The Christian of the Future Will Either Be a Mystic or Cease to Be.

[2PhiloVoid]

I would never call perennial wisdom 'doctrine,' reducing it to a man's opinion. It is certainly a fact, and undeniable one at that. I find that to call it a 'doctrine' would be insulting. So we can be in agreement with that.

Friend, I wonder if you have explored them to speak this way to me? If not, I would be careful of downplaying it. There are truths of reality that Christianity alone cannot explain, but only serve to instruct.

Yes, I've studied them at the university level, in a few philosophy classes and some later on my own as well. While I'm no expert on the matter of other religions, I'm not a newbie either. The professors I had, however, were experts, (as has been Winfried Corduan who has also been a professor---so when I cite sources, I'm usually [95% of the time] referring to those who have a PhD or a ThD by which to research and compare perspectives. So knowing all that I've studied, I'm offering you some friendly, even brotherly, direction.

I won't explore this issue here in this thread further with you because it's primarly about Christian mysticism not General forms of mysticism. But if you want to get into a more elaborate discussion at some point, feel free to knock on my door and I can either share sources, discuss finer points in comparative religions, or just help you research some aspects more. Besides, while I'm not a huge fan of Buddhism, I've always been inclined to appreciate the collected sayings of Lao-Tzu and to think that "The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao." (From the first saying in the Tao Te Ching).

Peace in Christ!

And bless you in Christ as well!
Peace!

 

[Jonaitis]

Besides, while I'm not a huge fan of Buddhism, I've always been inclined to appreciate the collected sayings of Lao-Tzo and to think that "The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao." (From the first saying in the Tao Te Ching).

And bless you in Christ as well!
Peace!

I agree with that quote, and I need to study Buddhism and Taoism more. I hear that they are very similar to Advaita Vedanta is many ways. I recommend the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita for a better view of my perspective.

Bless you in Christ!

 

[timothyu]

We need to distinguish loud public worship from quiet personal meditation. I think we need both, so long that public worship is not too loud .

Public worship was once expected of society and it was a majority because of 'loudness'. Today it has diminished and a very small fringe minority 'appears' to be a majority thanks to online exposure simply from loudness.

 

[timothyu]

He invented useful things including the lightbulb.

This is a problem with tradition. In truth Edison bought the patent of an already invented lightbulb and tinkered as was the case with many of his 'inventions'. The same could apply to those who take Jesus' teachings, tinker, then claim new gospels or traditions.

 

[dqhall]

This is a problem with tradition. In truth Edison bought the patent of an already invented lightbulb and tinkered as was the case with many of his 'inventions'. The same could apply to those who take Jesus' teachings, tinker, then claim new gospels or traditions.

Edison had a cot in his lab. He stayed there until late at night testing various light bulb materials and configurations. He sometimes slept on his cot. Then he got up and tried to improve on what he had done the night before. His work has been surpassed by the invention of the LED energy saving bulb.

Edison invented the phonograph record player. He held over 1000 patents.

God continues to improve life on earth. The animal sacrifices ceased, even though they were Biblical. People are living longer. There is emphasis on reducing accidents and improving safety. Doctors have increased knowledge. An acre produces much more food than during first century times. Travel speeds accelerated. To God be the glory.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

This is a problem with tradition. In truth Edison bought the patent of an already invented lightbulb and tinkered as was the case with many of his 'inventions'. The same could apply to those who take Jesus' teachings, tinker, then claim new gospels or traditions.

That is both a plus and a minus. Applying his teachings in the 21st century requires interpretation. And we see that diversity of interpretations seems to be what divides Christianity. That is one way to look at it. Another might be to respect each others interpretations as equally valid expressions.

 

[timothyu]

God continues to improve life on earth. The animal sacrifices ceased, even though they were Biblical. People are living longer. There is emphasis on reducing accidents and improving safety. Doctors have increased knowledge. An acre produces much more food than during first century times. Travel speeds accelerated. To God be the glory.

And a majority of human life would perish is the power was to go out. Sometimes the old ways are better.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I agree with that quote, and I need to study Buddhism and Taoism more. I hear that they are very similar to Advaita Vedanta is many ways. I recommend the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita for a better view of my perspective.

Bless you in Christ!

Yes, the Eastern philosophies / religions have some similarities. Less similarity with the Western religions.

Bless you too!

 

[Andrewn]

It's important for me to say that I am a fallibilist, meaning I know that what I believe could be wrong or mistaken. I don't believe it's wrong or mistaken, but I understand that it could be, which allows me to accept that others believe differently without feeling the need to make a judgment about them on account of that difference. I'm always happy to share my faith and I do, but I make no judgment based on their response. I leave that heavy lifting to God.

I am personally cautious of placing judgement on another faith's experience of the Divine. Who am I to say that they haven't encountered God? Do I make my judgement based on actual experience or simply my dogma? I think I would be a fallibilist too. I cannot account for the experience of others outside the faith without presuming from my own subjective judgement. If the Muslim has had a numinous approach to Allah, then I raise my hands with them.

Joh 21:21 When Peter saw him [John], he said to Jesus, “Lord, what about him?”22 Jesus replied, “If it should be my will that he remain until I come, how does that concern you? Follow me!”

We follow Jesus. We know that He is the way, the truth, and the life. How He leads others is something we may only speculate about.

What I don't do is make condemnation my business. I am under grace and I will be judged by my Lord; that's the only business with which I try to concern myself.

Exactly.

 

[Andrewn]

But then I don't think other faiths (especially Buddhism, Hinduism and others of the far east) explicitly deny that atonement.

Those religions generally believe that Jesus is one of God’s incarnations, but they deny that his atonement accomplished anything specific or unique. Islam and Rabbinic Judaism do not believe that God can incarnate, but Oriental religions believe that God incarnates a lot, in many gods, buddhas, and masters, some even living today.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I agree with that quote, and I need to study Buddhism and Taoism more. I hear that they are very similar to Advaita Vedanta is many ways. I recommend the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita for a better view of my perspective.

Bless you in Christ!

Yeah, I'm familiar with those. I've read the Bhagavad Gita and I've studied some of the Upanishads, too, actually. That's what those classes I took in World Religions and also Eastern Philosophy were for ... although that was 18 years ago.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Those religions generally believe that Jesus is one of God’s incarnations, but they deny that his atonement accomplished anything specific or unique. Islam and Rabbinic Judaism do not believe that God can incarnate, but Oriental religions believe that God incarnates a lot, in many gods, buddhas, and masters, some even living today.

I think Eastern religions can interpret atonement in terms of karma. Jesus took on our bad karma.

 

[Clare73]

I think Eastern religions can interpret atonement in terms of karma. Jesus took on our bad karma.

Karma sounds like a corruption of the doctrine of sin, as we find many corruptions of Biblical doctrine in Satan's religions; e.g, re-incarnation, etc.

 

[Jonaitis]

I think Eastern religions can interpret atonement in terms of karma. Jesus took on our bad karma.

Let the story of Jesus' atonement be an illustration of one's renunciation of doership, thus attaining freedom from all karma.

"It is indeed impossible for an embodied being to give up all activities. Therefore it is said that he who renounces the fruits of action is one who has truly renounced."
- Bhagavad Gita 18:11

When Christ taught us renunciation, His words were echoing Krishna.

 

[Andrewn]

Zen and the Brain by Janes H Austin. He has become Buddhist, which is an atheistic religion.

Buddhism is often called an atheistic religion. This is an oxymoron. It seems to me that the Buddha adhered to what Christians may call "apophatic theology," and Hindus may call "nirguna brahman."

In popular religion in every Asian country, the gods support Buddhism and provide for the worldly needs of the people for health, wealth and spiritual protection. The native Japanese gods were seen as manifestations of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas to protect Japan even before Buddhism officially arrived. In Japan virtually all temples had a shrine, dedicated to a tutelary native god or Indian deity, to protect the sacred area.

So, even though Buddhism generally avoids ascribing attributes to God, oriental Buddhists believe in many incarnations of God. But western Buddhists may be atheistic.

 

[Jonaitis]

Buddhism is often called an atheistic religion. This is an oxymoron. It seems to me that the Buddha adhered to what Christians may call "apophatic theology," and Hindus may call "nirguna brahman."

Correct. Saguna Brahman would be the equivalent to God with attributes.

 

[Clare73]

Let the story of Jesus' atonement be an illustration of one's renunciation of doership, thus attaining freedom from all karma.

When Christ taught us renunciation, His words were echoing Krishna.

So you think God's truth is based on man's notions?

 

[Jonaitis]

So you think God's truth is based on man's notions?

I don't.

 

[Andrewn]

I had an experience where I thought I met Jesus. But based on scripture, I no longer think this. It was the experience that confirmed the Bible for me

If the experience confirmed the Bible, how was it contrary to the Bible?

 

[public hermit]

IMO, this thread has unsurprisingly turned into a representation of the tension between dogmatism and experience. The Bible say x vs. There is a perennial experience that seems to transcend the dogmatic claims of any particular faith. I don't think these two have to be in tension, but the dogmatist will always be limited by their dogma. And, as soon as dogmatism enters the discussion, it turns from dialogue to debate. I don't find any of that surprising.

Dogmatism can only assert truth claims; it cannot prove anything. Those who have experience, as ineffable as it is, can say, "You don't have to believe what I say. Seek as I have done, and find out for yourself." There is an empirical element to mysticism in so far as most anyone can take up a practice and experience it for themselves. There's no need for debate. Dogmatism can only assert and argue.