News:

If you have difficulty registering for an account on the forum please email antespam@gmail.com. In the question regarding the composer use just the surname, not including forenames Charles-Marie.

Main Menu

If one is a true Christian can one be a good Buddhist too?

Started by David Pinnegar, September 05, 2012, 11:49:46 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

David Pinnegar

Hi!

This morning His Holiness the Dalai Lama commented on Facebook:

QuoteAlong with love, compassion is the face of altruism. It is a feeling from deep in the heart that you cannot bear others' suffering without acting to relieve it. As compassion grows stronger, so does your willingness to commit yourself to the welfare of all beings, even if you have to do it alone. You will be unbiased in your service to all beings, no matter how they respond to you.

Descendant of Benjamin Latrobe, Alice Bailey, working as a missionary in India found no conflict between Buddhism and Christianity.

Can we invite Buddhists to enjoy organs in Church, or merely silence in a Quaker meeting house?

Best wishes

David P

JBR

I'm certainly no expert on Buddhism, but I'm sure that Buddhists would have absolutely no reason not to want to come into a church.

I'm sure that some of them would even enjoy attending an organ recital!
A missionary from Yorkshire to the primitive people of Lancashire

MusingMuso

I think I will stick to my previous proposition that Christianity is completely compatible with many religions and even none at all; especially a philosophy such as Buddhism, which strives to be in tune with the natural world and the positive elements of self.

I'm sure there are many Buddhists who have entered churches, and actually that is a lot more likely than with members of other beliefs and faiths.

That said, I do recall meeting someone I knew at York Minster and sitting beside them for a performance of the Matthew Passion, and feeling slightly uncomrtable when he burst into tears as soon as the orchestra began.

"You're supposed to be Jewish," I hissed.

"I know," he blubbered, "but this is Bach!"   :'(

Best,

MM



KB7DQH

QuoteI'm certainly no expert on Buddhism, but I'm sure that Buddhists would have absolutely no reason not to want to come into a church.

I'm sure that some of them would even enjoy attending an organ recital!


Looking at David's Youtube video introducing the "movable metro" I looked over the "related" videos on Youtube, and, lo and behold, one of the largest pipe organs  outside of Honolulu, Hawaii, is installed-- :o :o :o in a Buddhist Temple 8) 8) 8)..........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d0D-1zk_3A&feature=related

Eric
KB7DQH

The objective is to reach human immortality—that is, to create things which are necessary to mankind, necessary to the purpose of the existence of mankind, and which have become the fruit that drives the creation of a higher state of mankind than ever existed before."

David Pinnegar

Dear Eric

Thanks so much for this! What a surprise!

With the construction of sound inherent in organ music with stops at harmonic pitches all locked together, it's not inconceivable that it should not be limited to the Christian tradition as music and sound is a language more fundamental than the words of religions can express.

For interest the details on the YouTube video:
QuoteHigashi Hongwanji Mission in Hilo, Hawaii (on the Big island), has the largest pipe organ in Hawaii outside of Honolulu. It is being restored by master organ technician Scott Bosch. Organist Rick Mazurowski tested it out after its first tuning in several years. The organ is three manuals with 27 ranks of pipes. It was built and installed in 1962 by the Wicks Organ Company. The Hongwanji denomination of Shin Buddhism uses western styl songs, or gathas, in the services. A history of the Hongwanji denomination can be found here
http://www2.hongwanji.or.jp/english/history.html
Information about the use of the gathas can be found here......
http://djbuddha.org/documents/IASBS2005.pdf

Best wishes

David P

revtonynewnham

Hi

Interesting question.  It should be pretty obvious that you can't effectively serve two masters - in Christianity, the wortship of Almighty God must be to the exclusion of any other object of worship "You shall have no other gods ...".  However, I see no issue with any Buddhist PRACTICE that is not specifically incompatible with the teachings of the Bible - it's really no different to Messianic Jews (i.e. Jews who accept and worship Jesus as Messiah) - and even "Messianic Muslims" (not my term by the way!).  There are Messianic synagogues and Messianic Mosques where Jesus is worshipped, but within the traditions of another religion.  It's too easy (and has been one of the failings of the church over the years) to try and make everybody conform to one pattern and form of worship - leading to teaching Africans Victorian hymns in English for example.  Keep within the tenets of the Bible, and the rest is pretty much irrelevant.

Every Blessing

Tony

David Pinnegar

Quote from: revtonynewnham on September 17, 2012, 05:55:09 PM
Interesting question.  It should be pretty obvious that you can't effectively serve two masters - in Christianity, the wortship of Almighty God must be to the exclusion of any other object of worship "You shall have no other gods ...".  However, I see no issue with any Buddhist PRACTICE that is not specifically incompatible with the teachings of the Bible - it's really no different to Messianic Jews (i.e. Jews who accept and worship Jesus as Messiah) - and even "Messianic Muslims" (not my term by the way!).  There are Messianic synagogues and Messianic Mosques where Jesus is worshipped, but within the traditions of another religion.  It's too easy (and has been one of the failings of the church over the years) to try and make everybody conform to one pattern and form of worship - leading to teaching Africans Victorian hymns in English for example.  Keep within the tenets of the Bible, and the rest is pretty much irrelevant.

Dear Tony

Interesting thoughts here. I was much influenced by a visit to India and being in a Taxi with a postcard depicting Lord Siva and the caption "God is One"

If God is, by Genesis 1, "The Creator" or to deanthropomorphise "The Construction Force" which results in all that we experience, then there is only one God.

It may be that this is the one god that all religions speak of. Being a "force" that can be also regarded as a process, there is plenty of scope for looking at the multi faceted aspects that this force and processes present to us in different perspectives. Perhaps we don't have to look at other perspectives as serving two masters if we look for the ways in which the paths lead to the same God.

"You shall not have any other gods" - ceases to be a problem because all are part of the one.

Buddhism has a teacher, but no god. Buddha is not a god. There is no god in an anthropomorphised sense. I don't believe Christianity has to have an anthropomorphic God: God as a force or process that results in the universe, creates, constructs, is actually more powerful than any anthropomorphisation can achieve - but this force can behave like a father and so we can describe God in such an anthropomorphic way provided we remember this as an analogue, a description.

It's interesting to read that Mullahs in Iran are actually terrified of Christianity because Muslims there are walking away from Islam.

People are naturally turning away from divisive teachings of religious leaders of faiths because humanity knows that God is One and any teaching that divides humanity from humanity is seen naturally to be false.

Paradoxically therefore, by the ability of interpretations of Christianity to embrace others as different perspectives of the same one God, the teachings of Jesus and coming to God through Christ will be visibly superior to those whose teachers tell them that coming to God depends upon the cutting of the beard to the correct length. Not until such teachers embrace Christ's two commandments, which are universal, will their perspectives of religion have any lasting influence.

It is for this reason I propose efforts to find ways in which we can be more holistic with others, and in this way, the sound of the Organ may flourish.

Best wishes

David P

revtonynewnham

Hi David

I actually basically agree with you!  The anthropomorphic view of God is really an attempt to try and explain something that is beyond human comprehension.  It's a partial picture of a much larger whole - as is the concept of God as Father (the Bible actually also mentions female attributes of God in a couple of places - and, of course, human beings, both male & female are made in God's image. 

In terms of evangelism/mission/outreach (or whatever else you can call it) you have to start where people are - and there's no Biblical justification for enforcing a particular style of spirituality on anyone.  The bottom line is that salvation is through faith in Jesus - the ability, in the words of the earliest Christian creed, to say, and mean "Jesus is Lord".  Anything else is down to culture, etc.  The danger is in going down the "all roads lead to God" routre, which just isn't the case.

Every Blessing

Tony

makemoreandmore

Ignorant and unlearned as I am, I have pondered over the fact that the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch, and the name (derogatory?) stuck. What was it about them, or what did they believe, that was so radical in their day, so that they were singled out as 'Christians'?

Even the most cursory examination of the New Testament gives the answer, yet I meet so many today who take to themselves the name 'Christian' without holding to any of the basic tenets that these first Christians lived by, and often died for.

To answer to the question which is the subject of this post, one would need to appreciate first, What is a true Christian? , and he would then need to consider whether, had he lived in Antioch in those days, there might have been any danger of him being singled out as one of 'the Christians'.


David Pinnegar

Quote from: thatminidotcom on September 20, 2012, 07:04:55 PM
To answer to the question which is the subject of this post, one would need to appreciate first, What is a true Christian? , and he would then need to consider whether, had he lived in Antioch in those days, there might have been any danger of him being singled out as one of 'the Christians'.

Hi!

You pose an interesting set of points.

Belief in a biologically virgin birth? Perhaps not. Stories about Jesus living after being Crucified? Certainly - but most certainly the ideas that he gave surviving long after the physicality of his earthly existence.

Increasingly I'm coming to realise the function of the nature of the Epic Story and the Epic Storyteller keeping alive teachings and wisdom, sometimes stressing something a little here and there, sometimes embellishing some aspect to the delight or better understanding of his audience. In the nature of the Gospels having been written down rather later than the time of the events to which they related, the stories that we read will have come through that process.

So what is important to them? As you say, to the people who follow these Gospels, what is important to those who consider themselves Christian specifically?

To me, personally, the understanding of a property common to all the universe, common to all matter and to all living things and people which we call God, the Creator. So as to avoid anthropomorphic confusion, I like to thing of the Creator as a force, the Construction Force or Force or Thrust of Creation.

Beyond that, what is special about Jesus' teachings? The Jews had a problem, not dissimilar to that of some branches of Islam today: the teachers believed that you got to heaven by following rules - rules written by Scribes and interpreted by Levites (and no doubt someone here will fill in for rusty memories like mine where the Pharisees come in . . . ). In contrast, Jesus taught us that we have to learn not what the universe (including us does), not merely rules, but how it works, how it operates, behaves - and why.

Learning how the universe works enables us to fit in with the universal laws of creation that made us and all that we experience: it teaches us not what to do but how to think, and therefore how to adapt appropriately in different situations.

Thus "Love Thy God", he said, "and your neighbour as yourself" and "that's all you have to do". It's a way of thought and a way of life. As for being all one needs to do, it's a tall order and a hard task to follow.

To the early Christians, therefore, being a Christian was not about following rules but doing more than that and as living examples manifest telling the good news of how it was possible to get people to live in harmony with others.

One of my favourite stories from the Gospel is that of the feeding of the five thousand. The miracle was not of magic creation of food but that it was possible to get people to break down their barriers and cooperate.

Obviously the crowd had come together from lots of people hearing that Jesus was in town. For this number to have come together, many would have come from long distances. They would have brought food with them to sustain them on the way and for as long as they needed during the time they expected to hear Jesus' teachings. But when it came to food time, none of them wanted to admit to having food nor producing it for fear of no-one else having come with food. The individuals could hardly stuff themselves seeing their neighbour go hungry. So no-one dared show what they had. That is, until . . . Jesus encouraged a few to get out their food from pockets and bags and pass it round . . . and as it was passed round, on the way everyone could bring out their food pretending it was the food that Jesus had got the first ones to produce at the beginning.

So in this way, Christianity was a really practical philosophy, a way of thought to guide the follower's thinking and micro-decisions. Jesus and the Father of Thought, God, was not just another fairy story . . .

The problem was that these first Christians were singled out, because giving a more intelligent and enlightened view of life, they were the serpents in the Garden of Eden to those whose heaven was found only in the comfortable following of rules . . .

Is this an helpful explanation?

Best wishes

David P

revtonynewnham

Hi

A true Christian is someone who can say - and mean "Jesus is Lord".  It's as simple and as complex as that - think about the implications of that word "Lord".  "Jesus is Lord" is probably the earliest Christian creed.

That said, it's easy to try and ignore the miracles - but theologically, the virgin birth was necessary, as was the resurrection.  I regard them as non-negotiable - even if they can't be explained by science.  I also disagree about the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and it's partner miracle, the feeding of the 4,000.  I think they are miracles of creation - the people had been out for longer than anticipated - although the "sharing" explanation does make a valid moral point.

For clarification, the Levites were descendants of Levi - one of the original tribes, and served as workers in the temple, a branch of the family stemming from Aaron formed the hereditary priesthood of Israel.  Pharisees were, as Wikipedia puts it:- " were at various times a political party, a social movement, and a school of thought among Jews during the Second Temple period beginning under the Hasmonean dynasty (140–37 BCE) in the wake of the Maccabean Revolt."  Some were scribes (i.e. teachers & enforcers of the law) - and they in general, didn't like their somewhat privileged position challenged - at least as they appear in the Gospels.

Every Blessing

Tony

MusingMuso

#11
QuoteHi!

You pose an interesting set of points.

Belief in a biologically virgin birth? Perhaps not. Stories about Jesus living after being Crucified? Certainly - but most certainly the ideas that he gave surviving long after the physicality of his earthly existence.

Increasingly I'm coming to realise the function of the nature of the Epic Story and the Epic Storyteller keeping alive teachings and wisdom, sometimes stressing something a little here and there, sometimes embellishing some aspect to the delight or better understanding of his audience. In the nature of the Gospels having been written down rather later than the time of the events to which they related, the stories that we read will have come through that process.

So what is important to them? As you say, to the people who follow these Gospels, what is important to those who consider themselves Christian specifically?

To me, personally, the understanding of a property common to all the universe, common to all matter and to all living things and people which we call God, the Creator. So as to avoid anthropomorphic confusion, I like to thing of the Creator as a force, the Construction Force or Force or Thrust of Creation.

Beyond that, what is special about Jesus' teachings? The Jews had a problem, not dissimilar to that of some branches of Islam today: the teachers believed that you got to heaven by following rules - rules written by Scribes and interpreted by Levites (and no doubt someone here will fill in for rusty memories like mine where the Pharisees come in . . . ). In contrast, Jesus taught us that we have to learn not what the universe (including us does), not merely rules, but how it works, how it operates, behaves - and why.

Learning how the universe works enables us to fit in with the universal laws of creation that made us and all that we experience: it teaches us not what to do but how to think, and therefore how to adapt appropriately in different situations.

Thus "Love Thy God", he said, "and your neighbour as yourself" and "that's all you have to do". It's a way of thought and a way of life. As for being all one needs to do, it's a tall order and a hard task to follow.

To the early Christians, therefore, being a Christian was not about following rules but doing more than that and as living examples manifest telling the good news of how it was possible to get people to live in harmony with others.

One of my favourite stories from the Gospel is that of the feeding of the five thousand. The miracle was not of magic creation of food but that it was possible to get people to break down their barriers and cooperate.

Obviously the crowd had come together from lots of people hearing that Jesus was in town. For this number to have come together, many would have come from long distances. They would have brought food with them to sustain them on the way and for as long as they needed during the time they expected to hear Jesus' teachings. But when it came to food time, none of them wanted to admit to having food nor producing it for fear of no-one else having come with food. The individuals could hardly stuff themselves seeing their neighbour go hungry. So no-one dared show what they had. That is, until . . . Jesus encouraged a few to get out their food from pockets and bags and pass it round . . . and as it was passed round, on the way everyone could bring out their food pretending it was the food that Jesus had got the first ones to produce at the beginning.

So in this way, Christianity was a really practical philosophy, a way of thought to guide the follower's thinking and micro-decisions. Jesus and the Father of Thought, God, was not just another fairy story . . .

The problem was that these first Christians were singled out, because giving a more intelligent and enlightened view of life, they were the serpents in the Garden of Eden to those whose heaven was found only in the comfortable following of rules . . .

Is this an helpful explanation?

Best wishes

David P


Dear David,

What a refreshing take on the miracle of the 5,000, which is the way it was explained to me perhaps 45 years ago.

Amusingly, I recall an old priest who had seen most things in life, and had a weary look. I remember asking him about the feeding miracles, and he gazed across the church hall, where the ladies were preparing food for the Parish celebrations.

"My dear boy, when you have seen how far Miss Potts can make two tins of salmon and a bag full of breadcrumbs go, the feeding of the 5,000 is but a culinary sleight of hand."

Wonderful!

Best,

MM

MusingMuso

Quote from: revtonynewnham on October 01, 2012, 09:20:32 AM
Hi

A true Christian is someone who can say - and mean "Jesus is Lord".  It's as simple and as complex as that - think about the implications of that word "Lord".  "Jesus is Lord" is probably the earliest Christian creed.

That said, it's easy to try and ignore the miracles - but theologically, the virgin birth was necessary, as was the resurrection.  I regard them as non-negotiable - even if they can't be explained by science.  I also disagree about the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and it's partner miracle, the feeding of the 4,000.  I think they are miracles of creation - the people had been out for longer than anticipated - although the "sharing" explanation does make a valid moral point.

For clarification, the Levites were descendants of Levi - one of the original tribes, and served as workers in the temple, a branch of the family stemming from Aaron formed the hereditary priesthood of Israel.  Pharisees were, as Wikipedia puts it:- " were at various times a political party, a social movement, and a school of thought among Jews during the Second Temple period beginning under the Hasmonean dynasty (140–37 BCE) in the wake of the Maccabean Revolt."  Some were scribes (i.e. teachers & enforcers of the law) - and they in general, didn't like their somewhat privileged position challenged - at least as they appear in the Gospels.

Every Blessing

Tony


Dear Tony,

I don't regard the Virgin Birth as remotely necessary, and the evidence is distinctly iffy. It is also a re-working of an older religious idea....possibly Indian?  The Ressurection makes sense in either an actual or a philosophical way, so it needn't be a mircale.

As for feeding miracles, I once bought a wand, which didn't do what it said on the box. I threw it to one side as a twelve year old, but later ressurected it as a baton. Since then, I've had a magical control over people.


So it's true....mircales are everywhere.


Best,

MM

David Pinnegar

Hi!

I appreciate that undeifying Christ is possibly hurtful to some but in fact the ability to unfairystory Jesus may be key to demonstrating to atheists the value of Jesus' teachings and to break down differences with other religions.

A virgin birth can be an expression of birth to a philosophically simple girl - the message being that you don't have to be educated, clever, speak posh, born in the royal household or be the son or daughter of a ruler to be a Christian - rather the reverse - in the nature of it being more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

In the course of the epic storytelling process between the time of events and the time of writing of the Gospels, the storyteller would find that the Virgin idea expressed impressionably the concept of spiritual simplicity.

As Son of God as man who follows the property of the Universe that makes all work together, which exhibits a paternal behaviour to all, and in this way makes manifest the will of God, Jesus as "God made Man", a human being becomes a greater example for all of us as to how to think to behave, rather than what rules that must be obeyed. In this way, he brings to mankind the intelligence of God, the creative constructive Law that rules the Universe, so that we too can construct and create, rather than behave as children, good or naughty.

"In the beginning was the  . . . . " - word - law - sound . . . ?

Undeification of Christ in this way brings appreciation of the greater God that Jesus asks us to follow, in the process deifying him more than can any fairy-story interpretation.

The Son of Man, born with the Idea of God, the Holy Spirit, making manifest the property of the universal Father, God actually becomes more of an example to follow, more of a teacher, one with whom we can relate and one who brings us face to face with the deeper most universal god.

In my quests I found
http://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Peace-Jesus-Christ/dp/0852071035 helpful, appearing in part online at
http://www.deepinfo.com/religion/Peace0.htm
and probably fully on
http://www.thenazareneway.com/essene_gospel_of_peace_book1.htm
http://www.thenazareneway.com/essene_gospel_of_peace_book_two.htm
http://www.thenazareneway.com/essene_gospel_of_peace_Book3.htm
http://www.thenazareneway.com/essene_gospel_of_peace_book_4.htm
which over the years I have found to contain great wisdom.

In the Gospel of Peace, I have found the shattering of the fairy-tale imagery of Christ very shocking and distressing, but recognise such wisdom in the teachings that I have found it worthwhile to contemplate further.

Perhaps there are many non churchgoers who will sympathise:
QuoteAnd though the sun was now set, they departed not to their homes. They sat round about Jesus and asked him: "Master, which are these laws of life? Rest with us awhile longer and teach us. We would listen to your teaching that we may be healed and become righteous."

And Jesus himself sat down in their midst and said: "I tell you truly, none can be happy, except he do the Law."

And the others answered: "We all do the laws of Moses, our lawgiver, even as they are written in the holy scriptures."

And Jesus answered: "Seek not the law in your scriptures, for the law is life, whereas the scripture is dead. I tell you truly, Moses received not his laws from God in writing, but through the living word. The law is living word of living God to living prophets for living men. In everything that is life is the law written. You find it in the grass, in the tree, in the river, in the mountain, in the birds of heaven, in the fishes of the sea; but seek it chiefly in yourselves. For I tell you truly, all living things are nearer to God than the scripture which is without life. God so made life and all living things that they might by the everlasting word teach the laws of the true God to man. God wrote not the laws in the pages of books, but in your heart and in your spirit. They are in your breath, your blood, your bone; in your flesh, your bowels, your eyes, your ears, and in every little part of your body. They are present in the air, in the water, in the earth, in the plants, in th e sunbeams, in the depths and in the heights. They all speak to you that you may understand the tongue and the will of the living God. But you shut your eyes that you may not see, and you shut your ears that you may not hear. I tell you truly, that the scripture is the work of man, but life and all its hosts are the work of our God. Wherefore do you not listen to the words of God which are written in His works? And wherefore do you study the dead scriptures which are the work of the hands of men?"

If the Church embraces the wider truths of the universal property of the universe that is god, and is willing to find interpretations of the parables that relate not to the magic of a conjuror at a children's party, but the way of thinking of life that enables mountains of troubles to be moved by faith, then more will find truth in the expanses of the Church and enveloping sound of the organ than the couched introspection of shrinks and anti-depressants.

Jesus asks us to give his teachings a presence in this world.

Best wishes

David P

makemoreandmore

Heard this very interesting sermon, preached last week by preacher who is 87 next year...

http://tabernaclecardiff.org/result/sermonresult/2986.jsp?n=95

I think it answers the question pretty adequately


David Pinnegar

Quote from: thatminidotcom on October 04, 2012, 09:48:40 PM
Heard this very interesting sermon, preached last week by preacher who is 87 next year...

http://tabernaclecardiff.org/result/sermonresult/2986.jsp?n=95

I think it answers the question pretty adequately

Hi!

I'm sorry but when I clicked on it my laptop speakers weren't able to be loud enough to hear in detail what he was saying. He appeared to be talking about "grace". What is the knub of his argument?

Recently I have been directed to great thinkers of the past, Bertrand Russell, Thomas Aquinas who, regarding God as a verb rather than a nown is in my limited view certainly on track . . . but all seem to look for a prime mover, a mind, a being, something still always within the concept of what we can comprehend as something capable of anthropmophisation. This appears to be the trouble. In explaining to people who have not had the privilege yet of introduction, the image of God in such a way is very helpful, as God behaves in a paternal manner. But after a certain distance the analogy breaks down and concepts more abstract lead increasingly in the direction of Buddhism.

Perhaps if we take Jesus' alleged teaching as quoted above
QuoteSeek not the law in your scriptures, for the law is life, whereas the scripture is dead. I tell you truly, Moses received not his laws from God in writing, but through the living word. The law is living word of living God to living prophets for living men. In everything that is life is the law written. You find it in the grass, in the tree, in the river, in the mountain, in the birds of heaven, in the fishes of the sea; but seek it chiefly in yourselves. For I tell you truly, all living things are nearer to God than the scripture which is without life. God so made life and all living things that they might by the everlasting word teach the laws of the true God to man. God wrote not the laws in the pages of books, but in your heart and in your spirit.
we get to something as transcendental as Buddhism . . . and perhaps even more.

Formerly I have written in these threads about God as some sort of creation of order out of disorder, and this has been refined by the idea that even compost is part of the process . . . but there is possibly an even simpler way to look at "the beginning" and all that is "created" which harmonises physics, chemistry, biology, jigsaw puzzles, animal behaviour leading to the human, theology and the quest for God.

If one imagines a primordial soup, at whatever level, of fundamental particles, of atomic components, of atoms, of molecules, of organic structures leading to proteins, of proteins necessary to find themselves in situations where they can replicate, of organism, of living matter, of species . . . then at whatever level it is, two objects come together and either they interact or they don't.

If two objects come together and they don't interact, the same is whether they don't interact or whether they reject, the outcome is the same. The objects go off somewhere else to see if they interact with anything else, and if they don't they go off to do the same.

In contrast, if two objects come together and react and become something else, as something else it has constructed, and then goes through the same process.

Ultimately therefore, the law of the universe is that everything solid has come together as a result of this simple process. What comes together is tested in new interactions to find the most useful, the most long lasting usefulness, and the most useful outlives the less useful, a form expressed by the principle of the survival of the fittest.

It is this Law towards which Jesus consistently teaches. Love thy God is not the anthropomorphised name of Yahweh, Allah, Siva or Zorastra, Apollo, Zeus or Jupiter, but this one fundamental Law that is God, that behaves as God, that is the father of the universe and creates and punishes accordingly, choosing creation, putting together over unconstruction and uselessness, fundamental to all and is the one God.

It is this to which religions, aspects of religions and interpretations can be put to the mirror to be tested.

"Love thy God" . . . the law the source of all that exists . . . and bring this into the human realm by "loving thy neighbour" as oneself. In Buddhism this is reflected in the concepts of compassion and alleviation of suffering.

In living, it is an active living process and this is why Jesus always requires one to test oneself, to go through the process as a constant striving rather than in any way merely to find satisfaction in merely obeying the rules, paying service to the dead words of text, praying as the Pharisees did sticking to the detail of the rules as the Levites, and in this way becoming a freedom of the mind, understanding the process and adapting to new situations accordingly. It is in this way that a mind based philosophy such as Christianity and Buddhism succeeds where prescribed systems fail.

Best wishes

David P

David Pinnegar

Hi!

I read today a story from India which leaves no reason for parochialism in the name of our religion leading us to God, nor in the recognition of God's people no matter if they follow a different path:

QuoteMr.Kalayanasundaram worked as a Librarian for 30 years. Every month in his 30 year experience / service, he donated his entire salary to help the needy. To meet his own needs, he worked as a server in a hotel.

He even donated his pension amount of about ten lakh rupees to the needy. He thus became the first person in the world to spend his entire earnings on a social cause.

In recognition of his service, the American government honored him with the 'Man of the Millennium' award. He received a sum of Rs 30 crores as part of this award which he distributed entirely for the needy as usual.

Another friend on Facebook today posted the following response from President Obama to a letter received from a young lad complaining that he was being teased in the playground for having two Dads:

Quote"I am so glad that you agree two men can love each other because I have two dads and they love each other, but at school kids think that it's gross and weird, but it really hurts my heart and feelings.... If you were me and you had two dads that loved each other and kids at school teased you about it, what would you do?"

And the President's response:

Dear Sophia,

Thank you for writing me such a thoughtful letter about your family. Reading it made me proud to be your president and even more hopeful about the future of our nation.

In America, no two families look the same. We celebrate this diversity. And we recognize that whether you have two dads or one mom what matters above all is the love we show one another. You are very fortunate to have two parents who care deeply for you. They are lucky to have such an exceptional daughter in you.

Our differences unite us. You and I are blessed to live in a country where we are born equal no matter what we look like on the outside, where we grow up, or who our parents are. A good rule is to treat others the way you hope they will treat you. Remind your friends at school about this rule if they say something that hurts your feelings.

Thanks again for taking the time to write me. I'm honored to have your support and inspired by your compassion. I'm sorry I couldn't make it to dinner, but I'll be sure to tell Sasha and Malia you say hello.

Sincerely,
Barack Obama

If the places where organs are commonly at home are going to be relevant to today's population, the religion needs to focus on the needs not of the Religion, nor on the survival of the Church as a man made organisation, but focussing on what God is. What is God? Not 1+1=1+1 - that's merely unconstruction, dead and not alive . . . but 1+1=2 . . . Love.

(Just as MM said it was in some posts some time ago . . . :-) )

Best wishes

David P

makemoreandmore

Just accept people are religious. That doesn't make them Buddhists, Christians, Mormons or whatever.

Why oh why are some people so concerned to make Christianity comply with their own philosophies. The world was awash with religion  in New Testament days, and its awash with it today.

With respect, I doubt that the worshippers of Diana would have been too bothered with the wooly philosophy being muted in the name of Christianity today, but the clear preaching of the apostles, like that of Christ Himself provoked a profound reaction.

If one can tolerate everything except the simple gospel that was proclaimed then and still, in some places, now, be that as it may. Those that love the Lord, His gospel, his Name, Person and Day will just get on building the 'wall', as Nehemiah did of old, because what sets Christianity apart from every single religion in the world, that ever was, or will be, is that God reveals Himself to man. It is not what man does for his god, but what God does for His man/woman.

As the apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesian Christians, who had turned from idols to serve the Living God, 'Saved by Grace alone, through faith. And that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.'

Yes, if one only heard that one word 'Grace' from the 80+ year old preacher, he might realise that this one single word separates Christianity from everything else.

David Pinnegar

#18
Quote from: thatminidotcom on November 06, 2012, 02:20:28 PMYes, if one only heard that one word 'Grace' from the 80+ year old preacher, he might realise that this one single word separates Christianity from everything else.

Hi!

Yes - I understand and respect completely what you are saying from the conventional views from our nurturing . . . but it such separation won't now work.

The reason is because the world has got smaller and weapons more potent, invasive and intrusive and we collectively face destruction. The reason why separation does not work is that it splits apart, it is not loving our neighbour as ourselves central to Jesus' teaching, and is part of the unconstruction function of the universe. Those who choose to unconstruct do so: it is their free will to do so, but in doing so they get used as compost for a more living process to occur with the materials released by the composting.

We have the option of being God's seed bearing crop, or compost. The world is currently going the way of compost.

Sectarianism - we are different and we are proud of it - is a religious arrogance - separation for the reason that our faith is better has always led the ways that have caused wars. It is far from Grace.

It is the reason that has turned many away from the church because, in the light of the Indian I quoted above, the superiority is vacuous. The Church must obey the universal teaching of Christ of the law of the universe, or suffer the consequences if it chooses obstinately not to construct, to bring people, peoples and nations together.

The teachings of Christ are there to bring peoples together. The universal law has been stated by many. The talents of those that bury them in the ground will be taken away and given to those that use them most to greatest effectiveness.

Best wishes

David P

David Pinnegar

Hi!

I am currently in the process of writing about the living spirit in contrast to the dead word, and am particularly grateful to MM for his careful guidance in responses to me.

The purpose of this is that people are turning their backs on the Church as irrelevant and, as the Archibishop of Canterbury has commented, a mere leisure option rather than a life force. Organ appreciation is dying with it.

I am very much seeking the nature of God, and in a manner common to all religions as well as to physics, with the final conclusion from the mathematical process of creation that God is Love - thanks particularly to MM for making me puzzle about things repeatedly.

However, the book is not particularly to be "my" book, it's one trying to gather people and peoples together.

In order to avoid war, and wars which will be ever so much more destructive, we have to find Love not just in our family members but in our neighbours - and now our neighbours are the other side of the world.

I did an experiment in the South of France to make Christianity happen in a sector disenfranchised by society. The local priest refused to do anything, and in fact it will probably end up being a formerly godless friend and a Muslim friend who will succeed where the Cristian refused to go.

If anyone would like to assist and would like a working draft in progress to peruse I would be happy to put it on email.

My wife kindly directed me to "Life of Pi" by Yann Martel about a young lad who is simultaneously Hindu, Christian and Muslim. It is a parable on many levels about finding God, but also an interesting observation about which story the human wants to hear.

Best wishes

David P