Why is the west so fascinated by the Dalai Lama?

[septimine]

We Christians in the West not only have been taught to be “nice” but we have allowed transgressive Western-values-hating-anti-Christian Marxist elitists to take over the education systems and media, all in the name of “tolerance” and “multiculturalism.” The problem is that militant secularists are not tolerant of Christians and multiculturalism in practice has tended to mean celebrate every culture except your own. So we have Westerners demanding that crosses be taken down while happily providing Muslim footbaths at universities. They are IMHO.

I don’t mind footbaths. I don’t expect secularists to put crosses everywhere. But what I don’t get is why Christians are complacent about it. We obey too much, and we’re not as keen to wear our faith on our sleeve. If people were demanding the right to wear crosses and pray and were quoting the Bible, the secularists couldn’t stop you. They can teach your kids whatever they want in public schools, but how would a teacher deal with a class full of Christian kids who challenge what they’re taught? What happens when a teacher has to deal with a bunch of kids who challenge secularism as a good thing?

 

[Gaber]

I don’t get why he attracts crowds. The religion he leads isn’t very big and it isn’t compatible with the Christian standards of the West. I find it dangerous when people of weak faith and who weren’t reared in Christianity open themselves too much to the Dalai Lama because then they start promiting things like reincarnation. I’ve seen it happen so many times, people dabble in other foods in the buffets of religion, and they ignore the great, rich, fulfilling food already in front of them (how do you like my metaphor?). They end up abandoning the truths of their religion for the sake of, well, paganism…

I like your metaphor. A very very simiar one was used in a book on comparative religion sometimes found in Catholic courses. It is used to ask why, when there issuch amazing richness in the cafeteria, some people will put certain things on their tray and then declare it to others as “The one true plate” that everyone, whatever their tastes or dietary needs or restirictions ought to eat.

Catholicism is catagorized by some as what is called n “ascending” religion. that means that in it’s world view mankind needs redemption and must earn it. Buddhism, in its varieties, on the other hand, is a “descending” religion, which means that in its view mankind is already “saved,” but are ignorant of how that is.

Remarkably, dependig on which way you are trained to think, the Teachings of Jesus, He having founded in our eyes a religion we don’t usually consider to be Eastern, but actually is, fits both views. But we don’t see that, nor do we practice that because of how we are trained to see. That is unfortunate for both parties, ascending and descending, becasue in a wider appreciation of actuality that either seems to be able to afford on the surface, both “a” and “d” are useful and true in their way.

So intuitively feeling this, as we are all made in the image and likeness of God, and are then necessarily only satisfied by one truth, some feel a kind of attraction to what the Dalai Lama says. And in many things he is not so far off the teachings of the Great Commandments, is he?

So while we may not like that someone is even checking out another plate, we might well remember that ours is an Eastern religion as well, and that at least one book that for some reason didn’t make it inot todays Bible,* if I’m not mistaken, has Jesus teaching re-incarnation, or something that can be mistaken for that, which we don’t really consider in our present day interpretations.

^You might also look therefor to the early history of our Church, up to the third century, and perceive that my our stanards of todya, some very strange things took place structurally and politically, after Peter lost to Paul in his arguments about who Christianity was actually for.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

I like your metaphor. A very very simiar one was used in a book on comparative religion sometimes found in Catholic courses. It is used to ask why, when there issuch amazing richness in the cafeteria, some people will put certain things on their tray and then declare it to others as “The one true plate” that everyone, whatever their tastes or dietary needs or restirictions ought to eat.

Catholicism is catagorized by some as what is called n “ascending” religion. that means that in it’s world view mankind needs redemption and must earn it. Buddhism, in its varieties, on the other hand, is a “descending” religion, which means that in its view mankind is already “saved,” but are ignorant of how that is.

Remarkably, dependig on which way you are trained to think, the Teachings of Jesus, He having founded in our eyes a religion we don’t usually consider to be Eastern, but actually is, fits both views. But we don’t see that, nor do we practice that because of how we are trained to see. That is unfortunate for both parties, ascending and descending, becasue in a wider appreciation of actuality that either seems to be able to afford on the surface, both “a” and “d” are useful and true in their way.

So intuitively feeling this, as we are all made in the image and likeness of God, and are then necessarily only satisfied by one truth, some feel a kind of attraction to what the Dalai Lama says. And in many things he is not so far off the teachings of the Great Commandments, is he?

So while we may not like that someone is even checking out another plate, we might well remember that ours is an Eastern religion as well, and that at least one book that for some reason didn’t make it inot todays Bible,* if I’m not mistaken, has Jesus teaching re-incarnation, or something that can be mistaken for that, which we don’t really consider in our present day interpretations.

^You might also look therefor to the early history of our Church, up to the third century, and perceive that my our stanards of todya, some very strange things took place structurally and politically, after Peter lost to Paul in his arguments about who Christianity was actually for.

All true, but there is a major problem in how Christians are being taught and trained as such. They say the two largest religious groups in North America are: Catholics and . . .former Catholics.

Catholics in general don’t know much about their faith. Sunday Mass is probably the extent to which their faith is exercised. Do Catholics have a strong prayer life? Are Catholics growing in the knowledge of their faith via reading of the Scriptures and the Fathers and Church teachings? What about their participation in the life of their parish that goes beyond Sunday Mass (if that)?

Catholics and Christians in general suffer from this lack of spiritual nourishment which makes them change their faith at the drop of a hat iin many cases (I recently heard of a local Catholic couple, both Catholic school teachers, who invited Jehovah’s Witnesses into their home - the wife soon became one of them!).

Rather than decry the Tibetans and others as a “threat,” why aren’t we presenting the Triune God to them? Why aren’t they knocking on our churches’ doors to get in?

Alex

 

[Alexander_Roman]

I don’t mind footbaths. I don’t expect secularists to put crosses everywhere. But what I don’t get is why Christians are complacent about it. We obey too much, and we’re not as keen to wear our faith on our sleeve. If people were demanding the right to wear crosses and pray and were quoting the Bible, the secularists couldn’t stop you. They can teach your kids whatever they want in public schools, but how would a teacher deal with a class full of Christian kids who challenge what they’re taught? What happens when a teacher has to deal with a bunch of kids who challenge secularism as a good thing?

I would add a foot massage after the foot bath . . .

Seriously though, this is my point that I make to my kids in religion class as well. When I distributed crosses on cords to a class of 80+ students, the majority of them simply put them around their necks and walked around with them on. I gave them rosaries and they not only put them on around their wrists or necks - other classes and even teachers came by to see if I had any extras to give them. They took the rosaries hungrily and asked if they had been blessed etc. I went up to three teachers and gave two of them rosaries as they held out their hands. The other teacher looked at me and said, “Is there one for me?”

My Saturday kids don’t take down a lot of notes but I insisted they write out the Jesus Prayer and other prayers. One asked me which psalms to pray and which are to be recommended.

Just get them started!! And we can all participate in that project!

Alex

 

[Gaber]

All true, but there is a major problem in how Christians are being taught and trained as such. They say the two largest religious groups in North America are: Catholics and . . .former Catholics.

Catholics in general don’t know much about their faith. Sunday Mass is probably the extent to which their faith is exercised. Do Catholics have a strong prayer life? Are Catholics growing in the knowledge of their faith via reading of the Scriptures and the Fathers and Church teachings? What about their participation in the life of their parish that goes beyond Sunday Mass (if that)?

Catholics and Christians in general suffer from this lack of spiritual nourishment which makes them change their faith at the drop of a hat iin many cases (I recently heard of a local Catholic couple, both Catholic school teachers, who invited Jehovah’s Witnesses into their home - the wife soon became one of them!).

Rather than decry the Tibetans and others as a “threat,” why aren’t we presenting the Triune God to them? Why aren’t they knocking on our churches’ doors to get in?

Alex

I agree, especially with the last line. And the one before is how my sister became a Mormon, along with her children and husband. So if you really believe in your particular faith, then it is comendable and useful to practice it. I fyou don’t, whateve it is, other things might be more attractive, especially if they are presented with fervor and enthusiasm, ant topics of pertinence are well treated.

But better yet is to wholeheartedly throw oneself into practice, and thus get beyond the elementary level that might present itself as any particular religion, philososphy, or lack of same. Progress is made by intensity of application. The final result is invariably identical.

 

[AtheistHammer]

Lol none of it is real anyway, GOD IS A LIE and “hardened atheists” go gooey over the Dalai Lama because the Dalai Lama is a non religious figure, Buddism is a way of life not a religion dumbass