The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The source of true self > Comments

The source of true self : Comments

By Peter Sellick, published 13/4/2006

Christianity should have no investment in calling itself a religion among the religions.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 13
  8. 14
  9. 15
  10. All
Holy crap that was a tough read! And I doubt that I understood a word of it. Perhaps that's one of the problems with religion(s) - Not that I am agin 'em I just find some of the language used by those who write about them...how can I put this? Otherwordly. That will have to do.
I particularly liked this paragraph

"The creation of the true and free self cannot come about through our own efforts since those efforts, having their source in the self, cannot transcend the self. Even the most adept attempt at detachment remains attached even if it is attached to the process of detachment. Even though we trumpet freedom we remain in bondage. The libertarian who would shrug off all restraint will enter into a moral and spiritual vacuum that will hold him in bondage just as surely as the most authoritarian religion".

Its a bit like a theological rendition of "there's a hole in the bucket dear Liza"

That says it all really - now don't ask me what the "it" is - but think about it for a while.

This sentence was cool as well;

"To meet with this one is to know that before him we must give way".

Getting out of the way I am.

But in spite of my misgivings and lack of comprehension I think I get Peter's point. But as long as the way to self is through selflessness it will always be a struggle. And even if in that struggle we can only get a glimpse of our true selves and others it is probably worth it whether we are fraying at the edges or not.

Sorry about that but I went to a funeral yesterday and am in a somewhat strange state of mind - must be Easter looming.
Posted by sneekeepete, Thursday, 13 April 2006 10:22:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Christianity should have no investment in calling itself a religion among the religions"

I agree 100%.

Religions are a do it now "rituals" in expectance of an after-death reward/punishment. While Christianity is God himself intervening with his creation initiating a meaningful connection. The rewards are for the living not the dead.

Jesus is the central part of humanity. Ignoring him is to orbit in a lifeless vacuum.

Peter Sellick's nails it down in this piece but seems to miss the target "audience".

There is a world out there that won't get the point simply because they truly believe they are doing just fine without an external self.

They are satisfied with the here and now existence - rejecting anything that is not.

Ignoring Jesus leaves much room for idolatry and self-centredness.

Ever since God created the universe Ė humans have tried to re-create God.
Posted by coach, Thursday, 13 April 2006 10:46:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I too only barely understood what this is about. Although I do get the sense from reading Peter's articles that he has quite a bit of insight into Christianity and what it should really be about.
If only he could dumb it down a bit for the rest of us.
Religions fail when they become esoteric and out of the reach of the common man.
Posted by Donnie, Thursday, 13 April 2006 11:58:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The first sentence was good the next one was the signs things were going wrong the rest went down hill from there. Come on, start off with a incorrect premises and try and fit the data method is doomed. The author like most Christians simply refuses to accept that his and in fact most western versions of the Christian mythology is moulded by western culture not the other way around. The basic test for this is to compare the western and eastern braches of Christianity. Doing so you see that the very things in western culture that the author says are Christian influence are simply not present in eastern Christianity. However it gets worst, if you look how Christianity has been practice in the western world throughout itís history, how it has changed . You get a even better picture of how the western world has progressed despite Christianity. The Author has the cart before the horse, the gift that Christianity gave the western world is lack of success. This might seem counter intuitive at first but think about it itís a religion you can do with out doing it, hell these dayís you donít even have to go to church.
Posted by Kenny, Thursday, 13 April 2006 11:58:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What an important topic - how poorly presented.

Yes religion is about dogma, about deprivation of living to the rules of a power system of clergy who assist one to be enlightened or "saved" in Christian terms. There's a growth in spiritual interest as a News Week survey showed in the US, where spiritual awareness has increased four-fold in twenty years. Religions, as rituals, stand in the way creating groups of people operating to create exclusivity.

This topic begs to be aired, but Peter's attempt is to patchworked, fuzzy and distant to warrant effort here.
Posted by Remco, Thursday, 13 April 2006 12:30:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ugghh. My head hurts.

Why do Christians always make their cultish propaganda so convoluted and hard to understand.

Being so close to this mystic oriental religion's festival where they celebrate the death, no birth, no death, at least barbaric mutilation of their godling that always existed but was created, or whatever. I won't get too much into bagging their hopelessly pathetic theology and their gruesome canabalistic rituals. What sacrifice is there in a god moving from human to "godly" form?

Suffice to say that the "Western Mind" was well established before the birth of this godling, who's influence one can only describe as negative upon Celtic/Gaul and Teutonic/Germanic mind.

Followers of this cult only do so for the "reward" of "Happy-Slappy Land" when they cease to be.

"Getting the theology wrong means creating distorted selves that are out of contact with how the world and we in it are". Exactly!

Christians have got it wrong.
Posted by Narcissist, Thursday, 13 April 2006 4:28:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 13
  8. 14
  9. 15
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy