Christianity

[Harry Baird]

Almost any religious tradition will, in its rituals of worship, evince a reverential attitude towards the "higher domains"; will inculcate a seriousness toward the full depth of life; etc, etc.

Make some concrete references. What specific religions are you referring to here? It would be helpful if you'd refer to your reading on the topic.

The list is long! If you want some concrete references, though, then here are a few: Sikhism, the Baháʼí Faith, the indigenous Dreaming religions of Australia, and Hinduism.

Can you fill out what religious rituals you are thinking about when you say they "will inculcate a seriousness toward the full depth of life".

I wasn't saying this is inculcated only by rituals, but by the religion as a whole, which seemed to be your contention of Christianity.

What do you mean by 'depth of life'

I was simply using your own words, which I understood you to be using consistent with their dictionary definitions. If you weren't, then perhaps you can explain what alternative definitions you had in mind.

what specific religon or tradition are you referring to where you see that honored?

All of the above.

[Alexis Jacobi]

None of this is of real interest to you, Harry old bean.

[Harry Baird]

Not so old chap, but you're welcome to your opinion.

[Immanuel Can]

We all know that Jesus was not a soldier or any sort of Roman or Jewish official who had that sort of power. Jesus was an intellectual and sincere interpreter of later Judaism where a man's intentions matter, more so than what he manages to accomplish or make a success of. Jesus lacked the power of a puppet king or a Roman, that's to say his power did not pertain to Roman- occupied Palestine, that was the "realm" J was talking about. The power of Jesus was to show people how to live. If you live well you benefit your soul. It's a simple thing but not always easy to do.

I'm not sure how that explanation justifies the claim that Jesus somewhere told his followers to take up the sword and fight. It's pretty obvious he didn't.

It's obvious that there are just wars and just actual fights against evil . Civil disobedience works sometimes. Martyrdom is not terribly effective. Sometimes in the name of goodness you have to resort to violence, willy nilly.

That may seem common sense to you. But that's a far cry from saying it represents anything in Christianity, or in the teaching of Christ.

Martyrdom is not effective, you say? Well, it depends who dies, doesn't it?

Name one person in history more famous or influential than the Man who died on a cross.

[Belinda]

I'm not sure how that explanation justifies the claim that Jesus somewhere told his followers to take up the sword and fight. It's pretty obvious he didn't.

It's obvious that there are just wars and just actual fights against evil . Civil disobedience works sometimes. Martyrdom is not terribly effective. Sometimes in the name of goodness you have to resort to violence, willy nilly.

That may seem common sense to you. But that's a far cry from saying it represents anything in Christianity, or in the teaching of Christ.

Martyrdom is not effective, you say? Well, it depends who dies, doesn't it?

Name one person in history more famous or influential than the Man who died on a cross.

JC was not a martyr but a hero. Martyrdom is passive. The idea that Xians ought to passively accept their station in life is what princes and principalities, including rich capitalists, did to the Xian message.

[henry quirk]

Last call, Alexis...

Christ is a symbol invested with a wide range of meaning.

The Christ symbol, an amalgam of a number of disparate saviour/messiah figures, yeah? The meanings: everything from bulwark against darkness to apocalyptic catalyst or fulfillment, yeah? And the true man or higher man, yeah?

Is Christ central to your notion of Christianity, or is he merely one symbol among several? Mebbe He's the lynchpin, the symbolic connective tissue holdin' it all together? Remove him and what happens?

[Immanuel Can]

JC was not a martyr but a hero. Martyrdom is passive.

"Like a sheep before it's shearers is silent," you mean?

The idea that Xians ought to passively accept their station in life is what princes and principalities, including rich capitalists, did to the Xian message.

That's Marxist nonsense, by the way. It came from the old goat himself.

Historically, the opposite proved true. The vast majority of social improvement efforts, from public education, to socialized medicine, to welfare, to prison reform, to mental health care, to the improvement of labour conditions, to children's rights, to foreign aid, to addiction treatment, to hospitals, to universities...and so on, had both their origins and their chief proponents in Christians and Jews. It seems there's little that is better for the future of the "oppressed" classes than a genuinely Christian ethos. Of course, one cannot mandate such: and the attempts by the Catholics to do so have been, as you say, disastrous. But the Catholics...well, I'll let them explain themselves. I feel no need to speak on their behalf.

What you won't find is anything in the teachings of Jesus Christ that allow them to act as they did. So consider that, if you will.

Meanwhile, look at what Marxism has done. Just look. Anywhere it has been, look.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Last call, Alexis...

Christ is a symbol invested with a wide range of meaning.

The Christ symbol, an amalgam of a number of disparate saviour/messiah figures, yeah? The meanings: everything from bulwark against darkness to apocalyptic catalyst or fulfillment, yeah? And the true man or higher man, yeah?

Is Christ central to your notion of Christianity, or is he merely one symbol among several? Mebbe He's the lynchpin, the symbolic connective tissue holdin' it all together? Remove him and what happens?

Since it seems that thinkin' about these things is very new for you I commend you in your quest to begin to answer the questions that you ask. Take weeks if needed.

How do you yourself answer them?

[henry quirk]

Since it seems that thinkin' about these things is very new for you

Nope.

I commend you in your quest to begin to answer the questions that you ask.

I already got a handle on things. I was lookin' to see your handle, but I think I'm done with this.

How do you yourself answer them?

In my own way: I've answered, up-thread, in various places.

'nuff said.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Sorry to seem non-cooperative Henry. When people come at one with streams of questions, and do not themselves just come out and write an essay (this is the only way to communicate on these fora), and in that way invite commentary, too much pressure is applied to the one queried. I do not like the dynamic of 'having to' respond to one question after another. Does this make sense?

I think that you should take the time to write out your own thoughts in relation to the questions you ask. If you've written about it already post those so I can examine them in a fresh context. It also seemed that you were actually making statements that took the form of questions. I am not closed to further communication on the topic but I want to see you (I request that you) put far more energy into it than you seem to be willing.

Christ is obviously a symbol. The symbol has a life, and a meaning, that is obviously distinct and separated from the historical person.

Christianity (as it formed and even in Judea) is definitely an amalgamation of various ideas. The Jews tended to see the Jesus-project and message as an infiltration from 'gentile' sources. And resisting these was always a matter of grave concern (and still is today).

Christ is a strange figure -- even for Christians! I referred some pages back to a man, seemingly decent and sane, who described getting auditory messages directly from the Lord Jesus as he made his way through the crowd at the January 6th event/riot. He also said 'Bible verses' that floated down from an opening in the clouds which had meaning for him in that context.

Is his experience 'real'? Must I take it as 'real'? How should I take it? How do you take it?

He's the lynchpin, the symbolic connective tissue holdin' it all together? Remove him and what happens?

How will you answer your own question?

Yes, certainly he is symbolic connecting tissue. And certainly he holds something together. And when you 'erase the horizon' it certainly produces all sorts of problems. And? What are your further thoughts here?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Gus, you know that as a human being I have little other than contempt for you, but as an intellect, you have at least the virtue of being self aware.

I wish to dedicate two recent posts to your fine self Mr Uwot!

[Belinda]

JC was not a martyr but a hero. Martyrdom is passive.

"Like a sheep before it's shearers is silent," you mean?

The idea that Xians ought to passively accept their station in life is what princes and principalities, including rich capitalists, did to the Xian message.

That's Marxist nonsense, by the way. It came from the old goat himself.

Historically, the opposite proved true. The vast majority of social improvement efforts, from public education, to socialized medicine, to welfare, to prison reform, to mental health care, to the improvement of labour conditions, to children's rights, to foreign aid, to addiction treatment, to hospitals, to universities...and so on, had both their origins and their chief proponents in Christians and Jews. It seems there's little that is better for the future of the "oppressed" classes than a genuinely Christian ethos. Of course, one cannot mandate such: and the attempts by the Catholics to do so have been, as you say, disastrous. But the Catholics...well, I'll let them explain themselves. I feel no need to speak on their behalf.

What you won't find is anything in the teachings of Jesus Christ that allow them to act as they did. So consider that, if you will.

Meanwhile, look at what Marxism has done. Just look. Anywhere it has been, look.

You would say that wouldn't you.
The advent of Christianity has been an enormous influence on European behaviour. I'm more pessimistic than you as I claim human greed and human fear are such that one Christian interpetation has been put to the service of greed and fear resulting in princes, ideologues, and sociopaths of all sorts capitalising on that meek and humble acceptance theme that can easily be interpreted from the Gospels and Acts.

[Immanuel Can]

JC was not a martyr but a hero. Martyrdom is passive.

"Like a sheep before it's shearers is silent," you mean?

The idea that Xians ought to passively accept their station in life is what princes and principalities, including rich capitalists, did to the Xian message.

That's Marxist nonsense, by the way. It came from the old goat himself.

Historically, the opposite proved true. The vast majority of social improvement efforts, from public education, to socialized medicine, to welfare, to prison reform, to mental health care, to the improvement of labour conditions, to children's rights, to foreign aid, to addiction treatment, to hospitals, to universities...and so on, had both their origins and their chief proponents in Christians and Jews. It seems there's little that is better for the future of the "oppressed" classes than a genuinely Christian ethos. Of course, one cannot mandate such: and the attempts by the Catholics to do so have been, as you say, disastrous. But the Catholics...well, I'll let them explain themselves. I feel no need to speak on their behalf.

What you won't find is anything in the teachings of Jesus Christ that allow them to act as they did. So consider that, if you will.

Meanwhile, look at what Marxism has done. Just look. Anywhere it has been, look.

You would say that wouldn't you.

No, look...just look.

Don't listen to me.

Just look.

[Belinda]

"Like a sheep before it's shearers is silent," you mean?

That's Marxist nonsense, by the way. It came from the old goat himself.

Historically, the opposite proved true. The vast majority of social improvement efforts, from public education, to socialized medicine, to welfare, to prison reform, to mental health care, to the improvement of labour conditions, to children's rights, to foreign aid, to addiction treatment, to hospitals, to universities...and so on, had both their origins and their chief proponents in Christians and Jews. It seems there's little that is better for the future of the "oppressed" classes than a genuinely Christian ethos. Of course, one cannot mandate such: and the attempts by the Catholics to do so have been, as you say, disastrous. But the Catholics...well, I'll let them explain themselves. I feel no need to speak on their behalf.

What you won't find is anything in the teachings of Jesus Christ that allow them to act as they did. So consider that, if you will.

Meanwhile, look at what Marxism has done. Just look. Anywhere it has been, look.

You would say that wouldn't you.

No, look...just look.

Don't listen to me.

Just look.

I agree Xianity has been a force for good just as you explain. Rich and powerful people have mostly distorted the message to make it seem that the poor are supposed to remain poor and downtrodden. Rich and powerful people are the elite group in any society human greed and fear being what they are. It has been a hard fight against that status quo of wealthy elites for all of these to get done(to quote you):

"vast majority of social improvement efforts, from public education, to socialized medicine, to welfare, to prison reform, to mental health care, to the improvement of labour conditions, to children's rights, to foreign aid, to addiction treatment, to hospitals, to universities...and so on, "(IC)

[Immanuel Can]

You would say that wouldn't you.

No, look...just look.

Don't listen to me.

Just look.

I agree Xianity...

No.

Marxism.

Look at what it has done. Look at what it has done in every single case ever. Just look.

If you do, I need say no more. You'll know.