The time when I nearly fell to Buddhism.

[Grand_Commander_Zhou_Ziyu]

Hi all, I would like to share with you a story that I believe could be material for some discussion. I am a Christian who's of an ethnically Chinese background, being born and having spent the first five-and-a-half years of my life in Chongqing. I've lived perhaps 55% of my life in the West and 45% in China, but I spent what I consider to be my formative years as an individual in China (ages 11-17).

As many of you may already know, Buddhism has a long history in East Asia, including China. It reached China as early as the Han Dynasty through the Silk Road. However, once Buddhism planted roots in China, it became so Sinicized that it eventually lost much of its original teachings into a hybrid religion of Buddhism, Daoism, Confucianism, and Chinese folk beliefs. It's interesting how a large variety of figures are subjects of veneration in China. The general Guan Yu became deified as a result of Luo Guanzhong's historical novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms, while from what we know of the historical Guan Yu he was a very average military commander who made a number of major blunders, and historical records unveiled so far have nothing to say about anything related to his noble character. However, the novel portrays him as not only a fierce warrior, but as an embodiment of Confucian values in line with the interests of the ruling class. Throughout the ages, he's been worshiped as the God of War and the God of Fortune. Even more ridiculous is how totally fictional characters have been worshiped as deity figures. I've seen shrines in "Buddhist" temples dedicated to Sha Jing and Zhu Ba Jie, both of whom are characters from the classical novel Journey to the West, a fictionalized retelling of the Tang monk Xuanzang's journey to India to retrieve the Buddhist sutras. Sha Jing is his aide while Zhu Ba Jie is a humanoid pig who was originally a marshal in the Chinese celestial court of the Jade Emperor, but was cast down to earth due to mistakes he made and his journey to accompany Xuanzang would become his redemption.

First of all, I would like to be very clear that the majority of Buddhists in China and East Asia (I don't know much about SE Asia) do not even follow authentic Buddhism as it was originally conceived and practiced in India. Instead, they follow this hybrid religion often with the purpose of personal gain, and the saddest thing, at least in China, is that much of it is related to money, career, and social status. These people may seem to be devout when they go to temples, burn incense and do other things, but if you really get to the bottom of their beliefs it's often the practicing of tradition rather than genuine faith in something much larger than themselves. Others will tell you it's like a mental placebo, that they aren't completely sure what they really believe in. I was surrounded by much of this in the past, and as I grew older and began to understand the truths behind these practices, I became increasingly disillusioned with them. One thing you'll find at many Chinese temples that claim to be Buddhist (yet also contain Daoist and other folk deities) have these money boxes called "Merit Boxes", in which it is believed that in order to get "blessings", you must make a financial contribution when you visit the temple. Last year when I was back in my hometown Chongqing, I was out with my aunt and she decided to visit one of the temples in the area we were in. Of course, I didn't follow her because I believe in the One God and Jesus Christ. However, I asked the man at the entrance why temples have these "Merit Boxes", and on whether he thought they tainted the essence of what it means to have spiritual faith. He said he didn't know, except for the fact that it's always been this way. Traditions of men, I see.

Fast forward to this year, a few months ago I was at a very weak point in my walk with God. I selected a university course on Buddhism with a focus on the Zen, and I will now admit that I was feeling temptation to give Buddhism another chance. The professor is actually an ordained Zen priest who had lived in Japan for many years, and now runs his own Zen sessions. I wanted to explore authentic Buddhism in contrast to the hybrid religion I was exposed to earlier in life. However, at the end of the course, I was not inspired. I simply could not accept Buddhism after all, even in a purer form. Towards the end of the course we actually visited a Zen temple run by a few Chinese and Taiwanese nuns, and they held a meditation session for the class. So, I wasn't sure what everyone else's beliefs were and it's all history, but during the meditation session they all followed. I did not. I remained vigilant and refused to join. God was telling me all along the way that while He gave me the free will to explore and investigate, as free will has been given to all humans, along the way He was telling me that He was, and would always be, the Best, the Greatest, and the most complete that cannot be found in any other faith. Amen.


Having told my story in the paragraphs above, I will now give more details on why I rejected Buddhism after the investigation:

1. Buddhism goes into the idea of the "true self", yet does not give a detailed account of what exactly the "true self" is. While it does refer to the cultivation of some qualities such as peace and goodness, we know that the fundamental issue that stands in the way of achieving piece and goodness is the presence of sin in a fallen world. The problem of sinfulness cannot be overcome by our own efforts, not through meditation, not through anything else. It can only be overcome through walking with Christ's grace, who died for our sins. There is absolutely NOTHING in Buddhism or any other faith of such greatness and wonder.

2. The Buddhist belief in a karmic system has never felt right to me. It is believed in Buddhism that we must pay for the bad deeds and negative karma accumulated in previous lives. How is this just? On the other hand, I know that God creates each and every one of us fresh, giving us the free will to accept or reject Him. WE, in our bodies, in this life (until Revelation), are solely responsible for the consequences of our own decision in light of the meaning of God's existence. It is utterly unjust, unfair, and unimaginable to have a belief in past lives, and that we must still bear the burden of the negative aspects of past lives. Good deeds may also take lifetimes to be rewarded. Therefore, Buddhism, to me, essentially denies free will and choice. In Christ, salvation or punishment is assured, and it is a decision that is entirely up to individuals to take or not to take.

3. The ultimate goal of Buddhism is nirvana, freedom from the cycle of reincarnation. It is the liberation from all individual desires. The removal of ego and desire is a central tenet of Buddhism. I completely disagree with this. While Buddhism believes that not all desire is bad, ALL desire has potential to cause suffering so the end goal is having no desire whatsoever. This is utterly untrue to me. Isn't the will to be free of desire a desire in and of itself? This has been a contradiction I've never been able to wrap my head around. On the other hand, I know that if God gave us certain desires, then there must be good and healthy reasons for us to have the capacity for those desires, as long as we follow them in the way He designed it to be. Of course, many desires are simply evil.


4. Buddhism offers NO explanation as to why the universe and everything in it exists. Life does not have order and meaning in and of itself. I cannot believe in the randomness of existence, of creation and establishment by chance. When it comes to morality, I cannot accept an evolutionary relativist point-of-view.


5. Buddhism does not offer and security and assurance. Christ does.


6. The Buddha never claimed to be a deity, and never claimed that his teachings were religious dogma. While Buddhism emphasizes the need for one to seek their own path rather than follow the authority of scripture or of men, Buddhism in practice is very much a religion based on the lineage of men and is often organized in an extremely rigid manner.


7. Buddhism meshes with local cultures and beliefs way too well, because it lacks a central point of reference. I just cannot take seriously something that is so loose and so susceptible to assimilation. While the same can also be said about Christianity as a religion, there is a point where we can ultimately return to, that is the Word of God and prayer for His wisdom and guidance. Buddhism offers no certainty and authoritativeness whatsoever in its beliefs.


8. Buddhism believes that change is constant, that there is no certainty in life, only change. Therefore, we should not strive to take control of our lives all the time. The resolution to this, as I know, is to leave it to God to do the work. Buddhism does not offer any assurance that we'll be taken care of regardless of what circumstances we find ourselves in, it's a "deal with it" kind of attitude rather than any hope of change. In other words, Buddhism believes that we should not strive for change and accept the world as it is. Once again, my refusal to accept this was another reason why I ended up rejecting Buddhism. I find no strength in such passiveness.


9. Sure there are Buddhist charities and social projects, but when Buddhism itself cannot explain where morality comes from and why a consistent and cohesive moral framework is so essential for the world, for our existence as beings with flesh but also with souls, what more can I say?


To have desire and free will is to have a spirit, a soul, to have life. While desire can be both positive and negative, or sometimes both depending on which end of the stick we choose, desire is what ultimately makes us ALIVE and HUMAN. God desires to love us and for us to love Him, to care for us, to protect us, to guide us and provide for us. God desired to give us another chance, to redeem ourselves because of His love for His creation. He wants us to be close with Him, and wept when we did not. It is good desire that leads us to seek God and His revelation, to seek His grace and mercy. Between uncertainty and ambiguity versus certainty and assurance, I resisted the former and persisted in the latter. In our world, the biggest hypocrisy I see in Buddhism as it is often practiced is that while it claims to free our minds from preconceived notions of structure, it is very much structured and controlled in practice. On the other hand, God's Truth begins by affirming structure and how it all relates to us as beings, how we can make sense of ourselves and navigate this world with a clear revelation of our end state that is joy and glory if we believe and follow Him, while Buddhism's end goal, in a way, is the cessation of our being and existence as we know it.

For those who believe shall not perish, but have eternal life.

 

[Uber Genius]

Instead, they follow this hybrid religion often with the purpose of personal gain, and the saddest thing, at least in China, is that much of it is related to money, career, and social status. These people may seem to be devout when they go to temples, burn incense and do other things, but if you really get to the bottom of their beliefs it's often the practicing of tradition rather than genuine faith in something much larger than themselves.

Christianity in America has many of these similar hypocrites.

 

[Uber Genius]

Well-thought-out description of some of the defeaters of Buddhism.

At bottom, an impersonal force no more personal that the forces of gravity, or the strong and weak nuclear forces, has created a illusory world. A world we can't properly perceive. This force is uncreated apparently and yet necessity for such a being is philosophically undefendable it seems.

Since this being is impersonal and eternal (due to the impossibility of an infinite causal regress) then this being would have the necessary and sufficient conditions to create the world we live in an eternity ago. Since this being is impersonal there is no will which would activate creation and we should be living in an infinitely old universe. 13.7B years ago the universe began to exist. Therefore we do not have an impersonal being as creator.

Buddhism has been adopted largely due to its exotic nature. Everything foreign was seen as valuable in the late 1960s and early-to-mid 1970s. EST was one such packaging and importing of Buddhism. But philosophical investigation finds it to be incoherent. Its adherents are unable or unwilling to do such investigations.

 

[Grand_Commander_Zhou_Ziyu]

Authentic, 'pure' forms of Buddhism do not believe in God, and do not look to God as an explanation for the existence of things because it is not of concern. However, Buddhism as practiced in many parts of Asia is polytheistic / pantheistic filled with deities, ghosts, spirits etc. As you mentioned, everything is impersonal and I cannot stomach the idea of how an impersonal force would be of any value in our lives when it comes to trying to understand it.

 

[ananda]

It's interesting how a large variety of figures are subjects of veneration in China ... Buddhism as practiced in many parts of Asia is polytheistic / pantheistic filled with deities, ghosts, spirits etc.

Samsaric reality, in many branches of Buddhist thought, every consciousness in the round of rebirth can generate the kammic potential for elevation or for demotion into various planes of reality. Therefore, humans, through mental and spiritual cultivation, can transcend even the gods, which explains such traditions (the worship or veneration of former, godly humans) as you describe.

I selected a university course on Buddhism with a focus on the Zen, and I will now admit that I was feeling temptation to give Buddhism another chance. The professor is actually an ordained Zen priest who had lived in Japan for many years, and now runs his own Zen sessions. I wanted to explore authentic Buddhism in contrast to the hybrid religion I was exposed to earlier in life. However, at the end of the course, I was not inspired. I simply could not accept Buddhism after all, even in a purer form.

I too rejected Zen (a form of Mahayana) in own my religious and philosophical search after leaving 30 years of Christianity.

Buddhism goes into the idea of the "true self", yet does not give a detailed account of what exactly the "true self" is.

As I understand it, the "true self" idea is generally taught in Mahayana, but is not found in Theravada or early Buddhism (I identify more with the latter).

While it does refer to the cultivation of some qualities such as peace and goodness, we know that the fundamental issue that stands in the way of achieving piece and goodness is the presence of sin in a fallen world.

We recognize that peace comes from addressing ignorance, desire, and aversion. It is a testable premise which I have had great success with, far more than the theory of sin.

The Buddhist belief in a karmic system has never felt right to me. It is believed in Buddhism that we must pay for the bad deeds and negative karma accumulated in previous lives. How is this just? ... It is utterly unjust, unfair, and unimaginable to have a belief in past lives, and that we must still bear the burden of the negative aspects of past lives ... Therefore, Buddhism, to me, essentially denies free will and choice.

The early Buddhist idea behind kamma & vipaka includes a combination of both determinism and free will & choice, and is eminently just, IMO. The inevitable ripening of kamma-vipaka from our choices done in the past, combined with our choices done in the present according to free will, together creates our future kamma-vipaka.

The ultimate goal of Buddhism is nirvana, freedom from the cycle of reincarnation. It is the liberation from all individual desires. The removal of ego and desire is a central tenet of Buddhism....Isn't the will to be free of desire a desire in and of itself? This has been a contradiction I've never been able to wrap my head around.

It is not seen as a contradiction in early Buddhism. Ven. Ananda, the Buddha's attendant, explained it as a man possessing a desire to go to a park: "Didn't you first have desire [... persistence ... intent ...,] thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular desire [... persistence ... intent ...,] allayed?" (SN 51.15).

Buddhism offers NO explanation as to why the universe and everything in it exists.

Yes it does, it's called patticasamuppada. It involves a cyclical model of creation, existence, and destruction in early Buddhism, which made far more sense to me than models involving first causes.

Buddhism does not offer and security and assurance. Christ does.

I found the opposite. I found greater peace, security, and assurance in the teachings of early Buddhism.

The Buddha never claimed to be a deity

I agree. He is claimed to be the Teacher of Deities in the early suttas.

and never claimed that his teachings were religious dogma.

I agree. His teachings are merely commentary on the nature of Reality. Or, to use another example, His teachings are simply a map which we use as a guide to Reality. It is not reality itself.

The Dhamma - the map He provided - is not meant to be blindly believed as dogma which provides salvation. Instead, the map is meant to be tested & used by putting it into practice by traversing Reality for ourselves, to find salvation.

While Buddhism emphasizes the need for one to seek their own path rather than follow the authority of scripture or of men, Buddhism in practice is very much a religion based on the lineage of men and is often organized in an extremely rigid manner.

I understand that lineages is a big deal in Mahayana/Zen/Tibetan. However, there is little emphasis on lineage in early & Theravadin Buddhism. However, the Sangha is considered valuable because serious, more advanced practitioners are meant to inspire and show the value of the Way to those less accomplished through successful example - not by preaching dogma.

Buddhism meshes with local cultures and beliefs way too well, because it lacks a central point of reference. I just cannot take seriously something that is so loose and so susceptible to assimilation. While the same can also be said about Christianity as a religion, there is a point where we can ultimately return to, that is the Word of God and prayer for His wisdom and guidance. Buddhism offers no certainty and authoritativeness whatsoever in its beliefs.

IMO Early Buddhism offers an even more certain authority: the Laws governing Reality itself are our final authority ... not fallible books subject to misinterpretation, mishandling, or decay.

8. Buddhism believes that change is constant, that there is no certainty in life, only change. Therefore, we should not strive to take control of our lives all the time. The resolution to this, as I know, is to leave it to God to do the work. Buddhism does not offer any assurance that we'll be taken care of regardless of what circumstances we find ourselves in, it's a "deal with it" kind of attitude rather than any hope of change. In other words, Buddhism believes that we should not strive for change and accept the world as it is. Once again, my refusal to accept this was another reason why I ended up rejecting Buddhism. I find no strength in such passiveness.

This is not taught in early/Theravada Buddhism. Effort and striving towards the goal is a big part of our practice & Path; after all, "Right Effort" is the sixth factor in the Noble Eightfold Path!

Sure there are Buddhist charities and social projects, but when Buddhism itself cannot explain where morality comes from and why a consistent and cohesive moral framework is so essential for the world, for our existence as beings with flesh but also with souls, what more can I say?

Morality is a spectrum - not a binary system - in early/Theravada Buddhism, and the relative morality of any particular action is dependent on intention along with the amount of suffering it produces and the amount of ignorance it dispels. For example, an intentional action which dispels ignorance and decreases suffering in one's self and others is considered far more moral than some other action which increases ignorance and increases suffering.

Early/Theravada Buddhism is almost a completely different philosophy/religion compared to Zen/Mahayana - as far as early Judaism is from modern Catholicism.

 

[holo]

I'll answer this as a relatively new student and practitioner of Secular Buddhism, which is basically Buddhism without any supernatural claims such as rebirth. So when I say Buddhism in the following, I mean the secular version.

1. Buddhism goes into the idea of the "true self", yet does not give a detailed account of what exactly the "true self" is. While it does refer to the cultivation of some qualities such as peace and goodness, we know that the fundamental issue that stands in the way of achieving piece and goodness is the presence of sin in a fallen world. The problem of sinfulness cannot be overcome by our own efforts, not through meditation, not through anything else. It can only be overcome through walking with Christ's grace, who died for our sins. There is absolutely NOTHING in Buddhism or any other faith of such greatness and wonder.

Sin is a metaphysical concept and since Buddhism doesn't have anything like a god, sin is basically an illusion. There's good and bad, there's such a thing as morality, but there's no offending or pleasing God. Personally I'm doing very fine without seeing the world or people through that lens. It's not like people need to believe in God to behave morally.

The self, well, what is that anyway? Sure, we may or may not have a soul, but that's very much a matter of faith and not something we can know. As far as I can tell, there's not really a part of me that I could truly label my "self". It's not my body, that's for sure. It's not my thoughts, because they come and go. My desires too. Maybe some part of my brain? Is there any part of me (mind or body) that could be removed (like my heart or my memories) and my self would cease to exist? I find it very liberating to stop seeing myself as some sort of unchanging, constant thing that's somehow not a product of everything that brought me here: my parents, upbringing, experiences, sickness, my ancestors, the sounds I'm hearing and so forth. I'm not something separate from the rest of the universe. On the contrary, like Alan Watts said, "you are something the whole universe is doing, just like a wave is something the whole ocean is doing."

2. The Buddhist belief in a karmic system has never felt right to me. It is believed in Buddhism that we must pay for the bad deeds and negative karma accumulated in previous lives. How is this just? On the other hand, I know that God creates each and every one of us fresh, giving us the free will to accept or reject Him. WE, in our bodies, in this life (until Revelation), are solely responsible for the consequences of our own decision in light of the meaning of God's existence. It is utterly unjust, unfair, and unimaginable to have a belief in past lives, and that we must still bear the burden of the negative aspects of past lives. Good deeds may also take lifetimes to be rewarded. Therefore, Buddhism, to me, essentially denies free will and choice. In Christ, salvation or punishment is assured, and it is a decision that is entirely up to individuals to take or not to take.

Karma can be taken to mean accumulating guilt or merit through several lifetimes, but it can also mean basically cause and effect. So if people treat me badly it's more likely because I've wronged them, than God punishing me, or because I did something wrong in a previous life. The way you describe God here seems to me to be the real injustice. He will not punish or reward people because of what they do, but because of what they believe.

Free will is a tricky one. I don't believe we really have such a thing, because absolutely everything has a cause. Thoughts and urges don't come from nowhere, there are reasons for you being the way that you are, which ultimately are beyond your control. You can't pick and choose freely what you want. So ultimately it makes no sense to speak of guilt. That's incredibly liberating to me. Not only can I stop condemning myself, I have no basis to condemn others for anything either. That doesn't mean I'm not trying to change myself and the world, but it means I can let go of all moral outrage. People aren't really evil, they're just not enlightened.

3. The ultimate goal of Buddhism is nirvana, freedom from the cycle of reincarnation. It is the liberation from all individual desires. The removal of ego and desire is a central tenet of Buddhism. I completely disagree with this. While Buddhism believes that not all desire is bad, ALL desire has potential to cause suffering so the end goal is having no desire whatsoever. This is utterly untrue to me. Isn't the will to be free of desire a desire in and of itself? This has been a contradiction I've never been able to wrap my head around. On the other hand, I know that if God gave us certain desires, then there must be good and healthy reasons for us to have the capacity for those desires, as long as we follow them in the way He designed it to be. Of course, many desires are simply evil.

I take Nirvana to be a gradual and everyday thing, not some goal to be reached when I die. Same with enlightenment, it's more of a spectrum than an end stop.

I think you're wrong about the desire part. It's not desire itself that's the problem, but the way we cling to it. I desire, for example, to be healthy, but I practice not "attaching" myself to that desire so that I can be independent of it. If I'm healthy, good, but if I'm not, I can still have perfect peace.

4. Buddhism offers NO explanation as to why the universe and everything in it exists. Life does not have order and meaning in and of itself. I cannot believe in the randomness of existence, of creation and establishment by chance. When it comes to morality, I cannot accept an evolutionary relativist point-of-view.

I think it's a good thing Buddhism doesn't try to tell me about the origin of the universe etc. I can look for those answers elsewhere, from people who may know what they're talking about. For the time being I don't believe in any sort of God, but if I get to believe again some time in the future, Buddhism won't be at odds with it because it doesn't make contrary claims.

5. Buddhism does not offer and security and assurance. Christ does.

Good for you! For me, that used to be the case until I came to the conclusion that Christ doesn't in fact exist, at least not in the sense that I used to think. But by practicing Buddhism I find all the peace I need. Truth be told, I'm kind of impressed that it's even possible to have peace without believing in something supernatural. I'm here now, and as far as I know I'll be gone forever when I'm dead, and I'm 100% OK with that. It makes life today all the more vivid and precious.

6. The Buddha never claimed to be a deity, and never claimed that his teachings were religious dogma.

That's why I like him

While Buddhism emphasizes the need for one to seek their own path rather than follow the authority of scripture or of men, Buddhism in practice is very much a religion based on the lineage of men and is often organized in an extremely rigid manner.

That's why I like the secular version

7. Buddhism meshes with local cultures and beliefs way too well, because it lacks a central point of reference. I just cannot take seriously something that is so loose and so susceptible to assimilation. While the same can also be said about Christianity as a religion, there is a point where we can ultimately return to, that is the Word of God and prayer for His wisdom and guidance. Buddhism offers no certainty and authoritativeness whatsoever in its beliefs.

Buddhism claims some things and suggests some practices that can be pretty easily tested. For simplicity, let's take "meditation will make your mind clearer." It's true. Given, it may not work for you, but then Buddhism is fine with that - try something else. A common mantra, so to speak, is "return to the breath." Unlike God, I find that my breath is always present, I can always focus on it, if only just for a few seconds, and in simply breathing consciously I can find tremendous peace.

8. Buddhism believes that change is constant, that there is no certainty in life, only change. Therefore, we should not strive to take control of our lives all the time. The resolution to this, as I know, is to leave it to God to do the work. Buddhism does not offer any assurance that we'll be taken care of regardless of what circumstances we find ourselves in, it's a "deal with it" kind of attitude rather than any hope of change. In other words, Buddhism believes that we should not strive for change and accept the world as it is. Once again, my refusal to accept this was another reason why I ended up rejecting Buddhism. I find no strength in such passiveness.

Nobody is taken care of regardless of circumstance. I'm sure there were a lot of people crying out to God in the gas chambers, to no avail. So I'll take a "deal with it" approach over that any day.

Buddhism doesn't say you shouldn't strive for change, that's a common misconception. It's not passiveness, but rather trying to relate to the world in a wise and compassionate and skillful manner. Meditation is great in that regard, it can really create a space between stimulus and reaction. For instance my immediate reaction to my kid breaking something may be anger, but meditation offers me that space, those few extra seconds to take in what's happening, understand what it is, and then acting (as opposed to reacting). I like the ELSA way of putting it:
Embrace
Let go
Stop
Act
Instead of mindless and reflexive reaction, you can embrace whatever is there, be it pain or sorrow or joy. Take it in, allow yourself to experience it. You can let go of the burning desire to change it, or to stop it from changing if it's something good. You can pause and breathe. And then you can act.

The part about change being constant and nothing being certain is obviously true.

9. Sure there are Buddhist charities and social projects, but when Buddhism itself cannot explain where morality comes from and why a consistent and cohesive moral framework is so essential for the world, for our existence as beings with flesh but also with souls, what more can I say?

In everyday I find I don't really have use for some solid and philosophically sound way of explaining where morality comes from. But the more I breathe, the more I see that absolutely everything is interconnected and dependent on everything else, the more compassionate I become. I've even stopped stomping spiders

 

[Phil 1:21]

Satan often comes in pretty wrapping paper.

 

[Lost4words]

Hi all, I would like to share with you a story that I believe could be material for some discussion. I am a Christian who's of an ethnically Chinese background, being born and having spent the first five-and-a-half years of my life in Chongqing. I've lived perhaps 55% of my life in the West and 45% in China, but I spent what I consider to be my formative years as an individual in China (ages 11-17).

As many of you may already know, Buddhism has a long history in East Asia, including China. It reached China as early as the Han Dynasty through the Silk Road. However, once Buddhism planted roots in China, it became so Sinicized that it eventually lost much of its original teachings into a hybrid religion of Buddhism, Daoism, Confucianism, and Chinese folk beliefs. It's interesting how a large variety of figures are subjects of veneration in China. The general Guan Yu became deified as a result of Luo Guanzhong's historical novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms, while from what we know of the historical Guan Yu he was a very average military commander who made a number of major blunders, and historical records unveiled so far have nothing to say about anything related to his noble character. However, the novel portrays him as not only a fierce warrior, but as an embodiment of Confucian values in line with the interests of the ruling class. Throughout the ages, he's been worshiped as the God of War and the God of Fortune. Even more ridiculous is how totally fictional characters have been worshiped as deity figures. I've seen shrines in "Buddhist" temples dedicated to Sha Jing and Zhu Ba Jie, both of whom are characters from the classical novel Journey to the West, a fictionalized retelling of the Tang monk Xuanzang's journey to India to retrieve the Buddhist sutras. Sha Jing is his aide while Zhu Ba Jie is a humanoid pig who was originally a marshal in the Chinese celestial court of the Jade Emperor, but was cast down to earth due to mistakes he made and his journey to accompany Xuanzang would become his redemption.

First of all, I would like to be very clear that the majority of Buddhists in China and East Asia (I don't know much about SE Asia) do not even follow authentic Buddhism as it was originally conceived and practiced in India. Instead, they follow this hybrid religion often with the purpose of personal gain, and the saddest thing, at least in China, is that much of it is related to money, career, and social status. These people may seem to be devout when they go to temples, burn incense and do other things, but if you really get to the bottom of their beliefs it's often the practicing of tradition rather than genuine faith in something much larger than themselves. Others will tell you it's like a mental placebo, that they aren't completely sure what they really believe in. I was surrounded by much of this in the past, and as I grew older and began to understand the truths behind these practices, I became increasingly disillusioned with them. One thing you'll find at many Chinese temples that claim to be Buddhist (yet also contain Daoist and other folk deities) have these money boxes called "Merit Boxes", in which it is believed that in order to get "blessings", you must make a financial contribution when you visit the temple. Last year when I was back in my hometown Chongqing, I was out with my aunt and she decided to visit one of the temples in the area we were in. Of course, I didn't follow her because I believe in the One God and Jesus Christ. However, I asked the man at the entrance why temples have these "Merit Boxes", and on whether he thought they tainted the essence of what it means to have spiritual faith. He said he didn't know, except for the fact that it's always been this way. Traditions of men, I see.

Fast forward to this year, a few months ago I was at a very weak point in my walk with God. I selected a university course on Buddhism with a focus on the Zen, and I will now admit that I was feeling temptation to give Buddhism another chance. The professor is actually an ordained Zen priest who had lived in Japan for many years, and now runs his own Zen sessions. I wanted to explore authentic Buddhism in contrast to the hybrid religion I was exposed to earlier in life. However, at the end of the course, I was not inspired. I simply could not accept Buddhism after all, even in a purer form. Towards the end of the course we actually visited a Zen temple run by a few Chinese and Taiwanese nuns, and they held a meditation session for the class. So, I wasn't sure what everyone else's beliefs were and it's all history, but during the meditation session they all followed. I did not. I remained vigilant and refused to join. God was telling me all along the way that while He gave me the free will to explore and investigate, as free will has been given to all humans, along the way He was telling me that He was, and would always be, the Best, the Greatest, and the most complete that cannot be found in any other faith. Amen.


Having told my story in the paragraphs above, I will now give more details on why I rejected Buddhism after the investigation:

1. Buddhism goes into the idea of the "true self", yet does not give a detailed account of what exactly the "true self" is. While it does refer to the cultivation of some qualities such as peace and goodness, we know that the fundamental issue that stands in the way of achieving piece and goodness is the presence of sin in a fallen world. The problem of sinfulness cannot be overcome by our own efforts, not through meditation, not through anything else. It can only be overcome through walking with Christ's grace, who died for our sins. There is absolutely NOTHING in Buddhism or any other faith of such greatness and wonder.

2. The Buddhist belief in a karmic system has never felt right to me. It is believed in Buddhism that we must pay for the bad deeds and negative karma accumulated in previous lives. How is this just? On the other hand, I know that God creates each and every one of us fresh, giving us the free will to accept or reject Him. WE, in our bodies, in this life (until Revelation), are solely responsible for the consequences of our own decision in light of the meaning of God's existence. It is utterly unjust, unfair, and unimaginable to have a belief in past lives, and that we must still bear the burden of the negative aspects of past lives. Good deeds may also take lifetimes to be rewarded. Therefore, Buddhism, to me, essentially denies free will and choice. In Christ, salvation or punishment is assured, and it is a decision that is entirely up to individuals to take or not to take.

3. The ultimate goal of Buddhism is nirvana, freedom from the cycle of reincarnation. It is the liberation from all individual desires. The removal of ego and desire is a central tenet of Buddhism. I completely disagree with this. While Buddhism believes that not all desire is bad, ALL desire has potential to cause suffering so the end goal is having no desire whatsoever. This is utterly untrue to me. Isn't the will to be free of desire a desire in and of itself? This has been a contradiction I've never been able to wrap my head around. On the other hand, I know that if God gave us certain desires, then there must be good and healthy reasons for us to have the capacity for those desires, as long as we follow them in the way He designed it to be. Of course, many desires are simply evil.


4. Buddhism offers NO explanation as to why the universe and everything in it exists. Life does not have order and meaning in and of itself. I cannot believe in the randomness of existence, of creation and establishment by chance. When it comes to morality, I cannot accept an evolutionary relativist point-of-view.


5. Buddhism does not offer and security and assurance. Christ does.


6. The Buddha never claimed to be a deity, and never claimed that his teachings were religious dogma. While Buddhism emphasizes the need for one to seek their own path rather than follow the authority of scripture or of men, Buddhism in practice is very much a religion based on the lineage of men and is often organized in an extremely rigid manner.


7. Buddhism meshes with local cultures and beliefs way too well, because it lacks a central point of reference. I just cannot take seriously something that is so loose and so susceptible to assimilation. While the same can also be said about Christianity as a religion, there is a point where we can ultimately return to, that is the Word of God and prayer for His wisdom and guidance. Buddhism offers no certainty and authoritativeness whatsoever in its beliefs.


8. Buddhism believes that change is constant, that there is no certainty in life, only change. Therefore, we should not strive to take control of our lives all the time. The resolution to this, as I know, is to leave it to God to do the work. Buddhism does not offer any assurance that we'll be taken care of regardless of what circumstances we find ourselves in, it's a "deal with it" kind of attitude rather than any hope of change. In other words, Buddhism believes that we should not strive for change and accept the world as it is. Once again, my refusal to accept this was another reason why I ended up rejecting Buddhism. I find no strength in such passiveness.


9. Sure there are Buddhist charities and social projects, but when Buddhism itself cannot explain where morality comes from and why a consistent and cohesive moral framework is so essential for the world, for our existence as beings with flesh but also with souls, what more can I say?


To have desire and free will is to have a spirit, a soul, to have life. While desire can be both positive and negative, or sometimes both depending on which end of the stick we choose, desire is what ultimately makes us ALIVE and HUMAN. God desires to love us and for us to love Him, to care for us, to protect us, to guide us and provide for us. God desired to give us another chance, to redeem ourselves because of His love for His creation. He wants us to be close with Him, and wept when we did not. It is good desire that leads us to seek God and His revelation, to seek His grace and mercy. Between uncertainty and ambiguity versus certainty and assurance, I resisted the former and persisted in the latter. In our world, the biggest hypocrisy I see in Buddhism as it is often practiced is that while it claims to free our minds from preconceived notions of structure, it is very much structured and controlled in practice. On the other hand, God's Truth begins by affirming structure and how it all relates to us as beings, how we can make sense of ourselves and navigate this world with a clear revelation of our end state that is joy and glory if we believe and follow Him, while Buddhism's end goal, in a way, is the cessation of our being and existence as we know it.

For those who believe shall not perish, but have eternal life.

What about Buddhism form Thailand? Is that different to the Buddhism you grew up with?

 

[tampasteve]

What about Buddhism form Thailand? Is that different to the Buddhism you grew up with?

Yes, Thai Buddhism is almost entirely Therevada. Chinese Buddhism is mostly Mahayana and it's branch Vajrayana. However, it also has a syncretic nature due to influence of folk religions of Thailand and the large Chinese population and influence over the centuries.

 

[ananda]

Satan often comes in pretty wrapping paper.

That is also how the evil god Mara is perceived in early Buddhism. He tempts humans and deities to stay within his realm and influence by encouraging them to embrace life & spurning personal effort (Sn 3:2), and by promoting worship & obedience to a Creator and Father God (MN 49)

 

[Grand_Commander_Zhou_Ziyu]

Buddhism in Thailand is, well..... more deeply rooted in society than Buddhism is in China, but it's often mixed with lots of folk beliefs about spirits and other things.

 

[FireDragon76]

That is also how the evil god Mara is perceived in early Buddhism. He tempts humans and deities to stay within his realm and influence by encouraging them to embrace life & spurning personal effort (Sn 3:2), and by promoting worship & obedience to a Creator and Father God (MN 49)

Theravada Buddhism has alot of anti-Hindu polemics like that (and in turn, Hinduism has its own, such as the idea that the Buddha was an avatar of Krishna who lead atheists to Hell and saved the world).

Historical critical scholarship of the Tipitaka is a fascinating subject. What can be known of the historical Buddha is very much up for debate. More humanistic approaches to Buddhism do not see the sutras as infallible, and do not emphasize the polemical aspects all that much.

 

[FireDragon76]

Buddhism in Thailand is, well..... more deeply rooted in society than Buddhism is in China, but it's often mixed with lots of folk beliefs about spirits and other things.

From what I have read, it's often dry dogmatic religion, priestcraft and animism. Meditation practice actually died in the 10th century in the Theravadan tradition and was not revived until modernity, likely due to pressure from missionaries and eastern and western religious reformers. Most serious meditation and practice happens in the forest dwelling ascetics, not at temples. In addition, there are alot of corrupting, inegalitarian social practices associated with being a monk in Thailand that are pharisaical in nature.

 

[NeedyFollower]

Hi all, I would like to share with you a story that I believe could be material for some discussion. I am a Christian who's of an ethnically Chinese background, being born and having spent the first five-and-a-half years of my life in Chongqing. I've lived perhaps 55% of my life in the West and 45% in China, but I spent what I consider to be my formative years as an individual in China (ages 11-17).

As many of you may already know, Buddhism has a long history in East Asia, including China. It reached China as early as the Han Dynasty through the Silk Road. However, once Buddhism planted roots in China, it became so Sinicized that it eventually lost much of its original teachings into a hybrid religion of Buddhism, Daoism, Confucianism, and Chinese folk beliefs. It's interesting how a large variety of figures are subjects of veneration in China. The general Guan Yu became deified as a result of Luo Guanzhong's historical novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms, while from what we know of the historical Guan Yu he was a very average military commander who made a number of major blunders, and historical records unveiled so far have nothing to say about anything related to his noble character. However, the novel portrays him as not only a fierce warrior, but as an embodiment of Confucian values in line with the interests of the ruling class. Throughout the ages, he's been worshiped as the God of War and the God of Fortune. Even more ridiculous is how totally fictional characters have been worshiped as deity figures. I've seen shrines in "Buddhist" temples dedicated to Sha Jing and Zhu Ba Jie, both of whom are characters from the classical novel Journey to the West, a fictionalized retelling of the Tang monk Xuanzang's journey to India to retrieve the Buddhist sutras. Sha Jing is his aide while Zhu Ba Jie is a humanoid pig who was originally a marshal in the Chinese celestial court of the Jade Emperor, but was cast down to earth due to mistakes he made and his journey to accompany Xuanzang would become his redemption.

First of all, I would like to be very clear that the majority of Buddhists in China and East Asia (I don't know much about SE Asia) do not even follow authentic Buddhism as it was originally conceived and practiced in India. Instead, they follow this hybrid religion often with the purpose of personal gain, and the saddest thing, at least in China, is that much of it is related to money, career, and social status. These people may seem to be devout when they go to temples, burn incense and do other things, but if you really get to the bottom of their beliefs it's often the practicing of tradition rather than genuine faith in something much larger than themselves. Others will tell you it's like a mental placebo, that they aren't completely sure what they really believe in. I was surrounded by much of this in the past, and as I grew older and began to understand the truths behind these practices, I became increasingly disillusioned with them. One thing you'll find at many Chinese temples that claim to be Buddhist (yet also contain Daoist and other folk deities) have these money boxes called "Merit Boxes", in which it is believed that in order to get "blessings", you must make a financial contribution when you visit the temple. Last year when I was back in my hometown Chongqing, I was out with my aunt and she decided to visit one of the temples in the area we were in. Of course, I didn't follow her because I believe in the One God and Jesus Christ. However, I asked the man at the entrance why temples have these "Merit Boxes", and on whether he thought they tainted the essence of what it means to have spiritual faith. He said he didn't know, except for the fact that it's always been this way. Traditions of men, I see.

Fast forward to this year, a few months ago I was at a very weak point in my walk with God. I selected a university course on Buddhism with a focus on the Zen, and I will now admit that I was feeling temptation to give Buddhism another chance. The professor is actually an ordained Zen priest who had lived in Japan for many years, and now runs his own Zen sessions. I wanted to explore authentic Buddhism in contrast to the hybrid religion I was exposed to earlier in life. However, at the end of the course, I was not inspired. I simply could not accept Buddhism after all, even in a purer form. Towards the end of the course we actually visited a Zen temple run by a few Chinese and Taiwanese nuns, and they held a meditation session for the class. So, I wasn't sure what everyone else's beliefs were and it's all history, but during the meditation session they all followed. I did not. I remained vigilant and refused to join. God was telling me all along the way that while He gave me the free will to explore and investigate, as free will has been given to all humans, along the way He was telling me that He was, and would always be, the Best, the Greatest, and the most complete that cannot be found in any other faith. Amen.


Having told my story in the paragraphs above, I will now give more details on why I rejected Buddhism after the investigation:

1. Buddhism goes into the idea of the "true self", yet does not give a detailed account of what exactly the "true self" is. While it does refer to the cultivation of some qualities such as peace and goodness, we know that the fundamental issue that stands in the way of achieving piece and goodness is the presence of sin in a fallen world. The problem of sinfulness cannot be overcome by our own efforts, not through meditation, not through anything else. It can only be overcome through walking with Christ's grace, who died for our sins. There is absolutely NOTHING in Buddhism or any other faith of such greatness and wonder.

2. The Buddhist belief in a karmic system has never felt right to me. It is believed in Buddhism that we must pay for the bad deeds and negative karma accumulated in previous lives. How is this just? On the other hand, I know that God creates each and every one of us fresh, giving us the free will to accept or reject Him. WE, in our bodies, in this life (until Revelation), are solely responsible for the consequences of our own decision in light of the meaning of God's existence. It is utterly unjust, unfair, and unimaginable to have a belief in past lives, and that we must still bear the burden of the negative aspects of past lives. Good deeds may also take lifetimes to be rewarded. Therefore, Buddhism, to me, essentially denies free will and choice. In Christ, salvation or punishment is assured, and it is a decision that is entirely up to individuals to take or not to take.

3. The ultimate goal of Buddhism is nirvana, freedom from the cycle of reincarnation. It is the liberation from all individual desires. The removal of ego and desire is a central tenet of Buddhism. I completely disagree with this. While Buddhism believes that not all desire is bad, ALL desire has potential to cause suffering so the end goal is having no desire whatsoever. This is utterly untrue to me. Isn't the will to be free of desire a desire in and of itself? This has been a contradiction I've never been able to wrap my head around. On the other hand, I know that if God gave us certain desires, then there must be good and healthy reasons for us to have the capacity for those desires, as long as we follow them in the way He designed it to be. Of course, many desires are simply evil.


4. Buddhism offers NO explanation as to why the universe and everything in it exists. Life does not have order and meaning in and of itself. I cannot believe in the randomness of existence, of creation and establishment by chance. When it comes to morality, I cannot accept an evolutionary relativist point-of-view.


5. Buddhism does not offer and security and assurance. Christ does.


6. The Buddha never claimed to be a deity, and never claimed that his teachings were religious dogma. While Buddhism emphasizes the need for one to seek their own path rather than follow the authority of scripture or of men, Buddhism in practice is very much a religion based on the lineage of men and is often organized in an extremely rigid manner.


7. Buddhism meshes with local cultures and beliefs way too well, because it lacks a central point of reference. I just cannot take seriously something that is so loose and so susceptible to assimilation. While the same can also be said about Christianity as a religion, there is a point where we can ultimately return to, that is the Word of God and prayer for His wisdom and guidance. Buddhism offers no certainty and authoritativeness whatsoever in its beliefs.


8. Buddhism believes that change is constant, that there is no certainty in life, only change. Therefore, we should not strive to take control of our lives all the time. The resolution to this, as I know, is to leave it to God to do the work. Buddhism does not offer any assurance that we'll be taken care of regardless of what circumstances we find ourselves in, it's a "deal with it" kind of attitude rather than any hope of change. In other words, Buddhism believes that we should not strive for change and accept the world as it is. Once again, my refusal to accept this was another reason why I ended up rejecting Buddhism. I find no strength in such passiveness.


9. Sure there are Buddhist charities and social projects, but when Buddhism itself cannot explain where morality comes from and why a consistent and cohesive moral framework is so essential for the world, for our existence as beings with flesh but also with souls, what more can I say?


To have desire and free will is to have a spirit, a soul, to have life. While desire can be both positive and negative, or sometimes both depending on which end of the stick we choose, desire is what ultimately makes us ALIVE and HUMAN. God desires to love us and for us to love Him, to care for us, to protect us, to guide us and provide for us. God desired to give us another chance, to redeem ourselves because of His love for His creation. He wants us to be close with Him, and wept when we did not. It is good desire that leads us to seek God and His revelation, to seek His grace and mercy. Between uncertainty and ambiguity versus certainty and assurance, I resisted the former and persisted in the latter. In our world, the biggest hypocrisy I see in Buddhism as it is often practiced is that while it claims to free our minds from preconceived notions of structure, it is very much structured and controlled in practice. On the other hand, God's Truth begins by affirming structure and how it all relates to us as beings, how we can make sense of ourselves and navigate this world with a clear revelation of our end state that is joy and glory if we believe and follow Him, while Buddhism's end goal, in a way, is the cessation of our being and existence as we know it.

For those who believe shall not perish, but have eternal life.

I engage with Buddhist from time to time but I believe they are Zen Buddhist . It seems meditation and their own peace of mind is the goal .
It seems to me as a follower of Jesus Christ , love and to be reconciled with our heavenly Father is the goal or outcome of The way , the truth and the life ....salvation/eternal life is a by-product of life . Jesus was a man of sorrows because He cared.

Maybe those who followed Jesus but left for Buddhism can share their relationship with their heavenly Father . Do you still maintain a healthy concern for the eternal well being of others ?
In any of your writings , how does it account for the fact /example that we have an earthly creator ( our earthly father ..which is one and not many ) which I believe speaks to the existence of one heavenly Father ?

Did any of you who left organized Christianity ever know or love our Father ?

 

[ananda]

Maybe those who followed Jesus but left for Buddhism can share their relationship with their heavenly Father . Do you still maintain a healthy concern for the eternal well being of others ?

Certainly, though I now define "eternal wellness" as nibbana (permanent contentment, peace, bliss), rather than as eternal life.

In any of your writings , how does it account for the fact /example that we have an earthly creator ( our earthly father ..which is one and not many ) which I believe speaks to the existence of one heavenly Father ?

We have many earthly creators which took part in our birth - father's sperm, mother's eggs, that from their fathers and mothers in an uncountable line before them, the nutrients they ingested, the mental and emotional predispositions, etc. After birth, we are still subject to ongoing re-creation, from the nutrients we eat, the thoughts we entertain, etc. This speaks to the Buddhist concept of ongoing rebirth, from the confluence and influence of many causes - not from a single cause (e.g. one heavenly Father).

Did any of you who left organized Christianity ever know or love our Father ?

Love, certainly. How would you define "know"?

 

[NeedyFollower]

Certainly, though I now define "eternal wellness" as nibbana (permanent contentment, peace, bliss), rather than as eternal life.

We have many earthly creators which took part in our birth - father's sperm, mother's eggs, that from their fathers and mothers in an uncountable line before them, the nutrients they ingested, the mental and emotional predispositions, etc. After birth, we are still subject to ongoing re-creation, from the nutrients we eat, the thoughts we entertain, etc. This speaks to the Buddhist concept of ongoing rebirth, from the confluence and influence of many causes - not from a single cause (e.g. one heavenly Father).

Love, certainly. How would you define "know"?

Certainly, though I now define "eternal wellness" as nibbana (permanent contentment, peace, bliss), rather than as eternal life.

Oddly enough , when I was "enlightened" to be conformed to the image of our heavenly father , it took the form of caring and pain . Prior to that when I was only a cultural christian or a lost believer , I had no real concerns and was by nature an optimist . I was also childish and not serious or sober minded. Of course optimism can be a form of delusion .

We have many earthly creators which took part in our birth - father's sperm, mother's eggs, that from their fathers and mothers in an uncountable line before them, the nutrients they ingested, the mental and emotional predispositions, etc. After birth, we are still subject to ongoing re-creation, from the nutrients we eat, the thoughts we entertain, etc. This speaks to the Buddhist concept of ongoing rebirth, from the confluence and influence of many causes - not from a single cause (e.g. one heavenly Father).

I understand how one can say that we have many earthly creators ...our biological inheritances and cultural influences certainly shape our beliefs . One can say that Judaism is the mother of Christianity due to the prophecies in Deuteronomy 18:15 which agree with the statement in Luke 9:35 .
For me anyway , I did have a single cause which was the truth spoken to me when I was not looking for truth . It humbled me and broke my heart . ( This was not in a "church" setting . )
But after the birth of child , one can leave it to die or feed it ....but to feed from society's influences ( TV , Movies , Music ) will ultimately leave one believing like the diet from which it is fed.

Love, certainly. How would you define "know"?

Intimate ..to understand . To love the same things . To agree with and be engaged in the same purpose which is eternal life . To love others as I was loved when I was an enemy of God . It is tied to faith more than belief .

 

[ananda]

Oddly enough , when I was "enlightened" to be conformed to the image of our heavenly father , it took the form of caring and pain . Prior to that when I was only a cultural christian or a lost believer , I had no real concerns and was by nature an optimist . I was also childish and not serious or sober minded. Of course optimism can be a form of delusion .

Is permanent contentment/peace/bliss not the ultimate end-goal of your faith?

I understand how one can say that we have many earthly creators ...our biological inheritances and cultural influences certainly shape our beliefs . One can say that Judaism is the mother of Christianity due to the prophecies in Deuteronomy 18:15 which agree with the statement in Luke 9:35 .
For me anyway , I did have a single cause which was the truth spoken to me when I was not looking for truth . It humbled me and broke my heart . ( This was not in a "church" setting . )
But after the birth of child , one can leave it to die or feed it ....but to feed from society's influences ( TV , Movies , Music ) will ultimately leave one believing like the diet from which it is fed.

Thanks for sharing. It seems like you agree that we are undergoing a constant state of rebirth.

Intimate ..to understand . To love the same things . To agree with and be engaged in the same purpose which is eternal life . To love others as I was loved when I was an enemy of God . It is tied to faith more than belief .

If the "Father" is defined as a personal being, where is this being that I can observe & understand? If the "Father" is instead defined as "love", "purpose", etc. then I suppose his "personal being-ness" becomes irrelevant, and we can merely focus on love & purpose on their own.

 

[NeedyFollower]

Is permanent contentment/peace/bliss not the ultimate end-goal of your faith?

Thanks for sharing. It seems like you agree that we are undergoing a constant state of rebirth.

If the "Father" is defined as a personal being, where is this being that I can observe & understand? If the "Father" is instead defined as "love", "purpose", etc. then I suppose his "personal being-ness" becomes irrelevant, and we can merely focus on love & purpose on their own.

Is permanent contentment/peace/bliss not the ultimate end-goal of your faith?

Well no , not really . Love or caring is and love can really hurt . Christ was a man of sorrows because he cared deeply . Paul was grieved continually for his kinsmen after the flesh( Israel ) because he cared . I envision God sending His Son because of concern and knowing full well He would be rejected . But love goes anyway because love is also hope.

Thanks for sharing. It seems like you agree that we are undergoing a constant state of rebirth.

I am not sure how much of anything works really . I have maybe as many questions as others but certain things I believe to be true and they are verified both in scriptures and experiential ways .
There are things I observed years ago that I no longer believe to be true . I wasn't living a lie years ago but was not " tall enough " spiritually to see the things I believe I see now . ( For example , I no longer observe christmas for it is about "stuff " and much ungodliness occurs . I do not see it as God honoring . ) I grew into that understanding but it is not my place to judge those who honestly in their heart observe it unto the Lord . Does that make sense ?

If the "Father" is defined as a personal being, where is this being that I can observe & understand? If the "Father" is instead defined as "love", "purpose", etc. then I suppose his "personal being-ness" becomes irrelevant, and we can merely focus on love & purpose on their own.

I believe I see what you are saying . For us to know him and be known by Him , must he be a He and must we make Him anthropomorphic ?
I do think we ( humans )were made in His image ..more so than animals . In the beginning he created them both male and female .
I know we are very visual by nature . We follow a demonstration better than a verbal instruction . ( Where there is no vision , the people perish . ) I know there was the instance where Jesus told the woman at the well . " God is a spirit and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth. " My personal understanding is that Jesus was the visible( express )image of the invisible God. It is why Jesus told Andrew when Andrew asked Jesus to show then the Father .."Have I been with you all of this time and you have not seen the Father ? Know ye not that the Father dwells in me and I in the Father ? "
I think it especially telling that Jesus was hideously ugly ...it is so contrary to society and man which typically prizes the outward ...good looks , success , pride . It is so contrary to man , it must be God . How beautiful is He now ? Can you see Him ? His lowliness ? His meekness ? His concern ?
I love Him .

 

[ananda]

Well no , not really . Love or caring is and love can really hurt . Christ was a man of sorrows because he cared deeply . Paul was grieved continually for his kinsmen after the flesh( Israel ) because he cared . I envision God sending His Son because of concern and knowing full well He would be rejected . But love goes anyway because love is also hope.

Love & hope ... to what end? Belief in Christ ... to what end?

I am not sure how much of anything works really . I have maybe as many questions as others but certain things I believe to be true and they are verified both in scriptures and experiential ways .
There are things I observed years ago that I no longer believe to be true . I wasn't living a lie years ago but was not " tall enough " spiritually to see the things I believe I see now . ( For example , I no longer observe christmas for it is about "stuff " and much ungodliness occurs . I do not see it as God honoring . ) I grew into that understanding but it is not my place to judge those who honestly in their heart observe it unto the Lord . Does that make sense ?

Have you verified that you only possess one birth in experiential ways?

I believe I see what you are saying . For us to know him and be known by Him , must he be a He and must we make Him anthropomorphic ?
I do think we ( humans )were made in His image ..more so than animals . In the beginning he created them both male and female .
I know we are very visual by nature . We follow a demonstration better than a verbal instruction . ( Where there is no vision , the people perish . ) I know there was the instance where Jesus told the woman at the well . " God is a spirit and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth. " My personal understanding is that Jesus was the visible( express )image of the invisible God. It is why Jesus told Andrew when Andrew asked Jesus to show then the Father .."Have I been with you all of this time and you have not seen the Father ? Know ye not that the Father dwells in me and I in the Father ? "
I think it especially telling that Jesus was hideously ugly ...it is so contrary to society and man which typically prizes the outward ...good looks , success , pride . It is so contrary to man , it must be God . How beautiful is He now ? Can you see Him ? His lowliness ? His meekness ? His concern ?
I love Him .

I understand loveliness & ugliness, looks, success, pride, lowliness, meekness, and concern, because those are qualities that are immanent in mankind in the here-and-now. Other than that, no, I can't say I see his personal being.

 

[NeedyFollower]

Love & hope ... to what end? Belief in Christ ... to what end?

Have you verified that you only possess one birth in experiential ways?

I understand loveliness & ugliness, looks, success, pride, lowliness, meekness, and concern, because those are qualities that are immanent in mankind in the here-and-now. Other than that, no, I can't say I see his personal being.

Love & hope ... to what end? Belief in Christ ... to what end?

There is no end to eternal love for it is eternal . That is the "field" in the parable in which the man sold all that he had in order to buy that field. Divine love is it's own reward . Love and forgiveness are only concepts until they are experienced and then they work a humility in one's heart and an understanding . If I start from the position , "In the beginning God" , it takes a lot of pressure off of me for it is not about me , it is about God . And we see in experiential ways that good fathers desire that their children be like them . If a father adopts an abused child who has learned unlove , his desire is that his child be conformed into His image , not in the image of his biological parents . Consequently , I believe it is the Father's will that we be like Him , who is also eternal .
Belief in Christ is also called the gospel of reconciliation . To be reconciled . If you have never been estranged from dearly loved children , the importance of reconciliation can only be a mental exercise . It is also a demonstration of extreme love and self-denial . For the joy that was set before Him ( reconciling children to the Father ) , he endured the suffering of the cross .
I guess another answer to the to what end question is the promise of innocence regained ..a pure child innocence before we knew there was evil . ( Forbid not the infants for of such is the kingdom of heaven ...therefore whosoever does not humble himself like this little child ,shall in no wise enter the kingdom of heaven . )

Have you verified that you only possess one birth in experiential ways?

No , as far as I am aware , I have been twice born . Once by lust ..by the will of man and the second time by love by the will of God . ( And it was not because I was looking for Him nor is it because I had anything to offer . )
The second birth is ongoing and involves unlearning what society has taught me . It is much like the children of Israel going through a desert and unlearning all of the things they picked up from 400 years in Egypt. It is a battle ....like remaining an ice cube in boiling water . Walking out of sync to very loud music ..but I do it ( by his grace ) for the sake of love of who our God is and for the love of others .
The good news is love can be taught . Jesus said to go make disciples teaching them to observe all that he commanded . This of course went off course in the main long ago when religion became nationalized and politicized . There was never anything called Christendom ...a christian nation , etc. These are all concepts of man and tend to inflate , deceive and contradict . It will only lead to hating our enemies and self-righteousness . I can't help but notice that many atheist have a since of superiority ...a higher understanding ...better education , etc. It is the same smugness and a form of self-righteousness that many despise from their religious counterparts . I may be walking in it now unbeknownst to me ...I wish you were closer by for you would detect it on me before I would in all probability .

I understand loveliness & ugliness, looks, success, pride, lowliness, meekness, and concern, because those are qualities that are immanent in mankind in the here-and-now. Other than that, no, I can't say I see his personal being.

It hit me one day ( after my initial awakening ) when I remember from Isaiah it saying " For thus says the high and lofty one who inhabits eternity , whose name is Holy . I dwell in the high and holy place with him ALSO that is of a contrite and humble spirit , to revive the spirit of the humble and to revive the heart of the contrite . " ( Isaiah 57:15 ) And when I put that with "Learn of me for I am lowly of heart and meek of spirit " , it dawned on me why God gives grace to the humble ...because God Himself is humble .
Some of the things Christ was tempted with but did not fall to were ...ambition ...for the "I AM " dwelt in Him ...he was so he did not have to be anything . And he was not competitive for he had no competition .
Do you remember the temptations in the desert ? ...IF you are the Son of God ...do XYZ ....satan kept trying to get Jesus to prove who He was ...one who is has nothing to prove ...they may demonstrate but not prove . Anyway , just many of the reasons I love our Lord .