Originally posted by jaywillExactly. John Lennon will talk to you, but you have to believe that he is alive and talking to hear him.
I don't know what the point of your several responses is.
But the point I am making here is the availability of Christ is like the availability of air. As air is all around us and accessible to all so God's Son is accessible.
In fact God said through the prophet Joel [b]"And it shall be in the last days, says God, that I will pour out of My Spiri ...[text shortened]... im; For whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Romans 10:12,13)[/b]
I'm right there with you on this.
Originally posted by jaywillOne perspective is that Zen (Chan in China) was a synthesis of Mahayana Buddhism and the Taoism of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu. Chan teachers often equated the Tao and Dharma or Buddha nature. The key, I think, is not to treat such phrases as indicating some kind of metaphysical “something;” I think it is a mistake to read Lao Tzu that way—and I think he cautions against it. I tend to prefer the term tathata, generally translated as “thusness” or “suchness” or the “just-thisness” of the world and us in/of it.
I think the Taoist does realize that there are paradoxes in the universe.
How would you briefly compare Taoist philosophy with Zen?
Originally posted by jaywillI don't believe that prayer is futile and meaningless, at least not to everyone anyway. If you've got faith in God, then prayer is a great way to convince yourself that God really exists and that you're really communicating with him. I presume that there would be some therapeutic value in that. But for someone who doesn't have faith, then it's just a waste of time.
Do you feel that prayer is futile and meaningless? I don't. Neither do I believe that Jesus is not a living Person. I believe as He taught that in resurrection He would make Himself available to all who would receive the Spirit of reality. The Spirit of reality is Christ in another form in which He is able to impart His life into o ...[text shortened]... me a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) is one of these trustworthy and reliable facts.
b]
I really don't see how you can believe that Christ is a living person. If he's a living person, where is he hiding? If your answer is Heaven, then what is he waiting for in order to return to Earth?
I have to admit, the term "Spirit of Reality" is something entirely new to me. Where does it originate from? In any case, all it seems to stipulate is using Christ's teachings in an everyday context in the modern world. That's a pretty profound title for such a simple idea.
Would you mind listing a few of these "facts" you speak of? I need something a little more specific than a Bible passage. What's the point you're trying to make here?
B.
Originally posted by jaywillBuddhists believe in Nirvana, Daoists believe that death is the compliment to life. . .Also followers of dao are philosophes, not people of religion. . .😕
I think the Taoist does realize that there are paradoxes in the universe.
How would you briefly compare Taoist philosophy with Zen?
Originally posted by telerionYep. You're right there. A big Copy Cat. Whatever I say about Jesus, sure, you're right there with your copy cat.
Exactly. John Lennon will talk to you, but you have to believe that he is alive and talking to hear him.
I'm right there with you on this.
Whatever Christ is John Lennon is sure to be right there like the Big Copy Cat.
Koo Koo Ka Jub !
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundYes, but Zen does not always (or even perhaps often) engage in such Buddhist metaphysics—at least such folks as Lin-chi (Rinzai) seem not to, even if sometimes they use the terms to point up their ultimate emptiness. (I came across one Japanese roshi of the Rinzai tradition who used the term “nirvana” to mean only calm-clear mind, nothing more.) I think this may be part of the Taoist influence on Ch’an.
Buddhists believe in Nirvana, Daoists believe that death is the compliment to life. . .Also followers of dao are philosophes, not people of religion. . .😕
A student once asked the Zen master, “What happens after death?”
ZM: “I don’t have any idea.”
Student: “But—you’re a Zen master!”
ZM: “Yes, but I’m not a dead Zen master...”
All of which might just show that as a Zen Buddhist I would be a heretic too...
1 edit
Originally posted by vistesdThat is really rich vistesd. I had to laugh. I studied Zen through Allen Watts' book.
Yes, but Zen does not always (or even perhaps often) engage in such Buddhist metaphysics—at least such folks as Lin-chi (Rinzai) seem not to, even if sometimes they use the terms to point up their ultimate emptiness. (I came across one Japanese roshi of the Rinzai tradition who used the term “nirvana” to mean only calm-clear mind, nothing more.) I t ...[text shortened]... er...”
All of which might just show that as a Zen Buddhist I would be a heretic too...
To tell you the truth I found that any "vibration" or "force" or, for lack of a better term, consciousness, is inferior to a Person. I think there is much truth to Tao and Buddhism. But I think my deepest need was for a Person.
A way cannot replace a Person in my experience. A conscousness or an awareness of something cannot replace the knowing of a Savior Christ. You see I found that I am still above an awareness or a force. It is still on a lower order of being than my self. But to receive the indwelling resurrected and living Jesus dethroned my ego and comfortably placed me in a peaceful and proper place supported by the Person of God.
I can see why forgiveness and lordship are so linked together in the gospel. A force or a vibration cannot and need not forgive. But a Person forgives. And I did not have to beg or grovel for forgiveness. I simply accepted that the justice of God fell upon the Son on the cross in place of falling upon me, who deserved it.
What do you say about the forgiveness of passed sins and Tao? Who is there to Whom one must answer? Is it only to one's "noble" self one gives an account for his wrongs?
1 edit
Originally posted by BromageI don't have any faith in myself alone. I don't think I have more faith than the next person as a natural response to Jesus.
I don't believe that prayer is futile and meaningless, at least not to everyone anyway. If you've got faith in God, then prayer is a great way to convince yourself that God really exists and that you're really communicating with him. I presume that there would be some therapeutic value in that. But for someone who doesn't have faith, then it's just a waste o specific than a Bible passage. What's the point you're trying to make here?
B.
I think I know where I can obtain faith. I know where to get it. The word of God produces the believing ability in me in some measure. The Bible is like radiation to me. You can agree or disagree with uranium. Regardless you will get the radiation infused into you.
This is something like my experience with the Bible. When I read it with my spirit and with a willingness to be changed by God, faith is just transfused into me. When I have nothing but my own darkened thoughts to meditate on faith leaks out. But when I think on His word, and better yet praise and pray His word back to Him, I find it harder to NOT believe than to believe.
It is really really hard for be to believe that Christ did not rise from the dead as He taught He would. His resurrection is consistent with everything else He said and did.
It is logical and consistent and to be expected - that is that One so victorious over the world would also be victorious over the worst of the world, death.
I am born. My skepticism about life can hardly remove my realization that I am born. Likewise through Jesus I have been reborn. Even though I may at times not be happy with God I cannot deny that I have been reborn.
I have been reborn through the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Right here it tells me:
"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has regenerated us unto a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3).
Do you think that 500 people to whom Jesus appeared in His resurrection were hallucinating or convincing themselves collectively?
When Paul wrote that the resurrected Christ appeared to Peter and then to other disciples and then to 500 at one time, they probably were still alive to refute what Paul had written.
Do you have any record of someone of that crowd refuting what Paul told the church in Corinth?
" ... And that He was buried, and that He has been raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.
And that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve; Then He appeared to over five hundred brothers at one time, of whom the majority remain until now, but some have fallen asleep [died]; Then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; And last of all He appeared to me also, as ot were to one born prematurely." (First Corinthians 15:4-8)
3 edits
Originally posted by jaywillYou carry your own water my friend.
That is really rich vistesd. I had to laugh. I studied Zen through Allen Watts' book.
To tell you the truth I found that any "vibration" or "force" or, for lack of a better term, consciousness, is inferior to a Person. I think there is much truth to Tao and Buddhism. But I think my deepest need was for a Person.
A way cannot replace a Person in my ex ...[text shortened]... m one must answer? Is it only to one's "noble" self one gives an account for his wrongs?
I could never speak for Tao the way some people speak in Gods stead, niether would i claim know the answers.
How you find your peace is your business, if you find you can deal with your past wrong doings through salvation, then who am i to question your choice. I must admit, that the bad things that happen to me are easier to take, knowing that they are part of the natural order of things, and that they are no different from that which others face.
I have no wish to question your faith, i just do not believe the same things that you do.
1 edit
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundI understand. But one aspect of this salvation in Christ is from the actual record of actual real bad things done by me. I don't mean only bad things that happened to me. I mean bad things that happened to others because of me and/or bad things done by me.
You carry your own water my friend.
I could never speak for Tao the way some people speak in Gods stead, niether would i claim know the answers.
How you find your peace is your business, if you find you can deal with your past wrong doings through salvation, then who am i to question your choice. I must admit, that the bad things that h ...[text shortened]... ce.
I have no wish to question your faith, i just do not believe the same things that you do.
God has not overlooked my sins or ignored them. Justice was imputed on my behalf on Christ at His cross. Now if I believe in Christ, whether God likes me or doesn't like me He is legally bound to justify me as if I had never sinned.
This gives us the boldness before God. We know that "He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9)
I really like this verse because it does not say He is faithful and merciful in this instance. It is a matter of righteousness. He is faithful and righteous to forgive us and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. The death of Christ in our behalf has made our justification if we accept God's plan, a matter of righteousness. It would be unrighteous for God to not forgive the one who believes into Christ. And righteousness is the foundation of His throne. The righteousness of God is the foundation of His government over creation.
He must forgive and look upon us as if we have never sinned. Justice has fallen upon Christ on man's behalf.
This also is not a matter of only my individual peace or my individual salvation. But the Bible shows the consummation of God's salvation is a great corporate holy "city" New Jerusalem. Here a collective entity of myriads of Christ indwelt human beings become the collective expression of God mingled with man for eternity.
She is called the Bride and the Wife as a collective and corporate expression of God and man united. She is also called the tabernacle of God. She is the capital of the new heaven and the new earth. In Christ we gave a great corporate destiny of the deification and glorification of a universal Spouse of Jesus Christ.
Originally posted by jaywillObviously the first line of my message went over your head.
I understand. But one aspect of this salvation in Christ is from the actual record of actual real bad things done by me. I don't mean only bad things that happened to me. I mean bad things that happened to others because of me and/or bad things done by me.
God has not overlooked my sins or ignored them. Justice was imputed on my behalf on Christ at His ...[text shortened]... ate destiny of the deification and glorification of a universal Spouse of Jesus Christ.
I said "you carry your own water", that was my answer to your question.
I do not believe that just because you tell someone you did a bad thing, that it goes away. If you've done bad you've done bad. . .live with it. This idea that you can somehow magically erase the evils of men by devine worship of forgiveness is, to me, extremely strange.
How many evils have you managed to deal with because some invisible entity has abracadabra'd them to the back of your mind? ...maybe if people lived up to the fact that they have done bad things, rather than considering themselves to have a clean sheet all the time, the world would be a better place.
Originally posted by jaywillI’m glad you could laugh. 🙂
That is really rich vistesd. I had to laugh. I studied Zen through Allen Watts' book.
To tell you the truth I found that any "vibration" or "force" or, for lack of a better term, consciousness, is inferior to a Person. I think there is much truth to Tao and Buddhism. But I think my deepest need was for a Person.
A way cannot replace a Person in my ex ...[text shortened]... m one must answer? Is it only to one's "noble" self one gives an account for his wrongs?
Re: all the talk about Person, etc. I understand it. But—
I think you still think you are somebody.
If you get riled at that statement, you didn’t get it. It’s not an insult. (I still think I am a somebody sometimes, too—and keep trying to put the flowing water back in the bucket...)
Interesting thing about Watts: he was an Episcopal priest (chaplain at Northwestern University) who moved through Zen Buddhism toward Taoism.
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundI could never speak for Tao the way some people speak in Gods stead...
You carry your own water my friend.
I could never speak for Tao the way some people speak in Gods stead, niether would i claim know the answers.
How you find your peace is your business, if you find you can deal with your past wrong doings through salvation, then who am i to question your choice. I must admit, that the bad things that h ...[text shortened]... ce.
I have no wish to question your faith, i just do not believe the same things that you do.
Or even to speak about Tao in the same way. When I try, the words end up a tangle—though maybe that at least points to the inescapable entanglement...
“The musician does not need to have ‘faith’ that there is a melody, nor does he have to accept the existence of the melody on some scriptural authority; he obviously has a direct experience of the melody itself. And once the melody is heard, it is impossible ever again to doubt it...
“Some might say the Tao is nothing more than the physical universe. But this would seem to miss the crucial point in much the same way as it would to say that a melody is nothing more than a group of sounds. Rather it might be said that the universe bears the same sort of relation to the Tao as the group of notes of a melody bears to the melody itself.”
—Raymond Smullyan, The Tao Is Silent
And vice versa... The melody is no more a “thing-in-itself” than are the notes; nor is it like a director standing backstage... That’s why “it” cannot be talked about in that way.
Imagine a virtuoso violinist playing an original melody. When he is done, someone asks: “But, what does it mean?” Or: “For what ultimate purpose are you playing music?”
Was it Chuang Tzu who called Taoism “the watercourse way?” I might say the musician—or the dancer!—
(the “sage” of Lao Tzu) pours herself into the music, and allows the music to flow through her, realizing she too is the music.
Like water flowing through water—
If you try to separate the flowing from the water
there is nothing there.
If you try to separate the water from the flow,
you end up with stagnation, and a crop of mosquitoes...
1 edit
Originally posted by vistesdOh. Christians aren't suppose to be able to laugh? Sorry.
I’m glad you could laugh. 🙂
Re: all the talk about Person, etc. I understand it. But—
I think you still think you are somebody.
If you get riled at that statement, you didn’t get it. It’s not an insult. (I still think I am a somebody sometimes, too—and keep trying to put the flowing water back in the bucket...)
Interesting thing about Watt ...[text shortened]... copal priest (chaplain at Northwestern University) who moved through Zen Buddhism toward Taoism.
I still think I am a big shot? Yes. I am more egotistical than you could ever imagine. That is why I need Jesus so very much. You see there is hope in Christ. There is hope to be sober minded and have a clear assessment about one's self.
I am just a sinner saved by grace. I am learning to live by Christ.
About Allen Watts being an Episcopal priest, I didn't know that. But it doesn't surprise me in the least. The clergy laity system burns a lot of people out. A professional mediatorial class of "spiritual" people often ends in clergyman suffering from some form of burn out which sends them searching.