thing of beauty

Originally posted by knightmeister
Whether Christian or Atheist surely we must all agree that Christ's message is a thing of beauty.

Just another comment / question about your original post. When you say Christs message am I right in guessing that you are really talking about your own particular interpretation of that message?


Probably the most beautiful though is the image of unconditional love and forgiveness gaining victory over judgement and hate. Isn't this what we most need in our world of wars and terrorism ? Tough , single minded forgiveness of our "enemies"? I imagine sometimes what Jesus would have done about 9/11. My guess is that he would have commissioned a hospital for sick children of Islamic militants and fundamentalists and made the WTC site a centre for world reconciliation. Imagine Osama Bin laden falling ill and being invited to such a place for his treatment!! Love and humanity over brute violence and revenge. Idealistic maybe (or maybe not?)
Surely you can see that some of the most inspirational people of recent times: Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King etc have demonstrated the 'message' you are talking about in a far more effective way than Jesus ever did. In fact I am not aware of Jesus starting any hospitals or other charitable organizations. Of course you can make all sorts of arguments about the results of the religion he started but that is not what you asked us to find beautiful. You were talking specifically about the story of his lifetime.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Just another comment / question about your original post. When you say Christs message am I right in guessing that you are really talking about your own particular interpretation of that message?


[b]Probably the most beautiful though is the image of unconditional love and forgiveness gaining victory over judgement and hate. Isn't this what we most n ...[text shortened]... asked us to find beautiful. You were talking specifically about the story of his lifetime.

Surely you can see that some of the most inspirational people of recent times: Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King etc have demonstrated the 'message' you are talking about in a far more effective way than Jesus ever did. In fact I am not aware of Jesus starting any hospitals or other charitable organizations. WHITEY

For you this is a perfectly logical argument. Many people have achieved loads more than Jesus did to create a beautiful world. For a christian this is not a problem because anything these guys did was via the power of Christ's spirit anyway. Christian theology believes that Ghandi etc would never have done what they did unless Christ was with them. What Christ did he is still doing. MLK for example would have clearly attributed much of what he achieved to Christ anyway. Furthermore , neither MLK or any of the others will bring about the final victory of love over might at the end of time. I'm not aware that any of the above would claim themselves to be more effective and inspirational than Jesus. There may or may not be MLK churches world wide in 2000 years time but there are Chrsitian churches.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Just another comment / question about your original post. When you say Christs message am I right in guessing that you are really talking about your own particular interpretation of that message?


[b]Probably the most beautiful though is the image of unconditional love and forgiveness gaining victory over judgement and hate. Isn't this what we most n ...[text shortened]... asked us to find beautiful. You were talking specifically about the story of his lifetime.

When you say Christs message am I right in guessing that you are really talking about your own particular interpretation of that message? WHITEY

Of course it's my interpretation. But I also think it's the right one. Just as you think yours is.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Furthermore , neither MLK or any of the others will bring about the final victory of love over might at the end of time.

But you get the point that as an atheist I cannot possibly find beauty in the story of Jesus Christ by thinking about things that I don't believe in at all. Its like me saying to you: Don't you as a Christian admit that the story of the Norse gods beautiful? After all, nothing can compete with Odins final victory in the year 4000 AD.

I'm not aware that any of the above would claim themselves to be more effective and inspirational than Jesus. There may or may not be MLK churches world wide in 2000 years time but there are Chrsitian churches.
The main reason why there aren't any religions based on them is they didn't go round claiming to be God. And that in itself, to me, sets them apart as better and more inspirational than Jesus who inspite of his various teachings did not seem to go very far towards actually helping his fellow human beings. And even if I do find some beauty in many of the things Jesus said and did, I must pick and choose because there are some very distasteful things there too.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But you get the point that as an atheist I cannot possibly find beauty in the story of Jesus Christ by thinking about things that I don't believe in at all. Its like me saying to you: Don't you as a Christian admit that the story of the Norse gods beautiful? After all, nothing can compete with Odins final victory in the year 4000 AD.

[b]I'm not aware t ...[text shortened]... d and did, I must pick and choose because there are some very distasteful things there too.

But you get the point that as an atheist I cannot possibly find beauty in the story of Jesus Christ by thinking about things that I don't believe in at all WHITEY

So you like the idea of power , hate and might ruling over gentleness , compassion and humility? Curious

Originally posted by knightmeister
So you like the idea of power , hate and might ruling over gentleness , compassion and humility? Curious

I really don't have a clue where you are getting that from. When did I ever say anything even remotely like that?

Originally posted by twhitehead
I really don't have a clue where you are getting that from. When did I ever say anything even remotely like that?

You haven't. the question is rhetorical. What's your response? I only asked the question because I imagine that you don't like the idea at all , and if you don't then you must at least find Jesus partly appealing (even though it would kill you to admit it) because that is precisely what he stood for. For example , if you dig the guy in China who stood in front of the tank then you should also dig the carpenter who preached love and forgiveness and shunned violence. If you dig ghandi when he said "there are many causes I would glady die for but none for which I would kill" then you must dig the carpenter who went to the cross and told Peter to put away his sword. Both Ghandi and Jesus did actually die as aggressive pacifists speaking truth to power. Ghandi chucked the Brits out of India, Jesus usurped the entire Roman empire with his message.

Now if I were an honest Atheist or a socialist or both I think I would find Christ to be a bit of a hero of mine at least.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But you get the point that as an atheist I cannot possibly find beauty in the story of Jesus Christ by thinking about things that I don't believe in at all. Its like me saying to you: Don't you as a Christian admit that the story of the Norse gods beautiful? After all, nothing can compete with Odins final victory in the year 4000 AD.

[b]I'm not aware t ...[text shortened]... d and did, I must pick and choose because there are some very distasteful things there too.

And even if I do find some beauty in many of the things Jesus said and did, Whitey

...like what?

Originally posted by knightmeister
I have to believe that the True motivation should be for the sake of love, compassion, justice, truth etc. themselves. Think of one

..But surely within the scope of compassion and love the self is included? If one is motivated by a love for humanity how does one exclude oneself from part of the human family? For each of us there is one person with w ...[text shortened]... ommand to love others AS (I repeat AS) we love ourselves and NOT instead of loving ourselves.

Wow. I don't know how you got this from what I posted.

The ego is the source of the desires of the self. The motivation of the ego is to "feel good" and/or avoid "feeling bad". What I'm trying to say is that the motivation should be love, compassion, justice, truth etc. themselves.

I get the impression that you've bundled "feeling good" with love. As a thought experiment, see if you can separate the two.

By the way, it's been my experience that most often, "false compassion and sanctimonious BS" emanates from those who show love, compassion, justice, truth, etc. because it makes them "feel good" to do so.

Originally posted by knightmeister
You haven't. the question is rhetorical. What's your response? I only asked the question because I imagine that you don't like the idea at all , and if you don't then you must at least find Jesus partly appealing (even though it would kill you to admit it) because that is precisely what he stood for. For example , if you dig the guy in China who stood ...[text shortened]... or a socialist or both I think I would find Christ to be a bit of a hero of mine at least.

As I said, based on your interpretation, there is a lot of beauty in the story. However you are picking and choosing to suit yourself. I dont really feel like going through the whole new testament right now, but your feel good summary of Jesus is far from complete. Although he did preach some very nice things he also did not take a completely pacifist stance, and as far as I know did not speak out very strongly against the barbarity of the old testament and the Jewish laws of the time. He did not speak out against racism, slavery, etc.
But worst of all, his creation of a barbaric religion is a criminal act of the worst kind.

Originally posted by knightmeister
What do you think is meant by the following verses?

"Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it. "

"He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it..." LEMONJELLO


This tells me a lot about you in that you are talking about things y ...[text shortened]... hink self love is arrogance or smug egotism you don't really know what true self love is.

This tells me a lot about you in that you are talking about things you don't believe and quoting a guy who you presumably think was deluded to support your argument. I find myself wondering what YOU think about what he said and whether you feel ready to lose your life to Jesus.(which i doubt)

Ok, you want to know what I think. Other than my general interest in descriptive facts about the world, I couldn't care less about whether or not Jesus, or the Buddha, ever actually walked the earth; or about whether or not some divine agent exists out there; or about whether or not I won't really die when I die. Yawn. I know that your metaphysics crumbles around such points: that's your problem. Still, though, some of what is commonly ascribed to these teachers I find quite beautiful – not as a set of beliefs that somehow opens the gates to eternal life and never-ending happiness or any other such utter nonsense, but rather just as a set of practices that are particularly well suited to our existence and to the cultivation of virtues. Those verses I posted are examples where I think the teacher is on top of his game and aligned with Dharma practice: I think they're about losing *one's* self and achieving true freedom and virtuous living through disintegration of the ego and the loss of whatever it is that causes one to cling needily to his life through the grip of self-attachments.

I also think you have grossly misinterpreted ThinkOfOne's excellent post. He's not talking about "self-hatred and self loathing". That's junk you crammed in there – why you're doing that, I don't know. He's just talking about how illusions shrouded in self-attachments dull and impair our basic motivations and cause people to distort a simple and beautiful message. Yes, there are aspects of the teaching that are "thing[s] of beauty", but the self-centered motivations that are too common to the pious are ugly. The problem lies in the clinging to illusions of permanence. I like the following words of Batchelor (whose Buddhism Without Beliefs I think addresses the impairment of motivation that ThinkOfOne hit on):

"In the face of a changing world, such craving seeks consolation in something permanent and reliable, in a self that is in control of things, in a God who is in charge of destiny. The irony of this strategy is that it turns out to be the cause of what it seeks to dispel. In yearning for anguish to be assuaged in such ways, we reinforce what creates anguish in the first place: the craving for life to be other than what it is."

Originally posted by LemonJello
[b]This tells me a lot about you in that you are talking about things you don't believe and quoting a guy who you presumably think was deluded to support your argument. I find myself wondering what YOU think about what he said and whether you feel ready to lose your life to Jesus.(which i doubt)

Ok, you want to know what I think. Other than my gen anguish in the first place: the craving for life to be other than what it is."[/b]

I also think you have grossly misinterpreted ThinkOfOne's excellent post. He's not talking about "self-hatred and self loathing". That's junk you crammed in there – why you're doing that, I don't know. LEMON

I have not suggested that TOone is saying this but I did point out this. We have a self. It seems self evident to me that we are to do one of three things with this self. We can be indifferent and ignore it , we can love it with compassion , or we can hate it and mistreat it. Now unless you have any to add that's it. If you and ToO are ruling out self love that leaves only indifference towards self or self hate. So I am asking what you suggest we do with this self of ours with which we are entrusted and have responsibility for. Are we to say that our self has less value than other selves? Or isn't it more logical that every self is equally deserving of love (including us) not more than or less than anyone else. I accept the idea that loving ourselves as a gateway to loving all humans is radical because its always assumed we should have no concern for our own self. I fully expected some resistance to this idea but nevertheless have you not noticed that those who love and care for others are also good at looking after themselves and those that neglect themselves tend to not be so good at looking after others. I put it to you that if one is not even able to attend to one's own needs and not be empathically in touch with one's very own self , how on earth can one even begin to empathise with another self? You are probably equating self love with egotism and arrogance which it is not. Self compassion leads to only one thing more compassion for others and more undertstanding.Self compassion is not being "up yourself" , it's just looking after yourself.

So what should , in your opinion, be our stance be towards our self?