Hybrid spirituality and the Christ

[shesulsa]

I had a wonderful and all too short telephone conversation with another MT member the other day and we both felt that when we analyze how Jesus responded to his disciples and looked at some of his teachings and approaches to daily life and spirituality that he spoke in some ways that could be construed as Zen and Daoist.

I'm curious as to others' thoughts on this?

 

[kamishinkan]

When studying the teachings of the Messiah, it is easy to see familier teachings in other known religions. I think that is the point, as far as moral, ethical teachings you can see very similar teachings. The main difference is the necessity of a Savior and that is where Christian/Hebraic teachings differ from most others.

Just a thought.....
Darrell Collins
Kamishinkan Dojo

 

[SAVAGE]

When studying the teachings of the Messiah, it is easy to see familier teachings in other known religions. I think that is the point, as far as moral, ethical teachings you can see very similar teachings. The main difference is the necessity of a Savior and that is where Christian/Hebraic teachings differ from most others.

Just a thought.....
Darrell Collins
Kamishinkan Dojo

The message is the same...but the belief in Jesus as GOD...is what is needed to enter heaven....without this you are just another good person not going to paradise.

I understand that this is not what alot of you believe..but it is the foundation of my faith and arguing is not going to change what the bible says...or what I believe..and I will not to change or put down your belief.

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

I have no doubt that Jesus is God. But, I don't think that's the point. The similarities between Jesus' teachings and, particularly, Taoist thought is notable.

Jesus spoke not only of getting to Heaven; but, how to get along, day by day, as well. His teachings were simple and non-aggressive. We are to do what we're supposed to do while honoring God. It's a way of sensing and going with the flow of the universe, which is called God's Plan. Same same.

Does this suggest that one is more right than the other? Not academically, no. It's a personal belief and relationship in and with The Saviour that separates my faith from a philosophy. Tao was good starting point for me, though.

 

[White Fox]

sorry Egg I'm just wondering but how can Jesus be God? Did he not say Our father who art in heaven hallowed be thy name. Is he not praying to somebody?

I don't mean to be offensive please don't take this the wrong way.

 

[Bigshadow]

I think the principles of most religions are all pretty similar. It is in the details that they differ.

 

[kamishinkan]

Jesus is God in a sense. I know this will at first ruffle the feathers of my Christian brethren but, Jesus (Yeshua Hb) was praying to His Father God (Elohim Hb). The sense that Jesus is God is birthed in the Shema (Duet 6:4) Here O'Israel, The Lord our God the Lord is one. The word one in this verse is the Hebrew word Echod. Echod is a unity of one. The same word is used in Genesis as the two (husband and wife) will become ONE (Echod). Jesus (Yeshua) is ONE with the Father as is the Holy Spirit (Ruach Ha Kodesh Hb) ONE with the Father and the Son. They are THREE in ONE. It is considered in Hebraic (Messianic) circles as a Tri-Unity in modern Christian terms, Trinity. Many use this to PROVE that they are three individuals with one purpose, but it is deeper than that. It is similar to a person who IS a spirit being, that has a soul (mind, will, and emotions) and lives in a body (This was a pretty good way that was explained to me years ago).

As far as His teachings, almost all ethical/spiritual religions use similar teachings to help the practitioner live a quality life. In Christianity, it goes beyond that to having to accept Jesus as your Savior. Without that, as Jesus said, You can gain the whole world and in the end lose your soul.

Just a thought....

Darrell Collins
Kamishinkan Dojo

 

[SAVAGE]

Jesus said the prayer OUR father, because he was teaching people to pray to him, I cannot say why Jesus made reference to the father, mybe it hadto do with the capability of man to understand th message....like when Jesus said that no one is to divorce, when moses said it was alright....jesus said that at that time the people were not ready to receive the message of divorce!

As for the deity of christ one need look no futher than JOHN 1:1-16

Jesus is the WORD!

 

[hemi]

sorry Egg I'm just wondering but how can Jesus be God? Did he not say Our father who art in heaven hallowed be thy name. Is he not praying to somebody?

I don't mean to be offensive please don't take this the wrong way.

Well the best answer I can give is that you would need to study the trinity. In the book of John, Jesus was asked by one of his disciples, show us the father. Jesus responded “when you have seen me you have seen the father”.

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

sorry Egg I'm just wondering but how can Jesus be God? Did he not say Our father who art in heaven hallowed be thy name. Is he not praying to somebody?

I don't mean to be offensive please don't take this the wrong way.

No offence taken. The Trinity had always been a stumbling block for me, in all the years before.

My belief is that Jesus, God and The Spirit are all manifestations of The Unity. Think Body, Mind and Soul, if you want. The separation exists. My mind is not my body, my soul is not my mind; yet, they all combine to make me.

Comprehending the nature and extent of God is a nice meditation; but, the truth will always derail my thinking. I look at infinite nature and all I could know or experience or see is in existance. Everything I could EVER know, experience and see. God is a degree larger than all of that, making Him incomprehensible.

As C.S. Lewis stated (paraphrased), at some point, one has to choose whether or not to believe because logic will fail.

repectfully,

egg

 

[heretic888]

I'm curious as to others' thoughts on this?

Perennial Philosophy

Christianity and the Perennial Philosophy

I'm suddenly reminded of the writings of St. Dionysius:

"Unto this Darkness which is Light, pray that we may come, and may attain unto vision through the loss of sight and knowledge, and that in ceasing thus to see or to know, we may learn to know this which is beyond all perception and understanding - for this emptying of our faculties is true sight and knowledge - and that we may offer the transcendent in all things the praises of transcendent hymnody, which we may well do by denying or removing all things that are - like any person who, carving a statue out of marble, removes all the impediments that hinder the clear perception of that latent image and by this mere removal display the hidden statue itself in its hidden beauty."

I would go beyond simply saying Christianity is compatible with Buddhism or Taoism. I would argue that, at their core essence, they are identical.

This may also tie in somewhat with my discussion of James Fowler's Faith-Development Theory over at The Study.

Laterz.

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

I am constantly amazed and appreciative (well, occasionally stunned) of your posts, heretic.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

thich nhat hanh has written at least two books bringing christianity and buddhism together. great stuff, interesting and challenging. they've made a serious impact in my own spiritual thinking.

 

[Ray]

Well the best answer I can give is that you would need to study the trinity. In the book of John, Jesus was asked by one of his disciples, show us the father. Jesus responded “when you have seen me you have seen the father”.

For sure, they are exactly similiar in appearance; but the prayer Christ prayed for his disciples (previous to the arrest) to "be one even as" the father and son are one causes me to believe that either: he wanted his disciples to be rolled up together into one being OR that they were to be one in purpose and totally unified in spirit.

This and other things, leads me to believe that the trinity is not truely a biblical doctrine.

 

[heretic888]

For sure, they are exactly similiar in appearance; but the prayer Christ prayed for his disciples (previous to the arrest) to "be one even as" the father and son are one causes me to believe that either: he wanted his disciples to be rolled up together into one being OR that they were to be one in purpose and totally unified in spirit.

Or, the more parsimonious explanation:

Jesus of Nazareth (assuming he actually existed and said the aforementioned) was trying to describe a type of mystical state that has been an extremely common sentiment among human spirituality for the past 3,000 years or so.

This and other things, leads me to believe that the trinity is not truely a biblical doctrine.

Among primitive Christian communities, the trinity doctrine actually has precedent in the writings of Valentinus.

Curiously enough, however, the Holy Spirit to Valentinus was feminine in nature. This idea seemed to be very widespread among pre-Nicene Christianity.

Laterz.

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

Curiously enough, however, the Holy Spirit to Valentinus was feminine in nature. This idea seemed to be very widespread among pre-Nicene Christianity.

Laterz.

This is a line of thought that I can sidle up to. In my experience, presence of the Spirit consistantly leads to emotions more feminine in nature, to me anyways.

 

[donald]

If you read the Holy Bible, and accept it as truth. Then you have to accept that The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit are one. If not, then Jesus of Nazareth is a liar. The Bible states that GOD is one, and yet there are areas in the old, and new testaments that seem to declare otherwise. I believe that if you look at the Bible as a whole. You will see very clearly that, GOD The Father,GOD The Son, and GOD The Holy Spirit, are separate distinct persons, but are one. I really don't believe that we can understand this completely, but we have to accept it. GOD's Word does'nt say we have to be theologians, but that we are saved by grace through the Lord Jesus. Into whose hands all things(the book of Ephesians etc., new test.)have been put. If you disagree, you disagree. Your debate is with The Living GOD, not with man. I hope this helps someone...

 

[heretic888]

If you read the Holy Bible, and accept it as truth. Then you have to accept that The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit are one. If not, then Jesus of Nazareth is a liar.

This is what is called a False Dilemma in logical discourse....

1) It does not logically follow that if one reads the modern Bible and accepts it as "truth" (however so defined), that one must accept trinitarian doctrine.

2) It does not logically follow that if the modern Bible is something other than the "truth" (however so defined), that "Jesus of Nazareth" is a "liar".

3) It does not logically follow that if the modern Bible is nothing other the "truth" (however so defined), that "Jesus of Nazareth" is in fact not a "liar".

Your logic is very wacky.

Your debate is with The Living GOD, not with man. I hope this helps someone...

Your argument reminds me of the synthetic-conventional stage in James Fowler's Faith-Development Theory.

Laterz.

 

[kamishinkan]

heretic,

Not sure I follow that argument..
If the Hebrew scriptures say "Shema Israel Adonai Elohenu Adonai Echod" Duet 6:4 (Hear Israel, The Lord our God, The Lord is one) and Elohim (God) sent his Son according to the scriptures confirmed by Yeshua (Jesus) and was empowered by the Ruach Ha'Kodesh (Holy Spirit). That is three manifistations of the ONE God. Besides the word in Duet 6:4 Echod means a unity of one, as in a husband and wife are ONE. Matter of fact in Gen. where it is commanded that the husband and wife are to become one, the word Echod is used. If it was the word Yached it would mean individually one, but with that rendering I don't see how you could read the scriptures and not see the Tri-unity of God.

 

[heretic888]

If it was the word Yached it would mean individually one, but with that rendering I don't see how you could read the scriptures and not see the Tri-unity of God.

Because two people can observe the exact same phenomenon but come away from it with completely different perceptions or interpretations. It is a non-sequiter to argue that yours is the de facto "truth" position, with the Burden of Proof being perennially placed on one's opponents.

Now, don't get me wrong: I'm not arguing for or against the Trinity. Trinitarian symbolism is common enough both in and out of Christianity (i.e., the "Hindu Trinity" of Brahman, Vishnu, and Shiva) to give some credence to the idea. However, one could equally point to, say, Wisdom (Chokmah) in the Book of Proverbs to conclude that God is actually a Holy Quaternity. Or, we could take the route of Jewish Kabbalah and conclude that God actually subsumes a number of lesser manifestations or sephirah, far more than the three we are discussing here.

In the end, it all matters very little in that all of the above are just ideas. One idea doesn't capture the ineffable and transcendent any more than another idea. You can't truss it up by saying your particular idea is "backed by scripture" or is "divinely inspired" if you want, but that really amounts to nothing but some egoic huffing-and-puffing.

My point, however, is about the use of non-sequiters in the context of logical discourse. I find arguments such as "agree with me or you say Jesus is a liar!" to be utterly indefensible.

Laterz.