Is Christianity a Negative Religion?

[earl]

I've got some questions to follow up Luna. Now I recognize that these questions relate to fairly standard tradional Christian doctrines but of course I'm not very traditional anywhoo. As to "resurrection"-how are you meaning that? You appear to believe that one's soul is "with God" in the afterlife-so what is resurrected? "Lord" knows I'll have no need for my human body once I've checked out of it. As to forgiveness and reincarnation, I don't see them as mutually exclusive. As you may have heard,one of the commonly reported near death pheomena is what has been termed the "life review" where NDE'ers have reported having the experience of spontaneously viewing the totality of the life they've lived in the presence of a loving essence where our "hamartia" is quite evident to us. If New Agers of old are right that reincarnation isn't for the purpose of appeasing God-i.e. obtaining His/Her forgiveness-rather it is for the soul's learning-more chances to correct our "hamartia"/poor aim, then I don't see it as inconsistent with a Christian orientation. But then I am a heretic. earl

[lunamoth]

Hi earl, Thank you for the post. My goodness, every response I give seems to open up lots of questions. But that for sure is fine with me. But, quite a lot will always remain in the cloud of unknowing.

Originally Posted by earl

I've got some questions to follow up Luna. Now I recognize that these questions relate to fairly standard tradional Christian doctrines but of course I'm not very traditional anywhoo. As to "resurrection"-how are you meaning that?

Well now, neither Jesus nor any of the Apsotles including Paul who wrote most about this really gave much in the way of concrete detail did they? In fact I'm pretty sure that all that Paul said about the resurrected body is quite metaphorical...you recall 1 Corinthians 15.

35But someone may ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?" 36How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. 39All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

42So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"[e]; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. 46The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 47The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 48As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we[f] bear the likeness of the man from heaven.

50I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."[g]
55"Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?"[h] 56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

It is my own thinking about this that leads me to conclude that we will have a body...light needs to be reflected off some-thing for it to be detected, and love likewise needs a differentiation to be experienced. I don't think it is our material body here that is resurrected...even Paul seems to say that's not so. I have no idea what it would be 'made' of.

You appear to believe that one's soul is "with God" in the afterlife-so what is resurrected?

Our love is resurrected into a new body that has no hooks of self and other obstacles to interfere with our perfect love and God and each other.

"Lord" knows I'll have no need for my human body once I've checked out of it.

Nor I...but a body is a different matter than this body.

As to forgiveness and reincarnation, I don't see them as mutually exclusive.

I suppose they don't have to be. But it seems to me that if at the end of this life we are 'forgiven' and leave all sin behind...what is the purpose of coming back to live another life mired in the duality that creates sin? Would one be only partially forgiven? Also, there seem to be all kinds of logistical problems with the thing about new souls being created and the numbers of bodies and what will be the natural und of our planet and then the natural end of this universe.

Another thing is that I really don't see how we can ever really repay a karmic debt. Every day the mere act of eating to keep my body going causes the destruction of other organisms and the environment.

As you may have heard,one of the commonly reported near death pheomena is what has been termed the "life review" where NDE'ers have reported having the experience of spontaneously viewing the totality of the life they've lived in the presence of a loving essence where our "hamartia" is quite evident to us.

I believe in the life review as part of the transition out of this life into the next. I think the whole thing about 'hell fire' is seeing our life for what it really has been, the pain we've caused others, and the love we've shared. Just think...the more pain we've caused the more like hell such an experience would be. The more love we've created...the more like heaven that would be. During this life we tend to be blind to the ramifications of our actions...even the best of us. I think that's why some Christians of the Calvinist bent go on about how we are not 'good.' However, I think that kind of emphasis is misplaced.

If New Agers of old are right that reincarnation isn't for the purpose of appeasing God-i.e. obtaining His/Her forgiveness-rather it is for the soul's learning-more chances to correct our "hamartia"/poor aim, then I don't see it as inconsistent with a Christian orientation. But then I am a heretic. earl

Oh, I must be a heretic too because I totally agree that that 'judgement' has nothing at all to do with appeasing God.

Cheers,
luna

[earl]

Thank you for your thoughts, Luna. I agree that in any form of afterlife, one's "soul" is emdodied or contained in something. That's why I have trouble with the branches of Christianity that posit some form of "resurrection" occurring only at the "end of times." You seem to be saying-& I'd agree-that at death (one's own personal end of times) that we are born into an afterlife in which we are clothed in some "body." So we'd already have a spiritual body at death so to speak. I've seen you say elsewhere that to you living the Christian life isn't really about concerning oneself with the aferlife, it's about having more abundant life in this life and I would agree. Whether I have already had more than 1 bite of the apple and/or will have others, (i.e., reincarnation), that is the crucial point for me. Have a good weekend, earl

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by earl

Thank you for your thoughts, Luna. I agree that in any form of afterlife, one's "soul" is emdodied or contained in something. That's why I have trouble with the branches of Christianity that posit some form of "resurrection" occurring only at the "end of times."

Good point earl. The way I think of it, the end of this life will be our end of times. As I said above, when we end it will be as if all 'time' ends. Frankly, if I were to put an image to this I'd see myself meeting not only Jesus right away, but all of my loved ones, including my children, grandchildren, etc. who lived on this earth long past me. There would be no experience of waiting alone in the next life until they too pass over.

Have a good weekend, earl

Thank you for your views as well earl. I hope you also have a great weekend!

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

"...you would not consider people who believe in some forms of universal salvation/apacatastasis Christians? Why not?"

--> I am not sure what you are referring to. I think we are saying the same thing. Salvation seems to me to be a universal Christian concept. I cannot imagine a Christian who does not believe in salvation.

By universal salvation (or universal reconciliation) I do not mean that it's believed by all Christians. It refers to the idea that all end up in harmony with God.

Originally Posted by wiki

Main article: Universal reconciliation
In Christianity, Universalism refers to the belief that all humans will be saved from eternal damnation or annihilation in hell. A related doctrine, apokatastasis, is the belief that all mortal beings will be reconciled to God, including Satan and his fallen angels. Universalism was a fairly commonly held view among theologians in early Christianity. The two major theologians opposing it were Tertullian and Augustine. In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six known theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Cesarea, and Edessa or Nisibis) were universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality, and one (Carthage or Rome) taught the endless punishment of the lost.[1] In later centuries, universalism has become very much a minority position in the major branches of Christianity, though it has a long history of prominent adherents.

See also

Apokatastasis
Primitive Baptist Universalist
Trinitarian Universalism
Unitarian Universalism
Universalist Church of America

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

"...reincarnation ... seems counter to the idea of grace and forgiveness."

--> I agree. I see the issue of reincarnation/karma vs. forgiveness/salvation as the key issue separating Christians from me.

"Personally I can't reconcile reincarnation with resurrection...."

--> Neither can I. It is either one or the other.

"...although I guess some might think you reincarnate over and over until the general resurrection."

--> It is an interesting idea, although reincarnation negates the entire idea of resurrection. If you think it through, the idea of reincarnation eventually wipes out the entire idea of forgiveness/salvation. The idea of reincarnation changes everything.

I think I addressed this in my above post to earl.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

"The Incarnation is meaningful to me, but I know there are some Christians who have a very different view of this."

--> Christians who reject the deification of Jesus? Amazing.

"You know of Bishop Spong I would guess."

--> I have never heard of him. What did he say?

Here's a wiki link about Bishop Spong.

"Who gets to make that call?"

--> You know where this is leading. What is you definition of a Chrisitian?

One who follows Christ? It's just a label.

Edit: I'm going to ammend that. I think anyone who sees themself as Christian and does something about that is part of the Body of Christ, the Church. I think there is more distinction than just a label. However, it's not for us to judge whether another makes some kind of cut as to whether they are a Christian or not.

[Nick the Pilot]

Luna,

You said,

"Individual life requires some kind of 'body.'.... ...we will have a body...light needs to be reflected off some-thing for it to be detected, and love likewise needs a differentiation to be experienced."

--> That is an interesting observation. In Theosophy, however, we eventually become the Light — all distinction and differentiation between me and the Light disappears. (This is a very difficult concept to understand, when someone is hearing it for the first time.)

"...if at the end of this life we are 'forgiven' and leave all sin behind...what is the purpose of coming back to live another life mired in the duality that creates sin?"

--> You have the described the difference between Christianity and Theosophy beautifully.

"...there seem to be all kinds of logistical problems with the thing about new souls being created and the numbers of bodies...."

--> There are? Please feel free to list them.

"...there seem to be all kinds of logistical problems with ... what will be the natural end of our planet and then the natural end of this universe."

--> Please feel free to list them.

"Every day the mere act of eating to keep my body going causes the destruction of other organisms and the environment."

--> If it is part of the Divine Plan, it is not a bad thing that creates bad karma. Eating a fruit or a vegetable does not create bad karma.

"I think the whole thing about 'hell fire' is seeing our life for what it really has been, the pain we've caused others, and the love we've shared."

--> It is interesting to contrast this to one Theosophical view. 'Hell fire' is seen as the continued desire for fleshly experiences that we no longer have a body for. Some people think our desires and addictions will automatically disappear when we no longer have a physical body. I see no reason to make this assumption, hence the Theosophical view of Hell.

I need to add that the Theosophical Hell also is a place where we experience the pain we have caused. In this instance, the Theosophical and Christian views of Hell agree.

"...the end of this life will be our end of times."

--> This is a huge difference between Christianity and Theosophy. Theosophy sees this life as merely one for of consciounsness in a long line of forms of consciousness. Christianity sees humanity going from nothing to human to Heaven, and that's it. For Theosophy, that is way too short a path.

"...Our love is resurrected into a new body...."

--> By that do you mean a new physical body?

"I think anyone [is a Christian] who sees themself as Christian and does something about that..."

--> It makes discussions easier when specific beliefs that make a person a Christian are listed. (Unless, of course, no such list exists.)

~~~

Some people may say this continuing discussion has taken this thread off-topc. I disagree. All of these differences are things that have led people away from Christianity.

[Nick the Pilot]

Hi, Earl,

As one heretic to another, I hope you and I can have some interesting discussions together.

You said,

"As to forgiveness and reincarnation, I don't see them as mutually exclusive."

--> I am curious as to how you arrived at this conclusion.

"...one of the commonly reported near death pheomena is what has been termed the 'life review' where NDE'ers have reported having the experience of spontaneously viewing the totality of the life they've lived in the presence of a loving essence where our 'hamartia' is quite evident to us."

--> This "life review" is a key part of my belief system, as it is the very basis of determining good/bad karma, and determining if another incarnation is necessary. How does this "life review" fit into your belief system?

"If New Agers of old are right that reincarnation isn't for the purpose of appeasing God-i.e. obtaining His/Her forgiveness-rather it is for the soul's learning-more chances to correct our "hamartia"/poor aim, then I don't see it as inconsistent with a Christian orientation."

--> I do not follow. When you have the time, please feel free to provide more specifics.

"I agree that in any form of afterlife, one's 'soul' is embodied or contained in something."

--> I want to emphasize that this is something we have in common.

"Whether I have already had more than 1 bite of the apple and/or will have others, (i.e., reincarnation), that is the crucial point for me."

--> Are you saying you believe in reincarnation? Or that it only at the "what-if" stage for you? (Or maybe not even that far?)

[earl]

I see no particular reason to automatically discount the possiblity of reincarnation Nick. As to what I meant about forgiveness and reincarnation not necessarily being in opposition, again I think of the NDE phenomena of the life review. The descriptions I've read of the review taking place while "held in a sort of loving embrace of a Divine essence" suggests a form of forgiveness given the experience of total acceptance accompanying that review. Why further life experiences on this plane may assist one in further growth as you no doubt would see is fairly obvious-as Luna put it, experiences here in the world of form are very "duality-based" and if the Christian's path toward "God" involves an ever deepening "kenosis" or "self-emptying," in order to unify ever more fully with God, than no better place to learn how to do that than this world, which Buddhists describe as the "saha" world, meaning "rose-like"-i.e., beauty of the flower accompanied by the pain of its thorns. Only in pain, limitation, heart-ache, etc. are we faced with the choice to either open our hearts and being ever wider to a fuller appreciation of the Divine living through the "roses and thorns" or close in upon our diminishing sense of self. So you could say that I agree with Luna that we are all always "forgiven," but like you I agree there's always more to learn. earl

[Nick the Pilot]

Earl,

You said,

"...if the Christian's path toward "God" involves an ever deepening "kenosis" or "self-emptying," in order to unify ever more fully with God, than no better place to learn how to do that than [to return back to] this world...."

--> That is an interesting way of looking at it. The purpose of multiple physical lives as being a time of self-emptying.

[lunamoth]

Hi earl, I'd like to make one comment about this.

Originally Posted by earl

So you could say that I agree with Luna that we are all always "forgiven," but like you I agree there's always more to learn. earl

That's a very nice thought and I like it. I have one question about it though, and it concerns a problem with karma and reincarnation that I would have. (I have a similar concern regarding any belief system which would include an eternal hell for the 'unsaved,' but I'll stick to this for simplicity.)

What would be the explanation for true evil perpetuated in this world against basically good or innocent people. For example, the horrors of the Nazi death camps. It seems a very negative and dismal worldview, hateful even, to attribute the suffering of the Jews and other minorities in the death camps to their own bad karma from this or previous lives. It's like saying they were born into this life to suffer such atrocity because of their own fault. Likewise children who are abused and suffer. Are they actually to blame for their suffering because of old karmic debt in past lives? And what sense does it make karma-wise for future lives? A baby is born, tortured while it is helpless and unable to do anything to unburden itself from karmic debt, what will happen in the next life? Was it merely a punishment for that baby to be born into a life where it would be abused and killed in infancy. Heavy questions I know...but it is a sticky point for me when considering reincarnation.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

~~~

Some people may say this continuing discussion has taken this thread off-topc. I disagree. All of these differences are things that have led people away from Christianity.

Hi Nick, I just want to let you know that I see this post but I'm going to first finish up with your other questions before addressing these. I don't think this is off topic.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

"The non-Christian world is very different from the Christian world. --> How so?"

--> This is a very complicated topic. I would break it down into three areas.

(1) As I said before, the idea of reincarnation changes everything. It changes the very way a person perceives the universe.

(2) When you remove the idea of having a personal relationship with an Almighty God, it also changes everything.

* The idea of giving praise disappears.
* The goal of life changes.
* The looking outward stops. The looking inward begins.

(3) When you remove the idea ressurection, it also changes everything. Here, too, the goal of life changes.

I would agree that our ideas about God and afterlife affect our worldview and how we approach our relationships with others. An point of interest (not up for debate because I realize there are positive ways to look at the inward journey)...I think one goal of our spiritual path should be to 'get over ourselves,' and not worry so much about just our own life. Part of religious practice for me is to look outside myself and not be so self-centered. (Please know I am not saying you or anyone else is self-centered! I'm just saying my goal is to not be so self-centered.)

--> The one thing that immdiately pops into my mind is that Theosophy is not scary at all. There are many facets of such an idea I could get into, but I will only address one here. The words supernatural, mysticism, occult, etc., have taken a bad rap. The words have taken on a meaning of black magic, seances, and witchcraft (and I must say I believe these negative connotations have been purposely created by church leaders). I can truly say that I have never read anything in Theosophical literature that scared me. When read from a Theosophical perspective, even the concept of Hell is seen as a positive experience!

OK. The thing about such symbols and rituals is that their meaning is tied to the belief system in which they are used. For example, Satanists from the view of Christians would be way off track because the Christian understanding of Satan is as the embodiment of evil. But, if the Satanist redefines Satan/Lucifer as Knowledge or enlightenment, then they are in fact not worshipping evil but something positive. Now, some Satanists, for all I know, may in fact view evil as good and I would have to say that they are wrong and that is not a good path to be on. But most Satanists I've talked to actually value themselves and their abilities in a rather humanistic fashion. It might (but not even necessarily) be a self-centered path but it would not be an 'evil' path.

New religions co-opt symbols and language from existing religions all the time, and this is a great cause of bad feelings and confusion a lot of the time. But it's not the symbol or ritual that is important, but what the symbol/ritual points to, right?

Sorry, but I see the fear of mysticism as coming from Christianity. Do you know that my fundamental Christian sister once told me that the signs of the Zodiac are signs of the Devil? (true story, yuck.) There is more, but I will stop here, to hear your reaction.

Fundamentalism is a pretty narrow slice the Christianity pie. Some Christians view any form of mysticism with suspicion, but for others that is far from the case! There are famous Christian mystics, St. Teresa of Avalon, St. John of the Cross, the anonymous author of The Cloud of Unknowing. All the Christian contemplatives...the contemplative life is the Christian word for mystic experience. I would submit that every Christian who prays is involved in mysticism.

--> I do not mean to blow my own horn, but Theosophy uses both literal-factual approaches and symbolic approaches — and Theosophy is very careful to say which story is factual and which is symbolic. The factual/symbolic problem has been completely eliminated in Theosophy, while (in my humble opinion) it is still a big problem in Christianity.

I don't see any problem at all in Christian interpretation of Scripture. I don't see the value in prefect uniformity of interpretation.

Also, some parts of the Bible were meant to be taken literally. Some parts of the Bible were meant to be taken symbolically. Again, in my humble opinion, it has gotten all mixed up to the point of the original teachings being lost. In order to truly understand the Bible, a person has to know which is which. (And that is exactly what I and Theosophy do, but that is another topic for another day.) Curiosity is my strongest motivation. I can only hope I will motivate Christians into being more curious about what is in the Bible.

I read the Bible quite a lot, I read a lot of commentary about the Bible, I pray with the Bible. Every time I read it, even the same thing, new things come to me and shape my life. I don't see a whole lot of value in the question "Did this literally happen." I find a lot more value in trying to understand what was the meaning of the experience of the authors of the various book. I find a lot more value in trying to apply the lessons to my life. I find questions like "did the flood really happen?" to be exceedingly uninteresting.

The feeling I am getting from you is that we can never figure out what the Bible really means. I disagree. I feel this is a big difference between Christians and Theosophists. I have had many Christians tell me, "Ya know, it does not make sense, and that is OK with me." I would never settle for such an approach to my belief system. (Fortunately, Theosophy does not force me into such a corner.)

I would say that we can nevre exhaust the meaning of the Bible, not that we can never figure it out. I think we should expect the Bible to make sense to us. There are lots of conflicts in not only historical points but also in the 'lessons' of the Bible. That's because life is not flat and uniform and perfect, but very messy. It's an amazing document of the history of human experience of God, and it's a living book in that the Wisdom in it can inform my life today and every day.

"The Roman Catholic Church is positively progressive compared to some flavors of Protestantism, esp in things related to science and pluralism."

--> Feel free to give examples. (Go ahead and blow your horn!)

I am not a Catholic, never have been. But I think of the Jesuits and their pursuit of scientific truth. The Roman Catholic Church does not condemn to hell all outside Her walls as some flavors of Protestanism do. There is a willingness to accept (or at least not outright deny!) scientific theories like evolution. Thomas can give you a lot more examples than I can.

The main point, though (at the risk of repeating myself), is that He is unfair.

I don't see it that way. Even using the term He and thinking of God as a supernatural being is an artificial limitation.

"I don't approach the Bible in a literal-factual manner. It's not a science book and it's not a text book. It is poetry, it is sacred, it is symbol, and it is a thin place where we can hear the voice of God speaking to us. Likewise with religion...it is not the destination but the vehicle. If you can't trust it, you can't trust it, I understand that. Because what faith and belief really are...is trust."

--> I understand exactly where you are coming from. However, I see all of these attributes in Theosophical scripture too (I really do). And, I have yet to find one word in Theosophical scripture that does not make sense. Also, we are taught the Bible and Theosophical scripture come from the same source. Please find comfort in the idea that my Theosophical scripture gives me just as much poetry, sacred symbology, and glimses into the Divine Plan as your Bible gives you.

I believe you.

[i]
--> I am looking forward to the day when you spend all your time as a Guardian Angel — the time is closer than you think.

What does that mean?

[Nick the Pilot]

Luna,

You said,

"...What would be the explanation for true evil perpetuated in this world against basically good or innocent people. For example, the horrors of the Nazi death camps."

--> This calls for a review of some basic concepts regarding karma. All of us have a ton of bad karma we need to burn off. These evil experiences give us the opportunity to burn off a significant amount of karma.

"It seems a very negative and dismal worldview, hateful even, to attribute the suffering of the Jews and other minorities in the death camps to their own bad karma from this or previous lives."

--> It is a common misconception that certain groups have been targeted for extra suffering in this life because of they were unusually evil in their previous lives. Theosophy teaches quite the opposite.

Everyone has a karmic debt (so the theory goes), but the amount they are burning off now is not related to how evil they were in some previous life. When we see someone suffering we may thnk, "Look at their suffering. They must have been really bad in a previous life to deserve such suffering." We may then think this person is an unusually evil person, forced to endure unusually bad karma. Actually, just the opposite is true.

As stated before, all of us have a ton of bad karma we need to burn off. We cannot get to the next level until all of our bad karma has been burned off. Some of us actually agree to a larger amount of bad karma in a particular life. (I was told that, befoe I was born, I agreed to take on a larger amounf of bad karma than the average person — sometimes I could kick myself in the head for agreeing to such a thing!)

Just this morning, I was sitting in a doughnut shop having a doughnut and coffee. I watched the older woman who owns the shop. For the millionth time I reflected on how she has to work hard, while I have such a piece of cake job. Did she agree to burn off more bad karma than I did? Maybe so. Either way, my heart goes out to her because she works so hard. And because it is so unfair when viewed in the Christian way. No, sorry, I refuse to accept such an unfair faith.

"It's like saying they were born into this life to suffer such atrocity because of their own fault"

--> It is the common misconception. They chose to suffer such an atrocity. I have nothing but respect for such people.

"Likewise children who are abused and suffer. Are they actually to blame for their suffering because of old karmic debt in past lives?"

--> What is the alternative answer to your question? Just bad luck? Oh well, that is just the way it goes? The unfairness of such an answer makes me disregard it immediately.

"A baby is born, tortured while it is helpless and unable to do anything to unburden itself from karmic debt, what will happen in the next life?"

--> I believe that baby will reborn with a huge sense of compassion for the suffering it will see around it in its next lifetime. To me, this makes perfect sense.

"Was it merely a punishment for that baby to be born into a life where it would be abused and killed in infancy"

--> Punishment, no. Paying off an old debt, yes.

~~~

You have left out the other side of the question. How about the miserable scum who are born rich and powerful? I see no way the idea of "Oh well, just luck" answers it. Karma answers such a question fully. There is no unfairness in karma at all.

(By the way, we are creeping ever closer to another idea that chases me away from Christianity — babies that die in infancy.)