in bliss and have no concern for man. The world is material, and nothing can come from nothing.

Imagine in Epicurus' time, that he was surrounded on all sides by people who believed in the myths and the power of the gods. I can see why he would continue to participate in the rituals for several reasons: 1) because there was pleasure in the festivals, and 2) he would have gotten a lot flak from everyone around him (non-Epicureans) if he hadn't participated in the rituals.

In some sense the only parallel here is that if you are Epicurean and you find yourself surrounded by Christians family members, then perhaps you might join in with them by bowing your head during prayer before meals.

Now personally, I would hesitate to create any new rituals to Greek or other pagan gods/goddesses, as fun as it could be -- there is not any necessity and it creates "supernatural" ideations.