Figuring Out Religion

[doodle]

Also, the gospel of Thomas which includes mostly sayings of Jesus was omitted from the bible...

With sayings like this it is pretty evident why the catholic church wanted to keep this out of the cannon...


3. Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the (Father's) kingdom is within you and it is outside you.


When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty."

[doodle]

The primary purpose of the Council was to affirm what the vast majority of the early Christians already believed about the divinity of Jesus:

The council settled, to some degree, the debate within the Early Christian communities regarding the divinity of Christ. This idea of the divinity of Christ, along with the idea of Christ as a messenger from God (The Father), had long existed in various parts of the Roman empire. The divinity of Christ had also been widely endorsed by the Christian community in the otherwise pagan city of Rome.[10] The council affirmed and defined what it believed to be the teachings of the Apostles regarding who Christ is: that Christ is the one true God in deity with the Father.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Coun ... a#Overview

Gosso, well put.  I used to think that the Council of Nicaea was a sort of Star Chamber that capriciously decided which writings they favored, and discarded the rest.  But history shows that the Christian community had already accepted the central doctrines of the Christian faith, and the council merely made the obvious choices official. 

There was quite a bit of debate in the early years of Christianity about the divinity of Jesus. Eventually the opposition was squashed and the powers that be created a religion that gave the church control over the only means to eternal salvation....what a freaking racket.

Christianity and the bible were born out of a alliance between power hungry bishops and the roman empire who had killed jesus a few centuries prior due to the annoyance and dangers that he posed to the powers that be.

[doodle]

Short lecture on Jesus...always interesting. http://youtu.be/N1qui6pC54A

[Mountaineer]

Christianity and the bible were born out of a alliance between power hungry bishops and the roman empire who had killed jesus a few centuries prior due to the annoyance and dangers that he posed to the powers that be.

I would offer the Scriptures were written over a period of a thousand plus years and verbally existed longer than that and the Jews were the ones who acutally physically asked to have Jesus killed because they could not believe his word that he was God in spite of the miracles and teachings they saw and heard; they thought he blasphemed.  The Jews were the "brain" and the Romans were merely the "tool" that killed Jesus because the Jews at that point in time were not in charge of the civil government.  In reality, I would say that we (you, me and the people who have lived and will live until the last day) are the ones who really killed Jesus - that is what taking on the sins of the world and choosing to die means from Jesus' perspective.  I would further offer that those who wish to understand Christianity and the Bible do some study from reliable and credible sources; Wikipedia is not reliable on religion, whether Christianity or one of the other major world religions, in my opinion (and that of most theologians) as the Wiki tends toward the secular in a big way.  As a corollary, if I want to understand how my car transmission works, I do not go to my Pastor to teach me.

... Mountaineer

[Kshartle]

Doodle, how do you know God didn't direct them? Just because something has no proof doesn't mean you shouldn't believe in it.

They realize they've been mentally abused into thinking their creator made them a horible creature worthy only of a lake of fire and gave them natural instincts they are supposed to go against (self-interest). They are also responsible for the actions of people who came before them. Listen, it has nothing to do with some men trying to control the minds of other men and give them position and wealth. It can't be that because God wouldn't allow that. Well.....he will in every other religion and in government and other organizations and in abusive homes and etc. etc. but not in this one.

Kshartle, I'd really like to hear more about your experience with religion.  I guess I'm asking for your agnostic/atheistic "testimony."  I know that sounds strange, but here's why I'm asking:  You obviously have very strong opinions regarding morality, violence, authority, etc.  I'd like to know a little more about your path to your present views.  I wonder this about a lot of people, but you've been quite verbose in your defense of your views, so I think it makes sense for you to share a bit of your personal journey to these beliefs. 

I mean this with all due respect.  And of course, it's a shameless plea to extend the length of this thread from a mere 20+ pages to something closer to infinity. 

Desert I'm sorry if my post was rude. I was most definately a believer, a true beleiver. i think I've covered the background fairly well so far. I didn't mean to sound nasty. It just looks so clear now to me what it all is and it's very very different than how it looked when I was in it.

[Kshartle]

Kshartle, I'd really like to hear more about your experience with religion.  I guess I'm asking for your agnostic/atheistic "testimony."  I know that sounds strange, but here's why I'm asking:  You obviously have very strong opinions regarding morality, violence, authority, etc.  I'd like to know a little more about your path to your present views.  I wonder this about a lot of people, but you've been quite verbose in your defense of your views, so I think it makes sense for you to share a bit of your personal journey to these beliefs. 

I mean this with all due respect.  And of course, it's a shameless plea to extend the length of this thread from a mere 20+ pages to something closer to infinity. 

Desert I'm sorry if my post was rude. I was most definately a believer, a true beleiver. i think I've covered the background fairly well so far. I didn't mean to sound nasty. It just looks so clear now to me what it all is and it's very very different than how it looked when I was in it.

Kshartle, I understand your post.  Growing up in a dysfunctional environment permanently shapes our lives.  And when many or most of those in that dysfunctional environment are Christians (or at least call themselves Christians), it is something we want to get as far away from as possible.  Unfortunately, everything, including Christianity, can be misused and abused. 

And I do believe that you were a true believer.  I made that transition myself, from true believer to non-believer.  I managed to stay a non-believer for more than 20 years.  And during those 20 years, I wrote things far more rude than your post above.    So no offense taken!  I'm pretty thick-skinned on this topic.

I think towards the bottom of the 2nd page I started wrting my thoughts on the topic. If you are interested and you read through please feel free to ask anything at all.

I didn't srop being a Christian because of any hypocrisy from Christians. It was from what I see as obvious inconsitencies in the entire concept and the immorality of it. God can't be inconsistent and immoral and still be God. He can't be a violator of rights and still be loving and good. If he's not good then he's not right which means he's wrong and this is all a big logic fail.

There might be a creator or group of creators. I don't know. It's seems impossible that we're alone. I look around and what I see looks like it was designed. But I don't think what is described in the Bible or other religious documents jives with reality.

[Gosso]

Short lecture on Jesus...always interesting. http://youtu.be/N1qui6pC54A

Alan Watts is presenting the standard gnostic teaching.  This is nothing new.  I was in this position for a while as well.  But the major thing that separates christianity from gnosticism is the resurrection of Jesus.  I know many are likely rolling their eyes, but this is the key difference. 

St. Paul makes it crystal clear in I Corinthians 15 that the main reason to believe that Jesus was God is because of the resurrection.  Without this then Jesus is just another failed messiah or simply a mystic.  This is one of the reasons why the Gospel of Thomas was not included, because it failed to mention the crucifixion and resurrection.

Having said that, it does require faith to believe in the resurrection.  We can study the history and collect as much evidence as possible, but eventually we must decide if we are to accept this extraordinary claim/theory.  It is easy to write it off with conspiracy theories.  But the more I looked into it the more it seemed plausible.  There isn't 100% verifiable proof, but there is enough evidence to believe that it could have happened.

I will point people towards the work of NT Wright (a leading New Testament scholar), which really helped me:
- Fr. Barron provides a great summary of NT Wight's work (8:35): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEs3es9WyIg
- Here is NT Wright giving a lecture on his work (78 minutes): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jyrG1vAczw

[Mountaineer]

Interesting insights on human spirituality by N T Wright:

In chapter 2 of Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense, Wright tells the story of a “hidden spring.”?It goes on for a few pages, but here’s the gist. The western world has been ruled by a dictator who paved over the springs of water with thick concrete, thus forcing the people to drink from his complex system of pipes. That worked for a while until people started pining for the distant memory of bubbling springs and fresh water.
Then, in time, without warning, the springs burst through the concrete in a sudden explosion.
Wright’s dictator is materialist philosophy, and the water “is what we call today ‘spirituality,’ the hidden spring that bubbles up within human hearts and human societies.”? (p. 18)
Wright continues,
The official guardians of the old water system (many of whom work in the media and in politics, and some of whom, naturally enough, work in churches) are of course horrified to see the volcano of “spirituality”? that has erupted in recent years. All this “New Age”? myticism, the Tarot cards, crystals, horoscopes, and so on; all this fundamentalism, with militant Christians, militant Sikhs, militant muslims, and many others bombing each otherwith God in their side. Surely, say the guardians of the official water system, all this is terribly unhealthy? Surely it will lead us back to superstition, to the old chaotic, polluted, and irrational water supply? They have a point. But they must face a question in response: Does the fault not lie with those who wanted to pave over the springs with concrete in the first place (pp. 19-20)
“The hidden spring”? of spirituality is the second feature of human life which, I suggest, functions as an echo of a voice; as a signpost pointing away from the bleak landscape of modern secularism and toward the possibility that we humans are made for more than this. (p. 20; the “first feature”? is the topic of chapter 1, the cry for justice).

... Mountaineer

[Gosso]

Interesting insights on human spirituality by N T Wright:

In chapter 2 of Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense, Wright tells the story of a “hidden spring.”?It goes on for a few pages, but here’s the gist. The western world has been ruled by a dictator who paved over the springs of water with thick concrete, thus forcing the people to drink from his complex system of pipes. That worked for a while until people started pining for the distant memory of bubbling springs and fresh water.
Then, in time, without warning, the springs burst through the concrete in a sudden explosion.
Wright’s dictator is materialist philosophy, and the water “is what we call today ‘spirituality,’ the hidden spring that bubbles up within human hearts and human societies.”? (p. 18)
Wright continues,
The official guardians of the old water system (many of whom work in the media and in politics, and some of whom, naturally enough, work in churches) are of course horrified to see the volcano of “spirituality”? that has erupted in recent years. All this “New Age”? myticism, the Tarot cards, crystals, horoscopes, and so on; all this fundamentalism, with militant Christians, militant Sikhs, militant muslims, and many others bombing each otherwith God in their side. Surely, say the guardians of the official water system, all this is terribly unhealthy? Surely it will lead us back to superstition, to the old chaotic, polluted, and irrational water supply? They have a point. But they must face a question in response: Does the fault not lie with those who wanted to pave over the springs with concrete in the first place (pp. 19-20)
“The hidden spring”? of spirituality is the second feature of human life which, I suggest, functions as an echo of a voice; as a signpost pointing away from the bleak landscape of modern secularism and toward the possibility that we humans are made for more than this. (p. 20; the “first feature”? is the topic of chapter 1, the cry for justice).

... Mountaineer

Fantastic!  I need to add that book to my reading list.

One thing about Christianity that saddens me is when people turn into a purely legalistic/political enterprise (many churches are guilty of this), which saps all the mystery and fun out of it.  But this spirituality needs to be somewhat harnessed and tamed so that it can be useful for us (ie the difference between a wild and trained horse).  The wild horse may be beautiful but it is of little practical use to us.

I personally see the church as a tool for helping me form my relationship with God.  I don't worship the church, I worship God.

[Gosso]

St. Paul makes it crystal clear in I Corinthians 15 that the main reason to believe that Jesus was God is because of the resurrection.  Without this then Jesus is just another failed messiah or simply a mystic.  This is one of the reasons why the Gospel of Thomas was not included, because it failed to mention the crucifixion and resurrection.

Having said that, it does require faith to believe in the resurrection.  We can study the history and collect as much evidence as possible, but eventually we must decide if we are to accept this extraordinary claim/theory.  It is easy to write it off with conspiracy theories.  But the more I looked into it the more it seemed plausible.  There isn't 100% verifiable proof, but there is enough evidence to believe that it could have happened.

are the two interpretations mutually exclusive? i don't see any inherent contradiction in Jesus was a messiah, mystic, gnostic (failed or not) who taught a path to knowing god, and was the son of god resurrected (provable or not).

I agree that Jesus taught us that He was God (He proved it to His followers with the resurrection), and also how we are to follow Him or "the way" to Him.  I personally still read the Gospel of Thomas as a lesser addition to the four Gospels, but obviously I'm reading it through a different lens than a pure gnostic. 

Christianity begins with faith and then a long transformation takes place (which may continue after death) where we are slowly turned into "little Christs" - at least that is how CS Lewis describes it.  If we lose sight that Jesus was God, then we can easily be led down strange paths and no longer take His words and warnings seriously.  If we water down Christianity into nothing more than doing what makes us feel spiritual or happy then it becomes useless and a bunch of fluff.

It seems to me that gnosticism is all about becoming your own God (a very libertarian idea ).  Whereas Christians try to align themselves with God (this implies we are not free).  We believe that our relationship with God is similar to a father and son relationship, where the father teaches his son how to become a good human being, ie Christ-like.  We also incorporate the material world of the body, which is why things like baptism, mass, and being part of the "Mystical Body of Christ" are also very important to Christians...these things feed the body as well.

I'm still working through a lot of this stuff myself, I agree it is all a bit weird (particularly in this scientism age), but it somehow works.

its not so much about "becoming your own god" as recognizing or perceiving the connection that already exists within, or seeing the world in the way Christ saw it, it is about transcending the "I" or ego or the "your own", because 'I" is inherently dualistic and separate. If there is an "I" then the rest is "not I" including god (some flip this to a "universal I that is all inclusive" but it amounts to using different words to point at the same thing) i agree lots of mysticism is horribly watered down and flufified but the real work that has to be done to clear all the clutter that keeps us in the dark/sin, or puts blinders on our perception, is far more than "feel spiritual or happy". the gnostic relationship is more of a see the world "through/as" gods eyes than a father teaching a child , it is knowledge of being a good human being through perception

[Kshartle]

Why do you guys think God says that murder and stealing are wrong? Why did he decide that for us?

[Mountaineer]

Why do you guys think God says that murder and stealing are wrong? Why did he decide that for us?

I gave my thoughts on this question to you in the Al Qaeda thread.

... Mountaineer

[Kshartle]

Why do you guys think God says that murder and stealing are wrong? Why did he decide that for us?

I gave my thoughts on this question to you in the Al Qaeda thread.

... Mountaineer

Sorry brother....didn't see it at first. I do now. Thanks.

[Mountaineer]

Why do you guys think God says that murder and stealing are wrong? Why did he decide that for us?

I gave my thoughts on this question to you in the Al Qaeda thread.

... Mountaineer

Sorry brother....didn't see it at first. I do now. Thanks.

No sweat Tonto 

... Mountineer

[Gosso]

its not so much about "becoming your own god" as recognizing or perceiving the connection that already exists within,  or seeing the world in the way Christ saw it, it is about transcending the "I" or ego or the "your own", because 'I"  is inherently dualistic and separate. If there is an "I" then the rest is "not I" including god (some flip this to a "universal I that is all inclusive" but it amounts to using different words to point at the same thing) i agree lots of mysticism is horribly watered down and flufified but the real work that has to be done to clear all the clutter that keeps us in the dark/sin, or puts blinders on our perception, is far more than "feel spiritual or happy". the gnostic relationship is more of a see the world "through/as" gods eyes than a father teaching a child , it is knowledge of being a good human being through perception

Hmmm, that's interesting.  One could say the goal of Christianity is to be able to see the world through a "Christ lens" or to become a saint, which wouldn't be far from what you've suggested.  Although Christians lean more heavily on Christ (and the church/Bible) to teach and help us.

My frustration with gnosticism/spirituality was that it lacked any intrinsic meaning (as far as I could tell), and it's general lack of interest in the material world.  Also I had no idea what I was supposed to "do", to attain this enlightenment/gnosis.  I had tried meditation for 3 or 4 months, but it felt forced and lost all interest in it.  I could mentally accept that my mind created the Universe (and all that jazz), but it just didn't do much for me.

Truthfully I just got bored of it.

I find Christianity provides a far more satisfying worldview that resonates with me.  I also find a certain richness and depth to Christianity that I had not found before.

[Mountaineer]

From today's Portals of Prayer devotional.  Seems to "illuminate" much of the discussion we have had today.

Clothed in Light

O Lord my God, You are very great! You are clothed with splendor and majesty, covering Yourself with light as with a garment, stretching out the heavens like a tent. Psalm 104:1-2

The Wise Men followed the star and found God. At that time and in that situation, humble wrappings covered Jesus in His humanity. But David speaks of divine clothing. “O Lord my God . . . You are clothed . . . with light.”? Wow! God unveils His image to humanity by describing His blazing attire. His garment of light reveals there is no darkness in Him. God also reveals the image of mankind. In His shining armor of justice, God shows humanity shrouded in sin, dressed in darkness, parading to their tombs. Yes, God’s Law and justice expose our sinful hearts and our need for a Savior. God not only exposes our need, but He also unveils the solution—Christ, the light. Christ’s proclamation, perfection, and power to purify the world reveals the Father’s will. And the Father is eager to remove our filthy rags, wash us in Baptism, and wrap us in Christ’s virtue. The Holy Spirit desires to dissolve death and adorn all believers with Christ’s life, making us fit to live forever with Him, the one clothed in light.

God of light, forgive us for our self-imposed blindness, and enable us to see Your saving light. Amen.

... Mountaineer

[Gosso]

the two don't seem that far apart from a gnostic perspective either. the idea of working toward sainthood seems especially well aligned (minus the catholic miracles perhaps)
  admittedly some mysticism is very disconnected from the material world but i would tend to count it in with the fluff. the type that deals in a deep interest in altering the way the world is perceived tends to take an introspective nature and a lot lot lot of hard work,(some mysticism even gos as far as recommending a couple years of psychoanalysis at the beginning) and its not just about meditation,  any practice that requires the kind of focus that forces or encourages entering into a state of flow (being truly in the moment) is good, it can be anything from martial arts, rock climbing, to painting or knitting. the real work or "what to do" is really no different than "what to do" to be a good christian, and that requires deep self examination and understanding of what you are thinking and how that is causing you to act in or see the world, when you understand it, you begin to change it, and the process of learning to truly shut down the internal dialog is underway. 

I agree with most of what you said.  On a basic level it is a stripped down version of what most religions attempt to achieve.  But I find this isn't enough, I need the stories, myth, ritual, art, literature, theology, saints, virtue, metaphysics, etc.  This makes it exciting and real...maybe I'm just a spiritual glutton

One thing that Joseph Campbell said that has stuck with me, is that one needs to select the mythology/religion that resonates with them and then stick with that system.  These mythologies have everything already built into them to give that "fullness" of life.  But we must take the whole system rather than pick and choose what we like.  Obviously I think Christianity is "correct", but I can see a lot of good in other religions/spirituality, and Vatican II even echoed this sentiment:

1. In our time, when day by day mankind is being drawn closer together, and the ties between different peoples are becoming stronger, the Church examines more closely her relationship to non-Christian religions. In her task of promoting unity and love among men, indeed among nations, she considers above all in this declaration what men have in common and what draws them to fellowship.

One is the community of all peoples, one their origin, for God made the whole human race to live over the face of the earth.(1) One also is their final goal, God. His providence, His manifestations of goodness, His saving design extend to all men,(2) until that time when the elect will be united in the Holy City, the city ablaze with the glory of God, where the nations will walk in His light.(3)

Men expect from the various religions answers to the unsolved riddles of the human condition, which today, even as in former times, deeply stir the hearts of men: What is man? What is the meaning, the aim of our life? What is moral good, what is sin? Whence suffering and what purpose does it serve? Which is the road to true happiness? What are death, judgment and retribution after death? What, finally, is that ultimate inexpressible mystery which encompasses our existence: whence do we come, and where are we going?

Source: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_coun ... te_en.html

i tend to be model-agnostic when it comes to picking the paradigms i view the world through, each model of the world is a bit like a lens making some things clear and blocking out others, for example if i wanted a model that built strong family values and tight nit community i might look to what the Mormons do, if i want to understand suffering Buddhism is a strong contender for shedding light, if i want a philosophical approach to understanding the universe (this suits me well) i might look to Taoism, if i want to understand how a volcano works or how the personality develops i would look to science, and psychology. and as great as each of these is in its ability to illuminate in one area, they all have their own blind spots in others

in science light can be a particle or a wave depending on how the experiment is preformed and the tools used for measurement, one tool/experiment isn't necessarily more right or wrong than the other, it becomes a question of which is more useful to achieve the goals you want at this particular point in time.. i tend to view religion the same way..

all that being said... i don't disagree with the idea that "if you find something that resonates with you stick with it", some aspects of religion like ritual and community (neither a strong draw for me) require a pick one and stick with it approach to have value, and most religions/paradigms have a lifetime worth of growth to offer even if they have blind spots... especially if you can retain the "open to the value and good others have" attitude you and tortoise have shared..

[Tortoise]

One thing that Joseph Campbell said that has stuck with me, is that one needs to select the mythology/religion that resonates with them and then stick with that system.  These mythologies have everything already built into them to give that "fullness" of life.  But we must take the whole system rather than pick and choose what we like.  Obviously I think Christianity is "correct", but I can see a lot of good in other religions/spirituality [...]

I see a lot of good in other religions and spirituality, too, but here are a few things that I think make Christianity unique:

• Eyewitness accounts: Much of the New Testament, including the Gospels, was written by eyewitnesses of Christ's miracles, death, and resurrection. They were written only shortly after Christ's death, while the eyewitnesses were still alive. In 1 Corinthians 15:6, it is written that Christ appeared to a crowd of more than 500 people after his resurrection, most of whom were "still living" at the time that letter was written. If the resurrection was a lie, those eyewitnesses would have refuted it--and the early Christian church would have fizzled out very quickly. But it didn't; it spread persistently, and many early Christians endured torture and death for their conviction that Christ's resurrection was the real deal.
• Christian morality: Jesus Christ turned morality on its head. The last shall be first and the first shall be last. The servant is greater than the master. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth. Self-righteous moralists have no place in the Kingdom of God, etc. No one had ever taught such a radically upside-down morality before. Christ wasn't the same old myth in different clothing. He was something completely different.
• A personal God: So many religious and spiritual systems are centered around an impersonal God. If we are created in God's image--which would make sense, since we came from God and are therefore part of Him--why would God not share our ability to feel love, anger, hope, humor and amusement, etc.? This turns out to be a huge distinction between Christianity and other religions, because the idea of a personal God softens people's hearts and utterly transforms them in a way that no impersonal God ever could.
• The world of matter isn't fundamentally bad, or an illusion: In contrast to so many other religions and spiritual systems, where the whole point is to escape the world of matter, sweep away the illusion of matter, etc., Christianity embraces the physical world as an integral part of its rituals and God's ultimate plan--not to eliminate the earth, but to merge heaven and earth. I think that's important, because it affirms that God doesn't want to completely do away with His own creation--He wants to save it and ultimately perfect it.

[ns3]

I was a devoted Christian for about 20 years. Some would even call me a fanatic. I taught Bible studies in my home and at one point I was even officially ordained as a Southern Baptist minister due to the efforts of some others that I wasn't wholly comfortable with. I'm not even sure I can tell you what Southern Baptists' official doctrines are but I was assured it didn't really matter so I went along with it.

Before that I was a drug addict.

Today I see a lot of similarities between my drug addiction and my clinging to Christianity. I think both were attempts to fill the same inner void and both required total devotion and constant higher doses in order to fill it.

[Gosso]

I see a lot of good in other religions and spirituality, too, but here are a few things that I think make Christianity unique:

• Eyewitness accounts: Much of the New Testament, including the Gospels, was written by eyewitnesses of Christ's miracles, death, and resurrection. They were written only shortly after Christ's death, while the eyewitnesses were still alive. In 1 Corinthians 15:6, it is written that Christ appeared to a crowd of more than 500 people after his resurrection, most of whom were "still living" at the time that letter was written. If the resurrection was a lie, those eyewitnesses would have refuted it--and the early Christian church would have fizzled out very quickly. But it didn't; it spread persistently, and many early Christians endured torture and death for their conviction that Christ's resurrection was the real deal.
• Christian morality: Jesus Christ turned morality on its head. The last shall be first and the first shall be last. The servant is greater than the master. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth. Self-righteous moralists have no place in the Kingdom of God, etc. No one had ever taught such a radically upside-down morality before. Christ wasn't the same old myth in different clothing. He was something completely different.
• A personal God: So many religious and spiritual systems are centered around an impersonal God. If we are created in God's image--which would make sense, since we came from God and are therefore part of Him--why would God not share our ability to feel love, anger, hope, humor and amusement, etc.? This turns out to be a huge distinction between Christianity and other religions, because the idea of a personal God softens people's hearts and utterly transforms them in a way that no impersonal God ever could.
• The world of matter isn't fundamentally bad, or an illusion: In contrast to so many other religions and spiritual systems, where the whole point is to escape the world of matter, sweep away the illusion of matter, etc., Christianity embraces the physical world as an integral part of its rituals and God's ultimate plan--not to eliminate the earth, but to merge heaven and earth. I think that's important, because it affirms that God doesn't want to completely do away with His own creation--He wants to save it and ultimately perfect it.

I 100% agree.

But I do often wonder how Christ sees these other religions and spirituality.  As long as they are teaching to love God and their fellow human, then at a bare minimum I think God would show great mercy.

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”?

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’  This is the first and greatest commandment.  And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’  All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”?

I find Christianity is the best path to fulfill these commandments.

[Mountaineer]

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”?

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’  This is the first and greatest commandment.  And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’  All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”?

I find Christianity is the best path to fulfill these commandments.

Gosso, I agree that Christianity is the best path to fulfull these commandments.  However, I may have a slightly different "take" than you might think.  My lens for reading and understanding Scripture indicates Jesus gave those commandments to point out to us once again how impossible it is for us humans to fulfill them.  The statement about "all the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments" is further explanation of that ... we cannot by our selves fulfill those commandments.  So, I beleve that Jesus came to fulfill the Law, not abolish the Law, perfectly for our sakes.  The Law just makes us realize how we are not able to keep it perfectly.  Christianity (the Gospel i.e. good news) is about what God did for us (via Jesus atoning for all our sins).  Thus, I am forgiven for not being able to do those commandments perfectly because Jesus already did it in my stead.  God no longer sees my sins because of what Jesus did.  Make sense?

... Mountaineer

[Gosso]

i tend to be model-agnostic when it comes to picking the paradigms i view the world through, each model of the world is a bit like a lens making some things clear and blocking out others, for example if i wanted a model that built strong family values and tight nit community i might look to what the Mormons do,  if i want to understand suffering Buddhism is a strong contender for shedding light, if i want a philosophical approach to understanding the universe (this suits me well) i might look to Taoism, if i want to understand how a volcano works or how the personality develops i would look to science, and psychology. and as great as each of these is in its ability to illuminate in one area, they all have their own blind spots in others

in science light can be a particle or a wave depending on how the experiment is preformed and the tools used for measurement, one tool/experiment isn't necessarily more right or wrong than the other, it becomes a question of which is more useful to achieve the goals you want at this particular point in time..  i tend to view religion the same way..

all that being said... i don't disagree with the idea that "if you find something that resonates with you stick with it", some aspects of religion like ritual and community (neither a strong draw for me) require a pick one and stick with it approach to have value, and most religions/paradigms have a lifetime worth of growth to offer even if they have blind spots... especially if you can retain the "open to the value and good others have" attitude you and tortoise have shared..

I see it a bit differently.  I see someone's religion as a type of marriage where a certain level of commitment and fidelity are required.  This allows the religion/God to sink into the individual, and actually create change in the person.  This doesn't mean the husband cannot have female friends, but ultimately all of his faith, hope, and love are with his wife (but of course God is above both the husband and wife).

When it comes to science and religion, I see the two as somewhat separate.  Science is the study of the observable universe, while religion has more to do with meaning.  It is highly frustrating to me when these two groups try to fight over who is 100% correct...just seems like a lot of hot air to me.

i probably see it a bit differently from you because i think the will/drive to change (the "sink in" part) comes from within.. its what brought you to the church in the first place, the church may (and hopefully does) act as a multiplier of that drive and if being committed helps that then "all good by me"...

i am more inclined see science and religion as having overlap, one deals with the observable universe the other deals with how we interact with and observe it, they have different areas of expertise and each covers areas the other does not, but they both operate in a world of interactive processing.

i to tend to think arguments over which (sci vs religion) is 100% correct are hot air as well, they tend to come from a very limited "either-or" perspective on both sides of the argument..

[Mountaineer]

interactive procesing, I also am not drawn to the ritual and community.  I would describe myself as a Christian in spite of the ritual, not because of it.  I've chosen a denomination that is generally light on ritual (no robes, no theatrics), but of course there is still some church-speak and ritual that I subject myself to.  It's growing on me a bit, but I don't think I'll ever be a champion of ritual.

Desert, I am currently reading a book you may find interesting.  "Heaven on Earth - The Gifts of Christ in the Divine Service" by Aruthur A Just Jr.  The author shows how the liturgy is thoroughly anchored in Scripture.  It explains the LCMS service so it might not be totally applicable to other denominations but it does cover the history (what and why) of worship practices from the beginning of Christianity through our postmodern world.

... Mountaineer

[Gosso]

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”?

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’  This is the first and greatest commandment.  And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’  All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”?

I find Christianity is the best path to fulfill these commandments.

Gosso, I agree that Christianity is the best path to fulfull these commandments.  However, I may have a slightly different "take" than you might think.  My lens for reading and understanding Scripture indicates Jesus gave those commandments to point out to us once again how impossible it is for us humans to fulfill them.  The statement about "all the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments" is further explanation of that ... we cannot by our selves fulfill those commandments.  So, I beleve that Jesus came to fulfill the Law, not abolish the Law, perfectly for our sakes.  The Law just makes us realize how we are not able to keep it perfectly.  Christianity (the Gospel i.e. good news) is about what God did for us (via Jesus atoning for all our sins).  Thus, I am forgiven for not being able to do those commandments perfectly because Jesus already did it in my stead.  God no longer sees my sins because of what Jesus did.  Make sense?

... Mountaineer

I see where you're coming from.  I guess this is the whole debate of saved by faith alone or by works?  My take is that everything begins with faith, and then God helps to transform us through prayer, so that it becomes natural or easy to follow the commandments/Law ("my yoke is easy").  Now I agree that none of us will achieve this level of perfection (at least in this life), but we still have to make an attempt, ask for forgiveness when we fail, and then Christ will pick us back up again.  We're sort of like children learning to walk. 

[Tortoise]

I guess this is the whole debate of saved by faith alone or by works?  My take is that everything begins with faith, and then God helps to transform us through prayer, so that it becomes natural or easy to follow the commandments/Law ("my yoke is easy").  Now I agree that none of us will achieve this level of perfection (at least in this life), but we still have to make an attempt, ask for forgiveness when fail, and then Christ will pick us back up again.  We're sort of like children learning to walk.

That's a great summary, Gosso; I think you hit the nail on the head.

The New Testament makes it clear in different passages that both faith and works/behavior are important, but that faith comes first and is far more important--because true faith in Christ will naturally influence one's deeds as a reflection of that faith, whereas deeds without faith can be tainted by various personal motives or a sense of self-important righteousness. Here are two passages that discuss this:

But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,”? but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”?

Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”?and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.