Stoicism and Paul: Making a Cosmology-Anthropology-Ethics for Today


Padawan Learner
FOTCM Member
I had not taken note of this thread earlier, or paid full attention to read it as I've done today and it just so insightful.
Thanks alot for your efforts @Approaching Infinity ...well written and distilled...

.....Paul was basically battling against low-level religion (Judaism in his case). Unfortunately his solutions just ended up creating another religion.
A very sad state of affairs.


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I had not taken note of this thread earlier, or paid full attention to read it as I've done today and it just so insightful.
Thanks alot for your efforts @Approaching Infinity ...well written and distilled...

A very sad state of affairs.

@Hope ,

I think it depends on how close our "religion" comes to reality. It seems that religion is something that is not likely to just go away but maybe we can Work on our attempts at making it closer to reality.

I really like what the Cs say about "religion":

Session 28 September 2002:
A: Life is religion.

Q: (L) What does that mean?

A: Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of little faith in terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people think that the world exists for them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the worlds will cease. They will become exactly what they give to life. They will become merely a dream in the "past." People who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the "Future."

Part of this search for the spirituality of "religion" may depend on science and the attempt to be as objective as we can in our search for "truth". Laura and Ark are two of my best examples as I see it.

Session 12 Feburary 1997:
Q: (L) Okay, he is on the threshold of some kind of experience. Is there some way that we might identify this experience? Is it going to be so outstanding that you can't miss it? Or, is it going to be something that you have to pay attention to or you might miss it?

A: What does "threshold" imply?

Q: (L) Well, a door. It's a door. Does this mean he is going to go through a door, psychically, spiritually, physically? Going to someone's house?

A: It does not just imply a "door," but also one's positioning, and a sense of inevitability.

Q: (L) Is there something I can do to help?

A: Have you not helped already?

Q: (L) But, I mean specifically in this "threshold" and "unfolding" experience?

A: Yes! And, by the way, Arkadiusz, science is most spiritual indeed!

Q: (L) Well, considering certain other elements, I was just wondering if our pathways are supposed to now be parallel or diverge... how they relate from this point...

A: Seems to us that your pathways are intertwining!

Q: (L) The use of the word "intertwining" is curious. You used that in regard to the relationship between EM and gravity. Is there a parallel?

A: If you wish.

Q: (L) Well, I am tired, Ark is tired, so is there anything further you would like to tell us this evening?

A: Combine energies in pursuit of answers, and the rest falls into place.

Q: (L) One last question: you say "combine energies." Is there any reason why this will facilitate the pursuit of answers?

A: Complementary souls.

I think the need to combine our energies and network are paramount in this endeavor.

Approaching Infinity

FOTCM Member
Thank you Laura and Approaching Infinity for your time and work

I look forward to the continuation of the analysis and summarizing of Troels Engberg-Pedersen.
If you like this thread, check out this one too:

Ashworth's ideas are very compatible with TEP's. Also, we did a MindMatters show where we summed up some of TEP's other work on Paul and the Stoics this last weekend:



The Force is Strong With This One
FOR - Flower of Life = Sacred Geometry based on creation, manifestation and dimensional reality systems. According to Drunvalo Melchizedek.

Also the Grays prefer humankind to not reach a specific goal as a lot of material suggests this theory... Sorry if I'm wrong, after all isn't the plane-t a "star-seed" of some-kind.


Jedi Council Member
EP: "First, Paul's construction of the self and the initial I-perspective is not at all 'individualistic' in any modern sense. And secondly... the basic thrust of Paul's writing is towards some form of communitarianism. The overarching theory to be found in Paul abut how the self should see its relationship with God, Christ, the world and the others is about a move from an I-perspective to a totally shared one. ...the whole point of his thought lies in practice. It is social practice that is his primary target."

I must say that I am impressed by these words. I would like to share something that resonates similarly for me.

For the world it still exists, and it will exist as long as man is given choose, the possibility of achieving what Hindu philosophy calls the mansion of peace. In it, man has, in front of his Creator, the scale of magnitudes, that is, its proportion. From that mansion it is feasible to realize the world of culture, the path of perfection.

From Rabindranath Tagore are these phrases: The modern world pushes incessantly to his victims, but without leading them anywhere. That measure of the greatness of humanity is in its material resources is a insult to man.

We are not allowed to doubt the importance of the moments that await humanity. Noble thought, spurred on by his vocation really, try to adjust a new landscape. The historical unknowns are certainly considerable, but they will not delay the march of the peoples however great their uncertainty may seem to us.

It is important, therefore, to reconcile our sense of perfection with the nature of events, to restore harmony between material progress and
spiritual values and again provide man with a vision certain of its reality. We are collectivists, but the basis of that colectivism is of an individualistic sign, and its root is a supreme faith in the treasure that man, because he exists, represents.

In this phase of evolution the collective, the "we", is blinding its sources to selfish individualism. It is only fair that we try to resolve whether the life of the community should be accentuated on the matter alone or whether it would be prudent for the freedom of the individual to prevail alone, blind to common interests and needs, provided with an unstoppable, material ambition as well.

We do not believe that any of these forms has redemptive conditions. The miracle of love, the stimulation of hope and the perfection of justice are absent from them.

Equally damaging are the excessive right of one or the passive impersonality of all to the reasonable and elevated idea of man and humanity. In cataclysms, the pupil of man has seen God again and, reflexively, has seen himself again. If we are to preach and carry out a gospel of justice and progress, we must base its verification on individual improvement as a premise of collective improvement.

The grudges and hatreds that are blowing in the world today, unleashed among the peoples, and among the brothers, are the logical result, not of a fatal cosmic itinerary, but of a long preaching against love. That love that comes from self-knowledge and, immediately, from the understanding and acceptance of other people's motives.

What our philosophy tries to reestablish when using the term harmony is, fully, the sense of fullness of existence. At the Hegelian principle of realization of the self in the we, we point out the need for that "we" to be realized and perfected by the self.

Our community will tend to be of men and not of beasts. Our discipline tends to be knowledge, it seeks to be culture. Our freedom, coexistence of freedoms that comes from an ethic for which the general good is always alive, present, indeclinable.

Social progress must not beg or murder, but must be carried out in full awareness of its inexorability. Nausea is banished from this world, which may seem ideal, but which is in us a conviction of something achievable.

This community that pursues spiritual and material ends, that tends to surpass itself, that yearns to improve and be more just, better and happier, in which the individual can realize and realize it simultaneously, will welcome the future man from his high tower with Spinoza's noble conviction: "We feel, we experience, that we are eternal."


The Living Force
5:24: “…those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” Refresher: the flesh is “I” - “ANY feature - bodily OR non-bodily - that belongs to THE INDIVIDUAL (who is also a bodily being)” - again, individual/biological/social features. “Acts of the flesh” include vices of body (adultery, uncleanness, wantonness) and vices of egoism (enmity, strife, emulation, anger, intrigue).

Re-reading AI's post regarding the letter to the Galatians, I found the usage of the term "emulation" interesting. The definition for the word is

tr.v. em·u·lat·ed, em·u·lat·ing, em·u·lates
To strive to equal or excel, especially through imitation: an older pupil whose accomplishments and style I emulated.
2. To compete with successfully; approach or attain equality with.
3. Computers To imitate the function of (another system), as by modifications to hardware or software that allow the imitating system to accept the same data, execute the same programs, and achieve the same results as the imitated system.

A quote found allegedly from Confucius states the following:

When you see a worthy person, endeavor to emulate him. When you see an unworthy person, then examine your inner self.
- Confuscius, in Top 100 Power Verbs: The Most Powerful Verbs and Phrases You Can Use to Win p. 170

Would the correct idea regarding emulation to be to emulate the correct person, rather than cast it off as a sin altogether? I find at work a kind of rat-race dynamic happening where people tend to look to others and use their emotional reaction to them as an impetus to "do something". From what I see it seems to be a fear-driven behavioral loop. I find my boss to be like that as well and I feel I may also be unwittingly encouraging the unhealthy dynamic.

Also, I remember reading somewhere about how the Roman youths or soldiers being very competitive and rivalry was rife. Paul would have brought a countering or grounding message to their hormonally fueled behavior.

Emulation seems to be a double-edged sword, OSIT. When it is used in the spirit of one-upmanship or competing with another to be "better than them" in some way, it becomes a tool to engender strife, enmity, frustration and anger, thus feeding 4D STS more than anything else. When it is used from the point of view of "standing on the shoulder's of giants", i.e. taking the thoughts of others as knowledge to be utilized in one's own life and creative endeavors, learning from the mistakes of others, it could be seen as a much more positive value. But that requires an additional step of actually making that knowledge "one's own", through the process of understanding and assimilating it within one's being. So it may not be considered emulation per se -- since that is closer to blind imitation, while the example of assimilating knowledge is a more elaborate and considered process which can't be summed up in one word.

Going back to Confucius's alleged quote - I still think it means emulate in the sense of imitation of a person one considers worthy, like Paul or even Confucius, for example, that would probably be a good thing. But these days, good role models come few and far between in our daily lives, so the method of emulation should be used very carefully. Watching Jordan Peterson's videos comes to mind, and how the C's have said that something of the soul is imparted through video.

But then, there are other quotes which try to define emulation in that link as well which can be considered. I hope that what I'm engaging in is not wasteful speculation.

Just some thoughts that came to mind.


Jedi Council Member
This was posted on a Stoic group, and I really like the simplicity and clear language used in the flow chart.
The word "hope" has an opposite which is "hopeless" and has always given me an uneasy feeling, using the term.
This flowchart, to me, seems to be an illustration of a "simple understanding".
Specifically, being with reality as it is, as it becomes.
Anybody else with thoughts on this?
Top Bottom