Why the hate against Christianity?

[Breakingthewall]

5 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

What you are perceiving is the limitation of language.  "Self" and "no-self" point to the same "thing".   Ultimately, you can't really understand any of these paths unless you fully commit to it as a practice and then the limitations of language fall away.     

I see something essentially wrong in Buddhism. Buddhism is negation. Nirvana is the absence of desire and attachment, and its main characteristic is the absence of suffering. It is a tranquil peace, in which the absence of reality is perceived, which is revealed as illusion.

Buddhism is absence, and it seems to me to be escapism, a philosophy that seeks to transcend certain human impulses in order to avoid suffering. Buddhism doesn't speak of the absolute creative power of reality, since any creation is dismissed as "illusion," which really means "nothing." Buddhism is a philosophy that attempts to apply negative adjectives to reality in order to reach absolute emptiness, which is the essence of reality. In my opinion, it is a misguided religion limited. Christianity, in its essence, is more accurate, and so is Hinduism.

[Breakingthewall]

The essence of Christianity is very simple: open your heart. In your heart is God. Your heart is God. Your heart is the bleeding heart of Christ, and through suffering, the doors of glory are opened, which is beyond the human.

Bare your heart, be absolutely humble, accept the martyrdom and absolute suffering of Christ with an open heart, and the gates of the divine will open for you. You only have to surrender yourself, and you will have everything. The absolute light will open a crack in your heart and flood reality, and you will realize that the world is a toy, and only the total light of being is, hallelujah. 

Simple and absolutely real 

[Terell Kirby]

2 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

In your heart is God.

You are God

3 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Simple and absolutely real 

Only thing real is Gods Dream-which is the same as your Dream.

[Breakingthewall]

1 minute ago, Terell Kirby said:

Only thing real is Gods Dream-which is the same as your Dream

Forms are just forms but the substance is the divine light. That's the essence of any spirituality. Can you open yourself to the absolute light? That's enlightenment. Christianity points very good to that light because they call it love, and that light is the total power that's in your heart, the infinite source. Buddhism says that the essence of reality is emptiness, but it's impossible, reality can't be empty because you are, and you fill the infinity, since you are the infinite being. The very fact of the absence of limitations is the key, you are that, and the real spirituality is opening yourself now to your real nature, to the total. 

[yetineti]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Christian faith is not not-knowing.

@Leo Gura Care to elaborate? What I meant was:

Christian faith is a form of not-knowing—not in the Ralston sense, but in the sense that it replaces understanding with belief. Their faith functions as a barrier to knowing because it prevents doubt and inquiry.

If they had doubt instead of faith, their not-knowing would resemble Ralston’s—an open, investigative stance. But since they don’t, their not-knowing becomes passive and limiting rather than conscious and liberating.

One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.

Edited Saturday at 10:00 PM by yetineti

[UnbornTao]

Jesus, another religion is emerging. Faith and doubt (questioning) are not the same; as a matter of fact, the former tends to preclude the latter. A "crisis of faith" occurs when someone starts doubting their faith -- questioning it.

One of the main appeals of adopting a religion is that it seems to relieve us of any personal responsibility. Why go through the struggle of challenging one's conception of existence and self and go towards what's genuine, when taking on a nice set of beliefs is so much easier and faster? But what does this result in?

Edited Sunday at 01:24 PM by UnbornTao

[Breakingthewall]

Christianity is formulated metaphorically to make it understandable to ordinary people. When it is said: "Whoever believes in me shall live," people understand that you must believe in Jesus and what he says, like a good obedient disciple. But you can't ask people to open a hole in their being and disintegrate it. This is what it really means: "Whoever believes in me shall live." Die and you will live. Give without reservation and you will live. Right now, at this very moment, break your mind, break your barriers, open your heart without the slightest reservation. Erase your ego until not a trace remains. Give yourself to the flames, forget about yourself, and the whole life will open up for you.

[Someone here]

@UnbornTao  I think the problem is that some people were literally brainwashed and indoctrinated into religion since they were infants and thats why its difficult to let a religion go . And some people were raised in a neutral secular environment.. so its easy for them to see through religions. It's not anybody's fault .

Edited Saturday at 10:10 PM by Someone here

[puporing]

It isn't merely about "religion" and its "pros and cons", it's a function of how much love you had when you incarnated here.

It was no accident that I eventually landed on Jesus. It was really essentially, matter of factly because no other teachers could match the love that was within me, and I've tried many (all "non-religious" ones in fact prior to Christ teachings).

I was nowhere close to being a "Christian" or "religious person"..

And that isn't something you can just easily "prove" or argue about simply with words alone.

You choose your "teacher" per your existing state of consciousness.

Edited Saturday at 10:28 PM by puporing

[UnbornTao]

On 15/3/2025 at 10:07 PM, Someone here said:

@UnbornTao  I think the problem is that some people were literally brainwashed and indoctrinated into religion since they were infants and thats why its difficult to let a religion go . And some people were raised in a neutral secular environment.. so its easy for them to see through religions. It's not anybody's fault .

It's usually hard for anyone to challenge their own presumptions about themselves and existence, especially the deepest ones. Yet, the ones consciously adopted -- being more superficial -- are more easily recognized as artifice. In other words, you likely notice, at some level, that they are just beliefs -- as something that is not true for you; you simply like them. Hopefully, they're beneficial in some way, but that doesn't make them true. And, especially with religion, they more often than not undermine genuine inquiry.

I'd invite you to consider why you feel so drawn to adopting and believing in a set of presumptions in the first place -- and to notice that this has nothing to do with honesty.

An assertion such as "Buddha wasn't a Buddhist" isn't just a cute saying; it points to the principle of responsibility. It isn’t so much about what Jesus said -- it's about the mass of people, not having truly grasped what is being conveyed, yet believing in it nonetheless and use it as a pretext for all kinds of unconscious behavior -- which often is directly antithetical to what the original guy said. This is a propagation of ignorance, not consciousness. But we aren't aware of this difference.

Edited Sunday at 10:22 PM by UnbornTao

[puporing]

@UnbornTao I could say the same about what you're doing with Leo's teachings. To me they are a belief at my level of consciousness, but is not obvious to you right now either.

But here you are thinking you are above "beliefs" or "religion".

Edited Saturday at 10:27 PM by puporing

[UnbornTao]

15 hours ago, puporing said:

@UnbornTao I could say the same about what you're doing with Leo's teachings. To me they are a belief at my level of consciousness, but is not obvious to you right now either.

But here you are thinking you are above "beliefs" or "religion".

Fuck what anyone says -- including oneself. Ultimately, it is always about personal comprehension. Short of that, why defend a notion, something assumed, that essentially boils down to "hearsay" or rumor in one's experience? 

We could start with the simple fact that we don't really know who Jesus was or what he said (or most other "religious" figures for that matter). So how could we assume belief is warranted here? Do we even know what it is that's being believed? Have we taken the trouble to investigate belief itself -- something that, by its very nature, isn't and can't be true?

Again, I think a claim like "Jesus wasn't a Christian" can illuminate this whole dynamic of faith. But it's clear that a belief was adopted at some point, displacing any possibility for insight to occur, unless the belief is challenged. 

Edited Sunday at 01:29 PM by UnbornTao

[puporing]

4 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

we don't really know who Jesus was or what he said

That's a good starting point yes.

4 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

how could we assume belief is warranted here?

I don't know about "warranted", but his existence/way of being clearly had an enormous impact on humanity, whether or not he was "fully understood" to this day. 

I am just saying, anytime you follow ANY TEACHER at all you are holding a belief of theirs, because you have to in order to keep listening to them.

4 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

But it's clear that a belief was adopted at some point, displacing any possibility for insight to arise unless the belief is challenged. 

Simultaneously you should look at why it had such an impact on mankind and resulted in this kind of mass following, rather than waving it all off as "delusions". That seems to be bad faith to me to not look at both side of the coin if you are claiming to be "searching for the truth".

 

Edited Saturday at 10:43 PM by puporing

[UnbornTao]

@puporing Why would the truth cater to any individual? Jesus was likely profoundly conscious. But what we know of him is myth for the most part. We should notice this dynamic: an individual has some kind of breakthrough, communicates it, and it eventually degrades into a religion -- this is done by the "followers."

"And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold, saying to them, 'It is written, "My house shall be a house of prayer," but you have made it a den of robbers.”

I hear the above passage as: "Contemplate (prayer) for yourself instead of exchanging beliefs."

Regarding believing a teacher, it is actually not needed. You can simply be willing to listen to what they have to say. The problem isn't so much the believing itself but not recognizing it as such, and conflating that act with something it is not.

Edited Sunday at 01:29 PM by UnbornTao

[puporing]

9 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

 Why would the truth cater to any individual? 

Apparently that's how it turned out to be, apparently it's an extremely narrow path.

Why are you following a "particular teacher" and thereby "catering to an individual"?

Can you ever escape that anyways?

9 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

We should notice this dynamic: an individual has some kind of breakthrough, communicates it, and it eventually degrades into a religion -- this is done by the "followers."

But you are blaming the person for it, whereas he really had no control of it, not really. 

9 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Regarding believing a teacher, it is actually not needed. You can simply be willing to listen to what they have to say.

Yes but even that willingness alone requires you to be close to them already, but not fully there, as if you were fully there, there would just be a mutual recognition of "sameness", and no more teaching is needed.

For example, if you all were the exact same as Leo (in consciousness) you wouldn't need to "follow him" anymore, the way you are doing right now.

9 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

not recognizing it as belief

Again, I am saying that's Leo's followers to me, they do not recognize that it is a belief, relative to my state. But you can't see that.

Edited Saturday at 11:10 PM by puporing

[UnbornTao]

Someone should start a new religion.

Edited Sunday at 04:48 PM by UnbornTao

[Basman]

1 hour ago, puporing said:

...you should look at why it had such an impact on mankind and resulted in this kind of mass following, rather than waving it all off as "delusions". That seems to be bad faith to me to not look at both side of the coin if you are claiming to be "searching for the truth".

There are plenty of reasons for why religion spreads that have nothing to do with spirituality. Religion is first and foremost political.

God in the context of religion is kind of the ultimate scam. With a religion like the Flying Spaghetti Monster it is too obvious that it is an arbitrary belief. But if you point towards something profound you can make your religion profoundly self-referential, "word of god", etc. It doesn't matter if the religion itself is actually godly.

The most important distinction that I've made in regards to understanding religion is that god isn't religious. Religion is a man made mental construct. It is literally like the saying give to god the things that are of god and give to the Romans what are of the Romans, but instead of Romans it's religion. You don't need to subscribe to a religion to get spiritual value from it but religion does need you because it is parasitic in nature.

[Salvijus]

All that matters is the question "can religion be used to attain to wisdom and love?" 

All those pro religion will say yes and gives proofs for it. 

All those anti religion will say no and give proofs for it. 

But it only takes one proof that it can be used to attain wisdom and love to validate religion. 

When it only takes one proof, I feel this is the easiest debate to settle. 

[Terell Kirby]

2 hours ago, Basman said:

God in the context of religion is kind of the ultimate scam.

Christianity- the ultimate spiritual grift 

[yetineti]

@puporing

Do you consider yourself unique in your relationship to Jesus— in comparison to most Christians?

—

When I was 5, in Sunday school, and they taught me about Jesus, something clicked.

I asked, “Why do we not just do what Jesus does? What is all the other stuff and the stories?”

I do not remember their response.

But I was turned off to religion based on its inconsistencies and how I viewed other’s perceptions or motivations behind it.

I became atheist, years passed, I became agnostic, years passed, I found Leo’s work, etc..

I like what I have heard about Jesus. I can relate some of his teachings to my conceptions of God. Jesus is God. I am God.

But I often hesitate to even mention this as I view it as an encouragement to faith and could ultimately mislead people.

The vast majority of people cannot relate to Christianity on that spiritual level. The system of Christianity does what it is doing… and there are not millions and billions of enlightened people…

—

Ironically, I have a favorite story from the Bible that perfectly illustrates this problem: the story of the Golden Calf.

The Israelites got impatient waiting for Moses and made an idol—a version of God that fit their desires—instead of following what was actually given to them. It broke the First Commandment:

“You shall have no other gods before Me.”

Which is exactly what I fear when talking about my own views. It’s easy to shape a version of God that makes sense to me, but that doesn’t mean it’s actually God or that Jesus really means anything more than other stories’s attempt at Truth— including my stories.

People awaken to what they awaken to. Jesus seemed awake. It only makes sense that people may awaken to him. But— the story of the Golden Calf.

“You shall have no other gods before Me.”

I view stories, such as Jesus’s, as idolatry.

I view Leo’s stories of Love and God the same way.

Leo may not point to a clear ‘idol’ but his work could be misrepresented and lead to some serious misunderstandings.

Some people take the ‘You are God’ thing too far and make an Idol of themselves— there’s been a few of those.

And each framework has its own risks. And some are cleaner or sloppier.

Christianity, I’d argue, is sloppy. They’re good at engaging people. But I am not so sure for enlightening them.

 

Edited Sunday at 08:24 AM by yetineti