Burner Impressions of Christianity

[Me2]

Getting all Luce Irigary on me, eh? I really dig the existentialists, but I think that I break with pretty much everyone post-Sartre when I say that I think reality has nothing to do with percpetion. I think that maybe there is 'reality' and there is 'perceived reality'. I think saying that reality is shaped by perception is a form of solipsism (although I know it's directly contrary with Sartre and his contemporaries).

I don't know that Irigaray would consider herself an existentialist, but I suppose her work in trying to create a feminine language may fit within the bounds of creating meanings for our own lives. Simone de Beauvoir on the other hand was in the same mind-stream as Sarte, ie. both influenced by Husserl.

I think solipsism is an extreme and unsubstantial view of reality, but lets go there anyway.....To say that u can split reality into the concrete and the perceived is a big leap, because how do we know that there is any reality beyond that which we perceive?? Really, I think it's more about how our reality is shaped by the paradigms (gender, class, race, religion, education) we live under than our own free will to perceive it in whatever form we prefer.

And as for the Dana, thing...Sorry. My perception of Dana's made me think you were a woman. So you are.

Clever......I laughed.

[MikeVDS]

Oops, this one isn't specifically stoning, just death:

Leviticus 20:13:

This is almost identical to Leviticus 18:22. In transliterated Hebrew, the verse is written: "V'ish asher yishkav et zachar mishk'vei ishah to'evah asu shneihem mot yumatu d'meihem bam." However, it adds a compulsory death penalty to the participants. In various translation the passage has been translated:

...

(King James Version): "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."

I know it's taught that the old laws have become irrelevant since J.C. came strolling along, but where does it say that? I don't know either way, but have never been shown where that idea comes from.

[DJmoYst]

I know it's taught that the old laws have become irrelevant since J.C. came strolling along, but where does it say that? I don't know either way, but have never been shown where that idea comes from.

The new covenant was ratified through the blood of Jesus Christ. Not only did his death pay for our sins, it also ended the old covenant and began the new. In my church we drink the wine in remembrance of Jesus' death, we show our acceptance of the new covenant, including the forgiveness that is given because of his shed blood. Jesus coming does not negate but fulfils the old covenant.

[Fat SAM]

Me2, you're right. Irigary is more of a post-feminist, but I think she's relevant to the notion of reality as socially constructed.

On solipsism and perception: How can you know that what you perceive is what is? When you look at your computer screen, for instance, you might see a 'red' line where the 'preview' and 'submit' buttons are. That line, though you perceive it as red, is actually a trick of the eye and your brain, organizing the multicolored pixels into one uniform color. Whether you see it as red or not, your perception doesn't change the fact that it's not actually red.

I think that I must argue that perception is not reality. Reality is reality and perception is merely the personal interpretation. A good friend of mine likes to define reality so: "It's what's still there when you close your eyes."

MikeVDS...here you go...And it's not that the Law is irrelevant. It's that Christ is said to have fulfilled the Law by his sacrifice.

Matthew 5:17
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

In further support of the idea of the New Covenant:
Luke 22:20
"This cup is the New Covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you."

In support of Love as the highest commandment:
Also, Matthew 22:36-40
"Teacher, what 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' (An interesting metaphysic profession, by the way - mind, heart, and soul as seperate...) 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."

Also in Luke 10:25 - 26
"On one occasion, an expert in the Law stood up to test Jesus. 'Teacher,' he asked, 'what must I do to inherit eternal life?'
"What is written in the Law?" He replied. "How do you interpret it?"
"He answered: 'Love the Lord with all your soul and all your strength and with all your mind' and 'Love your neighbor as yourself."
"You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

The second cite comes from the story of the Good Samaritan. Three men, a priest, a Levite, and a Samaritan passed a beaten, robbed traveller on the road and only the Samaritan stopped to help. The Samaritans were hated by the Jews (basically the equivalent of the 'untouchable caste' in India), but Jesus tells the Pharisee who questioned him that it was the Samaritan who acted as a neighbor.
"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?"
"The one who had mercy on him," the expert in the Law replied.
Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."
In the name of charity and love, Jesus tells a Pharisee to mimic a Samaritan, which would simply have been unheard of.

I maintain that while our modern religious leaders often preach hate, persecution, and exclusion, Jesus taught love.

[gyre]

Isn't the anti-gay thing about the Essene/anti-Essene question of whether people must have children to make a church more powerful or avoid it because every birth was a soul removed from heaven?
And after that, it just gets complicated.

If I had word directly from God and I thought it was wrong, I would oppose it.


Character is what you are in the dark.

[Archantael]

When someone quotes "scripture" from which book are they quoting? A quick Google search turns up a site with no less than 16 different bibles for sale, a little further digging and the number of translations out there becomes apparent...and there's a bunch.

http://store.bibles.com/Category/Bibles ... glish.aspx
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15367a.htm

Next up, all of these bibles were translated from other languages. I'll cheat and use Wikipedia's definition of the word translation:
"Translation is the interpretation of the meaning of a text in one language (the "source text") and the production, in another language, of an equivalent text (the "target text," or "translation") that communicates the same message.

Translation must take into account a number of constraints, including context, the rules of grammar of the two languages, their writing conventions, their idioms and the like."

Basically using those two sources above and keeping in mind the limitations of translations I could find ways to shred or spin almost any scripture that gets quoted to make it reflect the message I want to get out there. To overly simplify this it's why I laugh at bible thumpers...they go on rants defending a book that's got serious flaws....yet they're trying to change the world with it. It's hilarious when one thinks about it....and also kinda sad too.

[itwazed]

To say that the Bible has serious flaws may be a huge understatement not only was it translated by people with there own agenda, the books that were chosen to be in the new testament were hand picked by people trying to forward their version of Christianity. That said while it is a book written by man it is i believe whole heartedly its is inspired by God. So much like Fat SAM I look for the consistencies in the Teachings of Christ and the message of love and hope that it brings to guide me in my day to day living. I quote stories like the Good Samaritan becuase they make a comment on his society that in todays world would go something like this.

A man wraps his car around a telephone pole after skidding on a patch of ice on a road with little traffic. As he lays unconcious a Babtist minister drives by, slowing down slightly as he sees the wreck he thingks to himself, well someone must already know about this and im late for home fellowship so he continues on. The next person to go by is an Epsicopal Priest, seeing the awful wreck he prays but doesnt even slow down becuase hes sacred of being liable. The third person is a devout muslim and as he sees the wreck he pulls over quickly and rushes to the mans aid, he removes him from the car and calls 911. He sits with man till the ambulance comes and tells the paramedic hes not sure if the man has health coverage and if he doesnt he liked to be contacted to help cover his expenses. And finally after the ambulance leaves and the man is stable the muslim goes back on his way, but after running his errands he stops at the hospital to check on the mans progress...so you tell me which one of these men was most Christ like.

[MikeVDS]

I don't think the language flaws are that serious for most passages, though there are a few I can think of which people often debate over. For the one I quoted, I had a list of about 16 versions and I erased them all except the KJV because they all basically said the same thing, and figured it was pointless.

As far as being able to ignore the old laws, I don't get that from those passages. I see how someone might want to see that from those passages and it doesn't contradict your point, but it's not explicitly apparent from those. I did a bit of research last night and found one passage that someone says explains why the old laws are obsolete, but it was late and confusing and I lacked the energy to try to figure it out.

Do the Jews still hold to those laws?

[helitack]

...religions and governments are all about control...

[MikeVDS]

...religions and governments are all about control...

Governments, no doubt; that's the idea. For any religion I'm certain it depends on the specific leadership, but those positions tend to attract people or change people into taking more power. Some started for control, others have been marketed for control, but you're always going to have different results depending on the details.

[gyre]

Religion and power once meant the same thing.
You have to keep that in mind when when looking back.

I love the line about 'the messenger both terrible and vulnerable.'
Completely at someone's mercy, but representing great power.


I was always very interested in translation flaws.
I asked a biblical scholar about this and he gave me one from genesis.

"God created man and woman in six eras (or periods of time)."
No Adam and Eve, no mention of days.
And that was just a quick example.
We don't even have full understanding of some of those languages now.
And did you notice the two versions of creation in genesis?
More mysteries.

[Ron]

...
A man wraps his car around a telephone pole after skidding on a patch of ice on a road with little traffic. As he lays unconcious a Babtist minister ....s...so you tell me which one of these men was most Christ like.

None of them, it's a trick question! Christ would have either known that the driver was an awful money lender who got what he deserved, or have healed the poor SOB on his own and refused to contribute to a huge industry that uses mercy and aid as its products for sale. ;)

Ron

[Ron]

...religions and governments are all about control...

Yeppers. You know how primatologists know which ape is the alpha in a chimp community? The alpha is the one that controls (in as much as he's able) what everyone else eats, who everyone else has sex with, and who fights who, when and how. Seems to me that most rules, and the efforts to enforce them, that churches and governments create and continue have to do with who's boinking whom, how, who's fighting who, in what way, and what folk can eat. Hmmmm, seem familiar?

Ron

[DJmoYst]

Christ would have either known that the driver was an awful money lender who got what he deserved, or have healed the poor SOB on his own and refused to contribute to a huge industry that uses mercy and aid as its products for sale.

Ron

I know Jesus didn't associate with tax collectors or thieves so your probably right.

[Fat SAM]

1st: Archantael. The book I quoted from is the NIV or New International Version, which is pretty widely used. I'd love to quote to you from the KJV, but I don't have one. And please don't feel sorry for me. I'm not trying to change the world with shredded, out of context scriptures or by Bible thumping, which I hardly think I'm doing by answering questions. I am trying to change the world, however, by acting (as often as I remember to) in a loving way with the people I encounter. As for spinning the text given, I think I did pretty well at not adding or taking away anything. I even gave subtext.

MikeVDS: Some Jews still uphold the Law. It's a truly complex and painstaking system of rules, though, and only the most ultra-orthodox Jews live by the whole Law. It's pretty tough,actually. Even then, I think that the practice of sacrifice (at least among the Jews) has been eliminated. At least you don't hear about it, anyway.

Gyre: The anti-gay attitude probably does have a lot to do with procreation, but I think it has more to do with keeping people supplying a smallish tribe (the Jews of Exodus - as it comes first from Leviticus, the first delivery of the Law and then is repeated in Deuteronomy, the second reading of the Law with some clarification. The Laws were passed to the Jews before they entered the Promised Land. It's a pretty old notion) with new generations. As for translation flaws, I agree...they're pretty numerous. That's one of the reasons I feel comfortable seeking out (what I think) is the deeper deiscernible message in the Bible. A professor friend of mine speaks Latin and quoted to me from the Latin vulgate one day. We then compared the Latin with the modern version and they didn't have even remotely the same meaning. It's a book handed down through so many filters that it's tough to say 'This is certainly the intended reading. That's ok. I'm comfortable with my belief as I have derived it.

I think that some of you are missing my point. I'm not arguing the validity of the Bible. I'm sure that the New Testament of the Bible (the Old Testament is unchanged since antiquity thanks to the Jewish scribing traditions) is a book frought with agenda and sadly, I'm sure the core message of the one who inspired it has been buried beneath power plays and attempts to control the people who believe it. Even worse, in a world where people rely largely on mass media for information rather than personal investigation, I think people tend to believe whatever they're given as true and fail to question the motives of those who deliver the information.

I'm arguing points systematically in the formal sense (eg. if a, then b). I could do the same thing with the Bhagavad Gita and would probably hear fewer remarks about the accuracy of the scriptures quoted and I think that it probably has to do with the biases in place with some of the contenders. You asked for the cites, you got them.

Suffice to say, I stand apart from what I see as mainstream Christianity and believe in the messenger and the message, which, in my personal interpretation is one of love. My beliefs have been formed over a fifteen year inquiry (and one that will continue as long as I can read) into spirituality which has taken me through the Bible, the Quran, The Tao Te Ching, the Hindu scriptures, The Analects of Confucious, The Celestine Prophecy and Carlos Castaneda, and even out of religion and pseudo religion and into the realms of metaphysics in books like The Elegant Universe. I even incorporate the works of the great atheist Nietzsche into my belief system...how? By taking the pieces that I think make sense and working them into the larger structure. If you tell me it's wrong to do this, I'll ask you how you know. What proof do you have? No more that I do.

I take my beliefs as a synthesis of what I believe are concurrent and cooperative beliefs and ideas from many cultures and many sources. I'm not going to argue that people have done wrong in the name of Christ and Christianity any more than in the name of any other religion or any less. Mankind has historically manipulated those around him and the world itself in order to yield the highest available benefit for himself and will continue to do so, regardless of the negative impact it may or may not have on others. In the meantime, I will continue to believe what I believe and I will continue to (try to) practice love as my highest rule. I believe that my inspiration for that practice is Jesus. Find your own inspiration. It's not my place to bully anyone into believing as I believe.

I think you'd be hard pressed to tell me that loving is wrong (but I'm sure someone will try).

And back to topic, acting in love toward those around me is what I like to do on the Playa as a Christian burner. Or can I just be a person?

Boo yah.

[helitack]

I have a really good amigo in Coahuila that used to run the cantina in Boquillas. Many philosophical discussions and answers to world problems were solved by him and the patrons of the cantina over many beers, shots of Sotol and tequila. His name..........Jesús

[Me2]

When someone quotes "scripture" from which book are they quoting? A quick Google search turns up a site with no less than 16 different bibles for sale, a little further digging and the number of translations out there becomes apparent...and there's a bunch.

I take the view point that if God is powerful enough to create the universe, then He/She's probably powerful enough to protect the meaning of the holy scriptures down through time, what ever form they end up in. Plus I don't believe all there is to know about God is found in the bible, it's just the history of man's relationship with God.

[dana]

I think Dana's negative impression of Christianity has been largely based on interaction with the Christians she has likely come into contact with who are largely undereducated and have likely spent little time actually reading the Bible (most churches I've attended rarely encourage reading the Bible as a book and rather dole it out in abstracted, out of context chunks). She seems to be railing against the actions of the people she has interacted with (either historically or currently) and not to the core beliefs themselves (which sadly seem to go largely unpracticed). Ghandi was once asked what he thought of Christians and replied, "I don't know. I've never met one." Touche. With Dana, I agree that science and spirituality are not at all mutually exclusive. I think they can coexist in a belief system in perfect tandem. I also agree with her that the average Christian probably does not believe that the Earth is only 7000 years old. It's impossible to justify and is held usually by only the most literal interpreters of the Bible and even then, I think it might just be obstinance.
.

About your assumptions:
First I'm a manly man with a girlie name.
No many of the people were quite intelligent (not necessarily wise) including pastors and preachers. One of the worst was a med student who was the type that quotes exact scripture including numbers. We were having a discussion in which I was voicing pretty much what you and itwazed are saying, about having to sort through to find the truth, interpret, etc. He fired back with an exact bible quote saying something like interpretation is an opening to the devil or some such shit.
And just to top it off when I was in between jotting down some of these very ideas, I encountered a pastor who told me if I didn't believe in Christ I would spend an eternity in hell. I replied that if he really believed that, his god was an idiot. I have to assume this pastor has spent at least a little time reading the bible.
And as far as the 7,000 year thing I've heard that shit on the radio twice, so I know its being propagated.

Its peculiar that you would make those assumptions, all of which are wrong. But that's what we do. I see faith or dogma in that same sense. We take assumptions and codify them, repeat them and spread them until they become scripture, faith and dogma.
Oppose that to belief which immediately shows you its validity. For example itwazed holds a belief in what we might call "the true face of jesus". (For me I might call that the "true face of humanity".) Its not faith because its something that itwazed can experience directly. Someone else might want to believe humanity in its essence is debased, selfish and dangerous. All will tend to experience their own divergent possibility which strengthens their belief. Far from "concrete", reality encompasses those shifting and divergent possibilities.

I thought to go into more detail about faith and belief but I'm losing motivation here. Bottom line for me personally, I reject christianity and religion because it doesn't provide me even slightly adequate tools to further my spirituality. Not enough detail. The bible tells me almost nothing useful about how consciousness works, the function of the unconscious, subconscious, what ego is, why I'm here, where I can go from where I am, a believable sense of my relation to the divine, how to function in altered states, etc. etc.

[dana]

Plus I don't believe all there is to know about God is found in the bible, it's just the history of man's relationship with God.

One interpretation that I can put to Genesis and the story of the serpent and expulsion from the garden of eden is that its not so much the creation of humanity as its a story of turning away from Goddess, an ancient paradigm shift.

[Me2]

Plus I don't believe all there is to know about God is found in the bible, it's just the history of man's relationship with God.

One interpretation that I can put to Genesis and the story of the serpent and expulsion from the garden of eden is that its not so much the creation of humanity as its a story of turning away from Goddess, an ancient paradigm shift.

Cool. I'd never thought about it like that before.

Is there a form of worship/spirituality that encompasses both Mother and Father God/dess?

[Fat SAM]

I appreciate what you're saying, Dana.

Eh...I don't know. Maybe folks like me and twazed are the minority. Maybe Christians are mean spirited, ignorant, dingbats. Maybe I'm going to hell for believing the way I do. I've defended my beliefs to other Christians, too, though. Some have condemned me. Some have considered my arguements - I've been tossed the line about interpreting the word, too. I usually counter by saying that it's God's place to judge, not man's and then point out that it says in the Bible that even the devil (not something I take literally, I think) can quote scriptures (it happens when Jesus is tempted in the wilderness). Another good counter for the Bible being taken literally is the quote that 'with God, a day is as a thousand years." As is a synonym for like, which calls for comparison, which calls for interpretation...
All I know is that I've read the book and calls it like I sees it. If there's a God, God will be the one to judge me, not Jerry Fallwell, not Raul Reese, not Pastor Bill or the guy at the coffee shop.
And I apologize for assuming you were a woman. I saw another post where it happened before and felt bad about it, but you're probably used to it by now.

For my part, Christianity is what brought me onto the path of union with God, and it works for me. I pray to God, I call God Jehovah (but I'm not sure that's God's only name), and I believe in Jesus. As it stands, though, I have a really complicated and broad spirituality and so far, no one book or belief has seemed really to satisfy the demands of my questioning.

I think God is an all encompassing being who approaches different people in different ways. I believe God is omnibeatic and like Jesus says, 'wishes that none should perish but that all should come to Him.' (The genderized version is in the scripture. I try to refrain and just use the term God). Does that mesh with the idea that interpreting the Bible differently than the way it is written (currently) means we'll go to Hell? Or that not hearing the New Testament means we'll go to Hell? I can't accept that. I think Hell is a concept and that it exists, but in a much more complex fashion than the lake of fire thing. I won't get into it. The point is that I think that the power hungry have used a positive message about love to control people and the threat of consequence, particularly painful, eternal consequence, to scare people into line. What I don't think, however, is that the message, the deeper message - which I think still remains - is invalid or irrelevant.

[dana]

Eh...I don't know. Maybe folks like me and twazed are the minority.

I usually counter by saying that it's God's place to judge.

I think Hell is a concept and that it exists, but in a much more complex fashion than the lake of fire thing..

Fuck this is really wierd. I have Big Love playing in the background while I'm typing this.... (You know, the HBO show on Mormon faith and polygamy and love.)

It seems to me that there is a tendency to fall out somewhere on a spectrum from the literal hard core fundamentalists to people with a more liberal interpretation like you and itwazed - maybe call em Burner Christians?

I don't believe God needs to judge. I've heard an idea that I'm not exactly sure whether I take on faith or belief - The next moment after a transgression you are already forgiven by God. It is only for you as an individual to accept that forgiveness.

Alright no copping out on the Hell thing. Spill the beans baby!! Its a damn wierd concept - one lifetime to decide whether you should be punished for eternity. As if God could suddenly give up, take some sort of satisfaction in punishing people. I have to be pretty sure that if I could easily come up with a better plan, God's would have to be at least as good.


And Me2, well yeah. That's my spirituality. I usually abbreviate GGATI - God/Goddess/All that Is. You notice that Genesis starts out with reference to "the void" and "the waters" both recognizable through similar symbols from Taoism for the feminine. Goddess was said to give rise to God and together create All that Is. (Faith. I haven't experienced it yet.)


Damn! This episode of Big Love has a lot of sex. I think maybe I should convert?
What's omnibeatic? (Everything is beautiful?)

[mdmf007]

[quote="Ron"][quote="itwazed"]...
A man wraps his car around a telephone pole after skidding on a patch of ice on a road with little traffic. As he lays unconcious a Babtist minister ....s...so you tell me which one of these men was most Christ like.[/quote]

None of them, it's a trick question! Christ would have either known that the driver was an awful money lender who got what he deserved, or have healed the poor SOB on his own and refused to contribute to a huge industry that uses mercy and aid as its products for sale. ;)

Ron[/quote]

BlasphemyRon - Theres a pill for everything out there, You must feed the system.

need a boner - got you covered. Too many boners your covered there too. Bad mood, we can cheer you up.

Ron hit a bone with me; as an EMS providor we could charge 1/3 my rates if all people paid for EMS work, and still make a profit. You really think an ambulance takes 450 an hour and 15 a mile to make ends meet? when the crew makes 15 an hour on the high end - not even close.

[Zhust]

My beliefs have been formed over a fifteen year inquiry (and one that will continue as long as I can read) into spirituality which has taken me through the Bible, the Quran, The Tao Te Ching, the Hindu scriptures, The Analects of Confucious, The Celestine Prophecy and Carlos Castaneda, and even out of religion and pseudo religion and into the realms of metaphysics in books like The Elegant Universe.

So why not just head straight for the love?

I tend to learn vicariously, thinking it's some kind of short-cut -- and also realizing that by taking the shortcut I miss the scenery along the way. So when I hear about people who read many religious and philosophical texts, they all seem to come back to things like, "learn to always love", and "judge actions but don't condemn people". So I just hoard the gems and head for people to discuss things with when I'm confused, resorting to books only after that.

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Wow this is getting heated up!

You can not know who Jesus was for every thing was lost or embellished and corrupted.

The Torah is the history of the Jews written in Mythological form like the greek myths.

Throw both books away and start over again for the religions of the children of Abraham (christianity, Judaism and Islan) are fading.

As we speak now, Islam implodes!

AIIZ

PS- Carlos Castaneda books were fictious. He even proclaimed it as such.

[itwazed]

I dont think throwing out thousands of years of religous text and history is nessacary or prudent. There are still valuable lessons and in the case of the Torah a massive geneological and legal history of a people to compare the Torah to greek mythology is a broad overstatement.

That being said speaking as a Christian on Christianity in the modern age there def needs to be far reaching and sweeping changes. The one I think that would have a drastic effect is for a shift of paradigms, focus not on Jesus as God, but rather Jesus as man. For me the lessons of Jesus are not so much in his crucifixion but the teachings, and ultimatly his actions leading up to his "conviction". Focus on Jesus as messiah and God have led to a sin obssesed, good vs evil, watered down version of his teachings. I think for many people they follow the mainstream Churchs because its easy and comforting; Jesus died on a cross for my sins so I can go to heaven, anyone who does not believe this is not going to go to heaven and hence shall be punished in hell, anyone going to hell is evil and must be perscuted or re-educated (converted). While my critique is very much over simplified (i could write on this all day) and maybe a bit harsh its a very honest look at my personal feelings of the failings of modern Christianity.

[Fat SAM]

Dana -
Omnibeatic means all good or all benevolent.

Hell. I guess I think it's a place that we build for ourselves, or I should say a condition we make for ourselves. I think if the lesson of Christ is to love as the highest commandment, then hell is being burdened after death not by a physical, fiery torment, but rather a torment which our souls carry within. Imagine being consumed forever by hate and malice and sadness and guilt, forgetting the goodness that love brings into your being.

The Tibetan Buddhists believe that hell is a place filled with those very negative aspects which our own psyche creates and that those aspects of ourselves are the demons that plague us in that place. They believe in anata though, and that to be rid of them, you need to make your soul clear, like a prism, so that you can change, reflect, and alter the images (because to them that's all those aspect are...phantoms into which we breathe power and life) and get past them.

The idea of being cut off eternally from love is terrible, I think. Far worse than physical torture, which by practice, one can learn to overcome fairly easily. If there's a place in which the soul has transcended the corporeal, how can the soul then turn inward and trascend the soul? Does the soul have a psyche and if it does, is that the real soul? It doesn't make sense to me. I think the soul is a core and I think love is its goal and that love is what carries us through, unburdened, into trascendence.

Judgement - As I said before, I think Christ's goal was to finish it for us. Hence 'it is finished.' I don't know if we stand in proper, courtroom style judgement before God. It's a concept anyone who has seen a courtroom can grasp, though, so maybe it was easier to convey to people that way. Or perhaps it's just part of the 'scare folks into line' aspect of controlling a group of people. Regardless, I do believe in God and if God judges then it's God's judgement I'll deal with and everyone else's judgement I'll ignore.

Zeus - I know that Castaneda's books are fiction. I'm pretty sure the Celestine books are fictitious too, but that doesn't mean that one can't glean wisdom from them. That's why I called them pseudo-religion.

Jayce - I read books because it's convenient. I'm a student, so I take classes that suit my desire (they all fulfill my credit requirements, you know?) and with individual study courses, I can even tailor classes to my desired studies. I've also had some incredible professors who just enjoyed teaching East/West Phil. Comparison courses...I like reading. I also like practicing and so I do that, too. And I go out and talk to people about these things as often as possible, as we're doing right now. Book learning isn't for everyone. We all come to our path from different directions.

[dana]

Throw both books away and start over again for the religions of the children of Abraham (christianity, Judaism and Islan) are fading.

PS- Carlos Castaneda books were fictious. He even proclaimed it as such.

Whether you throw the books away and start over, or keep em and sort through them, the key thing is to ask the basic questions: does this feel right, am I impelled to head in a particular direction, how well does all of it hold together, etc. Our approach to the Divine will always fall short. Religions tend to forget that. What is true and liberating today, will be tomorrow's prison.

I've heard that about the Castaneda books. I put that guy Walsh (Conversations with God) in the same category. Essentially fictitious but still containing a few good truths. "Follow the path with heart".

Although there is another possibility with Castaneda: Some recounting of actual experiences, some poetic license, and a final attempt to get rid of a bunch of annoying hangers-on. That is part of the books - about erasing your history and blending in.

[DJmoYst]

Throw both books away and start over again for the religions of the children of Abraham (christianity, Judaism and Islan) are fading.

I agree with the thought that thing have been skewed over the years to the point that we have to take a lot of it with a grain of salt. But on the other hand the teachings in the bible are essential in my personal spirituality.

Now that i'm on the topic of spirituality i dont think that Christianity is a fading religion. Churches are now appealing to spiritually deprived Americans with worship songs and tails of overcoming great defeat. These two things are what people are drawn to. Church is now becoming a relatable place aposed to an out of date machine that still runs on leaded gas.

Seeing someone come from nothing to something great is the single most powerful thing i have witnessed in my life. Seeing grown men cry and give up their guilt to the cross touches all those who witness it.

Not to self promote but the word Twazed, but it explains the almost unexplainable felling i get when 800+ people with similar if not my same ideals raise their voices in praise to the higher power.

I am strong in my spirituality because i have felt the presence of God.

[FabFascist]

My thoughts can best be summed up by a rational person's gut reaction to the following comment made to me when I tried pointing out that the King james version of the Bible was an antiquated translation full of errors:

"Well, if it was good enough for Jesus, it is good enough for me."

Enough said?