Is Christianity a Negative Religion?

[Nick the Pilot]

Andrew,

Gandhi's quote,

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

is very profound.

[Nick the Pilot]

Pathless,

"God: Every time I try to talk to someone it's sorry this and forgive me that and I'm not worthy..."

--> That is very profound.

[Nick the Pilot]

InLove,

You said,

"That this Great Spirit of Creation could also be One of such a Love...."

You have described by belief system perfectly.

"The way I see it, we have lost the purity of thought which exists in the mind of God."

--> In essence, I agree with your idea. However, I would say we are learning to appreciate such purity of thought. I see learning to appreciate such purity of thought as a positive experience.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Luna,

You said,

"I find it surprising to see forgivness considered undesirable."

--> That is the value of inter-faith dialogue. We are slowly learning what the other person is thinking.

I agree.

As a matter of fact, I must confess that my colleagues and I have characterized Christianity as a religion based mainly on fear.

As a matter of fact, I do a lot of work helping ex-Christians get rid of their fear. Once they get rid of their fear, things go a lot better.

It strikes me that way too, that there is a lot of misuse of fear in some branches of Christianity, but in defense I also would like to point out that it is not so for all Christians. Along with the message "Repent for the Kingdom of God is near" Jesus taught love and 'fear not!' I love 1 John 4:

7Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son[b] into the world that we might live through him. 10This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for[c] our sins. 11Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

13We know that we live in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. 14And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. 15If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God. 16And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him. 17In this way, love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment, because in this world we are like him. 18There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

19We love because he first loved us. 20If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. 21And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother.

Theosophy teaches many of the same ideas as Christianity, but without the fear and the negativity. This is what I like about Theosophy.

That is commendable.

I would like to take a moment, and emphasize what we have in common. You said,

"What do you mean no fall...look around...does this seem like all is paradise?"

--> On this point, Theosophy agrees with you. This is an ugly world, full of suffering. The Garden we left was much better. (You and I just disagree on why we left the Garden.)

But the world is beautiful too. Somehow we must strike the balance between loving the world now but also not settling for things as they are. We must also love it as it is meant to be, peaceful and safe for all. The Kingdom of God is within us and it is now, and not yet.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Luna,

Zeras said,

"... everyone is a sinner even a new born??"

--> This takes us into an entirely different criticism of Christianity. Is this something you also want to explore?

I don't believe anyone is born with sin but all humans just by being human are born with the tendency toward, the potential for, sin. And we start to sin just as soon as we start to judge and we have to judge to adapt to our world and sruvive. So, it's a catch-22 and it is the character of a 'fallen' world. Please realize that I am using the terms Garden and 'fallen world' metaphorically. I don't think there ever was an actual Garden of Eden nor a single first human Adam. To me Adam represents our evolution into self-knowledge. Where there is morality and law there is sin (missing the mark, falling short). FWIW, I don't think Christians are under any law but the command to love one another, and we have quite enough on our hands trying to live up to that one. Also FWIW, I view hell as our separation from God, heaven as being close to/in harmony with God. And God is Love.

A baby is born human and with very selfish needs that it has to express for survival. As it grows it (hopefully) learns trust (faith) and love (give and forgive). If a baby is neglected (its needs not met, not loved) it may not learn trust and love, but instead its natural selfishness (required for survival) will become his or her dominant way of interacting with the world. Thus, we really are born as 'sinners,' and it is love that saves us from this fate.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Luna,

Zeras said,

"... everyone is a sinner even a new born??"

--> This takes us into an entirely different criticism of Christianity. Is this something you also want to explore?

This reminds me of a question I have. In Theosophy is every person born with a karmic debt left over from a previous life?

[Caimanson]

I don't think christianity is negative or positive, it is.
It becomes something else as soon as anyone interprets it and lives it, with good bits and bad bits.
I think it is more a reflection of the bearer than the faith in itself, and I think it is the same for all other beliefs imo.

The way my mind works is that I am an unrepentant literalist, either the whole thing is true or else I reject it.
I could pick and choose from the bible, but that is too much hard work, and since I now don't believe the myth or some of the supposed facts it just doesn't work for me anymore.
I am only left with my belief in god, and that is a very personal one.

My experience is of the fundamentalist type.
For example, in my old church they preached the unconditional forgiveness of god, but as soon as you become "saved" the tune changes dramatically, and then it is more about the law and works. Too much manipulation, but that is a human thing. But I must also say that not everything was about using you, they also loved and cared.

Nick, you mentioned that forgiveness is no responsibility.
The way it was taught to me was that god may wipe away the sin, but you still have to live with the consequences of sin.
True repentance is changing your ways, good deeds, love your neighbour, etc. Some people abuse forgiveness but that is their problem.
For example, if you abuse your family god may forgive you, but you and your family still have to live with the consequences of your actions.
So you are still under pressure to make ammends if you want to change your situation.

[Nick the Pilot]

Luna,

You said,

"I don't believe anyone is born with sin...."

--> Isn't this a fundamental Christian teaching?

"In Theosophy is every person born with a karmic debt left over from a previous life?"

--> Yes they are, although they do not carry the brunt of the entire load in that lifetime.

[Nick the Pilot]

Caimanson,

You said,

"...either the whole thing is true or else I reject it."

--> Theosophy takes a different approach. We say the Bible has been re-written, and wrongly translated into English. The actual story is in there somewhere. It is our job to find that true story. (And, getting to the true story, after being denied it for years, is fun!)

"The way it was taught to me was that god may wipe away the sin, but you still have to live with the consequences of sin."

--> That, by definition, is not forgiveness. Either all repercussions are wiped out, or they are not. (I have definitely noticed a shift in Christian belief of forgiveness/karma over the years. Even my fundamentalist Christian dentist told me he believes in karma. I thought to myself, "We are making progress!")

"For example, if you abuse your family god may forgive you, but you and your family still have to live with the consequences of your actions."

--> This is an interesting mix of forgiveness and responsibility. It also begs the question: what about people who do bad things and get off scott free? The example that keeps coming back to me is the mall-shooters and school-shooters who kill, then turn their gun on themselves, and kill themselves. If, at that last second they repent, they are off "scott-free", and they do not have live with the consequences of their killings either, as you suggest. (Fortunately for me, my belief system teaches quite a different end to the story.)

One of the problems I have with Chrisitianity is that I always come up with examples that just do not work. Sorry, I have decided to go with a system that handles every example I can throw at it.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Luna,

You said,

"I don't believe anyone is born with sin...."

--> Isn't this a fundamental Christian teaching?

The idea of Original Sin started in the Western Chruch with St. Augustine. It was never recognized by the Eastern Orthodox Church, and I think that now it is even debated in Roman Catholocism. I have never heard it preached in the Episcopal Church although it is one of the 39 Articles of the Anglican Communion. In the AC article (note this is a historical document and not a confession of faith), the definition of 'Birth-Sin' is not inherited guilt but a 'fault of nature' of every man (in my words, a propensity toward sin, which is as I have described a few posts ago).

I find the concept of Original Sin absolutely useless when it is used to say that we inherit sin and have it when we are born, although that does seem to be similar to what Theosophy believes. I find though that it does describe the predicament of humans, that we have a hard time doing what we know to be right.

[Nick the Pilot]

Luna,

I am asssuming you use the Bible as a book of authority.

Genesis 3

"14 The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all cattle, and above all wild animals; upon your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. 15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." 16 To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." 17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return." 20 The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. 21 And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins, and clothed them. 22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" -- 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man...."

--> It is this cursing of humans, placing of emnity, multiplying of pain as punishment, and the cursing of the ground that is referred to as Original Sin.

I would continue my train of thought, but it would take me into a type of discussion you have asked me not to have with you. I stop here.

[Caimanson]

[quote=Nick the Pilot;99208]

--> That, by definition, is not forgiveness. Either all repercussions are wiped out, or they are not. (I have definitely noticed a shift in Christian belief of forgiveness/karma over the years. Even my fundamentalist Christian dentist told me he believes in karma. I thought to myself, "We are making progress!")

How would you forgive/discipline a child?
The way I understand it, forgiveness is at a relationship level: I am at peace with god but I still have to clean my mess.
Does Karma have that relationship level with the creator?

"For example, if you abuse your family god may forgive you, but you and your family still have to live with the consequences of your actions."

--> This is an interesting mix of forgiveness and responsibility. It also begs the question: what about people who do bad things and get off scott free? The example that keeps coming back to me is the mall-shooters and school-shooters who kill, then turn their gun on themselves, and kill themselves. If, at that last second they repent, they are off "scott-free", and they do not have live with the consequences of their killings either, as you suggest. (Fortunately for me, my belief system teaches quite a different end to the story.)

I wouldn't dare to elaborate on the theological details of such last second repentance.
Though for starters, the shooter is now dead. That is bad enough in my eyes.

[AndrewX]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

This reminds me of a question I have. In Theosophy is every person born with a karmic debt left over from a previous life?

Yes. Not only that, it is suggested that any given individual's accumulated karma from the earliest few hundred, or thousands of incarnations ... would easily constituted an insurmountable obstacle to spiritual enlightenment, if it were not for certain mitigating factors. The easiest way to think about it, is to imagine that each of us has something like a spiritual counselor, or arbitrator, whom and which seeks to "work things out" so that we may pay our debt, while still managing to advanced forward on the path toward our ultimate goal.

But some important factors overshadow, or underscore, anything we say about karma. It is assumed, as Nick points out, that our original going forth from the Garden of Eden (as a symbolic state, or condition), was God's direct Will, or instruction. It may be thought of as the advice of a loving Father - a purely Spiritual Being of inestimable Wisdom and infinite Love, as well as a Power that He Himself attained only by demonstrating His own mastery in the lower worlds in previous evolutionary cycles.

The Spiritual "us" which goes forth, the Genesis Humanity pre the donning of "coats of skin," is a Spark of God, a `Monad,' and as such is of the same Eternal Essence as the God that sent us forth. This is how we understand the "created us in His own image" bit.

And the first several cycles of development, which the Monad undergoes, concern its descent "downward" from the worlds of Spirit, into the worlds of matter, until finally the lowest point of the material evolutionary cycle is reached. The Monad incarnates via the mineral kingdom, and for untold eons, the Consciousness principle - or `soul' - slowly starts to develop.

Theosophists speak of the Monad as "sleeping" through these stages of Consciousness development, because there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the strictly material worlds which can stir the awareness, or the pure spiritual Being, of the Monad itself. And the journey of the Monad is through the vegetable kingdom, animal kingdom, and finally, entering into the human kingdom, the Consciousness Princple, or `Soul,' becomes "Individualized."

(Previously, an entire forest might be ensouled by a monad, or a flock of birds will be spoken of as the incarnation of the `group soul.' Humanity is where there is finally a one-to-one relationship between the form we see in the mirror, and the Parent Monad in Highest Heaven. In between, in worlds that are still transcendent of our everyday consciousness, the Soul mediates, serving as the bridge between our outward, consciousness-in-form, and the innermost, trancendent Beingness of pure Spirit.)

The karma that we can think of as being held over from our earliest, brutish, animal-like incarnations (involving plenty of killing, crime, and the wronging of our brothers in all kingdoms of life) ... must be dealt with at some point, before we are fully enlightened. It isn't looked at as an inconvenience, or unfortunate side effect of God's instruction to us to go forth, incarnate into form, and experience life in the material world(s). Rather, karma is thought of as how we learn our lessons.


Theosophists understand life, in all worlds of being, as operating according to the Hermetic Axiom:

As it is Above so it is below;
As it is Within so it is without;
As in the Great so in the small;
There but one Life and one Law.

Therefore, as we look around, and see what we - and the rest of Humanity are going through - this too, God Himself is going through (and fellow `Gods') ... just on a much, much grander scale. Thus Theosophists speak of the Planetary Logoi, of which Earth is but one, as plural Beings - in each of Whom a respective "Humanity" lives, and moves, and has its Being. So, too, with other kingdoms, since these kingdoms of life, on Planet Earth, are all part of God, and constitute important components - or organs - of His body of expression.


This is pantheistic, of course, although that's just the tip of the iceberg. Alexander Pope expresses it beautifully:

All are but parts of one stupendous whole,
Whose body Nature, is and God the soul.

Even the Planetary Logoi, Theosophically, are like the major and minor centers, or chakras, of the Solar Logos - GOD. The Mayans, the Egyptians, the cult of Sol Invictus ... not every ancient culture bowed down in reverence to a great, ball of fire. The Hindu prayer, the Gayatri, expresses it thus:

O Thou, Who givest sustenance to the Universe,
From Whom all things proceed,
To Whom all things return,
Reveal to us the face of the true, Spiritual Sun,
Hidden by a disc of Golden Light,
That we may know the Truth and do our whole Duty,
As we journey to Thy Sacred feet.

So, even God(s) have karma. It's just on a far grander scale than human karma. And speaking of strictly human karma, which concerns our non-mastery of life in the mental, emotional and physical worlds (and a life dedicated to Service based upon this mastery) ... an Initiate of the Third Degree can be said to be largely free of almost all personal debt.

What remains for an advanced Initiate is group karma, and the shared karma of race, nation, and Humanity as a whole. These are all accepted voluntarily, and willingly, from one point of view, yet the Enlightenment of a Full Buddha cannot be attained until one's Dharma has expanded to include such a scope. Therefore from a greater point of view, our karma does not end, even with "Self-Mastery."

As for the earlier stages of the Initiatiory Path, or the Path of Discipleship (including the Path of Purity, and of `Probationary Discipleship') ... the disciple is asked to take upon him or herself as much of the old debt as can be reasonably and feasibly shouldered - so that rapid progress may be made, and greater Service rendered to the race. This is part of why the Path is so difficult. It is a great hastening process. And even the heaviest of karmic burdens can be burned away in a few short lives of dedicated self-sacrifice.

The best book I've ever read about rebirth, authored by Melanie Mills under the pseudonym H.K. Challoner, is `Wheel of Rebirth.' I recommmend it for an excellent firsthand account of a disciple, working under the tutelage of her Master, to balance some of the darkest karma that any of us could possibly imagine. Her story is useful because it represents the extreme, and illustrates what we are all capable of, while for most of us the journey should not be quite so difficult.

Namaskar

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Luna,

I am asssuming you use the Bible as a book of authority.

Authority? That's not my relationship with my Lord.

I don't indulge in Bibliolatry.

My religion is informed by scritpure, tradition and reason. My faith is informed by experience of and the love of God.

Genesis 3

"14 The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all cattle, and above all wild animals; upon your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. 15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." 16 To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." 17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return." 20 The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. 21 And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins, and clothed them. 22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" -- 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man...."

--> It is this cursing of humans, placing of emnity, multiplying of pain as punishment, and the cursing of the ground that is referred to as Original Sin.

I have never heard original sin described this way. I certainly reject that idea.

[AndrewX]

As for a more direct response the the question, or idea, of whether or not original sin could possibly exist in the mind, spirit, aura of a newborn child, I recommend a book called `The Personal Aura,' by Dora van Gelder Kunz. Dora was a trained clairvoyant and a Theosophist, yet she speaks with a simplicity, and eschews most of the Sanskrit terminology which is so often present in Theosophical writings.

This particular book, available from Amazon.com, is a recent work ... and includes several illustrations of the astral body, or the aura of the emotional body. She worked very closely with an extremely gifted artist to produce something of immense practical value, and she provides explanations of what has been depicted - so that we can understand what we are looking at.

The part I wanted to call attention to in particular, is what has been called `karmic indicators,' and these do show up even in the aura of a newborn baby. She describes how these can be thought of as latent tendencies, or potentials, although they are not so much abilites, or personal qualities, as the actual `mechanism' by which karma works itself out, in the life of the individual ... as we evolve over time.

The aura itself, including the body (brain, physical consciousness, etc.), of a newborn baby, can thus be considered a tabula rasa, and to see a baby smile we must surely realize that there is an innocence there which no former incarnation of that soul could tarnish. Yet if there is indeed, a reincarnating Soul present, then there must be a mechanism for karma. We can beg the question, yes, but I find Dora's book, and the drawings, quite revealing ... as a reincarnationist, and as a student of human nature.

Namaskar