Vaishnavism vs Christianity

[suchandra]

 

This could calm down the rage attack some members of this forum have when Prabhupada said that Lord Jesus is a preacher of God consciousness and vegetarianism. According Vasu Murti Prabhu's research what we have today is not Chrisitianity but Paulianity. Below the details, "If Christians assign greater value to St.Paul's teachings over those of Jesus, then "Christianity" really is "Paulianity". Bertrand Russell referred to Paul as the inventor of Christianity."

 

Refuting 'So Much Garbage'

 

<!-- =================================== START OF MAIN AREA =================================== --> 30/Sep/07

 

by Vasu Murti Prabhu

 

10:18:16 am, Categories: Christianity

<!--noteaser--> The most-repeated argument against biblical vegetarianism I've gotten from Christians is that they think they are no longer under Mosaic Law, because the apostle Paul referred to his background as a former Pharisee and his previous adherence to Mosaic Law (with its dietary laws, commandments calling for the humane treatment of animals, etc.) as "so much garbage." (Philippians 3:4-8)

There is nothing in the synoptic gospels of Jesus, however, to suggest a fundamental break with Judaism. Jesus was called "Rabbi," meaning "Master" or "Teacher," 42 times in the gospels. The ministry of Jesus was a rabbinic one. Jesus related Scripture and God's laws to everyday life, teaching by personal example. He engaged in healing and acts of mercy. He told stories or parables—a rabbinic method of teaching. He went to the synagogue (Matthew 12:9), taught in the synagogues (Matthew 4:23, 13:54; Mark 1:39), expressed concern for Jairus, "one of the rulers of the synagogue" (Mark 5:36) and it "was his custom" to go to the synagogue (Luke 4:16).

Jesus began his ministry by teaching the multitudes not to "give what is sacred to the dogs, nor cast your pearls before swine." (Matthew 7:6) Dogs, like swine, were considered foul and unclean by the Hebrew people. (Deuteronomy 23:18; I Samuel 24:14; II Kings 8:13; Psalm 22:16,20; Matthew 7:6; Luke 16:21; Revelations 22:15) These words were used by the children of Israel to describe the neighboring heathen populations.

When sending his disciples out to preach, Jesus instructed them not to go to the gentiles, but to "go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 10:5-6) When a Canaanite woman asked Jesus to heal her daughter, he replied, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel...It is not fair to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." (Matthew 15:22-28)

Jesus regarded the gentiles as "dogs." His gospel was intended for the Jewish people. Even the apostle Paul admits that the gospel was first intended for the Jews, and that the Jews have every advantage over the gentiles in this regard (Romans 1:16, 3:1-2).

When a scribe asked Jesus what is the greatest commandment in the Torah, Jesus began with "Hear O Israel, the Lord, thy God, is One Lord." This is the Shema, which is still heard in every synagogue service to this day. "And you shall love the Lord with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength...And you shall love your neighbor as yourself," Jesus concluded.

When the scribe agreed that God is one and that to love Him completely and also love one's neighbor as oneself is "more important than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices," Jesus replied, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." (Matthew 22:36-40; Mark 12:29-34; Luke 10:25-28)

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus himself said, "Do not suppose I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill...till heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or tittle pass from the Law till all is fulfilled. Whoever, therefore, breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven...unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-20)

Jesus also upheld the Torah in Luke 16:17: "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest portion of the Law to become invalid."

Nor do these words refer merely to the Ten Commandments. Jesus meant the entire Torah: 613 commandments. When a man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Jesus replied, "You know the commandments." He then quoted not just the Ten Commandments, but a commandment from Leviticus 19:13 as well: "Do not defraud." (Mark 10:17-22)

Jesus' disciples were once accused by the scribes and Pharisees of violating rabbinical tradition (Matthew 15:1-2; Mark 7:5), but not biblical law. At no place in the entire New Testament does Jesus ever proclaim Torah or the Law of Moses to be abolished; this was the theology of Paul, a former Pharisee who never knew Jesus, but who used to persecute Jesus' followers. Paul openly identified himself not as a Jew but as a Roman (Acts 22:25-26) and an apostate from Judaism (Philippians 3:4-8)

Sometimes Christians cite Matthew 7:12, where Jesus says "Do unto others..." and this "covers" the Law and the prophets. But Jesus was merely repeating in the positive what Rabbi Hillel taught a generation earlier. No one took Hillel's words to mean the Law had been abolished—why should we assume this of Jesus?

If Jesus really did come to abolish the Law and the prophets, Simon (Peter) would not have resisted a divine command to kill and eat both "clean" and "unclean" animals (Acts 10), nor would there have been a debate in the early church as to what extent the gentiles were to observe Mosaic Law (Acts 15). When Paul visited the church at Jerusalem, James and the elders told him all its members were "zealous for the Law," and that they were worried because they heard rumors that Paul was preaching against Mosaic Law (Acts 21).

None of these events would have happened had Jesus really come to abolish the Law and the prophets. Jesus not only repeatedly upheld Mosaic Law, he justified his healing on the Sabbath by referring to commandments calling for the humane treatment of animals!

While teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath, Jesus healed a woman who had been ill for eighteen years. He justified his healing work on the Sabbath by referring to biblical passages calling for the humane treatment of animals as well as their rest on the Sabbath. "So ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham...be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath?" Jesus asked. (Luke 13:10-16)

On yet another occasion, Jesus again referred to Torah teaching on "tsa'arba'aleichayim" or compassion for animals to justify healing on the Sabbath. "Which of you, having a donkey or an ox that has fallen into a pit, will not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?" (Luke 14:1-5)

Jesus compared saving sinners who have gone astray from God's kingdom to rescuing lost sheep. He recalled a Jewish legend about Moses' compassion as a shepherd for his flock:

 

"For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost. What do you think? Who among you, having a hundred sheep, if he loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the one which is lost until he finds it? And when he has found it," Jesus continued, "he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he comes home,he calls together his friends and neighbors saying to them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost!'

 

"I say to you, likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance...there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents." (Matthew 18:11-13; Luke 15:3-7,10)

 

Paul, on the other hand, said if anyone has confidence in Mosaic Law, "I am ahead of him" (Philippians 3:4-8).

Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who said he did not come to abolish the Law and the prophets? Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who said whoever sets aside even the least of the laws demands shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17-19)?

Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who taught that following the commandments of God is the only way to eternal life (Mark 10:17-22)? Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus who said that it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest portion of the Law to become invalid (Luke 16:17)?

Paul may have regarded his previous adherence to Mosaic Law as "so much garbage," but it should be obvious by now that Jesus didn't think The Law was "Garbage"!

If Christians assign greater value to Paul's teachings over those of Jesus, then "Christianity" really is "Paulianity". Bertrand Russell referred to Paul as the inventor of Christianity.

I'm not saying Christians should all be circumcised and following Mosaic Law. The Reverend Andrew Linzey, the foremost theologian in the field of animal-human relations and author of Christianity and the Rights of Animals (1987), rejected such an approach in a 1989 interview with the Animals' Agenda.

I'm merely saying that Christianity for the past 2000 years has been based on a misunderstanding. My friend Rankin Fisher (a former Missionary Baptist minister), quoted a Methodist minister friend of his as having admitted, "We (Christians) aren't really following Jesus. We're following Paul."

[mystic_seeker]

Dear Suchandra,

 

I agree that Paul has had a tremendous influence on most Christians, probably more than Jesus (at least in some ways).... and that is troubling in my opinion.

 

I often find myself disagreeing with some of Paul's teachings though there are others I agree with. I certainly think that if Jesus returned today and examined all the division and different teachings in the various Christian churches he would not be happy. I do feel much of what Jesus truly taught has been lost or misunderstood.

 

But on one point I disagree with you. I do think Jesus came for everyone to draw them all back to God:

 

 

Matthew 28:16-20:

 

Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."(NIV)

[suchandra]

 

Dear Suchandra,

 

I agree that Paul has had a tremendous influence on most Christians, probably more than Jesus (at least in some ways).... and that is troubling in my opinion.

 

I often find myself disagreeing with some of Paul's teachings though there are others I agree with. I certainly think that if Jesus returned today and examined all the division and different teachings in the various Christian churches he would not be happy. I do feel much of what Jesus truly taught has been lost or misunderstood.

 

But on one point I disagree with you. I do think Jesus came for everyone to draw them all back to God:

 

Dear Mystic Seeker, it is ok that you say that the chosen people should not be privileged and Jesus considered all the people as God's eternal children.

To find out what Jesus actually taught would have required the tape recorder to be invented and even then the translators would be still arguing about the true meaning of this word and that word, e.g. the word "soul" or "immortal soul" is not found in the Bible. So we have to depend what Jesus taught in that way, what is revealed within the hearts of his followers today. Similiarly the mother tongue of Moses was Egyptian, when he spoke to the Hebrews, how could they properly understand?

 

 

 

 

[mystic_seeker]

 

Similiarly the mother tongue of Moses was Egyptian, when he spoke to the Hebrews, how could they properly understand?

 

 

This is a joke, correct? You are not seriously suggesting that Moses did not know Hebrew, right? Because he knew Hebrew....

[mystic_seeker]

 

e.g. the word "soul" ... is not found in the Bible.

 

The word soul (psyche, in Greek, the same Greek word that Plato and Aristotle used for soul) occurrs 58 times in the Bible.

 

See the image below.

 

[mystic_seeker]

Accidental double post

[sevabhakta]

Great article Suchandra.

 

It really sheds light on some of the contributing factors to the sham that the Roman Catholic Church with its militant Jesuit branch, and Popery has become.

 

The lust for fame adoration and distinction is very powerful, and Paul traded in his old laws, which he couldn't follow, for a new set which he made up from his speculative mind, and made sure they were all in his capacity to adhere to.

 

And he found lots of people to agree with him and set up a system for world domination to rival that of the Hebrews who had temporarily lost sight of the spirit behind their strict adherance to laws.

 

Unfortunately, the crew in Iskcon is displaying a similar tact. May Lord Krsna have mercy on all of us.

[gHari]

 

He told us to eat what God gives us.

 

[Matthew 6]

 

[...]

Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?

(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

 

But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you

. [...]

 

[suchandra]

 

This is a joke, correct? You are not seriously suggesting that Moses did not know Hebrew, right? Because he knew Hebrew....

Why a joke, it's hard to assume that the Egypt family who adopted Moses when he was an infant taught him Hebrew, remember the Hebrews were kept as slaves by the Egypts and considered as enemies.

The Bible devotes but a few sentences relevant to the subject of Moses' sense of his identity, and they are indirect. We are informed that Pharaoh had decreed that all new-born male Hebrew children be drowned. When Moses was three months old, his mother placed him in a basket, which she left among the reeds of the Nile. He was found there by Pharaoh's daughter, and was brought up in the royal palace from the time he was weaned (Ex. 1:22;2:3-10). We learn that:

 

 

Some time after that, when Moses had grown up, he went out to his kinsfolk and witnessed their toil. He saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his kinsmen. He turned this way and that and, seeing no one about, struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. When he went out the next day, he found two Hebrews fighting, so he said to the offender, "Why do you strike your fellow?" (Ex. 2:11-13)(*)

[suchandra]

 

The word soul (psyche, in Greek, the same Greek word that Plato and Aristotle used for soul) occurrs 58 times in the Bible.

 

See the image below.

 

 

This is not accepted by the most infuential Bible researchers (Watchtower Society, worldwide 60 mio publications per week), they say in the Bible we find the word ne'phesh but this ne'phesh is also used for living entity as a whole, it is not clearly defining the term soul as distinct from the material body. Additionally, the term "immortal soul", is nowhere to be found and as you say, was added as the term pneuma by the Greece philosophers like Socrates and Platon who also introduced the term psy khe', living entity as a whole, wholistic, holistic, but also not as an eternal soul who resides within a material body. And even those who consider that the Bible does use the word soul to refer to the immortal life, it does not clearly refer to that we exist eternally. This understanding is crucial, because the ultimate state of a person's eternal soul depends on whether one has a relationship with Jesus Christ, others, the heathens, are dead and gone when leaving their present bodies.

Since this is what we know about Christianity, heathens are finished forever after this lifetime, how can they have read in the Bible about the immortality of the soul? Be sure, they haven't!

In sum that is were we are today, 2007 - humanity is still totally bewildered about what actually is the soul, constitutional position, qualities, how the soul becomes covered by the subtle elements, how the soul becomes liberated.

Instead it is rather quite like that what modern scientists call the stupid stone age people were more advanced in understanding what are the qualities of the soul than humanity today, who considers advancement in terms of fancy cars, rocket driven airplanes or being a billionaire at the age of 30.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

I don't know about the soul issue with regards to the Bible/Torah, but, a week ago, I was attending services for my recently deceased Grandfather. Saturday was Yom Kippur, and my Uncle performed a service at my Grandparents' home.

 

I was amazed by how frequently the Holy Name was mentioned in the liturgy, and with what reverence the Holy Name was mentioned. I'd like to find that passage at some point and share it here.

[suchandra]

 

I don't know about the soul issue with regards to the Bible/Torah, but, a week ago, I was attending services for my recently deceased Grandfather. Saturday was Yom Kippur, and my Uncle performed a service at my Grandparents' home.

 

I was amazed by how frequently the Holy Name was mentioned in the liturgy, and with what reverence the Holy Name was mentioned. I'd like to find that passage at some point and share it here.

 

That's what I hear quite often, become tolerant, don't behave sectarian,

articles like below go in this direction.

 

God, Krishna, Allah: Tolerating them all

 

 

Ryan Brownell

Issue date: 10/3/07

 

Person 1: "So what do you believe?"

Person 2: "I believe that an all-knowing, invisible God created the universe and sent Himself as His own son to Earth to die for the sins of all humanity, only to rise from the dead three days later."

Person 1: "You have no idea what you are talking about. Everyone knows that an invisible Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe after drinking heavily and that pirates are divine beings."

Person 2: "Your logic is flawed. I think you are stupid."

In the above conversation, both parties feel the other's beliefs are ridiculous, and rightfully so. After all, logically, one being cannot be two, and anyone who saw "Pirates of the Caribbean" knows that pirates are anything but divine. Too often, religious intolerance puts up barriers that hinder intellectual growth through open discussion.

Let us take a quick overview of the beliefs of these two religions. According to the Bible, a virgin gave birth to a boy, Jesus, who had all the powers of God and actually was God himself in human form. All the while, this invisible God was still in his intangible kingdom on a different plane of existence. Jesus performed many miracles and was later killed, only to rise from the dead.

According to "The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster," there is an invisible and undetectable FSM that created the universe after drinking heavily. All evidence supporting evolution was made by the FSM to test the faith of its followers, or "Pastafarians." Also, the book says that pirates, the original Pastafarians, were divine beings whose reputation has been smeared by Christian theologians and Hare Krishnas.

A major goal of religion is to bring others into the body of its believers. To answer a question many readers may have, yes, I am a Christian, and no, I do not have an agenda, nor am I trying to convert anyone through this article. All I am attempting to do is invite anyone with a strong religious belief, or lack thereof, to be open to religious debate.

It is unlikely that you will convince someone to make a life-changing decision to believe what you do without being respectful and tolerant of what he or she already believes. This is why "street corner evangelism" is so unproductive.

Tolerance, according to dictionary.com, is "a fair, objective and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc. differ from one's own." In laymen's terms, to be tolerant is to have the ability to completely disagree with peoples' beliefs but still respect them as human beings.

A good friend of mine is a follower of Ásatrú, or Norse Paganism. We have openly expressed our views on religion to each other. Though I believe that his beliefs are incorrect, as I am sure he would say about mine, I still consider him a good friend and do not change my behavior around him because of his beliefs.

I have often told people that I am a Christian only to have them look at me as though I had an arm growing out of my head.

The freedom of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment is a great thing, and I suggest it be used to its fullest potential. I urge you, if someone tells you they worship a Flying Spaghetti Monster, Jesus Christ, the Easter Bunny or Chuck Norris, accept them as a human being, even if you do not accept their words as the gospel truth.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Chuck Norris rules!!! I just wish he'd stop dying his hair and beard.

 

 

I urge you, if someone tells you they worship a Flying Spaghetti Monster, Jesus Christ, the Easter Bunny or Chuck Norris, accept them as a human being, even if you do not accept their words as the gospel truth.

[theist]

The thread name Christianity vs. Vaisnavism sets up a false dichotomy IMO. I believe it shows either a lack of understanding of one or both for in essence I see no difference between the two.

 

Is the humbling of the self before the All-mighty Supreme Soul different for a soul who follows the instruction of Jesus Christ to do so inferior or superior to a soul who does so after hearing the same instruction of Mahaprabhu or one of his disciples?

 

Or to expand the question a bit, is a Sri Vaisnava or a Madhvaite somehow more or less a Vaisnava than a Gaudiya Vaisnava when such a soul humbles themselves before the Supreme Lord.

 

Vaisnavism is a big tent that can house every soul and their rasa with the Lord. It must be so because Vaisnavism is only found within the depths of the soul proper. It is not external to the self.

 

So maybe it would be helpful to first answer the question of what real Christianity is and then keeping in mind the principle of unity in diversity, see if real Christianity reaches far enough into the regions of the self to tap into the well spring of authentic Vaisnavism.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Mega-dittoes!!

 

The streams may flow through different lands and acquire something of the flavor of the earth through which they flow, but they come from the same All-Attractive Source.

 

 

The thread name Christianity vs. Vaisnavism sets up a false dichotomy IMO. I believe it shows either a lack of understanding of one or both for in essence I see no difference between the two.

 

Is the humbling of the self before the All-mighty Supreme Soul different for a soul who follows the instruction of Jesus Christ to do so inferior or superior to a soul who does so after hearing the same instruction of Mahaprabhu or one of his disciples?

 

Or to expand the question a bit, is a Sri Vaisnava or a Madhvaite somehow more or less a Vaisnava than a Gaudiya Vaisnava when such a soul humbles themselves before the Supreme Lord.

 

Vaisnavism is a big tent that can house every soul and their rasa with the Lord. It must be so because Vaisnavism is only found within the depths of the soul proper. It is not external to the self.

 

So maybe it would be helpful to first answer the question of what real Christianity is and then keeping in mind the principle of unity in diversity, see if real Christianity reaches far enough into the regions of the self to tap into the well spring of authentic Vaisnavism.

[suchandra]

 

The thread name Christianity vs. Vaisnavism sets up a false dichotomy IMO. I believe it shows either a lack of understanding....................................................................................................................

 

I choose that headline coz I thought it would attract new members - but again bet on the wrong horse. Everything is judged as to comfort the expectance of the Council of the Elders. And so it goes.

[gHari]

 

Mega-dittoes!!

 

The streams may flow through different lands and acquire something of the flavor of the earth through which they flow, but they come from the same All-Attractive Source.

Love that metaphor.

[theist]

 

I choose that headline coz I thought it would attract new members - but again bet on the wrong horse. Everything is judged as to comfort the expectance of the Council of the Elders. And so it goes.

 

 

Ahhhh....sure. You're just a troublemaker suchandra. I know the type. I got you pegged.

[theist]

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Murali_Mohan_das

Mega-dittoes!!

The streams may flow through different lands and acquire something of the flavor of the earth through which they flow, but they come from the same All-Attractive Source.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Love that metaphor.

 

 

 

Yeah me too. I'm gonna snatch it up when Murali ain't lookin'.

[gHari]

Well, it's not us versus them anyway. Never has been.

 

We just need them to understand that Krsna is God .... not the devil like that moron priest in Russia thinks? and the idiot jihadists of yesteryear fantacized to ratonalize their wickedness.

 

My experience in the badlands is that nonsectarian preaching benefits them the most. Of course in the process a little Hari Nama is sure to evolve. Lift them up. Don't destroy what little faith they may have ... they don't have the inclination to earn more.

[suchandra]

 

Well, it's not us versus them anyway. Never has been.

 

We just need them to understand that Krsna is God .... not the devil like that moron priest in Russia thinks? and the idiot jihadists of yesteryear fantacized to ratonalize their wickedness.

 

My experience in the badlands is that nonsectarian preaching benefits them the most. Of course in the process a little Hari Nama is sure to evolve. Lift them up. Don't destroy what little faith they may have ... they don't have the inclination to earn more.

 

Thanks so much - just the right words for saying goodbye to this topic!

[theist]

 

Thanks so much - just the right words for saying goodbye to this topic!

Not so fast suchandra. For what appears to have died has been resurrected. This is a good point at which to zero in on Christianity real (as in teaching of Christ) and Christianity apparent and Vaisnavism real and apparent. As we do that we can see if there are any points unity or divergence.

[theist]

Present day translations still offer this light into what Jesus taught His disciples on how to pray.

 

From Matthew 6:

 

Prayer

 

5"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.

 

6But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

 

7And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.

 

8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

9"This, then, is how you should pray:

" 'Our Father in heaven,

hallowed be your name,

10your kingdom come,

your will be done

on earth as it is in heaven.

11Give us today our daily bread.

12Forgive us our debts,

as we also have forgiven our debtors.

13And lead us not into temptation,

but deliver us from the evil one.^[a]'

 

 

 

14For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

---

In verse 9 the beginning of what is called the Lord's prayer we see an acknowledgement that God is a person and the one universal Father or Cause of all causes.

He also teaches that God's name is hallowed or sacred. This is Vaisnavism.

 

Verse 10 is an appeal that God's kingdom be present on earth as it is in heaven and that His will be done. This is what separates the kingdom of God from the kingdom of matter...that is the doing of God's will. This is Vaisnavism.

 

Verse 11 teaches us that we are always dependent on God for our maintence and that we need to give up our false sense of independence when approaching the Lord. This is Vaisnavism.

 

Verse 12 shows us the way to reconcile ourselves with the Lord. It is not by merely asking God to forgive us. It entails becoming the embodiement of forgiveness towards others ourselves. That is the mark of a true connection with the Supreme Lord.

 

Verse 13 is an acknowledgement that the illusory energy or "evil one" is stronger then the jiva but is under the control of the Supreme Lord and is an appeal for the Lord to save us from being further victimized and kept from Him by His external energy.

 

If one goes through the teachings of Christ in this way they will see how this shaktya-vesa avatar of Krsna taught Vaisnavism in the context of time place and circumstance most applicable to this land of Judaism.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Verse 10 is an appeal that God's kingdom be present on earth as it is in heaven and that His will be done. This is what separates the kingdom of God from the kingdom of matter...that is the doing of God's will. This is Vaisnavism.

 

Verse 11 teaches us that we are always dependent on God for our maintence and that we need to give up our false sense of independence when approaching the Lord. This is Vaisnavism.

 

Doesn't verse 11 contradict verse 10? If we truly wish the Lord's will to be done then why petition him for bread? If the Lord wills it, we will have bread.

 

 

Verse 13 is an acknowledgement that the illusory energy or "evil one" is stronger then the jiva but is under the control of the Supreme Lord and is an appeal for the Lord to save us from being further victimized and kept from Him by His external energy.

 

I prefer the phrasing I learned in Catholic High School, which was just "deliver us from evil". By saying "evil one", we are placing evil outside of ourselves. Most "evil" is the product of our own minds and not any personification of evil.

[theist]

 

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by theist

Verse 10 is an appeal that God's kingdom be present on earth as it is in heaven and that His will be done. This is what separates the kingdom of God from the kingdom of matter...that is the doing of God's will. This is Vaisnavism.

Verse 11 teaches us that we are always dependent on God for our maintence and that we need to give up our false sense of independence when approaching the Lord. This is Vaisnavism.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

Doesn't verse 11 contradict verse 10? If we truly wish the Lord's will to be done then why petition him for bread? If the Lord wills it, we will have bread.

 

 

Perhaps it is God's will that the living entities acknowledge their dependence upon Him.

Is it wrong to acknowledge one's dependence on the Lord in this way. Is it wrong to ask the Lord to please protect and maintain one?

 

If you think so then you should ask the same question of Lord Caitanya as that is precisely what he did as evidenced below.

 

 

 

 

TRANSLATION Madhya7.95

Almost like a mad lion, Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu went on His tour filled with ecstatic love and performing sankirtana, chanting Krishna’s names as follows.

 

 

TRANSLATION 7.96

The Lord chanted:

Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! he

Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! he

Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! raksha mam

Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! Krishna! pahi mam

That is, “O Lord Krishna, please protect Me and maintain Me.” He also chanted:

Rama! Raghava! Rama! Raghava! Rama! Raghava! raksha mam

Krishna! Kesava! Krishna! Kesava! Krishna! Kesava! pahi mam

That is, “O Lord Rama, descendant of King Raghu, please protect Me. O Krishna, O Kesava, killer of the Kesi demon, please maintain Me.”