Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know why I am doing this because I don't believe you will have any more clarity on anything at the end of this thread. I suspect you ask these questions to only convince yourself further that there is nothing else to understand any more than what you already know. Still, I will respond as an exercise for myself because explaining something to some one is the best way to learn.
I will remove your annoying whining and only respond to what seems like genuine inquiry. Thinking involves studying deeply, reading books, searching bibliography of books that impress you to find more books to read. Taking notes. Going to the original source of the religious texts and studying them in their original language, not translation although it may be necessary in the beginning. I don't know what this is other than research. The more you explore the more you can quickly separate the wheat from the chaff. That is a sign of acquiring knowledge.
I am doing this with my own religion but there is a lot of scholarship in all religions. For instance I read Emerson who was a preacher to see what moved him and whose writing he read and how it influenced his thoughts on religion, society, slavery, and what he preached. I am currently reading a book about just that - the books Emerson read. Why? Because his thoughts were influenced by writings on Advaita which is currently my passion. So that is how a mind evolves and opens up.
As a non-Christian I have read many books on Christianity written by Christians, because I find Jesus an amazing character. There is SO MUCH to know. Nothing I read has made me want to become Christian, because my religion has everything I need and it amazes me how much of Advaita thoughts are present in what Jesus taught. Have you ever read St.Thoms's gospel? The Dead Sea Scrolls?
If you just stay with your own thoughts and conclusions, with so much condescension for Christians there is no room to expand, you make your self a jail. Religion is not literal, empty facts, and history. They are all relevant but that is not all. In fact Religion is poetry. I really do believe that those who don't get poetry cannot get spirituality. They may be religious but not spiritual.
Well good for you. But you really didn't respond to most of my points. So let me simplify it for you:
Who was the master teacher in christianity? I would say Jesus. As he preached, who did he preach to? Scientists? Nope. Professors? Nope. Everyday people. Farmers, laborers, the common folks. Did he expect them to go out and research things? I don't think so because they couldn't...they were just trying to scrape by and there were no places to do such research; many or most of them probably couldn't even read or write. But I guess Jesus was off base...didn't realize that he was talking to the wrong people.
Well good for you. But you really didn't respond to most of my points. So let me simplify it for you:
Who was the master teacher in christianity? I would say Jesus. As he preached, who did he preach to? Scientists? Nope. Professors? Nope. Everyday people. Farmers, laborers, the common folks. Did he expect them to go out and research things? I don't think so because they couldn't...they were just trying to scrape by and there were no places to do such research; many or most of them probably couldn't even read or write. But I guess Jesus was off base...didn't realize that he was talking to the wrong people.
I will agree with you to this extent. I am absolutely certain that God would not require us to intellectually comprehend anything. That primarily sates the egos and needs of individuals who have the capacity to engage at that level. Agape love is something we can all understand and relate to no matter what our intellect or abilities are.
In fact, in my experience, it seems as though intellect tends to interfere with and complicate the invoking of such love for myriad reasons. Some of the most loving people I have known and currently know are considered "challenged." Their love is uncomplicated and sincere.
I will agree with you to this extent. I am absolutely certain that God would not require us to intellectually comprehend anything. That primarily sates the egos and needs of individuals who have the capacity to engage at that level. Agape love is something we can all understand and relate to no matter what our intellect or abilities are.
In fact, in my experience, it seems as though intellect tends to interfere with and complicate the invoking of such love for myriad reasons. Some of the most loving people I have known and currently know are considered "challenged." Their love is uncomplicated and sincere.
I think you've stated this very well.
Here's what I think a problem is. When somebody is really into something, they often make it complicated. Let's take something simple. Cary Grant. I just read the newest biography about Grant. Do I really need to read the other dozen biographies about him to have a decent understanding of who Cary Grant was? Want a more complex topic? I wonder how many books -- over the years -- have been written about the American Revolutionary War. Certainly hundreds, if not thousands. To have a decent understanding of the Revolutionary War, does one really need to read every book about it? I don't think so. If it's your thing, fine. But I think for most people a book or two will be enough. Now, I know people whose thing was the Civil War. And they read voluminous amounts of everything they could get their hands on about the Civil War. I knew one man back in Virginia who had, perhaps, fifty books about the Civil War, about Lee, Grant, Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, the assassination conspirators, Stonewall Jackson, William Tecumseh Sherman, and on and on. That was his thing; I felt it was an obsession. And most of us have one obsession or another. But there's a difference between having a personal obsession with a topic and trying to say that everyone needs that obsession or they're shallow.
And that applies to religion, as well. When I was living in Colorado, I visited the local Thai Theravada Buddhist temple often. The monks often invited me to come meditate with them in the evenings, and I occasionally did. Their English was fairly good, and two of them were very willing to sit down and just talk with lay people about anything to do with Buddhism. They were well-educated monks who had been to the prestigious "monk university" in Bangkok, and both had (not sure how to phrase it) high rankings among monks (I didn't even know there were rankings, other than regular monk and abbot). And during one conversation I said that I found their style of meditation to be difficult for me and complicated. And one of the monks had written a 2 part, rather long essay on the general topic and he referred me to it. The theme of the papers was -- don't make Buddhism and meditation complicated. I've probably read a dozen hardbound books on Buddhism and many other paperbacks and essays, and frankly it got to the point where I didn't feel that I was actually gaining much new insight. And that's my premise in this thread. For those who want to drench themselves in a topic -- whether it's christianity or Buddhism or almost anything else, it can certainly be done. The question is, for me, how helpful is it? In terms of christianity, how well educated were the disciples? As I recall, not very. Peter, Andrew, James, and John were 'just' fisherman. Those who wrote the books of the New Testament...they weren't scholars. And we all know some ministers with doctorates in religious studies who became disgraced...despite, I'm sure, being very knowledgeable about christianity. Some of the most faithful people, and good people I've known didn't go to college, and some didn't even finish high school. Yet they would be considered very good christians. And some people I have known who are VERY knowledgeable about christianity aren't very nice people. Go figure.
Why do some think that religion is so complicated?
Irkle stated a short time ago (along with an insult or two) that: "Many seekers do a great deal of independent research and thinking before they decide the Bible is worth consulting at all. Many Christians do a great deal of independent research and thinking about what the Bible says and issues the Bible doesn't address at all."
Yes, he makes claims such as the above. Not many do, and those that do often need to miss out facts they do not like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
But again, my main question here is what is it that's so complicated about christianity or Buddhism that it needs to be researched and studied? And for all those who don't research and study it, does that mean they're not good christians or Buddhists?
I can not speak for Buddhism, but if you want to get as close to the truth about Christianity as possible, you need to look at the complicated history that has led to the contradictory texts found in the NT. And considering much of the history of Christianity is lost, the different versions of Christianity would have been more complicated than what we know now.
But many Christians keep it simple and do not study their belief system.
That's the problem with religion, it can always be added to, expanded on, redefined, reworded, reinterpreted, refashioned, refangled, etc. LOL There's too much of the human element involved, and need for people to keep it going, pay for it, etc.
Spirituality on the other hand tends to be simple, pure, and continuous. I respect our Native Indian population for what they had (and still have). Many others move forward with spirituality, living in peace and progress. No fighting, arguing, or bickering.
I agree with this post.
A religion can revolve around single idea but then require a bunch of moving parts to make it work. Then if something isn't working, more ideas are added. That increases the complexity.
Why do some think that religion is so complicated?
Irkle stated a short time ago (along with an insult or two) that: "Many seekers do a great deal of independent research and thinking before they decide the Bible is worth consulting at all. Many Christians do a great deal of independent research and thinking about what the Bible says and issues the Bible doesn't address at all."
In all fairness, I'll start out with Theravada Buddhism. If one has a basic understanding of five things, you've pretty much got Buddhism in your mind: The Four Noble Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, the Five Precepts, Kamma, and cycle or rebirth and possible enlightenment. Of course, one could read every work of the Tipitaka, and read all sorts of books about Buddhism written by monks, study Buddhism at a university (as most monks now do in Thailand)...and you still come back to those 5 basic things. The VAST MAJORITY of the Buddhists in Thailand -- estimated at 66.3 million people -- don't "do a great deal of independent research and thinking" or do "a great deal of independent research and thinking about what the [Tipitaka] says and issues the [Tipitaka] doesn't address at all". Would making that kind of effort make them better Buddhists? Maybe, maybe not.
Now let's take the same ideas and transpose them on to christianity. Make a list of all the people mentioned in the bible. Did they go to libraries to do a "great deal of independent research"? No. They didn't have access to libraries. Did they set up debating societies? I don't think so. They were mostly spending their time herding goats, doing subsistence farming, possibly doing carpentry or other trades, and simple work. Maybe they studied religion on the internet. Oh wait...guess not on that, either. And yet, the religion survived.
Now as to these "many seekers" that Irkle talks about, I question the use of the word "many". My father's side of the family was 'very catholic'. I don't think they did any seeking or studying. None that I ever saw. On my mother's side of the family, varying degrees of methodism (and one grandfather probably an unthinking atheist)...again, no studying, no discussing. Over many years I have had friends and professional associations with hundreds of people who were 'christians', and until recently only knew one who studied and researched christianity. In my current neighborhood we have a social groups of about 22 people who socialize together weekly (interrupted by covid). So we know each other quite well. 1 does bible study and her husband in an atheist. The other 19 are -- as far as I can tell -- christians, and they don't even go to church on a regular basis, let alone study christianity and research it. So, I question the use of the word "many".
But again, my main question here is what is it that's so complicated about christianity or Buddhism that it needs to be researched and studied? And for all those who don't research and study it, does that mean they're not good christians or Buddhists?
It's even less complicated than that.
People have Theological Concepts they embrace based upon tradition, culture, personal choice, etc...so, those concepts influence and motivate them to a greater or lesser degree. To whatever degree they do or don't dig into the details of those Theological Concepts.
That's just how it is...and has been for a long time. And probably will be for a long time to come.
There ya go...as not "complicated" as it gets.
It's even less complicated than that.
People have Theological Concepts they embrace based upon tradition, culture, personal choice, etc...so, those concepts influence and motivate them to a greater or lesser degree. To whatever degree they do or don't dig into the details of those Theological Concepts.
That's just how it is...and has been for a long time. And probably will be for a long time to come.
There ya go...as not "complicated" as it gets.
"People" right around the world tend to have theological concepts based on whatever their mommies and daddies raised them to believe as children. And they will staunchly defend those theological concepts, and teach those theological concepts to their own children as the revealed undeniable truth, to their dying day.
I will agree with you to this extent. I am absolutely certain that God would not require us to intellectually comprehend anything. That primarily sates the egos and needs of individuals who have the capacity to engage at that level. Agape love is something we can all understand and relate to no matter what our intellect or abilities are.
In fact, in my experience, it seems as though intellect tends to interfere with and complicate the invoking of such love for myriad reasons. Some of the most loving people I have known and currently know are considered "challenged." Their love is uncomplicated and sincere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
I think you've stated this very well.
Thank you, Phet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
I can not speak for Buddhism, but if you want to get as close to the truth about Christianity as possible, you need to look at the complicated history that has led to the contradictory texts found in the NT. And considering much of the history of Christianity is lost, the different versions of Christianity would have been more complicated than what we know now.
But many Christians keep it simple and do not study their belief system.
I definitely agree with this. Is it time for a Group hug???
Yes, he makes claims such as the above. Not many do, and those that do often need to miss out facts they do not like.
I can not speak for Buddhism, but if you want to get as close to the truth about Christianity as possible, you need to look at the complicated history that has led to the contradictory texts found in the NT. And considering much of the history of Christianity is lost, the different versions of Christianity would have been more complicated than what we know now.
But many Christians keep it simple and do not study their belief system.
I think I understand your point. But I think it may be two different things. To make an analogy, a farmer here in Arizona could decide he wants to grow cotton (cotton actually was an important crop here in Arizona at one time, so that's not as crazy as it sounds). He can study information related to the soil type present, the irrigation needs, the need for protection against insect infestation, harvesting processes, marketing, etc., and if he masters those things, he may be able to successfully grow cotton again in Arizona. Of course he could also branch out and additionally study the history of growing cotton in the United and how it related to slavery and the Civil War. But that's a separate -- though somewhat related -- topic.
The average American -- the vast majority of christians in this country (and probably around the world) are like that cotton grower. On Sunday MAYBE they go to church and they hear the minister or priest tell the story of Jesus and explain what Jesus taught, or sometimes in some churches they will hear stories from the OT. The minister or priest doesn't stand up there and ALSO tell the complications that you speak of, the harm done by the religion over the centuries, or the contradictions. He just tells them how to be a christian. When church is over they go home and mostly don't think anymore about it, and not one in a thousand does and research to bring out 'the other side' of the story.
A few of us are different, and to one degree or another look further and deeper. But I've never heard a minister or priest preach the "but we also have to remember that..." side of the story, and most christians don't want to hear that side of the story. They just wanna do what they were taught in the song in Sunday school: "Tell me the stories of Jesus I love to hear; ... Scenes by the wayside, Tales of the sea, Stories of Jesus, Tell them to me. First let me hear how the children Stood round his knee, And I shall fancy his blessing Resting on me; Words full of kindness, Deeds full of grace, All in the love-light Of Jesus' face. Into the city I'd follow The children's band, Waving a branch of the palm tree High in my hand; One of his heralds, Yes, I would sing Loudest hosannas, "Jesus is King!" And really, to just be a 'good christian', that's all they need to do. Because if they truly research all of the story, they won't remain christians. We see that attitude right here on this forum. What happens when an atheist brings up the Crusades or the murderous story of christianity in South America back in the 1500s and 1600s? There will always be a flurry of activity to shift and cover up...because knowing and understanding the whole story is not being a "good christian"; being a "good christian" is, essentially, doing what you're told by the christian establishment.
And here's the disconnect: if you just did what Jesus taught, that's when I think you'd be a good christian.
Just for my own understanding, how does the rebirth process work and why the world population is increasing?
If the rebirth philosophy is true for the entire humanity then theoretically, the world population would’ve been pretty much stable.
Do more people get added to the cycle?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
