Christianity in the modern world.

kelly1 · 14-02-2008 10:34am

monosharp wrote: »

This is what turned me away from Christianity and every time I hear it I'm glad I did.

Would you mind elaborating please? Which part of it did you have difficulty with?

monosharp · 14-02-2008 12:10pm

kelly1 wrote: »

Would you mind elaborating please? Which part of it did you have difficulty with?

The unwavering belief that your right and everyone else is following the wrong path. And even if they come out of it OK its because Jesus took pity on them.

PDN · 14-02-2008 12:31pm

monosharp wrote: »

The unwavering belief that your right and everyone else is following the wrong path. And even if they come out of it OK its because Jesus took pity on them.

Ah yes, the dreadful belief that one's own opinion is right, and therefore that contradictory opinions are wrong.

So you, monosharp, would appear to be saying that your non-exclusive views are right. Therefore you disagree with Noel because his contradictory opinion (exclusivity) is therefore ... er ... wrong?

kelly1 · 14-02-2008 12:39pm

monosharp wrote: »

The unwavering belief that your right and everyone else is following the wrong path. And even if they come out of it OK its because Jesus took pity on them.

It's simple logic. Some religion must be right or they're all wrong. This idea that we're all going to heaven/nirvana/happy hunting ground and that God doesn't care who or what we worship is nonsensical. God would surely favour of a religion that is in accordance with His truth and that worships Him and makes atonement to Him as He wishes. Other religions would necessarily be displeasing to Him.

monosharp · 14-02-2008 1:00pm

PDN wrote: »

Ah yes, the dreadful belief that one's own opinion is right, and therefore that contradictory opinions are wrong.

So you, monosharp, would appear to be saying that your non-exclusive views are right. Therefore you disagree with Noel because his contradictory opinion (exclusivity) is therefore ... er ... wrong?

I never said it was wrong, I said its what turned me away from Christianity.

I don't know if Noel's opinion is right or wrong.

monosharp · 14-02-2008 1:10pm

kelly1 wrote: »

It's simple logic. Some religion must be right or they're all wrong.

I couldn't agree less.

I firmly believe that large swaths, if not all parts, of many religions are completely man-made.

Are you suggesting a Catholic will go to heaven because he picked the right religion while a Protestant won't because he does things slightly differently ? Or maybe the Jews have the right religion and they're going to heaven because they don't eat Pork which any divine being will tell you is an immediate ticket to eternal damnation.

This idea that we're all going to heaven/nirvana/happy hunting ground and that God doesn't care who or what we worship is nonsensical. God would surely favour of a religion that is in accordance with His truth and that worships Him and makes atonement to Him as He wishes. Other religions would necessarily be displeasing to Him.

I wonder if Jesus returned tomorrow would he even recongise Christianity.

kelly1 · 14-02-2008 1:17pm

monosharp wrote: »

I couldn't agree less.

I firmly believe that large swaths, if not all parts, of many religions are completely man-made.

Are you assuming that all religions are man made or do you allow for the the possiblity that there is one true divinely-revealed religion (excluding the false/deluded prophets).

monosharp wrote: »

Are you suggesting a Catholic will go to heaven because he picked the right religion while a Protestant won't because he does things slightly differently ? Or maybe the Jews have the right religion and they're going to heaven because they don't eat Pork which any divine being will tell you is an immediate ticket to eternal damnation.

I really don't want to get into a debate about who will be saved and who won't - only God know that. I'm interested primarily in getting at the truth. There are so many contradiction between religions and even within Christianity that they can't all be true.

monosharp wrote: »

I wonder if Jesus returned tomorrow would he even recongise Christianity.

I'm sure Jesus is apalled at the state of the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. That doesn't make Christianity wrong just because followers behave in an unchristian manner.

coffee_cake · 14-02-2008 1:23pm

kelly1 wrote:

Other religions would necessarily be displeasing to Him.

Well thats ok if other gods take in their own followers.

monosharp · 14-02-2008 3:12pm

kelly1 wrote: »

Are you assuming that all religions are man made or do you allow for the the possiblity that there is one true divinely-revealed religion (excluding the false/deluded prophets).

My minds open to anything.

I really don't want to get into a debate about who will be saved and who won't - only God know that. I'm interested primarily in getting at the truth. There are so many contradiction between religions and even within Christianity that they can't all be true.

My minds open to anything and I'm willing to learn about anything and constantly relearn.

I'm not saying I think there's one true religion and I'm not saying there's not because its impossible to know. I'm not saying Christianity is wrong and I'm not saying its right. Christianity has many great and worthwhile traits, the same as Islam, Buddhism and many many others.

Your talking about the differences between religions and then saying they can't all be true. I'm asking why not ?

Most religions core belief (as far as I'm aware anyways) -> Be a good person.

Are you saying that a divine being like God (if he exists) will care about something like ... oh I don't know. If we eat meat on a friday or if we eat cows or if we don't confess our sins or if we use condoms or if we spend every sunday worshipping him through prayer or if we call him Ala or God.

If you take a Christian and a Muslim, at the end of the day what's the difference ? They both pray to God, they both have it as part of their religion to be a good person.

I'm sure Jesus is apalled at the state of the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. That doesn't make Christianity wrong just because followers behave in an unchristian manner.

I never said Christianity was wrong.

Moreso I'd say almost every deity in every religion would be appalled at the state of their churches and followers today if they existed and returned.

Imagine Jesus and the Pope having a chat.

Jesus -> Hang on a minute there boss, what's all this condom/abortion business about ? And what's the deal with spending every Sunday morning talking to God when you could be out there helping people or being a better person. And what's your problem with gay people ? Didn't I say love thy neighbour ? Did I say "love thy neighbour unless he's X, Y or Z" ?

philologos · 14-02-2008 4:31pm

monosharp wrote: »

Imagine Jesus and the Pope having a chat.

Jesus -> Hang on a minute there boss, what's all this condom/abortion business about ? And what's the deal with spending every Sunday morning talking to God when you could be out there helping people or being a better person. And what's your problem with gay people ? Didn't I say love thy neighbour ? Did I say "love thy neighbour unless he's X, Y or Z" ?

Christ said to love your neighbour but at the time he didn't do away with religious laws. You can love someone who doesn't follow the Christian faith you know? Infact you could argue that telling people about the Christian faith is or if it isn't should be an act of compassion.

PDN · 14-02-2008 4:35pm

monosharp wrote: »

Imagine Jesus and the Pope having a chat.

Jesus -> Hang on a minute there boss, what's all this condom/abortion business about ? And what's the deal with spending every Sunday morning talking to God when you could be out there helping people or being a better person. And what's your problem with gay people ? Didn't I say love thy neighbour ? Did I say "love thy neighbour unless he's X, Y or Z" ?

Given that Jesus commanded His disciples to go into the world and preach the Gospel to every creature, I reckon that He would be more likely to tell the Pope off for not encouraging his adherents to do the very kind of witnessing that you seem to find irritating.

I think it would take a very active imagination for one to imagine Jesus telling the Pope that he shouldn't worry too much about killing babies.

philologos · 14-02-2008 5:04pm

PDN wrote: »

I think it would take a very active imagination for one to imagine Jesus telling the Pope that he shouldn't worry too much about killing babies.

50 million will be killed this year, and 1 billion have been killed since it was first legalized. It boggles my mind to see how people regard this behaviour as acceptable.

MeditationMom · 18-02-2008 12:54am

A little reminder that we are in the Buddhist forum here, and maybe a good place to ask - as I don't know for sure - where Buddhism stands on abortion.

From what I have heard the Dalai Lama say regarding many sexual issues - homosexuality, promiscuity, abortion, marriage, etc - he frames it not around the idea of religious or ethical dogma, right and wrong, sin and sinner, but frames it in the light of human dignity, and as always, in the light of compassion.

Many issues cannot be reduced to "this behavior is right or wrong" with the Bible, or any other scripture, as "munition". What is wrong in one case is right in another, without this being "wishy-washy" thinking, but wisdom. Wisdom to know the difference between right and wrong in the light of human dignity and in the light of compassion. Jesus himself demonstrated this again and again. Hanging out with prostitutes, lepers, adulterers, tax collectors, the lowest of the lowest, and preaching on the sabbath - committing one "sin" after another according to his religion. He went against his day's "only religion" to teach this wisdom - only to have his followers create yet another "only religion". What a waste. Pearls before swine.

Everything depends on the circumstances - and it takes tremendous humility and wisdom to know what is right and wrong at any time. It is not something one can look up in a book. Life is a sequence of trials and errors that teach us, if we pay attention. And it is the joy of being human - this infinite variety, and our individual and unique interaction with it all. For those who have no wisdom there are laws - religious or otherwise - and they do serve a purpose, no doubt. But one has to grow up.

The scriptures are there to inspire us and make us contemplate the inner life. They are full of wisdom and also full of added non-sense, not said by the original teachers, or said 2000 or 5000 years ago in a very different context and bound to be misunderstood today. Therefore they are not to be followed blindly or used as a justifications for rude, arrogant, patronizing, or even worse kinds of behavior.

In Buddhism we talk about maintaining a Beginner's Mind. This means an open, awake mind of "I don't know",and an inner attitude of kindness, compassion, and humility.

Húrin · 18-02-2008 1:19am

MeditationMom wrote: »

Take a magic marker and highlight every sentence in the bible YOU agree with100%. After you do that, do the same to any other scriptures of other religions you come across. Contemplate the things you have highlighted.

Despite popular belief The Bible is not a litany of moral instructions. It doesn't have quite a lot you can simply "agree or disagree" with. This sentence by sentence approach is also reductionist. I would recommend a more holistic method. This will not be quick but it will deliver.

MM, your method also assumes that the individual is the source of morality - a seemingly consumerist conceit, when in fact God is the source.

The faith you need is not faith in any religion. That is always what the church wants you to do. The faith you need - and this you can take from Christianity, or me, or many others, is this: "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free!" Trust that, whatever it is you don't understand will be revealed to you, bit by bit, as is best for you. Keep an attitude of trust, love, expectancy, open mindedness and open hearted-ness towards existence, life, the universe, God, yourself. Spend time is nature, in silence. Listen.

I agree.

Jesus left his church, his faith, and its elders behind also!

Not quite true. Jesus referred to the Old Testament frequently. He did indeed leave the Jewish elders and institutions behind, because they had distanced themselves from God.

Here is one of my favorite quotes:

By Ramana Maharshi: "No one doubts that he exists, though you may doubt the existence of God. If you find out the truth about yourself and discover your own source, this is all that is required."

Is this as egocentric as it sounds? Western interpretations of Eastern faiths all too often seems to serve as a consumerist alternative to real spirituality. This insults both western and eastern religion.

Húrin · 18-02-2008 1:40am

monosharp wrote: »

Imagine Jesus and the Pope having a chat.

Jesus -> Hang on a minute there boss, what's all this condom/abortion business about ? And what's the deal with spending every Sunday morning talking to God when you could be out there helping people or being a better person. And what's your problem with gay people ? Didn't I say love thy neighbour ? Did I say "love thy neighbour unless he's X, Y or Z" ?

I find the idea that celebrating our fellowship as Christians on Sundays is exclusive of helping other people (which we should be doing every day anyway) to be offensive.

"Becoming a better person" has implications you probably don't realise, like egocentrism, judgement and self-righteousness.

Matthew 12
9Going on from that place, he went into their synagogue, 10and a man with a shriveled hand was there. Looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, they asked him, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"

11He said to them, "If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out? 12How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."

13Then he said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." So he stretched it out and it was completely restored, just as sound as the other.

Christianity is more than an ethical code. If it only were that, it would be the same as all other religions.

Jakkass wrote: »

50 million will be killed this year, and 1 billion have been killed since it was first legalized. It boggles my mind to see how people regard this behaviour as acceptable.

Don't imply that abortion is a product of legalisation. It happened before legalisation, and the reasons why it is done go much deeper than law.

Asiaprod · 18-02-2008 9:26am

MeditationMom wrote: »

A little reminder that we are in the Buddhist forum here,

Indeed, yes, we are. Lovely post by the way.

In Buddhism we talk about maintaining a Beginner's Mind. This means an open, awake mind of "I don't know",and an inner attitude of kindness, compassion, and humility.

Nail on the head. You wrapped our Charter here up into a single sentence:)
This is an interesting debate, long over due here, but I would ask all to keep the Charter in mind.
Asia

Archeron · 18-02-2008 12:38pm

MeditationMom wrote: »

In Buddhism we talk about maintaining a Beginner's Mind. This means an open, awake mind of "I don't know",and an inner attitude of kindness, compassion, and humility.

This is exactly what first drew me to this forum to try and get ideas as to how to explore my own ideas of spirituality.

kelly1 · 18-02-2008 1:58pm

MeditationMom wrote: »

Many issues cannot be reduced to "this behavior is right or wrong" with the Bible, or any other scripture, as "munition". What is wrong in one case is right in another, without this being "wishy-washy" thinking, but wisdom. Wisdom to know the difference between right and wrong in the light of human dignity and in the light of compassion.

Do you think God's will comes into it? In Christianity, something is only wrong if it's wrong in God's eyes.

MeditationMom wrote: »

Jesus himself demonstrated this again and again. Hanging out with prostitutes, lepers, adulterers, tax collectors, the lowest of the lowest, and preaching on the sabbath - committing one "sin" after another according to his religion. He went against his day's "only religion" to teach this wisdom - only to have his followers create yet another "only religion". What a waste. Pearls before swine.

Jesus condemded those who adhered to the law for the law's sake while ignoring the spirit in which it was made. He also founded a Church (Mt 16:18) and told the apostles to go out and baptize and preach the good news and teach the truth. He also gave them the authority to forgive sins. He did not do away with religion but brought in a new coventant and established a Church to continue his saving work on earth after His ascension.

MeditationMom wrote: »

For those who have no wisdom there are laws - religious or otherwise - and they do serve a purpose, no doubt. But one has to grow up.

Couldn't this be interpreted to mean that you cut God out of the picture and become you own master?

MeditationMom wrote: »

The scriptures are there to inspire us and make us contemplate the inner life. They are full of wisdom and also full of added non-sense, not said by the original teachers, or said 2000 or 5000 years ago in a very different context and bound to be misunderstood today

Can you give examples of "added nonsense"? How do you know nonsense was added? This is often used by people to justify sin. e.g. Jesus didn't condemn homosexual acts explicity but St. Paul did so some choose to ignore Paul not realizing that Paul had the authority to teach morality.

MeditationMom wrote: »

In Buddhism we talk about maintaining a Beginner's Mind. This means an open, awake mind of "I don't know",and an inner attitude of kindness, compassion, and humility.

Some peoples minds are so open, that they believe anything including contradictions. Of course kindness, compassion and humility are vital but these virtues alone don't save your soul. Salvation comes from Jesus Christ alone.

Asiaprod · 18-02-2008 2:28pm

kelly1 wrote: »

Some peoples minds are so open, that they believe anything including contradictions.

A little to close to the edge there kelly1. Respect.
Asia

PDN · 18-02-2008 3:02pm

Húrin wrote: »

I find the idea that celebrating our fellowship as Christians on Sundays is exclusive of helping other people (which we should be doing every day anyway) to be offensive.

Not only offensive but also manifestly untrue. Research consistently indicates that the more often a person attends worship services, the more they give to charity and also the more time they devote to volunteering for community service. Even if you discount charitable giving to churches, and volunteerism in religious causes, this still holds true. Regular church goers (in fact, I believe this is also true of those who participate in non-Christian forms of worship), on average, donate more to purely secular charities than non-churchgoers. They also commit more time to purely secular community volunteerism than do non-churchgoers.

philologos · 19-02-2008 2:19pm

Húrin wrote: »

Don't imply that abortion is a product of legalisation. It happened before legalisation, and the reasons why it is done go much deeper than law.

I didn't imply but it certainly opened the floodgates to a much further level.

H&#250 wrote: »

Christianity is more than an ethical code. If it only were that, it would be the same as all other religions.

Exactly right, it's the "more" that compels us to follow the ethical code.

maitri · 19-02-2008 2:56pm

Kelly1 wrote:

Hello Maitri, my answer to this is that some good done for the love of God is far more valuable in the sight of God than the same thing done purely out of human goodness. Christ said that what we did for/to the least of His brethern was done for/to Him.

Hey Noel!

So he said indeed. But didn’t he actually also say (according to the Bible) that people would not know they did it for him? That they would say: “When did we see you hungry or thirsty or in need of clothes?”

Jakkass wrote:

Also, when one does a good deed to another, I always try to remember that this is God working through mankind, any appending of these good deeds to a particular person can in some cases lead to arrogance

Hey J!:)

I believe I can see the good point of this point of view.

Jakkass wrote:

But to answer the main point of your question, I believe good deeds that come through Christians are more likely to repeat themselves than good deeds that come as a result of no faith at all.

I'm still curious: Is this your personal experience or is it an opinion based on ideology?

And BTW, are you not perhaps forgetting Jesus’ story about the Good Samaritan?

Jakkass wrote:

The point is not that non-Christians cannot do good, it's that if you are Christian you have more power to do good if you ask it from the Spirit.

And you are sure the Spirit only works through Christians? (Not through Hindus like Gandhi? Or Jews like Anne Frank? Etc…)

PS to kelly1: About Jesus telling he is the "Way the Truth and the Life".
1 John 4:8 says that “God is Love”: "He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love."

If God is Love and Jesus is God, as Christians believe, doesn’t that really mean that Love is the “Way the Truth and the Life"?Which (if I’m not wrong) is not very far from what MeditationMom means when she talks about meditation being the Way the Truth and the Life”

philologos · 19-02-2008 6:58pm

maitri wrote: »

I'm still curious: Is this your personal experience or is it an opinion based on ideology?

And BTW, are you not perhaps forgetting Jesus’ story about the Good Samaritan?

The Good Samaritan refers to a group who were put to the edges of society. We welcome anyone of any walk of life to take part in Christianity. (Galatians 3:28)

maitri · 20-02-2008 2:30pm

Jakkass wrote: »

The Good Samaritan refers to a group who were put to the edges of society.

This is true and it is also true they were despised. However there were also religious differences as the Samaritans did not agree with the Jews on important points, e.g. The Samaritans claimed - and still claim - that their worship (as opposed to mainstream Judaism) is the true religion of the ancient Israelites, predating the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.

They believed (and still believe) that Mount Gerizim, not Jerusalem, is the one true sanctuary chosen by Israel's God. They also have a significantly different version of the Ten Commandments (for example, their 10th commandment is about the sanctity of Mt. Gerizim). Samaritans also rejected Jewish codes of law and had another view on priesthood.

Jakkass wrote: »

We welcome anyone of any walk of life to take part in Christianity.

Only as long as they accept all your main dogmas, I believe.

philologos · 20-02-2008 2:54pm

maitri wrote: »

This is true and it is also true they were despised. However there were also religious differences as the Samaritans did not agree with the Jews on important points, e.g. The Samaritans claimed - and still claim - that their worship (as opposed to mainstream Judaism) is the true religion of the ancient Israelites, predating the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.

They believed (and still believe) that Mount Gerizim, not Jerusalem, is the one true sanctuary chosen by Israel's God. They also have a significantly different version of the Ten Commandments (for example, their 10th commandment is about the sanctity of Mt. Gerizim). Samaritans also rejected Jewish codes of law and had another view on priesthood.

Only as long as they accept all your main dogmas, I believe.

I'm not sure what you are suggesting Christians should do here. However we should be concious to making people feel welcome in our churches and in our communities even if they do not believe in the same way we do. However that said and done, I cannot and will not deny that Jesus and the Christianity that he brought to the world is the truth according to my belief system.

Hm, as for accepting dogma, that's rather difficult considering that even certain churches differ (albeit in a minor sense) in relation to dogma. However, I think it is important to guide people towards the Christian path instead of forcing them to. It is the choice of the person whether to accept Biblical teachings or not, I don't see how we are excluding people from Christianity by offering them a choice. Every religion comes with key beliefs. It would be like me claiming to follow Judaism but the next day eating a bacon sandwich. It's a choice whether to accept or reject it.

maitri · 21-02-2008 2:56pm

Jakkass wrote: »

I'm not sure what you are suggesting Christians should do here. However we should be concious to making people feel welcome in our churches and in our communities even if they do not believe in the same way we do.

Hey J

I am sorry having ben rather unclear here. I'll try to explain my point better:
You said that you believe good deeds that come through Christians are more likely to repeat themselves than good deeds that come as a result of no faith at all, and I suggested that the story of the Good Samaritan might tell that this is not what Jesus was teaching. Then you said that the Samaritans were kept out of society while everybody is welcomed into Christianity, and I replied that even so the Samaritans also differed from the Jews in central beliefs. My point being: IMHO by telling the story of the Good Samaritan Jesus is reminding his listeners that people with different religious beliefs who are despised by the "true believers" can do real good and sometimes indeed do more good than the "pious". However there are always different ways of interpreting a story (at least if it is any good;)) and other people might read this story another way of course...

BTW, I would still be happy to know if it is your personal experience that good deeds that come through Christians are more likely to repeat themselves than good deeds that come as a result of no faith at all.

Jakkass wrote: »

However that said and done, I cannot and will not deny that Jesus and the Christianity that he brought to the world is the truth according to my belief system.

I am very happy about the last part of the sentence: "according to my belief system". It reminds me of a quote from a Buddhist sutra:

"If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth.
(…)
"If a person likes something ... holds an unbroken tradition ... has something reasoned through analogy ... has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to, having pondered views,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth." (Majjhima Nikaya 95).

philologos · 21-02-2008 10:28pm

Hm, I must say you pose an interesting question. One should look further to the question that Jesus was raising. He was teaching the Pharisees about who was their neighbour, or who the Mosaic Law was directed to when it said "Love your neighbour as yourself". Traditionally this had been confined to Jewry only, but Jesus challenged them by extending it to all mankind including those that many Jews despised.

Yes, Jesus was saying that it is possible for people with differing belief systems to assist and help each other in loving nature. However at the same time I believe that the Holy Spirit which was given to us through the teachings of Christ and His Apostles enables us to carry on with good deeds through God's power. This is the stance of Pauline theology really. We are made righteous no matter who we are to God through faith in Him, by the faith in Him we are compelled by the Holy Spirit to carry out good deeds in His name. This is how it has been for me by experience also. Perhaps other people believe other things...

Hmm, I don't see this really as "safeguarding" as such. I do not feel compelled to force my beliefs on anyone. If anyone shows an interest in my religion I will answer them, and ask them about how they feel about it among other things. However apart from that I feel Christianity has rather stable roots in the world and particularly in Ireland at the minute. By no means do I suggest that I know it all, but of what little I do know of God, I have been satisfied spiritually by it, and hopefully I will come to know Him more through further reflection. It's not an issue of and us versus them attitude for me, we are all one under Christ Jesus.

maitri · 22-02-2008 3:40pm

Thanks for your kind answer Asia

, and sorry that it has taken me so long answering your post. I have been pondering about it, not beeing quite sure what are my own views about this.

Asiaprod wrote: »

Because Buddhism requires total surrender of the ego. You did your best and you learned what you were meant to learn from the situation. Once you had learned the lesson, you no longer required the situation, so it resolved itself.

Maybe this is true. It makes sense. Yet I usually don't really know what I have learned. Only that I'm left with the feeling that the process of both struggeling with all my might and giving up when I see I can't fix things seems to be very valuable in some strange way. Maybe it has something to do with acceptance - accepting the initial resistance in me about the situation as well as the "giving up"... I don't know if this makes sense.

Asiaprod wrote: »

As I said before, Buddhism is gentle and compassionate, it is also hard and sever. We must kill our own ego, only through this path can things turn out right.

I don't know about killing the ego. To me it seems like an aggressive approach - too aggressive for me, at least.
Right now I feel like treating poor ego with compassion, it is already so full of self-hatred and self judgement which can easily turn to hatred or at least judgment of others.

Maybe my way (as I see it right now) would be more a way of relaxing and even accepting the ego (sometimes that would even mean accepting that the ego can't accept the ego, if you see what I mean). Because, as I see it, even if I like it or not ego is part of what is right now.

Asiaprod wrote: »

Any time we have problems we normally deal with them from the "I" perspective. The key to success is to also look at them through the "You" perspective.

The "you" perspective seems very important if we want to have real contact with other people, and I think we all - on some level - long for that.

I am happy that you say that it's important "to also look at them through the "You" perspective", since I feel a need for the "I" perspective as well, a need to be taken seriously by myself perhaps ...;)

(You see, I remember a time where I tried always letting other peoples needs come before my own because that was part of my ideology at that time and I didn't think my own needs were important - it made me ill, nervous and depressed, and I felt it made my contact with others less genuine and spontaneous and I kind of "dried out" in a way that I don't do when I have learned to listen to my own needs.)

Maybe there is also some level of contact even beyond "you" and "I"?

Asiaprod wrote: »

Only when we can see the situation from the other persons perspective can we effect change

You're probably right. I would say, when we make real contact from the heart, real understanding, change will take place by itself.

maitri · 22-02-2008 3:57pm

Thanks for your answer J. It is very interesting to learn about the way you are thinking. Than you!

Jakkass wrote: »

One should look further to the question that Jesus was raising. He was teaching the Pharisees about who was their neighbour, or who the Mosaic Law was directed to when it said "Love your neighbour as yourself". Traditionally this had been confined to Jewry only, but Jesus challenged them by extending it to all mankind including those that many Jews despised.

Interesting. Love your neighbour as yourself - does this perhaps also mean "see yourself in your neighbour"?

Jakkass wrote: »

We are made righteous no matter who we are to God through faith in Him

What does "faith in Him" mean to you? Is it a feeling of trust? Of some quality of Goodness perhaps? Of Meaning? Unity?

Jakkass wrote: »

Hmm, I don't see this really as "safeguarding" as such.

In my Norwegian translation it actually says "then you keep to the truth" instead of "To this extent one safeguards the truth".

Jakkass wrote: »

I do not feel compelled to force my beliefs on anyone.

That's a rare and admirable quality!

Jakkass wrote: »

I have been satisfied spiritually by it, and hopefully I will come to know Him more through further reflection. It's not an issue of and us versus them attitude for me, we are all one under Christ Jesus.

I am glad you have found something that works for you.:)

Have to run.

M.

Archeron · 22-02-2008 7:17pm

maitri wrote: »

The "you" perspective seems very important if we want to have real contact with other people, and I think we all - on some level - long for that.

I am happy that you say that it's important "to also look at them through the "You" perspective", since I feel a need for the "I" perspective as well, a need to be taken seriously by myself perhaps ...;)

(You see, I remember a time where I tried always letting other peoples needs come before my own because that was part of my ideology at that time and I didn't think my own needs were important - it made me ill, nervous and depressed, and I felt it made my contact with others less genuine and spontaneous and I kind of "dried out" in a way that I don't do when I have learned to listen to my own needs.)

Maybe there is also some level of contact even beyond "you" and "I"?

Hi Maitri!
Could the total loss of ego lead to a blinding of oneself to the "I" perspective, and possibly lead to the symptoms you list above? Is it possible, to look at (or through??) the "you" perspective to the point where doing good unto others overrules the need to do good for oneself?
Would it be considered a negative part of the ego to even ask that question?

Christianity in the modern world.

Comments