Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
My Misguided "Christian" Ethic Intersection
nenkohai
Veteran
I had a realization today in my therapy session: how my perfectionism is rooted in my Christian upbringing and indoctrination. I also looked at the concept of "sin" as lensed through the Four Noble Truths. By doing this, I'm not sure "sin" exists, per se.
By making the Christian proclamation that all people are "sinners" we become vested in the idea that as "sinners" we are, in essence, no good. By NATURE (in Christian doctrine) we are not good. Goodness, indeed, spiritual wholeness, according to the doctrine, only comes by way of the external source called "God" or "Jesus" or the "Holy Spirit."
From what I've learned thus far, Buddhism never says we are "sinners," but rather, by our very NATURE (again) we cause our own suffering. But, no where, did the Buddha state or imply that we are "no good." But that we CAN change our relationship to the inevitable suffering and bring about a spiritual transformation within ourselves.
Christianity espouses such a transformation but never details how to do it. Perhaps its the idea of "place your trust in God/Jesus." In a literal way? I can see putting my trust in the idea that it is POSSIBLE to to get to a spiritual transformation, but I have not found that path to transformation within Christianity like I have in Buddhism.
Granted, this experience is mine alone. I bring it to this group not to impose a binary "true" or "false," on these ideas but to deepen my thought process on it.
Namaste
By making the Christian proclamation that all people are "sinners" we become vested in the idea that as "sinners" we are, in essence, no good. By NATURE (in Christian doctrine) we are not good. Goodness, indeed, spiritual wholeness, according to the doctrine, only comes by way of the external source called "God" or "Jesus" or the "Holy Spirit."
From what I've learned thus far, Buddhism never says we are "sinners," but rather, by our very NATURE (again) we cause our own suffering. But, no where, did the Buddha state or imply that we are "no good." But that we CAN change our relationship to the inevitable suffering and bring about a spiritual transformation within ourselves.
Christianity espouses such a transformation but never details how to do it. Perhaps its the idea of "place your trust in God/Jesus." In a literal way? I can see putting my trust in the idea that it is POSSIBLE to to get to a spiritual transformation, but I have not found that path to transformation within Christianity like I have in Buddhism.
Granted, this experience is mine alone. I bring it to this group not to impose a binary "true" or "false," on these ideas but to deepen my thought process on it.
Namaste
4
Comments
The drive to be perfect is present in Buddhism, as well as Christianity.
I have had Thai Buddhists imply (since they don't know the word that follows) they were indoctrinated in Buddhism. It can happen in any religion. Although I think for most people the word indoctrination is too strong. I was raised in a Christian family, and was taught about Christianity; saying I was indoctrinated is simply too strong a word.
Okay, so you don't want to accept the concept of sin. But I don't know a single person in my entire life who had done no wrong. And, to me, that's all Christianity is saying.
Actually, Christianity does say how to do it. 10 Commandments, other moral teachings in the New Testament.
You mentioned seeing things through a certain lens, and I agree we all do that. Part of that lens in us choosing to associate certain words that are positive toward the belief system we prefer, and negative toward a belief system we don't prefer.
Original sin is an explanation of how we are also born with tendencies to do evil because of our inherited ignorance.
The Buddha also said that we are born into ignorance and it is this that leads us to behave unskilfully.
I'm not sure the difference is a significant as you may think.
In this sense it allies to the Buddhist idea of skillfulness / unskillfuless:
http://www.biblefood.com/7wrdsin.html
"Hamartia" = "To miss the mark", as in archery competition, and therefore fail to receive the prize, or blessing. This is the general Greek word for sin, and is used 221 times. "Hamartia" encompasses the other 6 words for specific sins, in the sense that in all types of sin, we are "missing the mark". Example: Heb. 12:1, KJV = "the sin (hamartia) which doeth so easily beset us". We are aiming at God's best, but miss it.
1. Sin might be "what happens after doing something that is not right action". It is a combination of the consequent situation and state of mind.
I consider right action a deed done in a way that it is not based on wanting to harm others, untrue... and done because of understanding the situation, not as a way to avoid pain, or out of fear, or because someone else thinks this is the right way. It is something we do because we feel it is right.
-
2. Buddha doesn't say we are good either.
-
3. The translation of the Bible sucks. I'm not sure about the original writing, it may suck as well if someone knew to actually read it. The problem is, we come from a different culture. The works of any culture are based on many assumptions - and those will not be included in the work, since it is a kind of "common knowledge". Thus it is really hard to know what the author really meant by it (if you consider the God being the author, it was still a message transmitted to people of a different culture - so put in a way for them to understand would equally mean desperately confusing to us).
I think it is like a person from a very different culture comes here, with the best intentions not to offend their host. Let me tell you what happens: it fails every time before it succeeds.
In some cultures, it is honorable to kill your enemies. Now if you had someone at your house who would kill your neighbor because he spoke badly of you, what would you think of them? Not to fondly, eh?
Thus, the Bible in any version is extremely confusing to us at best, and lost in translation at worst. I said it before in other threads, the Bible is a good book. But i think this is something to keep in mind, always. Trying to follow or obey a person that is unclear is impossible; and thus unnecessary to beat oneself over it. Can you tell me, what is God? (If "no", see below :cool: )
God, for many religious, or not so religious people, points to some kind of feeling. This feeling might be warm, fuzzy, "right", good (not in the bodily sense to much), whatever; some kind of combination of it. "God" is certainly not like the cat of the neighbor who threw up drunk on your door while shouting at you, that dug up the lawn and killed your dog, scratching it with its infected claws (for example :zombie: ; alright, i watch to many movies, now going on). If you follow that feeling that God points to, would you do things you would regret? They may be painful, hard, not something you would ordinarily do, or something you would fear the consequences of, but it would never be something you would regret (optimally, if you truly "knew God").
-
The 7 deadly sins of Christianity seem in some way similar to the 6 realms of Buddhism.
Maybe that could shed some light on it.
To some extent, this is another example of people -- even some metta-for-all-Buddhists -- dwelling on differences, rather than seeking common ground.
Commandments 5-10 are so similar to the first 5 Precepts, that to discuss the differences is tantamount to being petty. But, there's this gripping compulsion to say, "It's different", "He's different", "She's different".
I apologize for my negativity to the Christian Church. My intent is only to understand what I need to engage in a spiritual transformation. For myself alone, I have not been able to find the tools within Christianity to do that. It's not because I haven't looked.
I have struggled for years...
And I guess that's sometimes one of my points -- that it is a personal journey.
I'm curious, when you say "about any religion", do you include Buddhism?
However, @John_Spencer and @karasti are indicating an understanding more in the way of ancient traditional Christianity.
It is difficult to summarize mystical theology and I only have a limited lunch hour, but I will attempt to:
All of creation is intrinsically good and evil is but a temporary parasite brought about through actions of man's will. A sin is not a legal transaction but seen in a holistic way where healing is the approach. They are words, thoughts, and deeds that distance one from union with God or Theosis where man is called to grow in His likeness becoming like God, but not in essence but through His grace or uncreated energies.
There is no guilt associated with "Original Sin" only an effect upon human nature where there is now a tendency or conditioning in man's will towards sin.
Theosis is the union of the two wills where man is to become a full person as expressed by the Holy Trinity, but because of the fall and his conditioning man's will is bent towards the individual self, fueled by egoism, with fragmented characteristics that is mistakenly considered one's person, but this is not what is meant by the mystery of person.
Man's personhood is reflected in the abandonment of the self I previously described which is achieved through the will's self-emptying love for others or Kenosis shown by Christ.
Indeed, yes, about the personal journey... for everyone.
I have a hard time trusting the Bible because of how much was left out of it by the men of the Church in an attempt to better control the church goers. Regardless of what their reasons were, perhaps they thought they were doing the right thing back then, I think the Bible loses things when parts of it are missing because someone else decided not to include them. Because of that, I have a hard time putting everything together within it. There is plenty good to get out of the Bible, but for me at least, it required a LOT more reading between the lines than Buddhism does, and when I'm left too much to my own devices in figuring out a scripture, it usually doesn't work out very well.
If it helps, St Paul outlined exactly what you should cultivate (or as he saw it, should be cultivated in you by the Holy Spirit) to be a Christian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_Holy_Spirit
It's a list of nine virtues, much like the ten perfections, that should be expected of someone genuinely trying to live a Christian life.
This stuff is the important stuff. The rest of the dogma; whether you regularly go to Church; which version of the Bible you use; which denomination you belong to; whether you're a Calvinist or a Catholic - that's almost incidental compared to how you live. Christianity, like Buddhism, is a religion/philosophy of living well.
You'll have to believe me when I tell you, yea, I get it (everything said here about Christianity). In the interests of full disclosure, I've taught the Gospels in the church setting and even from the pulpit as a layperson. I've inspected and researched all of my pressing questions about Christian theology and the answers I found are very wanting. And it ultimately arrives at vinlyn's excellent point of it being a personal journey.
My goal in all this - to engage the process of life well and skillfully. Or, my best attempt at that.
It was only after looking at Buddhism, that I found any value in Christianity. Even it's mysticisism is hard to find and unravel. It would not surprise me to find similar sentiments amongst nominal Buddhists coming across Christian teachings and praising its humility, empathy and grace, compared with the local, useless, sour puss sangha . . .
Maybe atheists only start understanding the truth after leaving religion behind . . .
Personal transformation happens in a variety of guises. Christianity offers grace, Buddhism offers nirvana, atheists offer bus adverts:
There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist_Bus_Campaign
I understand where you are coming from regarding scripture, as I held the exact suspicion for many years and thought I had overcome it, but the essence of it reared its head recently sending me into a spiritual crisis of sorts that I'm only now beginning to come out of.
I'm not bitter about going through it, because I now see it as a necessary thing in my spiritual development. Like you I'm not seeking to go or get into any place, but only have a desire to enlarge my heart as much as possible with the time I'm given. What happens after that is beyond my means anyway, so I will continue with learning to let go of clinging to a self that is transient.
I have gained an insight that in our culture we can’t avoid the influence of the Reformation and the harboring of a general mistrust of the Church and authority that has sprung from it. I also see that it even very much effects how Buddhism is approached in the West.
Scripture is a part of the tradition of Christianity but not the whole of it. It came from the Church and not the other way around, and it is very difficult to understand it through private interpretation as scripture says.
Christianity is very much a communal religion, and we are taught and learn in humility from others, and participate in the sacraments in our journey in acquiring the mind of the Church. That is why the works of the holy fathers and holy mothers are so vital for us to become familiar with, as they show us that mind through their life and understanding.
Anyway, a funny thing is that I stumbled across this video link yesterday that actually addresses your very concern and helped me. If you have the time I think it would be well worth the listen. I also think a similar approach can be used when looking at Buddhist scriptures with regards to a historical and authoritative perspective.
youtube.com/watch?v=Gy-gCEWh5-4&feature=youtube_gdata_player
The Gospel According to Mary Magdelene
Chapter 4 25-7
I'm pretty sure that somewhere else in the gnostic gospels Jesus is reported as saying, 'Sin, as such, does not exist', but I can't find the quote. It seems you agree with him.
The collection was gifted to me a few years ago, but I have set it aside for now on becoming aware that novice monks arriving on the holy mountain of Mt Athos are first to become familiar with, not just read, St Macarius's "Fifty Spiritual Homilies and the Great Letter" before beginning with the Philokalia. Since I'm not a monk I'm certain I won't even begin for several years based on that guidance mentioned and that's fine, as there is plenty of spiritual treasure to be mined from St Marcarius’s works.
Also, there is a small collection of "Selected Writings of St. John Cassian the Roman" that I highly recommend. Though not a Roman Catholic saint he trained in the East and his works are integral to the foundation of Western Monasticism. It costs about $10 U.S. and about 7" high and 5" wide and not thick at all, but is packed with practical insight on various spiritual topics. I always have my copy with me.
When I was working in our church bookstore during our open house to celebrate the opening of our new temple a Buddhist visitor asked what book I would recommend for her given her background and I recommended the Selected Writings which she did purchase.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Way_of_a_Pilgrim
However I am involved in another dharma drama . . .
Time to 'sit still and know I am Buddha'
Sin is not simply missing the mark and being humanly imperfect. It is an insult of God and we are supposed to deserve to burn in hell for eternity because of it.
The way I was raised (Protestant/Evangelical) part of the Christian mindset is that every night before you go to sleep you evaluate your immense guilt and sinfulness and beg for forgiveness.
You receive that forgiveness, okay, but the whole idea is absurd and harmful anyway because of the basic premise of unworthiness.
One of the most painful moments in my entire life was when (as a young man) I discussed faith with my father and I explained to him that I didn’t have it any longer. After we discussed it for a long time, we all went to bed. In the middle of the night though, I heard the man cry with all his might and I knew why. He knew that I would burn in hell for all eternity, and he loved me. That was the brutal side to the faith that his entire life depended on.
is the equivalent of:
Lord Buddha, Enlightened Dharma Sun, I take refuge in you, from my unskilfulness
Sin is unmindfulness (of God)
The Hell Realms are being shut down in preparation for the Maitriya. Sadly even laxed Christians will be turned away
The point is most Christianity and perhaps Dharma too, is not engaged in at a deep enough level . . .
:wave:
Not just because it pictures an ugly and hateful image of God, but also because it dehumanizes the largest part of humanity.
Why would it be wrong to slaughter non-believers who are bound for hell anyway?
The way I see it, the idea of sinfulness/unworthiness is part of the justification of religious violence.
http://www.impropaganda.net/1997/zenarchy8.html
Looking forward to the humble Christian mauling of Dharma . . .
What you have described is contrary to the interpretation of the ancient Christian tradition I struggle to follow, and it might interest you to know that despite its unbroken history dating back to Christ and the Apostles this tradition and its followers are also condemned to hell by other Christian groups too.
Anyway, this does not mean there are those in my tradition who don't hold contrary ideas and don't express them outwardly, because many definitely do. Someone once told my daughter that her Creator should be ashamed of her, and this was because she expressed a point of view that in actuality was more to tradition than the attitude she was courageously speaking out against. Granted my daughter, being young, was very harsh in choice of words, but she said what was needed. She was actually speaking out against an exclusive attitude that is actually foreign to our tradition in defending other cultures and other religions, the Buddha and Buddhism in particular.
In my tradition The Church is seen as the body of Christ and She is called to be transfigured into His likeness. However, She has many members all of whom are moving toward that likeness but are in various states, and so that likeness as a corporate body has not been fully accomplished or perfected.
Not everyone is Christ like just because they claim to follow a tradition, and I think this is an important point to understand, because that understanding can easily be adapted to other religious traditions other than Christianity.
Not everyone views it that way though, even amongst Christians. That is the most common way of seeing it, and that's unfortunate, that the Christian teachers are so focused on those things and missing so much of the wisdom in their tradition.
I do hope so many people who are angry about/with Christianity and the people who practice it will work through their feelings so they don't have to be upset and angry anymore. It's possible. I was angry and frustrated with it, too but I've been working through it and I feel much better overall. There are Buddhists who have cried for their torturers and such because they knew how much they suffered and knew the Karma they were incurring. How is that any different from a Christian who cries out of worry for their child or loved one? If you look closely at it, it's really all the same stuff. But you have to remove your preconceived notions of it before you can see it more clearly.
We do it all the time; just not in this thread
I know there are other angles. I love my little book from Eckhart for instance. And thank God not all Christians are gloomy judgment-day freaks.
But this thread is about a basic Christian tendency to damage peoples’ self esteem with notions of fundamental sinfulness and unworthiness.
I thought people were not acknowledging this tendency in their posts and wanted to bring some balance.
No big anger here. I feel sorry for people who live in fear of hell. I’m not angry with them.
Buddhism has been around long enough now to begin to have its own generation of rebels.
The twenty- something daughter of friends, who had a Buddhist blessing and has a Buddhist middle name, has rejected all things Buddhist and leaves the room if the subject comes up muttering 'brainwashed ' etc....
I was reminded of a cartoon I saw. Long haired parents both wearing dungarees and sandals are looking startled as their toddler, who is sitting in his highchair, is throwing his bowl of food to the floor and shouting " I reject you and all your values, starting with brown rice and tahini ! "
What exactly is the purpose of a comment like that other than to denigrate another person's beliefs?
And what the Fathers say is that neither existence nor non existence apply to God.