The root of all Evil

[Barliman Butterbur]

Ah, but my dear Lotho! That's the whole point! True believers never try to force ANYONE to believe! Why did the early Church grow as it did - and continue to grow even when being a Christian was literally a death sentence? Because Christians lived their lives in such a way - showing love, compassion, mercy, charity and manifesting the miracles and wonders of a life in a relationship with God - that others simply wanted to be a part of it.

Wahoo! Would that that were still true! If indeed true believers never try to force anyone to believe, then I can only conclude from your statement that suchlike as the Crusaders, Catholics, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, along with the more aggressive stripe of Christian fundamentalists — in other words, those who proselytize, and also those who run missions (ranging from friendly discussion and shelters for the homeless, and who run children's charities in exchange for coming to Jesus — to the extreme of ramming it down your throat a la the Inquisition) are not true Christians. Do you really mean that?

...we have grown up in a culture which has at least the foundations of Christian morals and so we cannot recognize the fact that in the non-Christian world, especially the ancient pagan world, nobody gave a fig for anyone that wasn't a direct family member.

I need some clarification about the above statement. By "we:" are you speaking of Western culture generally, British or American society, what? And as for pagans, if you mean Wiccans, I have never run across a nicer bunch!

There were no orphanages or hospitals before Christianity. Even the Jews who were constrained to certain standards of kindness by their religion were not obligated to care for those outside of their family and/or tribe and they certainly were not even involved with - much less caring about - Gentiles. The parable of the Good Samaritan which is so familiar to us was a revelation to the Jews of Jesus' time. Considering a Samaritan (who was worse than dirt) as a "neighbor" was revolutionary!

I think here you need to be very careful of your claims. Jewish culture, especially the orthodox variety, has always been highly active in charitable works and institutions, to say nothing of education. And if they were not particularly motivated to help out those who were trying to wipe them out over the centuries, well, I can understand that.

In the beginning Christianity was spread not by the sword (like Islam), but by the words and the deeds of Christians. No one was "forced" to do anything.

That may be, but there were times in the past when Christianity was at least as aggressive as Islam (as mentioned before: the Inquisition; the Crusades). Today's proselytizing methods are admittedly more subtle and pleasant.

... No one can force anyone to believe. Under certain circumstances, one can be forced to exhibit outward signs of belief or unbelief (Christians under the Communist yoke), but that never constitutes belief which is something that the individual must consciously choose him or herself. An unwilling "believer" is no believer at all.

Tell that to those who were willing to torture and burn people at the stake trying to get them to say otherwise. "God save us from the things done in His name." But I don't want to fan flames. The point I want to make is this:

There are many Christians who, by their unswerving belief that "I Possess the Only Divine Truth and That Sets Me Above Just About Everyone Else" become arrogant and smugly superior, and that leads to thinking of everyone else as inferior, which further leads to intolerance, disrespect, which evolves to hatred and violence. The perfect example of such arrogance is that bumper sticker that says: "We're not perfect, just forgiven." Well where the hell does that leave the rest of us???!!!

I have known a great many wonderful Christians in my life who grace it. But these Christians are all too rare: they see Christianity as a religion that includes respect for the other person's way of life — and religion — no matter what it is, and see all things — including other ways of living — as manifestations of God's will. These Christians don't go to church as much as some others do, don't engage in formal rituals particularly, and don't pray as often — but their actions are loving, humane and respectful. And they are from all the varieties of Christianity. That makes them the kind of Christian that — assuming God's existence for the moment — She is proud of! And, funny thing: One need not be a Christian or member of any religion, or even a believer in God to be that good a person.

As for cats: I have a dog and love her, but cats!! When you have a relationship with a dog, it is master to underling; with a cat, it's equality at its best! A dog has a master; a cat has staff!

We're both on the same side on this one! I am a cat person 100% (and unfortunately I am so allergic to them that I can't own one), and cannot stand barking, fawning, vicious, yapping/yipping stupid dogs! (I think all city dogs ought to have their fangs and vocal cords surgically removed.)

I live in an apartment with a balcony facing the sidewalk. And every day, here come the "dog people," trained by their dogs to follow them, each connected to their dog by a leash. Some dogs have their people better trained than others. The better trained come after their dogs with poop bags and clean up after them while the dogs bark loudly at each other, threatening to destroy each other (by the tone of the snarling and yipping) from accross the street late at night when people are trying to sleep. And if they aren't doing that, they socialize by sniffing each other's butts. Dogs — you can have 'em! (I feel so much better now!)

Barley

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

Wahoo! Would that that were still true! If indeed true believers never try to force anyone to believe, then I can only conclude from your statement that suchlike as the Crusaders, Catholics, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, along with the more aggressive stripe of Christian fundamentalists — in other words, those who proselytize, and also those who run missions (ranging from friendly discussion and shelters for the homeless, and who run children's charities in exchange for coming to Jesus — to the extreme of ramming it down your throat a la the Inquisition) are not true Christians. Do you really mean that?Lotho

Let me see if I can address some of your issues at least very superficially: there is nothing "unChristian" about running missions or feeding the hungry or doing charitable acts in the Name of Christ and letting those you are serving know that you are in fact serving them in Christ's name. However, when one makes some sort of "bargain" out of the service - believe in Christ or you don't get the soup - then the most "Christian" person in that situation may well be the fellow in need of the soup rather than the "Christian" who is using extortion to gain a convert! Better by far to give the charity and to preach the Gospel (the Great Commission) quietly rather than attempting to "force" a conversion - which, as I noted before CANNOT BE DONE! I see nothing wrong with preaching. After all, it is what Christ told His followers - to bring the Gospel to all men. But the word "Gospel" means "Good News"! Not, "Do it my way, or else!!"

Consider: Albert Schweitzer made more converts to Christ in Africa through love, the Word and the use of his medical skills than all the priests, monks and missionaries combined who used the strength of their European countries to "gather converts"! Schweitzer's converts KNEW he loved them as Christ loved them. That's what makes converts. Not soup or charity or threats! Love brings people to Christ and anyone who calls him or herself a "Christian" but doesn't know that is more in need of conversion than the veriest pagan.

I need some clarification about the above statement. By "we:" are you speaking of Western culture generally, British or American society, what? And as for pagans, if you mean Wiccans, I have never run across a nicer bunch!Lotho

Yes. Western Civilization has as its moral foundation, the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule. Other civilizations also recognized these great virtues as virtues and lived by them. Indeed, only the most perverted cultures like the great tyrannies of the 20th century have rejected this understanding of "virtue" and chosen others in their stead. Christ says in Scripture to His Apostles that He has "other sheep" (followers) of whom they do not know. St Paul speaks of Gentiles and pagans who have God's Law written on their hearts! Indeed, in several instances in the Gospels and in Acts we are told of godly Centurians, hardly your average candidate for sainthood!

It is necessary to understand here what many Christians, alas, do not understand. When Christ talks about "judging others", He is not speaking of the necessary judgments that we must all make in life - is this person honest or dishonest or can we trust this person or not or should we marry him/her - but, rather, we must not make judgments about where other people stand with GOD! We are forbidden as Christians to do this and, in fact, this was one of Jesus' main disputes with the Pharisees who were constantly deciding where their fellow Jews were in relationship to God because they considered themselves "the standard" from which that judgment could be made. However, they failed miserably in the very important virtue of compassion, mercy and forgiveness so they were more condemned than the people that they routinely condemned because of their ignorance or sinfulness! Christians who "decide" that if you aren't a Christian (or a Baptist or a Catholic or an Orthodox), well, you're just damned - are being themselves disobedient to Christ's own command not to judge one's brother. No one knows where ANYONE stands with God except God! This is exactly why St. John Chrysostom was able to say with conviction that the walls of hell were lined with priests and bishops were the candlestands. These people believed that their clerical office saved them and often lived very unChristian lives indeed. But God does is not a regarder or persons nor is He influenced by how rich we are or how popular we are or how important we are or how "religious" we are - if our "religion" is without the love and foregiveness He Himself demanded of us.

I think here you need to be very careful of your claims. Jewish culture, especially the orthodox variety, has always been highly active in charitable works and institutions, to say nothing of education. And if they were not particularly motivated to help out those who were trying to wipe them out over the centuries, well, I can understand that. Lotho

Such institutions were manifest in later Jewish society - after the diaspora. Of course, the Jews were in the forefront of the understanding of the sanctity of life. Hippocrates from whom the great Oath of Physicians came was a Greek Jew. Prior to his teaching, the physician and the sorcerer were one and the same and you were as apt to be killed by a doctor as healed by one. But the Mosaic teachings and the understanding of man being created in the image and likeness of God led Hippocrates to insist that his students swear an oath to "First do no harm", an oath which also included prohibitions against abortion, euthanasia and assisting or counseling suicide.

However, as the Jews were (as you yourself point out) a people who kept to themselves, most of their humane doctrines and institutions were limited to their fellow Jews. Only when Christianity (which had its moral as well as its theological foundations in Judaism) became the religion of the Empire did such concepts find culture-wide expression. Hence, before Christianity there were no orphanages for the children of any race or religion nor any hospitals who cared for [/I]everyone[/I] in the society. In a way these things and the ideas that led to them did come through the Jews, but not from the ever more marginalized Jewish presence after the fall of Jerusalem. Rather, they arose from Judaism's "descendant", Christianity.

end of part 1

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

That may be, but there were times in the past when Christianity was at least as aggressive as Islam (as mentioned before: the Inquisition; the Crusades). Today's proselytizing methods are admittedly more subtle and pleasant.Lotho

Again, you are confusing the people with the Church. What has been done in the Name of God doesn't necessarily carry His blessing. Christ tells some in Scripture that though they cast out demons in His Name and even raised the dead, He doesn't know them! Such are the people of whom you are speaking here. Frankly, I am of the opinion that if Inquisitors and Crusaders (who frankly were more interested in plunder and rape than religion) had actually happened across Jesus of Nazareth in the course of their activities, they probably would have crucified Him again! And remember, the crusaders of the Fourth Crusade sacked Constantinople and gained for the West the (almost) eternal emnity of the Eastern Church. In fact, the relationship between the two Churches was so bad that many Orthodox preferred the Moslems in the Holy Land to the forces of the West. The old saying was, "better the Crescent than the Mitre!" for the Moslems were not interested in "converting" Christians (until later, that is), but the Catholic Church treated their Eastern brothers (who were only considered schismatics and not heretics as the Protestants were later to be named) with great cruelty in attempting to force them to accept the primacy of the Pope. It's a long and ugly history that has about as much to do with Christ, faith and love as spiders have to do with ice cream.

end of part 2

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

Tell that to those who were willing to torture and burn people at the stake trying to get them to say otherwise. "God save us from the things done in His name." But I don't want to fan flames. The point I want to make is this:

There are many Christians who, by their unswerving belief that "I Possess the Only Divine Truth and That Sets Me Above Just About Everyone Else" become arrogant and smugly superior, and that leads to thinking of everyone else as inferior, which further leads to intolerance, disrespect, which evolves to hatred and violence. The perfect example of such arrogance is that bumper sticker that says: "We're not perfect, just forgiven." Well where the hell does that leave the rest of us???!!!Lotho

I told you about the young girl who said that she believed that Christ was the Son of God and that meant she was saved. I told her that Satan also believes that! Does that mean that he is saved? Yes, Christians do believe that we possess the Truth in its entirety for if we did not, what possible reason would we have to preach it - or for that matter, to believe it? Would you wish to tell others about or even believe in yourself, God the Fairly Competent?

If I think that my belief is true, then I am obligated to tell you so - but not to make you feel bad or inadequate or stupid and still less to hold myself out as an example of what everyone should be. Rather it is only to say that I have found the Way. If we both wanted to get to New York City and my route was more direct than yours, you would not mind if I told you about it. The ultimate choice of whether you took is and always would be yours. Furthermore, I could not take credit for that better route since I did not create it but in fact, learned of it from others myself.

However, if I act in such a way as to put the lie to what I am saying - and this is the case with many "Christians" - then not only am I doing a disservice to you (for why should you believe that I have found the truth when I am hardly a person worthy of your respect?) but also to Christ since I am ostensibly speaking in His Name! Can an unrepentent liar preach honesty? I think not! Can an greedy or lacivious person preach continence whether of money or sex? No. Can a glutton preach astheticism? Hardly! Can a person puffed up with pride preach humility?? !!!! Hence, many "Christians" do more damage to the Faith when in their "preaching" they look for the speck in their brothers' eyes while busily ignoring the beam in their own - as Christ again cautioned in Scripture. St. Seraphim of Sarov said it best: "Save yourself and thousands around you will be saved!" Unfortunately, far too many who wish to bring Christ to others think that they can do so by browbeating them rather than acting in such a way that people want to know how they too may achieve that aspect of love, inner peace and joy.

Of course, as I have said, much of what many people think constitutes "belief" is nothing more than habit. If I say I believe Christ is my Lord, then I should be willing to act that way and, if required, lay down my life for my "neighbor"; that is, my fellow men. This is why one Catholic priest was canonized. In Auschwitz, a Jewish man was chosen to be led to the gas chamber but the priest stepped forward and asked to take his place. He was allowed to do so. Did he save them man? Probably not. Probably the man was gassed the next day. But the fact is that when the opportunity arose, this true "man of God" actually did lay down his life to save another. That's what it means to be a true Christian, not all the palaver and talk! Again, we do not know - and are not supposed to speculate - where any other soul stands with God. As a very wise priest once said, a good pagan is more pleasing to God than a bad Christian! Labels and bumper stickers do not please God! Living according to His command - and especially the command that we love one another - pleases Him.

I have known a great many wonderful Christians in my life who grace it. But these Christians are all too rare: they see Christianity as a religion that includes respect for the other person's way of life — and religion — no matter what it is, and see all things — including other ways of living — as manifestations of God's will. These Christians don't go to church as much as some others do, don't engage in formal rituals particularly, and don't pray as often — but their actions are loving, humane and respectful. And they are from all the varieties of Christianity. That makes them the kind of Christian that — assuming God's existence for the moment — She is proud of! And, funny thing: One need not be a Christian or member of any religion, or even a believer in God to be that good a person.Lotho

There is an old poem called Abou Ben Adhem (I think that's how it's spelled). It is about a good man who wakens in the night and sees an Angel writing in a golden book. Abou asks the Angel what he is writing and he tells him he is writing down the names of those who love the Lord. Abou asks if his name is in the book - and the Angel tells him "no". Alas, Abou then asks the Angel to at least put his name in the book of those who love their fellow men. The next night the Angel appears again and this time with a book which names those whom God loves. And lo! Abou's name leads all the rest! It is easy to "love God" Who is mostly a "concept" to men. It is infinitely harder to love our annoying, aggravating, miserable, wretched, awful, stinky and frustrating fellow men! But that is what we are constrained to do, as Christians at least. St. James said, "He who says he loves God and hates his brother is a liar!"

We're both on the same side on this one! I am a cat person 100% (and unfortunately I am so allergic to them that I can't own one), and cannot stand barking, fawning, vicious, yapping/yipping stupid dogs! (I think all city dogs ought to have their fangs and vocal cords surgically removed.)

I live in an apartment with a balcony facing the sidewalk. And every day, here come the "dog people," trained by their dogs to follow them, each connected to their dog by a leash. Some dogs have their people better trained than others. The better trained come after their dogs with poop bags and clean up after them while the dogs bark loudly at each other, threatening to destroy each other (by the tone of the snarling and yipping) from accross the street late at night when people are trying to sleep. And if they aren't doing that, they socialize by sniffing each other's butts. Dogs — you can have 'em! (I feel so much better now!)Lotho

I have a Peke and I lover her, but cats are still my favorites! Right now, my Little Girl (named for a former very special cat) who looks rather like a fuzzy black and white bowling ball is sleeping next to me as I type. I believe Dr. Samuel Johnson of dictionary fame had a cat named Hodge who slept next to him as he worked! I am sorry your allergies prevent you from having one. Who knows? Maybe some day they'll come up with a "cure-all" for people with allergies. One thing I am very glad of is that I am not allergic to animals! Only their eventual death saddens me to the point where I wonder if I want to go through it all again... But somehow, I always do.

God bless!

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

...when one makes some sort of "bargain" out of the service - believe in Christ or you don't get the soup - then the most "Christian" person in that situation may well be the fellow in need of the soup rather than the "Christian" who is using extortion to gain a convert!...the word "Gospel" means "Good News"! Not, "Do it my way, or else!!"

You must be unhappy about the current general state of Christianity in the world then.

...Schweitzer's converts KNEW he loved them as Christ loved them. That's what makes converts. Not soup or charity or threats!

My kinda guy!

...only the most perverted cultures like the great tyrannies of the 20th century have rejected this understanding of "virtue" and chosen others in their stead....

It is necessary to understand here what many Christians, alas, do not understand. When Christ talks about "judging others", He is not speaking of ...rather, we must not make judgments about where other people stand with GOD! We are forbidden as Christians to do this... John Chrysostom was able to say with conviction that the walls of hell were lined with priests and bishops were the candlestands.

"Tell me, Pretty Lady, are there any more at home like you?" Your understanding of Christianity is refreshing and dismaying at the same time (because it seems to be so comparatively rare).

...the Jews were in the forefront of the understanding of the sanctity of life. Hippocrates from whom the great Oath of Physicians came was a Greek Jew. Prior to his teaching, the physician and the sorcerer were one and the same and you were as apt to be killed by a doctor as healed by one. But the Mosaic teachings and the understanding of man being created in the image and likeness of God led Hippocrates to insist that his students swear an oath to "First do no harm", an oath which also included prohibitions against abortion, euthanasia and assisting or counseling suicide.

Frankly I think "Do No Harm" is a better statement of conduct that the Golden Rule or the Ten Commandments. "Do Unto Others..." in the hands of a madman or a Hitler or a Ghengis Khan can — and has done — do great harm to many. Some can say, "Well, 'do no harm' — that means I can ignore you.'" Of course there is no such thing as benign neglect. You can't leave a person alone who needs help.

I think "charity" has arisen by various paths through all religions.

On to Part Two (phew!)

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

Again, you are confusing the people with the Church. What has been done in the Name of God doesn't necessarily carry His blessing.

You can say that again! As I said before, "God save us from the things man does in His name!" I wish I could remember the exact quote, but someone said that by no other way is evil done so easily, so easily rationalized, and with a cleaner conscience than that done in God's name.

On to Parth Three (*puff!* *pant!*)

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

I told you about the young girl who said that she believed that Christ was the Son of God and that meant she was saved. I told her that Satan also believes that! Does that mean that he is saved? Yes, Christians do believe that we possess the Truth in its entirety for if we did not, what possible reason would we have to preach it - or for that matter, to believe it? Would you wish to tell others about or even believe in yourself, God the Fairly Competent?

Hee hee! Of course you do! That's the point: each religion, no matter how different it is from the others, preaches this same assertion: "I Am the One True Way!" Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism (well, not Hinduism, but I'll get to that in a second) all insist that they are the One True Way, and of course by implication everyone else is in serious error. Hinduism says "All is God: all matter and energy (matter and energy being congealed forms of Spirit, matter more so, energy less so), all that exists and does not exist, all that we understand and will never understand. And it also includes you, me, and — quite literally — the lamppost!" So Hinduism includes all religions as aspects of itself.)

If I think that my belief is true, then I am obligated to tell you so - but not to make you feel bad or inadequate or stupid and still less to hold myself out as an example of what everyone should be. Rather it is only to say that I have found the Way. If we both wanted to get to New York City and my route was more direct than yours, you would not mind if I told you about it. The ultimate choice of whether you took is and always would be yours. Furthermore, I could not take credit for that better route since I did not create it but in fact, learned of it from others myself.

Would that there were more Christians with this understanding! You and I both know that proselytizing gets out of hand whenever zealots, bigots and fanatics take it and force it down the throats of those who are other-than-they-are.

...much of what many people think constitutes "belief" is nothing more than habit. If I say I believe Christ is my Lord, then I should be willing to act that way and, if required, lay down my life for my "neighbor"; that is, my fellow men. This is why one Catholic priest was canonized. In Auschwitz, a Jewish man was chosen to be led to the gas chamber but the priest stepped forward and asked to take his place. He was allowed to do so. Did he save them man? Probably not. Probably the man was gassed the next day. But the fact is that when the opportunity arose, this true "man of God" actually did lay down his life to save another. That's what it means to be a true Christian...

I daresay that's what it means to be simply a good person, and there are such persons who belong to no particular creed or path.

There is an old poem called Abou Ben Adhem (I think that's how it's spelled). It is about a good man who wakens in the night and sees an Angel writing in a golden book. Abou asks the Angel what he is writing and he tells him he is writing down the names of those who love the Lord. Abou asks if his name is in the book - and the Angel tells him "no". Alas, Abou then asks the Angel to at least put his name in the book of those who love their fellow men. The next night the Angel appears again and this time with a book which names those whom God loves. And lo! Abou's name leads all the rest!

Good lord! My mother used to read that poem from time to time! hadn't thought of it in years!

I have a Peke and I lover her, but cats are still my favorites! Right now, my Little Girl (named for a former very special cat) who looks rather like a fuzzy black and white bowling ball is sleeping next to me as I type. I believe Dr. Samuel Johnson of dictionary fame had a cat named Hodge who slept next to him as he worked! I am sorry your allergies prevent you from having one. Who knows?...

When I lived with my parents we had a cat, despite my problems with allergy, called Whitey — a black cat with blue eyes. If you rubbed his fur back it was white — only the tips of the fur were black. We had him 17 years or so, and I had built up an inadequate immunity to him. My parents put him to sleep (years later when I was in my first marriage) because he had been poisoned from an abscessed tooth. It would have been nice had they warned me first. But that was my mother for you. I still miss him.

death saddens me to the point where I wonder if I want to go through it all again... But somehow, I always do.

I've had pets and I've had children. Children are worth the care and the travail (because of the joys); at this point in my life, pets are not.

Barley

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

I haven't time to do more than make a quick comment. Yes, I am very unhappy about the state of Christianity (or what passes for it) in today's world. Most of those "in charge" in the various churches (without the capital "C") don't seem to understand at all! They either try to appeal to people by letting them do whatever they want so they won't appear to be "judgmental" - and so abandon them in their sin to suffer its consequences both here on earth and afterwards or they set themselves up as scolds, nags and self-righteous prigs, "holier than thou" types who couldn't convert a ten into two fives! They become the message rather than the messenger. Christ is lost except as a "talisman", a word proclaimed in every other sentence and used as a club to either get people's attention (and annoy them, doubtless) or as an excuse for telling them that they are doomed to hell! If the Christ that they preach was actually THE Christ, I'd go back to my old Celtic druidic traditions and spend my time looking for virgins and oak trees! Of course, the latter are far easier to find than the former these days!

Anyway, read Lewis if and when you can. You will get a MUCH better understanding of what the Faith should be!

Well, must go now. Hoping to reply more fully later but now - duty (and Davis & Venturini, Esqs.) call!

God bless!

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

If the Christ that they preach was actually THE Christ, I'd go back to my old Celtic druidic traditions and spend my time looking for virgins and oak trees!...

Sounds like a plan! (Actually, I think I'd spend my time looking for virgins IN oak trees!)

Barley

 

[joxy]

This is why one Catholic priest was canonized. In Auschwitz, a Jewish man was chosen to be led to the gas chamber but the priest stepped forward and asked to take his place. He was allowed to do so.

Maksymilian Maria Kolbe, a Franciscan priest, volunteered his life in place of Franciszek Gajowniczek. He was then starved almost to death, and was killed by an injection. He was beatified - recognised as a saint and martyr - in 1982.

 

[Isthir]

I will state before I begin that I read only the last page of posts, so please do forgive me if I talk about something that has already been gone over.

Now, as for Buddhism saying 'we are the way'....you are correct as well as incorrect. The Buddha simply stated that he had found a way and shared it with others. It search most likely shaped the way that he found. Do you get what I am saying?

*Grumbles and has to go, but will post the rest of my thoughts later*

-Isthir

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

I will state before I begin that I read only the last page of posts, so please do forgive me if I talk about something that has already been gone over.

Now, as for Buddhism saying 'we are the way'....you are correct as well as incorrect. The Buddha simply stated that he had found a way and shared it with others. It search most likely shaped the way that he found. Do you get what I am saying?

*Grumbles and has to go, but will post the rest of my thoughts later*

-Isthir

One of the most profound differences between Buddhism and Christianity was stated by Fr. Thomas Hopko who spoke about his long association with a Buddhist sage and in one of their conversations, the sage told him that in Buddhism, "if one meets the Buddha, one is to kill the Buddha. In other words, the concept of the faith is not to be "like" the Buddha or one with him. Fr. John then told the sage that in Christianity, if one meets the Christ, then one must let the Christ kill him! In other words, only through Christ "slaying the old man" - the unredeemed human self - can one find salvation. Of course, once an individual has let his "old man" be slain by the Blood of the Lamb, only then can that person become what God intended for him. So, in fact, we can only achieve what we really are by surrendering ourselves to Christ (the opposite of the Buddhist concept) and allowing Him to give back to us our humanity raised to its true nature, that of a child of God Himself.

Many people misunderstand the call to be "obedient" or "submissive" to God to mean that we have to give up our "selves". That is entirely untrue; indeed, the opposite it the truth. It is only when we are willing to submit ourselves to God that, in fact, our true selves are revealed, the people we were supposed to be restored to us and ultimate freedom attained. If you will, it is a sort of "surfer" thing: if you fight the wave, the wave will sink you or, at best, you will struggle endlessly without achieving anything. However, if you go with the wave - however much control you feel you have lost in the direction you are taking - you will ride into glory!

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

I will state before I begin that I read only the last page of posts, so please do forgive me if I talk about something that has already been gone over.

Now, as for Buddhism saying 'we are the way'....you are correct as well as incorrect. The Buddha simply stated that he had found a way and shared it with others. It search most likely shaped the way that he found. Do you get what I am saying?

*Grumbles and has to go, but will post the rest of my thoughts later*

-Isthir

I'm not sure whom you're quoting, but my (admittedly inadequate) studies of Buddhism has never shown me a quote as arrogantly authoritative as one that would say that Buddhism is "the" way. It is "a" way, as you point out.

And looking at MM's posts on this, I'm thinking that it is interesting to get Buddhism — a way of life that evolved as a no-God offspring of Hinduism — and Christ mixed up together. A bit of oil and water, no? I believe that — contrary to M's assertion — the most profound difference between Christianity and Buddhism (indeed between Buddhism and all other religions) is that Buddhism postulates no one central God as do Hinduism, Judaism, Islam and Christianity. It does however, being the child of Hinduism, postulate a whole pantheon of lesser gods. The main thrust of Buddhism is compassionate and kindly behavior towards oneself and others, and that's what makes it so appealing to me personally. One does not need to believe in God to be a "godly" person.

On the other hand, Hinduism is the ultimate inclusive religion that states WHATEVER is (and by implication therefore isn't), is God: all forms of matter, energy and nothingness — including all sentient and insentient life and all other religions that are so doctrinaire as to be at war with each other.

Barley

 

[Isthir]

I am curious as to the gods of Buddhism. I never thought there was any, for the Buddha never described himself as divine, nor of the afterlife, or a higer power....as far as I know anyways.

-Isthir

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

I am curious as to the gods of Buddhism. I never thought there was any, for the Buddha never described himself as divine, nor of the afterlife, or a higer power....as far as I know anyways.

-Isthir

This will get you started: http://atheism.about.com/b/a/066313.htm. And of course a Google search will get you more than you ever wanted to know!

(And don't forget The Tibetan Book of the Dead.)

Barley

 

[Isthir]

This will get you started: http://atheism.about.com/b/a/066313.htm. And of course a Google search will get you more than you ever wanted to know!

(And don't forget The Tibetan Book of the Dead.)

Barley

Very interesting stuff there. I was just talking about the core of Buddhism....what the Buddha taught. As it says in your article, Buddha rejected all gods, but knew that it was not his place to tell others to do away with their gods. A little bit more of a tid bit. Buddha actually studied under the Hindu religion for quite some time before he became disillusioned with it and went out to find the truth. *Shrugs*

Hey, Barliman, how interested are you in the Philosophy of Religion?

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

...Buddha rejected all gods, but knew that it was not his place to tell others to do away with their gods. A little bit more of a tidbit. Buddha actually studied under the Hindu religion for quite some time before he became disillusioned with it and went out to find the truth. *Shrugs*

Hey, Barliman, how interested are you in the Philosophy of Religion?

What you say is true: the gods of Buddhism have nowhere the importance of those in Hinduism. To put something you said in a little sharper focus: When the Buddha (Siddartha Gautama) was alive, there was nothing BUT Hinduism. He was "the beginning of Buddhism" if you will, much as Jesus became the focal point of Christianity, the child of Judaism.

As to your last question, I was a "seeker" for many years, starting with a formal study of the mainline religions (a la Joseph Campbell) I was involved in a Zendo in Los Angeles for a while, and dropped out because the Zenmaster was a drunk. Then I found and stuck with a Hindu path for about 20 years. I left it because of the scandal connected with the so-called spiritual leader.

As of now, I am what you might call a "devout agnostic." For me, the God of the various holy books is God created in man's image. I am now fully convinced that we can never know whether such a being exists for the same reason that a cat is incapable of reading. So it's neither provable nor disprovable as far as I'm concerned.

Lately I have been very interested in the writings of Michael Shermer, the founder of Skeptic Magazine (www.skeptic.com). There were two other prior books which had a profound influence on my thinking along these lines (now both out of print): "Positive Illusions" by Shelley Tailor and "I and That" by Alex Comfort.

Right now, what is important for me is how people treat themselves and each other, all the rest of it being side commentary. There are some spiritual leaders whose thoughts I hold as being exceptionally important: The Dalai Lama XIV, Shunriyu Suzuki, Ananda Mayi Ma, and the wisdom writings of the I Ching (the Richard Wilhelm translation). Thoughts from these sources center on human interaction. My main objection to organized religions is that the real wisdom is inextricably all tangled up with doctrinaire flapdoodle.

I am envious of those who have a comforting religious view that gives them a sense of cosmic purpose, even if it is a "positive illusion."

Barley

 

[joxy]

My main objection to organized religions is that the real wisdom is inextricably all tangled up with doctrinaire flapdoodle.
I am envious of those who have a comforting religious view....

I know the stuff it's tangled up in, but I don't find it all difficult to extract the real wisdom, of my own Christianity, or of Islam.
And "comforting" isn't the first word that would spring to my mind when describing my Catholic Christian view.
I note that you have done a great deal of exploring, of other people's ideas, each of them with their own, basically man-made, religions. A strength of Christianity is that it is NOT man-made, that we are in a direct relationship with God, a relationship that requires no human intervention.

 

[Gimmi]

I am envious of those who have a comforting religious view that gives them a sense of cosmic purpose, even if it is a "positive illusion."

Barley, I enjoy reading your posts!

I have a comforting religious view that gives me a sense of cosmic purpose, and is the "Truth"! You seem to imply you wish you had a religion you feel is right. (Please don't envy this, BTW.) Reading into this I can assume no religion feels comforting or right to you. For you, a person who seems very logical, there's a good explanation for this:

1. How can you know what you feel is right? Feelings can be wrong. What you feel does not determine truth. If so, then you put yourself in place of God and look to yourself for what you "feel" is right.

2. Choosing whatever is comforting has lead to chaos. What if some people had a religion where they felt stealing was okay? And what about lying and cheating? Hitler felt killing Jews was right.

3. Truth doesn't contradict itself, i.e., if someone felt that something was right per their religious view and another person felt it was wrong per theirs, would they both be right? One for sure isn't. How can there be any comfort in having a religious view that could possibly be an illusion?

Even the Bible (the revelation of God) says that the heart is deceitful and untrustworthy. If you could come to know truth by yourself, by what you felt, then the Bible didn't need to be written. But, it exists and it reveals that only God is the Truth, not our feelings. It is a spiritual proof.

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

..."comforting" isn't the first word that would spring to my mind when describing my Catholic Christian view.

LOL! (A wry chortle)

...A strength of Christianity is that it is NOT man-made, that we are in a direct relationship with God, a relationship that requires no human intervention.

I'm happy that you have that belief, joxy, if it gives you comfort and a sense of purpose, structure and meaning to your life. It is a belief that untold millions share — and untold millions — like me — don't...

Barley