Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Christianity

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

> Dear Roger,

>

> I saw your post where you had mentioned the "darkside of Christianity".

Could

> you (or any one else) please elaborate a bit with some examples? I am

aware

> of a very narrow-minded side of Christianity, the Spanish Inquisition and

> such but am not aware of any modern day darkside. I am just wondering how

> Christianity got singled out of the religions? I mean, I've heard of

plenty

> of hucksters in every religion.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Paul Ladendorf

 

I single out Christianity because: a) in my community/state/country it's the

prevailing power: it elects presidents in the US b) I know many Christians &

have read about Christianity c) the legacy of Christianity deeply affects

the western world.

 

If we're looking for examples regarding evil or negativity, Hitler & Stalin

probably come to mind for most people. However, their influence was very

limited when compared with Christianity.

 

Modern day examples of Christian evil?

 

The fundamentalists believe that Jesus Christ is going to "save" them.

Doesn't this cause people to give away all hope of spiritual self

empowerment? Why should you consider anything resembling a spiritual quest

when some deity is going to do it all for you? Are there any similarities

here to some negative forms of Guru worship?

 

The fundamentalists believe that people are inherently sinful. Well, why

should we be surprised that events like the Columbine massacre happen here

in Littleton Colorado if all people are inherently evil? If we see people as

inherently evil, does this preconception lock us into negativity attitudes?

Does this preconception breed negativity?

 

Seems to me that Fundamentalist Christianity breeds intolerance &

superiority. Intolerance is a foundation for violence, in fact, intolerance

seems to be a contributing factor behind the Columbine massacre.

 

Study the horror of Christian history. Are the beliefs & philosophies that

contributed to a horrific past still embraced by Christianity today?

 

Christians believe that Jesus was the only Son of God. They believe that

Jesus was God & was the only being ever capable of this attainment. This

would seem to block God Realization, how can a Christian become God Realized

if Jesus was the only one?

 

Do these attitudes automatically place a believer in conflict, potentially

deadly conflict, with those who believe differently? Is Christianity still

triggering violence in some countries through aggressive self-righteous

missionary campaigns?

 

I don't want to put focus on WW-II, Hitler, or Christianity. But do these

examples have some bearing on the present? Aren't the ethical questions the

same as the questions facing our lives today?

 

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

 

Roger Isaacs <RIsaacs

Monday, April 10, 2000 2:33 PM

Re: Christianity

 

>> Dear Roger,

>>

>> I saw your post where you had mentioned the "darkside of Christianity".

>Could

>> you (or any one else) please elaborate a bit with some examples? I am

>aware

>> of a very narrow-minded side of Christianity, the Spanish Inquisition and

>> such but am not aware of any modern day darkside. I am just wondering how

>> Christianity got singled out of the religions? I mean, I've heard of

>plenty

>> of hucksters in every religion.

>>

>> Thanks,

>>

>> Paul Ladendorf

>

>I single out Christianity because: a) in my community/state/country it's the

>prevailing power: it elects presidents in the US b) I know many Christians &

>have read about Christianity c) the legacy of Christianity deeply affects

>the western world.

>

>If we're looking for examples regarding evil or negativity, Hitler & Stalin

>probably come to mind for most people. However, their influence was very

>limited when compared with Christianity.

>

>Modern day examples of Christian evil?

>

>The fundamentalists believe that Jesus Christ is going to "save" them.

>Doesn't this cause people to give away all hope of spiritual self

>empowerment? Why should you consider anything resembling a spiritual quest

>when some deity is going to do it all for you? Are there any similarities

>here to some negative forms of Guru worship?

>

>The fundamentalists believe that people are inherently sinful. Well, why

>should we be surprised that events like the Columbine massacre happen here

>in Littleton Colorado if all people are inherently evil? If we see people as

>inherently evil, does this preconception lock us into negativity attitudes?

>Does this preconception breed negativity?

 

Only a few years ago, the theologian and writer, Mathew Fox, was silenced by the

Catholic Church in which he is also an ordained priest. His crime is that he

espouses a creationist view of man's nature that asserts man's nature is

essentially created good. He argues that the sinful nature of man has been

over-emphasized by church doctrine in order to bolster the need for the church's

help and intervention as the provider's of absolution and forgiveness. He is

well worth reading.

>

>Seems to me that Fundamentalist Christianity breeds intolerance &

>superiority. Intolerance is a foundation for violence, in fact, intolerance

>seems to be a contributing factor behind the Columbine massacre.

>

>Study the horror of Christian history. Are the beliefs & philosophies that

>contributed to a horrific past still embraced by Christianity today?

>

>Christians believe that Jesus was the only Son of God. They believe that

>Jesus was God & was the only being ever capable of this attainment. This

>would seem to block God Realization, how can a Christian become God Realized

>if Jesus was the only one?

 

Well, the few saints who are assumed to have attained some sort of union with

God may be matched by the few acknowledged "realizers" in eastern religions.

Rarity is not exclusive to Christianity.

>

>Do these attitudes automatically place a believer in conflict, potentially

>deadly conflict, with those who believe differently? Is Christianity still

>triggering violence in some countries through aggressive self-righteous

>missionary campaigns?

>

>I don't want to put focus on WW-II, Hitler, or Christianity. But do these

>examples have some bearing on the present? Aren't the ethical questions the

>same as the questions facing our lives today?

 

Sad, but true, that the actual roots of anti-semitism may be traced to around

200-300 AD when in the struggles to make Christianity the predominant state

religion, the Jews were characterized as Christ-killers and rejectors of the

Messiah. Actual persecutions and deaths took place then at a scale not quite

approaching Hitler's, but the anti-semitism beliefs incorporated into

Christianity may be traced to that time. The wars with the Moslems and Arabs

really do have more to due with territory long disputed and fought over, tho the

Moslem religion also believes it has the one and only true God.

 

There are many, many modern predjudices still existing that have come down thru

history and were more exploited by Hitler than actually created by him alone.

 

Glo

>

>Roger

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>------

>Special Offer-Earn 300 Points from MyPoints.com for trying @Backup

>Get automatic protection and access to your important computer files.

>Install today:

>http://click./1/2344/5/_/520931/_/955391599/

>------

>

>//

>

>All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights,

perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back

into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean,

all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does

not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is.

Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee

relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into

It Self. Welcome all to a.

>

>To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at

> www., and select the User Center link from the

menu bar

> on the left. This menu will also let you change your

subscription

> between digest and normal mode.

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

> >R: The fundamentalists believe that people are inherently sinful. Well,

why

> >should we be surprised that events like the Columbine massacre happen

here

> >in Littleton Colorado if all people are inherently evil? If we see people

as

> >inherently evil, does this preconception lock us into negativity

attitudes?

> >Does this preconception breed negativity?

>

> Gloria: Only a few years ago, the theologian and writer, Mathew Fox, was

silenced by the

> Catholic Church in which he is also an ordained priest. His crime is that

he

> espouses a creationist view of man's nature that asserts man's nature is

> essentially created good. He argues that the sinful nature of man has been

> over-emphasized by church doctrine in order to bolster the need for the

church's

> help and intervention as the provider's of absolution and forgiveness. He

is

> well worth reading.

 

Isn't there a saying 'you will reap whatever you sow'? Certainly those

thoughts we hold dear (if we hold thoughts at all) have a great impact on

our lives. Too bad these observations have not been applied to this

destructive lie about man's essential character being sinful.

 

I've heard really good things about Mathew Fox.

> >R: Seems to me that Fundamentalist Christianity breeds intolerance &

> >superiority. Intolerance is a foundation for violence, in fact,

intolerance

> >seems to be a contributing factor behind the Columbine massacre.

> >

> >Study the horror of Christian history. Are the beliefs & philosophies

that

> >contributed to a horrific past still embraced by Christianity today?

> >

> >Christians believe that Jesus was the only Son of God. They believe that

> >Jesus was God & was the only being ever capable of this attainment. This

> >would seem to block God Realization, how can a Christian become God

Realized

> >if Jesus was the only one?

>

> G: Well, the few saints who are assumed to have attained some sort of

union with

> God may be matched by the few acknowledged "realizers" in eastern

religions.

> Rarity is not exclusive to Christianity.

 

It's somewhat remarkable to see marvelous Saints in the Christian tradition,

since the outward doctrine seems to deny realization. I've wondered why

Christians haven't considered: "I'm not a saint, yet saints exist. How do I

become a saint?" Seems like an obvious line of inquiry. Might procedures

exist that would encourage realization?

 

Jesus seems to point in this direction in Matthew when he says something

like 'it's not enough to keep the commandments outwardly (I believe he used

the example of lust), one must also avoid even the thought of impropriety'.

Many different styles of meditation have the potential to assist one to

stillness. There, one might realize the higher meaning behind "be still and

know that I am God".

> >R: Do these attitudes automatically place a believer in conflict,

potentially

> >deadly conflict, with those who believe differently? Is Christianity

still

> >triggering violence in some countries through aggressive self-righteous

> >missionary campaigns?

> >

> >I don't want to put focus on WW-II, Hitler, or Christianity. But do these

> >examples have some bearing on the present? Aren't the ethical questions

the

> >same as the questions facing our lives today?

>

> G: Sad, but true, that the actual roots of anti-semitism may be traced to

around

> 200-300 AD when in the struggles to make Christianity the predominant

state

> religion, the Jews were characterized as Christ-killers and rejectors of

the

> Messiah. Actual persecutions and deaths took place then at a scale not

quite

> approaching Hitler's, but the anti-semitism beliefs incorporated into

> Christianity may be traced to that time. The wars with the Moslems and

Arabs

> really do have more to due with territory long disputed and fought over,

tho the

> Moslem religion also believes it has the one and only true God.

>

> There are many, many modern predjudices still existing that have come down

thru

> history and were more exploited by Hitler than actually created by him

alone.

>

> Glo

 

I'm glad you mention these origins of anti-semitism. I've heard that some of

the first mass killings of Jews were committed by Christian Crusaders headed

to the middle east to slaughter Moslems. Very interesting to consider that

Christian doctrine is at least partially responsible for the holocaust.

Tragic & shocking!! Especially considering that Jesus was a Jew!

 

"moslem religion...only true God". Jesus spoke the Aramaic language.

Apparently Jesus refers to God the Father using the name "Allah" in Aramaic.

Wow! Where have we gone wrong?! A place to look for this would be Neil

Douglas-Klotz interesting book "Prayers of the Cosmos, meditations on the

aramaic words of Jesus".

 

No doubt the memory of Jesus has provided hope to mankind. Yet most of what

we know as Christianity is the shadow of a Roman cult, a direct product of

Roman politics. Few Christians seem to understand that many/most of their

beliefs came out of those "ecumenical councels" initiated by the Emporer

Constantine back around 325 A.D. Would we trust even today's politicians to

lead us to truth? How about Constantine, a Roman general apparently guilty

of murdering his own family members?

 

Love ya Glo,

 

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Roger,

 

Since you are speaking about a religion from the outside, as you say:

> I know many Christians &

>have read about Christianity

 

it might be better to take statements of doctrine from sources within the

religion. You are making some serious errors here.

 

Notably:

>Christians believe that Jesus was the only Son of God. They believe that

>Jesus was God & was the only being ever capable of this attainment.

 

Such views should never be attributed to Christians in general. They

certainly don't hold up in the light of scripture.

 

John tells us that at Jesus' last supper with his disciples, he spoke to

them at length. Among other things, he said, "In that day you will know

that I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and I in you." He also

said, "The things that I have done you will do also, and more, because I go

to the Father."

 

Paul called Jesus "the elder brother of many," and he wrote: "The entire

creation is groaning in labor with the birth of the sons of God."

>This

>would seem to block God Realization, how can a Christian become God Realized

>if Jesus was the only one?

 

You will find that many Christians have spoken and written about union with

God.

 

Love,

Dharma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dharma wrote:

> Hi Roger,

>

> Since you are speaking about a religion from the outside, as you say:

>

> > I know many Christians &

> >have read about Christianity

>

> it might be better to take statements of doctrine from sources within the

> religion. You are making some serious errors here.

 

If you say that I am failing to discuss this complex topic in an impartial

way, I won't resist. But I'm not ready take on your label "serious errors".

If you say I am off topic for this list that I'll also consider that.

 

Which source do you consider official for the religion? I can send you

copies of fundementalist christian brochures or enlist opinions from a

number my acquaintences to confirm my statements. Maybe we should be careful

trying to nail down an official source, acknowledging the heritage of

bloodshed surrounding this question.

 

I've been hearing for all of my life, from friends & acquaintences,

churches, billboards, TV etc... that Jesus is going to save me, that I'm a

sinner, that Jesus is the only Son of God, that he died to somehow save my

soul etc...

 

These view are the views of the majority of organizations, are they not? Do

you deny that such views exist? Do you think such views are an insignificant

minority?

> Paul called Jesus "the elder brother of many," and he wrote: "The entire

> creation is groaning in labor with the birth of the sons of God."

 

What chapter & verse is this? I did a search and did not find it.

> >This

> >would seem to block God Realization, how can a Christian become God

Realized

> >if Jesus was the only one?

>

> You will find that many Christians have spoken and written about union

with

> God.

>

> Love,

> Dharma

 

I expect you'll find many Christians who have spoken & written about union

with God who were then officially expelled from their organizations for

speaking heresy.

 

I have no intent to offend those who find inspiration through Jesus, and I

count myself among those. However, I don't see any value in denying the dark

side of Christianity. Doesn't denying the existance of negativity/evil

compound illusion?

 

Seems pretty obvious that Jesus, or whomever has authorship for statements

attributed to him, was indeed one with God. I wonder who was he really? What

did he really say? What was his intent? I'm not sure the various Christian

traditions really shed much light on these questions.

 

Is there any reason to hold Jesus above other realized saints?

 

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hello Roger,

>> Since you are speaking about a religion from the outside, as you say:

>>

>> > I know many Christians &

>> >have read about Christianity

>>

>> it might be better to take statements of doctrine from sources within the

>> religion. You are making some serious errors here.

>

>If you say that I am failing to discuss this complex topic in an impartial

>way, I won't resist. But I'm not ready take on your label "serious errors".

 

Not being part of the religion, you wouldn't know. But that's not important...

>Which source do you consider official for the religion?

 

For Christianity as a whole? Only the Bible, especially the New Testament,

the part written after Jesus. But even then, it's important to say what

translation you're quoting from.

 

After that, material from well-known and recognized saints, mystics,

theologians, scholars, etc. But it's important to specify their background

or what part of Christianity they speak from and/or for. Even saints may

disagree in the terminology they choose to use and in their own

orientations and personal "bents." So it is meaningful to know what

background they speak from.

 

After that, material of an official nature or "recognized" status from any

denomination, but you must say what denomination it comes from. The World

Atlas used to list 29 denominations of Baptists alone.:)) I have no idea

how many different denominations there are within all of Christianity.

>I can send you

>copies of fundementalist christian brochures

 

Aside from the Catholic/Protestant distinction, the major division among

Christians is between the fundamentalist and the liberal denominations...

and that is a spectrum, not a simple black-and-white matter. In general,

all the more fundamentalist denominations have more in common with each

other than they do with the more liberal denominations. They are sometimes

referred to as Southern and Northern, but that's a generalization, of

course.

 

I grew up in the Presbyterian church, but that doesn't tell you much except

that I was a Protestant. There are a number of Presbyterian denominations.

Mine was the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. It would be termed a

Northern, liberal denomination, and it has more in common with Northern

Baptists, liberal Baptists, than it does with Southern Presbyterians.

 

So fundamentalist Christian brochures do not represent the views and

beliefs of all Christians... they may represent what most fundamentalist

Christians think... or possibly just what one denomination espouses. So

it's necessary to name the source.

>than or enlist opinions from a

>number my acquaintences to confirm my statements.

 

Opinions from acquaintances are fairly meaningless, unless you have an

acquaintance who happens to be an authority on something in particular...

and then you'd have to specify that and his background and affiliation.

Polls are of some interest, if they are done in a rigorous manner and

either the sample is widespread or the sample is specified... but they are

about as far as you can get from any "official" or recognized source.

>I've been hearing for all of my life, from friends & acquaintences,

>churches, billboards, TV etc... that Jesus is going to save me, that I'm a

>sinner, that Jesus is the only Son of God, that he died to somehow save my

>soul etc...

>

>These view are the views of the majority of organizations, are they not?

 

You seem to be saying that you've been hearing the views of fundamentalist

Christians, which gives a limited view of Christianity, simply because you

are hearing from only one end of the spectrum. No - they are not the views

of the majority. I don't know what you could call a majority of

organizations... I don't even know how many denominations there are. :)

>> Paul called Jesus "the elder brother of many," and he wrote: "The entire

>> creation is groaning in labor with the birth of the sons of God."

>

>What chapter & verse is this? I did a search and did not find it.

 

I quoted from memory without looking it up. I'll give you two

translations... but I couldn't resist scanning more of it, so I'll put it

on another form. :))) If you have questions about the original words used,

just ask... I have the Greek here too.

>> You will find that many Christians have spoken and written about union

>with

>> God.

>I expect you'll find many Christians who have spoken & written about union

>with God who were then officially expelled from their organizations for

>speaking heresy.

 

Some have... and some have been called saints.

>I have no intent to offend those who find inspiration through Jesus, and I

>count myself among those. However, I don't see any value in denying the dark

>side of Christianity.

 

You seem to be identifying fundamentalist Christian doctrine with "the dark

side of Christianity." I have to strongly disagree with that... I may

disagree with them on many points, but I know there are many good and

loving people among the fundamentalists, who have helped many people. In

the end, doctrine is not important. Jesus said his followers would be

known by love. To me, anyone who loves his fellow man has a place among

the saints.

>Seems pretty obvious that Jesus, or whomever has authorship for statements

>attributed to him, was indeed one with God. I wonder who was he really? What

>did he really say? What was his intent? I'm not sure the various Christian

>traditions really shed much light on these questions.

 

The best sources are the gospels, those books specifically about him and

his life and teachings. (They were called in Greek the _Euaggelion_, the

Good Message or Good News. Greek _eu_ means good, and _aggelos_ (the

double g is pronounced ng) is angel or messenger. So the evangelists were

the good messengers or those who brought the good message. The word gospel

is from Old English... good "spiel.")

 

There are four gospels included in the canon of the New Testament. The

fourth gospel stands alone... it is the most Gnostic of the gospels and

has always been the favorite of mystics. We know the first three used

common sources... much material is repeated. And we know these books have

been edited. So I don't think we can place too much importance on any one

statement of his as it stands now in the gospels. Nevertheless, his

message comes through loud and clear.

 

I once went through all four gospels and made notes on exactly what he

said. I found his teachings quite clear without depending on any one line

or passage.

 

According to Mark, he first appeared in public at the Jordan River, where

he was baptized by John, his cousin. Then he retreated into the desert for

a time. Later he came into Galilee, the northern kingdom, and began

preaching. His message was: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God

is at hand. Transform your hearts and minds, and trust the good news!"

 

The word used for "the time" means something like "the right time,in the

fullness of time." The word for "is fulfilled" is _peplerotai_... if you

know the word "pleroma," you understand that one. But the key word is the

one I've translated as "transform your hearts and minds" - _metanoeite_!

_Nous, noia_ is "mind, understanding"; the verb "noeo" means "to

understand, to reflect upon, to consider"; and the verb _metanoeo_ means

"to change your mind." It is often translated as "repent," but I think it

has more the flavor of transformation of the mind. Metanoia!

>Is there any reason to hold Jesus above other realized saints?

 

That is a strange question. Jesus himself would not hold himself above

others. At his last supper with his disciples, he got down on his knees

and washed their feet of the dust of the road. He said, "The first shall

be last, and the last shall be first."

 

He told them just as clearly as he could what transformation means. He

said, "If you had really known me, you would have known the Father. From

now on, you do know him and have seen him." And later he said, "In that

day you will know that I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and I in

you."

 

Love,

Dharma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

> >If Jesus is the "son of God" and the children are the "children of

God",

> >that would place Jesus & the children on the same footing? That is: the

> >children are the sons/daughters of God, just as Jesus?

 

Greg:

> That's right. It's like the I AM THAT I AM, not only as God's name, but

> also as the name equally of anyone who utters the words.

>

> But then there's orthodox Christianity's Trinitarian analysis. The

> mysterious identity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Humans

are

> to treat all members of the Trinity as God, and we stand in slightly

> different relation to each member. The notion of a trinity of these

three,

> and the idea that Jesus is truly one of this trinity, "of the same

> substance" as God, doesn't leap out from the pages of the Bible. It was

an

> issue voted upon later in one of the Councils. Trent or Nicea, maybe you

> or Dharma can fill that detail in.

 

I've heard speculation that the hindu sat/chit/ananda is a different name

for father/son/holy spirit. Perhaps the trinity is a basic truth of creation

having somewhat different descriptions in different cultures. But the

trinity appears to be something that is beyond intellectual understanding,

perhaps direct experience is required to solve the mystery.

 

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

At 11:46 AM 4/24/00 -0600, Roger Isaacs wrote:

>

>I've heard speculation that the hindu sat/chit/ananda is a different name

>for father/son/holy spirit. Perhaps the trinity is a basic truth of creation

>having somewhat different descriptions in different cultures. But the

>trinity appears to be something that is beyond intellectual understanding,

>perhaps direct experience is required to solve the mystery.

 

Yes, there are tables of correspondences between the trinitarian elements

of various religions. I agree about the Trinity being beyond intellectual

understanding. In pentacostal Christianity, for example, there is very

little teaching about the trinity, and people are quite un-intellectual

about it. But much direct experience in the churches and in peoples'

lives. Also, they suffer from almost no problem with the mysteriousness of

the Trinity and other things that bug philosphers and theologians.

 

--Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Greg:

 

I am so glad you are sharing some of your pentecostal experience. It is

refreshing to me to reclaim all religious experience as acceptable and

"rational" even when it is expressed in forms that may be contrary to our

comfort level; to harvest from each where I find affinity and to accept what

is unintelligible to me as, nevertheless, intelligible and "meaningful" to

others.

 

Love, Kristi

 

At 02:07 PM 4/24/00 -0400, you wrote:

>At 11:46 AM 4/24/00 -0600, Roger Isaacs wrote:

>

>>

>>I've heard speculation that the hindu sat/chit/ananda is a different name

>>for father/son/holy spirit. Perhaps the trinity is a basic truth of creation

>>having somewhat different descriptions in different cultures. But the

>>trinity appears to be something that is beyond intellectual understanding,

>>perhaps direct experience is required to solve the mystery.

>

>Yes, there are tables of correspondences between the trinitarian elements

>of various religions. I agree about the Trinity being beyond intellectual

>understanding. In pentacostal Christianity, for example, there is very

>little teaching about the trinity, and people are quite un-intellectual

>about it. But much direct experience in the churches and in peoples'

>lives. Also, they suffer from almost no problem with the mysteriousness of

>the Trinity and other things that bug philosphers and theologians.

>

>--Greg

>

>

>

>------

>Get paid for the stuff you know!

>Get answers for the stuff you don't. And get $10 to spend on the site!

>http://click./1/2200/5/_/520931/_/956599595/

>------

>

>//

>

>All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights,

perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside

back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than

the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness.

Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is

where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal

Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously

arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a.

>

>To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at

> www., and select the User Center link from

the menu bar

> on the left. This menu will also let you change your

subscription

> between digest and normal mode.

>

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Kristie Shelloner <orleans

>...

> But that is a bit much to ask children to understood....simpler for them

to

> know that they are the just as beloved of God as his Chosen Son....

---

> Dear Greg:

>

> I am so glad you are sharing some of your pentecostal experience. It is

> refreshing to me to reclaim all religious experience as acceptable and

> "rational" even when it is expressed in forms that may be contrary to our

> comfort level; to harvest from each where I find affinity and to accept

what

> is unintelligible to me as, nevertheless, intelligible and "meaningful" to

> others.

>

> Love, Kristi

 

Thanks for your comments Kristie. And Thanks to you too Greg. I have a

friend who is a Pentecostal Christian and that relationship is a challenge

for me, and your comments help.

 

I was reading Paul Brunton last night, I'll take his comments and try to

link them to Barry Long's terminology although I've never heard Barry make

such a link to the trinity and so my comments are presumptuous.

 

"The Father" is ultimate "Mind" [PB] or "God OUT OF Existence" [bL].

The

"Father" is totally devoid of any characteristics, Genesis 1:2, "without

form, and void".

 

"The Son" is "World Mind" [PB] or "God IN Existence" [bL]. The "Son"

is all

of creation as the thought of God.

 

"The Holy Ghost/Spirit" is the "Overself" [PB]. The transcendental Spirit in

each individual.

 

PB's book something like "Notebooks:Enlightened Mind / Divine Mind" has

lengthy fascinating commentary on this. http://www.lightlink.com/larson/

---

 

Jesus was one with God, God OUT OF existence, and God IN existence, but this

was a realization in consciousness. To say that the outer form of Jesus or

the personality of Jesus in the world was the "son of God" is absolutely

ridiculous. To say Jesus was the "only son of God" is to idolize the faded

distorted memories of his personality.

 

There is virtually no difference here between an idol as a "graven image" or

an idol in thought. Both divert the holders attention out into material

phenomena away from inner realization of truth in stillness.

 

When we elevate anything material or specific to the status of "idol" this

places us in conflict. Conflict because we search for God outwardly where in

fact the Kingdom is within. And conflict because when any particular form is

worshipped, we automatically place ourselves in conflict with other forms

having different characteristics.

 

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Amen....Love, Kristi

 

At 09:16 AM 4/25/00 -0600, you wrote:

>Kristie Shelloner <orleans

>>...

>> But that is a bit much to ask children to understood....simpler for them

>to

>> know that they are the just as beloved of God as his Chosen Son....

>---

>> Dear Greg:

>>

>> I am so glad you are sharing some of your pentecostal experience. It is

>> refreshing to me to reclaim all religious experience as acceptable and

>> "rational" even when it is expressed in forms that may be contrary to our

>> comfort level; to harvest from each where I find affinity and to accept

>what

>> is unintelligible to me as, nevertheless, intelligible and "meaningful" to

>> others.

>>

>> Love, Kristi

>

>Thanks for your comments Kristie. And Thanks to you too Greg. I have a

>friend who is a Pentecostal Christian and that relationship is a challenge

>for me, and your comments help.

>

>I was reading Paul Brunton last night, I'll take his comments and try to

>link them to Barry Long's terminology although I've never heard Barry make

>such a link to the trinity and so my comments are presumptuous.

>

>"The Father" is ultimate "Mind" [PB] or "God OUT OF Existence" [bL].

The

>"Father" is totally devoid of any characteristics, Genesis 1:2, "without

>form, and void".

>

>"The Son" is "World Mind" [PB] or "God IN Existence" [bL]. The "Son"

is all

>of creation as the thought of God.

>

>"The Holy Ghost/Spirit" is the "Overself" [PB]. The transcendental Spirit in

>each individual.

>

>PB's book something like "Notebooks:Enlightened Mind / Divine Mind" has

>lengthy fascinating commentary on this. http://www.lightlink.com/larson/

>---

>

>Jesus was one with God, God OUT OF existence, and God IN existence, but this

>was a realization in consciousness. To say that the outer form of Jesus or

>the personality of Jesus in the world was the "son of God" is absolutely

>ridiculous. To say Jesus was the "only son of God" is to idolize the faded

>distorted memories of his personality.

>

>There is virtually no difference here between an idol as a "graven image" or

>an idol in thought. Both divert the holders attention out into material

>phenomena away from inner realization of truth in stillness.

>

>When we elevate anything material or specific to the status of "idol" this

>places us in conflict. Conflict because we search for God outwardly where in

>fact the Kingdom is within. And conflict because when any particular form is

>worshipped, we automatically place ourselves in conflict with other forms

>having different characteristics.

>

>Roger

>

>

>

>------

>Avoid the lines and visit avis.com for quick and easy online

>reservations. Enjoy a compact car nationwide for only $29 a day!

>Click here for more details.

>http://click./1/3011/5/_/520931/_/956676303/

>------

>

>//

>

>All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights,

perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside

back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than

the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness.

Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is

where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal

Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously

arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a.

>

>To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at

> www., and select the User Center link from

the menu bar

> on the left. This menu will also let you change your

subscription

> between digest and normal mode.

>

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...