I don't think I can agree with you; even a breif survey of the homeletics or theology of any number of Christain sects will disclose just how "unvalued" the human soul is, according to them.



As cause and effect, certainly. I think the concept of "orginal sin" a strange and dangerous one. To many Christians -- not merely lay people but theologans of some note -- children in the most unsinful and (I would say) blessed state are in fact, nothing more or less than the imps of satan, their actions are sinful in the extreme, and proof of the total depravity of human nature.

I do not buy that at all...but I spent enough hours as a undergraduate and garuate student, perusing the libraries of several schools of divinity. I know that is exactly what many significant figures in the history of Christianity (from St Paul, to St Augustine, to Calvin and beyond) meant and taught.

No sin is inherent from parent to child; such a notion is repugnant, moreso because it is, Christains believe and teach, by Divine decree that this happens. Both the account of sinfulness, and the result of such sinfulness is absolutely the antithesis of what one would expect from a deity of love, mercy and justice (which is what Christians believe their god to be!). In fact one has to note that, in Jewish theology, there is no doctrine of Original Sin, at all, and Adam's sin (if you chose to call it sin) has no implications for any but himself.




I would say, not being Buddhist, that this World is real; I rather side with Diogenes, who repudiated Plato's World of Forms, by deliberately stubbing his toe on a large -- and according to Plato unreal stone -- proclaiming "Thus I refute it!"

Our World, with both pleasures and sorrows, is as real as our spirit, our soul. The gods brought forth the material to compliment the spiritual. We do "walk on" through darkness and light, through pleasure and pain, through loss and gain, through lives and forms, not becuzse this World isn't real, but becuase it is only thus that we can find our place in the World, and beyond it.

"Be seeing you..."

__________________
Grassaf, Eolas

Eolas,

Thanks for your post and response. Well, you certainly have no need to emphasise some of the more unsavory aspects of the Christian faith, as they have often expressed themselves throughout history. I remember very well one incident, when a group of evangelists paid me a visit, seeking to "reclaim my soul for Christ" after I had moved away from their own particular brand of the faith. At the time I was also being visited by a couple who had a tiny baby with them. One of the evangelical guys gently smoothed the babies head and said........"What a lovely little sinner". (Fortunately, later, when we were alone again, the couple were able to laugh this off.......I think for a while they even called their baby "their little sinner" in tribute to the incident!!)

And again, the famous sermon by Jonathan Edwards...........The God that holds you over the pit of hell...........abhors you..........his wrath towards you burns like a fire.....he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire...............you are ten thousand times more abominable in his eyes, than the most hateful venomous serpent is in ours.... just about sums up what we are speaking of.

Yet again, my point was that the idea of "original sin" can point towards the paradox I spoke of, familiar to many spiritual paths. That the empirical, phenomenal "self" we experience ourselves to be, with which we identify, and which provides the foundation of our choices, is nevertheless in a certain sense a "false" self, merely a social self. And yet this is the only "self" we have to work with, to begin with............The idea of "original sin" when in the hands of a Thomas Merton, or a D.T.Suzuki, provides the basis for much worthwhile reflection and guidance. Well, at least for me. Personally I feel no need to subscribe in any way to the sentiments expressed by Jonathan Edwards, or those implied by my fundamentalist friends, or even to the sheer weight of how it has often been approached throughout Christian history.

Two men looked out through prison bars
One saw mud the other stars

As far as this world being real, perhaps a misunderstanding and I did not make myself clear. The Buddha overcomes samsara - the world of birth and death that we experience - not by mere denial but by showing forth its true nature. And the final word - at least for Mahayana Buddhism - is that samsara is nirvana. I have always sought never to betray this world, which is the only one I have known, for the sake of some imagined "other".

It was the Buddha's aim not to give a final speculative answer but to be free from all theories and to know, by experience, the nature of form and how form arises and how form perishes. He wanted not a third position lying between two extremes but a no-position that supercedes them both. This is the Middle Way. (From the Journals of Thomas Merton)

I would say this world is very real indeed, and is in a sense the only reality. Yet it can be misunderstood and therefore our stance towards it can be false and therefore destructive.

When the Buddhist master was asked for the miracles of Buddhism he replied...."My miracles are these:- when I'm hungry I eat, when I'm tired I sleep, when I'm happy I laugh, when I'm sad I cry." This is real. Yet there is a journey to make, an "exploration" before..... Returning to the place that we started from and knowing it for the first time......... Some sort of transformation of "self" seems required. Again, I find the doctrine of "original sin" worth a look in respect to all this.

For the garden is the only place there is, yet we shall not find it until we have searched everywhere and found nowhere that is not a desert.

Anyway, I plod on..................

__________________
When the bird and the book disagree, always believe the bird.

I'll stick with grace because of human nature.

One idea I know to be true yet find virtually impossible to hold is the idea that I do not exist as inner unity. There is no large collective "I" within me. Instead, I am a plurality The results of this inner condition is original sin.

Buddhism and Esoteric Christianity are similar in that they both begin with this idea that man exists as a plurality without inner unity. Man's name is legion. We are many and not "One" The difference is that esoteric Christianity seeks to create "One" or the soul while Buddhism, or at least modern western Buddhism, doesn't concern itself with a soul.

Common sense says that if we do exist as this plurality and in opposition to ourselves, hypocrisy would be natural for this fallen nature. But the trouble is this inability to remember that we are many and not "one." When I forget this, it is easy to exaggerate the worth of human nature.

This is hard to admit but if a person impartially looks inside without the need to judge or justify preconceptions, they will witness the chaos of our inner condition. Paul did it in Romans 7:


This is real psychology. This is so real IMO that it is the passage many people find most offensive. I've verified it for myself so I have no problem admitting myself as the wretched man. Yet I've learned how offensive this is to secularism. I've learned that without the help of grace, all the platitudes and wonderful thoughts will give way to the other side. As much as we are collectively caapable of the greatest compassion, because of our inability to "Know Thyself" and come to grips with the power of imagination, we are simultaneously capable of the greatest abominations. This is human nature that has created human history and will likely create the human future.

Paul is willing to look inside and admit it. Most are unwilling since it is too offensive to our corrupt ego. Everything will continue as it is. The only thing that will improve are the platitudes and speeches until we awaken to the need to "Know Thyself." and admit to our fallen human nature.