Do you feel anxiety about the decline of religion?

[Detales]

Contarini, It is pleasing to note that you expose yourself to many perspectives. For my part, I have, since I grew up well catechized and devout in that faith, been well steeped in Catholic and Christian writings, including the vast array of faithful protestation on these fora. And I agree that there is no neutrality, and I don’t believe that I have used that word on these pages referent to material.

It appeared to me that the people responding to my posts were basing their statements on what, to me, is piety. That means the acceptance of evidence supportive of one’s religious view as distinct from secular accounts. Perhaps that doesn’t include you and you came by your faith in an honest way. What concerns me is that there is vast likelihood in the early church of alterations and misunderstandings of the Master’s Teaching. In the second century a Corinthian, Dionysious, complained about alterations in the text of his own work, but noted it might be expected, as even the Gospels were being altered. Eusebious himself admitted that in his history he omitted all those things which would discredit the church and its leadership, and enhanced those things that served to enhance its image. And then there was the burning of libraries by early christianists as well. My anxiety, therefore, relative to this thread, is that people find a way from belief.

We ought also remember that English is an inherently dualistic language. EG, Heinlein correctly noted that “In English only the first person present tense of the verb ‘to be’ is true to fact.” David Bohm, among others, also sees the shortcomings of English in this regard and addresses it in his Wholeness and the Implicate Order. Nicoll addresses the shortcomings of depth of interpretations of parables in his The New Man.

In all, given what I have found as a result of my own mystical experience, all I am saying is that the Western interpretation of the Master’s work is lacking a dimension or two. My interpretation of His words, seen through the lens of a different mode of awareness, one pointed to by teachings ascribed to Jesus Himself, as far as I can see tells me that the exoteric teaching of the Church is inadequate to convey His actual intent.

I am not here to do your homework or anyone else’s, and it sounds like you have done some research, or even a lot, yourself. Clearly you are an intelligent person. I’m guessing though, that your interpretations might be in the academic realm only. I was forced to look further than that, and further than the inadequate answers of my own faith regarding my experience. I found those answers in my association with Dr. KG Mills, and in the writings of such as Sankara, Merrell-Wolff, Nisargadatta, Roberson, Ramana Maharshi, Krishnamurti, DR Hawkins, B Katie, Wilbur. and many more. They treat of the nature of what is foundational in fact to the awareness that in its incomplete capacity allows such a thing as christianist belief, or any belief. Their thesis is provable by direct experience, and need not rely on scriptures other than as a pointer to what is behind them.

As for references, I am sure, based on previous experience, that my following partial bibliography will be pooh-poohed by the pious. I can only say, go and do the work yourself, and talk to me after you have the eventually inevitable result.

Basic Self Knowledge by Harry Benjamin (I put this one first for a reason. A very intelligent acquaintance of mine wanted to join a dialog circle about this work. He was told “go and read the book.” He did. When quizzed on it, he was told “Go and read the book.” He did again, and returned, only with the same result. I don’t know to this day why he persisted. But he read the book 26 times before he realized that he had actually not comprehended the thesis of the book until then. He was then welcomed into the circle, competent to speak on the contents of the book. This is not uncommon when intelligentsia are reading esoteric books, especially in English, as noted above. The ideas are radically different that what our ordinary frame of reference includes, and therefore a certain kind of blindness has to be overcome. Similarly, a Jesuit scholar read one of my Mentor’s lectures seven times before he even comprehended that he did was not familiar with the concepts included therein. He was then competent to ask intelligent questions.)

*Milwaukee Journal, Nov 16, 1963, p5
All of the authors in paragraph 5 above
This Is The Faith Canon Francis Ripley
The Christian Agnostic L Weatherhead
Science and Sanity A Korzybski
A History of the Warfare of Science With Theology in Christendom AD White
The Sociology of Religion T Hoult
Standing for Something GB Hinkley
Our Unseen Guest Darby and Joan
A History of Egypt H Breasted
Most books by Norman Vincent Peale & a few by Bishop FJ Sheen
*The Pagan Christ & Water Into Wine *Tom Harpur
Those Incredible Christians HJ Schonfield (& his intro to The Passover Plot)
The Story of the Bible EJ Goodspeed
Age of Reason T Paine
The Untold Story of the Dead Sea Scrolls Harpers,Magazine, Aug, 1966
The Lost Years of Jesus Revealed, The Story of Religion & Is That in the Bible? C Potter
Jesus Died in Kashmir; Jesus. Moses, and the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel A Faber-Kaiser
A Rationalist Encyclopedia
The World’s Living Religions R Hume
An Encyclopedia of Religion
The Life and Sayings of Ramakrishna M Muller
Ethics of the Great Religions ER Pike
A New Look at the Bible Tradition LV Bischoff
An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiment With Truth M Gandhi
Asia Looks at Western Christianity T Ohm
Remembering FC Bartlett
God and the Bible & 3 others M Arnold
etc, etc, etc

 

[grannymh]

It seems as if developed countries, foremost, are being critically hit by the growth of secularism. The traditional worldview of Judeo-Christianity in Europe and North America is becoming viewed as “bigoted,” “medieval,” and “naive” by our younger generations.

I’ve not heard about it much on CAF, but is this trend reversible? Am I the only one who seems to be worried?

I feel anxiety about the growth of secularism and its sister relativism within the ordinary practice of religion.

Blessings,
granny

All human life is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

 

[Don_L]

I feel anxiety about the growth of secularism and its sister relativism within the ordinary practice of religion.

Blessings,
granny

All human life is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

Amen. This is why it is widespread outside the Church, because a secular element within, hardly makes the religion worth following seriously. A social agency with candles doesn’t attract too many. They go elsewhere, where serious salvation is being attempted.

 

[Detales]

Don L~~ “*They go elsewhere, where serious salvation is being attempted. *”

And “serious salvation” might be???

 

[Don_L]

Don L~~ “*They go elsewhere, where serious salvation is being attempted. *”

And “serious salvation” might be???

Dealing with our fallen nature as our Saviour told us.

Examining my mind is not as helpful to my soul, as examining my conscience.
Most of the fallen Catholics I see spend too much time chasing their own self-righteous minds and not enough with seeking God’s will.

 

[Detales]

“*God’s will. *” Which is? And how do you know?

 

[Don_L]

“*God’s will. *” Which is? And how do you know?

The secret is to first become humble.

 

[grannymh]

“*God’s will. *” Which is? And how do you know?

The 10 Commandments and the New Testament teachings. How do I know? It makes sense to me.

 

[Detales]

Don L~Yes, I know. I had absolutely everything I thought was rteal pulled out from under me like a rug, suddenly and unceremoniously.

Granny M~~ Good

 

[Detales]

Neil_Anthony,

Sorry to take so long in responding. There have been a number of family, political, and economic issues to deal with.

I can’t reference the documentary on the Ituri. That was 49 years ago, and was an actual movie we rented from the anthropology library. suffice it to say the it struck a devout and zealous Catholic youth pretty hard that there was a non-christian parallel to my faith. It stuck. Best I could do was ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0509/feature5/multimedia.html There were a few vague notes elsewhere about theri beliefs, but the nature of therevelation at the time wwe saw it made a rather distinct impression on us as a group. We replayed it several times to make sure we heard right.

Other crucified saviours

1. Wittoba
2. Osiris

3)Tammuz

1. Odin
2. Attis
3. Horus
4. Osiris
5. Heracles
6. and others

 

[Don_L]

Neil_Anthony,

Sorry to take so long in responding. There have been a number of family, political, and economic issues to deal with.

I can’t reference the documentary on the Ituri. That was 49 years ago, and was an actual movie we rented from the anthropology library. suffice it to say the it struck a devout and zealous Catholic youth pretty hard that there was a non-christian parallel to my faith. It stuck. Best I could do was ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0509/feature5/multimedia.html There were a few vague notes elsewhere about theri beliefs, but the nature of therevelation at the time wwe saw it made a rather distinct impression on us as a group. We replayed it several times to make sure we heard right.

Other crucified saviours

1. Wittoba
2. Osiris

3)Tammuz

1. Odin
2. Attis
3. Horus
4. Osiris
5. Heracles
6. and others

Saviours???

 

[bmadamsberry]

1. Wittoba- No proof that depictions of this Hindu god being crucified were created before Christianity. Most Eastern Religion scholars, such as my professor whom I asked, believe these images to have been taken from Christianity. So you have it backwards.
2. Osiris- Never crucified. He was nailed in a coffin, sent on the Nile, and a tree grew around his coffin.

3)Tammuz- Scholars have discovered that the cunieform and the tablets do not refer to him. You have the name wrong. It’s Inanna. Same story, though, different name.

1. Odin- Not crucified like Christ. He was hung to the tree by a spear/branch from the tree.
2. Attis- castrated and transformed into a tree.
3. Horus- stung to death by a scorpian
4. Osiris- already mentioned
5. Heracles- Had to do some searching for this one. I found three stories. One where he was killed by a boar, another where he killed himself, and one where he was crucified (this one, however, is considered the inferior story by most scholars. So why is it so poular?)
6. and others- by others you mean 9 others. I assume that you are drawing from *The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors * by Kersey Graves. This book, however, is laughed at by scholars, atheist and Christian alike! Atheists such as historian Richard Carrier.

However, none of it matters. I stress that point that it doesn’t matter if they’re similar, it doesn’t mean that one took from the other! For example, just because there are parallels between two novels does not mean that one author took the other’s story. So, just because a few gods were crucified (although only 3 AT THE MOST that you mention were crucified) does not mean that Christ’s crucifixion was stolen.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Thank you,

Some of the other posters seem to think you’re saying that Christianity copied the crucifixion story from those other religions - but I don’t think thats what you mean, is it?

You don’t even have to go to other religions to see more crucifixions, St. Peter was also crucified, and Christ calls all of us to carry our crosses in imitation of him and to accept death in the flesh.

Neil

Neil_Anthony,

Sorry to take so long in responding. There have been a number of family, political, and economic issues to deal with.

I can’t reference the documentary on the Ituri. That was 49 years ago, and was an actual movie we rented from the anthropology library. suffice it to say the it struck a devout and zealous Catholic youth pretty hard that there was a non-christian parallel to my faith. It stuck. Best I could do was ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0509/feature5/multimedia.html There were a few vague notes elsewhere about theri beliefs, but the nature of therevelation at the time wwe saw it made a rather distinct impression on us as a group. We replayed it several times to make sure we heard right.

Other crucified saviours

1. Wittoba
2. Osiris

3)Tammuz

1. Odin
2. Attis
3. Horus
4. Osiris
5. Heracles
6. and others

 

[Detales]

Neil~~"*Some of the other posters seem to think you’re saying that Christianity copied the crucifixion story from those other religions - but I don’t think thats what you mean, is it? *"

Yes and no.I really wish it had done so, if that were the case, with some accuracy. Yes, I know the reference to Grave’s book, and his is a short list compared to a list of thirty that I’ve seen. But that isn’t the point, really, though I know from experience what such a suggestion is to someone devout and pious. That was my experience, as a I stated, and I would have remained with it, but for two things.

First, I never believed that anyone went to hell for doing research and getting things straight. I would rather get things straight by looking into something myself, than commit what someone thought was the ultimate sin: taking things on simple authority, which is the way of most Catholics in my experience. I was curious. I wanted to know: If these people haven’t been in contact with christians as alleged, how did they come by their faith?

Second, I had a fundamentally life altering experience that my own church, as far as I could tell, had no means of dealing with in realistic, practical terms. Another system did. What would you have done? Fail to examine the other system for genuine contents, even as I understand the church approves of, and stick with simple faith? God gave me the double “B’s” and I couldn’t let it go.

A time honored way of getting at the actuality of things is to turn the factors of one’s considerations around. This is actually part of a simple technique of four questions and a “turn around” that is astonishingly useful even in self examination. Since I had experienced the absolute devastation of the ultimate turn around, I had no fear of simple intellectual inquiry. My turn around in this case of the seeming inadequacy of my faith was “I learned that mine is the one true faith. What if it isn’t, or if it is incomplete in some way?” After some forty years I learned that what I was seeking is there in church “teaching,” but in such a hidden, obscure, and irretrievable form, that it might as well not be there at all. Such is the danger of literalism and historicization of maps meant to guide one in such instances as mine, relatively rare though they may be.

So the “saviors” thing is for me relatively recent in one way, though it’s meaning is experiential for me these many decades. I’m just getting around to seeing how my current understanding has been a theme for at least as long as Man has had awareness. It is just that being rare, or subtle, it is a delicate matter to deal with. So, as is the wont of Man, the entire dynamic of what is an actual experiential transformation has been represented
in our history as a mythical journey.

Because the core meaning of myths is not often experienced, they are not only dismissed by the general public as stories, but these days “mythical” is synonymous with “untrue.” But, you see, that is the whole point. The status of transformative maps called myths as fiction offers a protection to those who have Knowledge of their Meaning. The capitalization here is intentional, to distinguish such from ordinary intellectual assertions and logics which deal primarily with exteriors and appearances, not with the interpretation of actual experience and its significance in another mode of perception. That mode is made necessary by a certain form of awareness experience.

It may seem hokum to you or to many, but I’m talking here of a dynamic that St Augustine noted in his City of God, and of which I am convinced Aquinas was intimately acquainted with near his end. So believe in crucified saviors as history or myth as you like, even your own current version. But know that such had a Divine Origin before the three centuries of turmoil following the alleged life of the Master. I know it sounds far fetched, and it is. I paid with my life for what I now know, but I was not deceived. I feel for those who have had my sort of insight and had not the system of Understanding that finally re-stabilized me into practicality. I have seen the schizophrenic damage that is the lot of someone who had my sort of transformative experience, and had to rely on simple faith to attempt a grounding.

So here is a dilemma. Simple faith is sufficient up to a point. But like a bell curve, that are events in one’s life, or the lives of a group that are more rarefied both in occurrence and in subtlety. How do we allow simple faith, and yet alert those who find more necessary that there is more? Traditionally it has been done by the use of myth, and as in the time of Iesus, with multi-layered language as described by Maurice Nicoll in his *The New Man:An Interpretation of Some Parables and Miracles of Christ * Such is the reason for the reference to the Gospel of Mark in my signature.

But as we experience in the church today, the very myth used for that purpose has been made into the basis of the simple faith by means of historicization. A study of how belief systems of any kind, particularly legends surrounding an individual, are formed, coupled with a survey of the literature surrounding the first the centuries of the church and what was present then as ancient belief systems, we can come to certain conclusions as being probable. Though I absolutely and completely avow that God IS, christianism as we know it today is about the least probable conclusion from those studies. Yet it is sufficient for the needs of most, and as Augustine indicated, this is well and good. I am only concerned here for the ones who slip through the cracks and are therefore subject to damage.

 

[bmadamsberry]

What I feel is deep sadness, regret, and sorrow for you. You haven’t found anything. All you have done is found a lie. It doesn’t matter to me if you admit it or not, because it’s true. You have been decieved, again whether you admit it or not is beside the point because it’s true. You haven’t discovered anything, you haven’t found anything. If you had really searched, if you had really tried to find the Truth you would have wound up back at the Catholic Church. This “incident” that you speak of that the Church didn’t have an answer for… what it actually didn’t have was an answer that satisfied you. The same happened with others. People who searched for Truth, but when they found it they were threatened by it and afraid of it… it just didn’t suit their fancy. But it’s the Truth nevertheless.
Again, I’m sorry for you. I’m sorry that you found what you are so sure is the Truth and yet are so wrong. So decieved.
I’ll pray for you, but in the end you’ll have to be the one to uncover your eyes.

God Bless, my friend. God Bless.

 

[Detales]

Bmadamsberry, thank you for your very misplaced concern. As to your prayers, this would be an excellent opportunity for you to discover the efficacy of a turn-around.

Bindar Doondat

 

[davidv]

Bmadamsberry, thank you for your very misplaced concern. As to your prayers, this would be an excellent opportunity for you to discover the efficacy of a turn-around.

Bindar Doondat

This wisdom is not such as comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, devilish.

James 3:15

Is countered by this:

But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, without uncertainty or insincerity.

Jas.3:17
​

​

 

[bmadamsberry]

I’ve had my turnaround, and I found the Truth in Christ and his Church. Don’t speak of my past as if you know what it was. I’ve been a diehard atheist, a Buddhist (true Buddhism, not the cheap stuff that they sometimes pass off in America), practiced Witchcraft, and was born and raised a Protestant for about 15 years (religions listed are not in chronological order). I’ve made my turns with religion, but I found the Truth.
Your scope is too limited, child. You are picking and choosing Truths instead of embracing it all. It’s downright pitifull.
Reply as you like, but I’m going to be gone for the next few days so don’t get angry when I don’t answer, as your kind are want to do.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Hi Detales, thanks for getting to my question,

Neil~~"*Some of the other posters seem to think you’re saying that Christianity copied the crucifixion story from those other religions - but I don’t think thats what you mean, is it? *"

First, I never believed that anyone went to hell for doing research and getting things straight. I would rather get things straight by looking into something myself, than commit what someone thought was the ultimate sin: taking things on simple authority, which is the way of most Catholics in my experience. I was curious. I wanted to know: If these people haven’t been in contact with christians as alleged, how did they come by their faith?

I think most people here agree with you that its important to search for truth yourself, not to just blindly accept it because “the church says so”. At least I know that I completely agree with you. I did the same thing, but in my case it led me in a big loop back to where I started

Second, I had a fundamentally life altering experience that my own church, as far as I could tell, had no means of dealing with in realistic, practical terms. Another system did. What would you have done? Fail to examine the other system for genuine contents, even as I understand the church approves of, and stick with simple faith? God gave me the double “B’s” and I couldn’t let it go.

Yes, I would have looked into the other “system” too. I would like to hear more about your experience and the other system.

A time honored way of getting at the actuality of things is to turn the factors of one’s considerations around. This is actually part of a simple technique of four questions and a “turn around” that is astonishingly useful even in self examination. Since I had experienced the absolute devastation of the ultimate turn around, I had no fear of simple intellectual inquiry. My turn around in this case of the seeming inadequacy of my faith was “I learned that mine is the one true faith. What if it isn’t, or if it is incomplete in some way?” After some forty years I learned that what I was seeking is there in church “teaching,” but in such a hidden, obscure, and irretrievable form, that it might as well not be there at all. Such is the danger of literalism and historicization of maps meant to guide one in such instances as mine, relatively rare though they may be.

It’s hard to really understand without you being more specific. I completely agree that the deep truths of Christianity can remain hidden, and can’t be or aren’t taught to us. The deep understanding, in my experience, only comes through prayer.

So the “saviors” thing is for me relatively recent in one way, though it’s meaning is experiential for me these many decades. I’m just getting around to seeing how my current understanding has been a theme for at least as long as Man has had awareness. It is just that being rare, or subtle, it is a delicate matter to deal with. So, as is the wont of Man, the entire dynamic of what is an actual experiential transformation has been represented
in our history as a mythical journey.

Can you be more specific? Certainly the meaning of our crucified savior certainly has great depth beyond the literal historical.

Because the core meaning of myths is not often experienced, they are not only dismissed by the general public as stories, but these days “mythical” is synonymous with “untrue.” But, you see, that is the whole point. The status of transformative maps called myths as fiction offers a protection to those who have Knowledge of their Meaning. The capitalization here is intentional, to distinguish such from ordinary intellectual assertions and logics which deal primarily with exteriors and appearances, not with the interpretation of actual experience and its significance in another mode of perception. That mode is made necessary by a certain form of awareness experience.

It may seem hokum to you or to many, but I’m talking here of a dynamic that St Augustine noted in his City of God, and of which I am convinced Aquinas was intimately acquainted with near his end. So believe in crucified saviors as history or myth as you like, even your own current version. But know that such had a Divine Origin before the three centuries of turmoil following the alleged life of the Master. I know it sounds far fetched, and it is. I paid with my life for what I now know, but I was not deceived. I feel for those who have had my sort of insight and had not the system of Understanding that finally re-stabilized me into practicality. I have seen the schizophrenic damage that is the lot of someone who had my sort of transformative experience, and had to rely on simple faith to attempt a grounding.

I agree about myths (like the Garden of Eden story) having deep meaning that requires an epiphany to understand. I don’t understand why relying on faith causes problems for people who have those experiences though. Maybe it won’t make sense to us unless you are more specific?

So here is a dilemma. Simple faith is sufficient up to a point. But like a bell curve, that are events in one’s life, or the lives of a group that are more rarefied both in occurrence and in subtlety. How do we allow simple faith, and yet alert those who find more necessary that there is more? Traditionally it has been done by the use of myth, and as in the time of Iesus, with multi-layered language as described by Maurice Nicoll in his *The New Man:An Interpretation of Some Parables and Miracles of Christ * Such is the reason for the reference to the Gospel of Mark in my signature.

But as we experience in the church today, the very myth used for that purpose has been made into the basis of the simple faith by means of historicization. A study of how belief systems of any kind, particularly legends surrounding an individual, are formed, coupled with a survey of the literature surrounding the first the centuries of the church and what was present then as ancient belief systems, we can come to certain conclusions as being probable. Though I absolutely and completely avow that God IS, christianism as we know it today is about the least probable conclusion from those studies. Yet it is sufficient for the needs of most, and as Augustine indicated, this is well and good. I am only concerned here for the ones who slip through the cracks and are therefore subject to damage.

Is there really a problem when a story is taken as myth by some and as history by others? For example, some Christians take the Garden of Eden story as history, some take it as myth, but we both get the same teachings from it. Why does it matter whether it was historical or not?