Jesus Christ lived in India

It is the Catholics who first followed the teachings of Christ, not the Protestants who came much later.

The Protestants too doesn't follow the teachings of chastity and celibacy as Christ taught and which is followed by the Catholic Church.


And whatever it may be , the Christians still do pray to Mary, which shows that they recognize divinity in her. I know of many churches with statues of Mary and many Christians who are very devoted to Mary.

Here is what Wikipedia has to say.......

The Immaculate Conception is the dogma that states that Mary was filled with grace from the very moment of her conception in her mother's womb and preserved from the stain of original sin. Only the Roman Catholic Church has officially adopted this teaching, and the title "Immaculate Conception" is one used only by Roman Catholics and those members of the Anglican Communion who describe themselves as "Anglo-Catholic".

And does Christian theology states that God the Father is impersonal.

The very sentence is a contradiction in itself.

 

Threre are many things the catholics do and believe which are evidently their own construction and have no real origin in the teaching of Jesus. Celibacy is one such - catholic priests were only required to be celibate after about the 10th century.


As to Marianism - I assure you that catholicism does not regard the Virgin as divine. Mary is simply head of the saints, who as I explained, are seen as intercessors. They can't answer your prayer, but god is more likely to listen to them praying for you - so the logic goes.
Hence the famous 'Hail Mary' says "pray for us sinners now and at the time of our death".
Ask any catholic - they'll tell you the same thing.
Orthodoxy holds a similar view.

I would have a look at the work of Miester Eckhart, probably the greatest of christian mystics, before you dismiss the impersonality of god the father.
Eckhart describes god for instance, as 'the ground of being': he speaks of the 'abyss of godhead' - clear enough that he is reffering to something impersonal.

There is no one 'theology' accepted by all christians, rather, there are different ideas which come from different levels of interpretation and experience from the ultra fundamentalist to the liberal to the mystical.

 

Must thank you BBB for informing us about the Buddhist Trikaya.

I checked it out and found this information.


Buddhism also has a trinity of sorts. The Mahayana (northern) school of Buddhism has the doctrine of a "triple body" or Trikaya. According to this belief there are three "bodies" of the Buddha-reality. The first is the eternal, cosmical reality, the second is the heavenly manifestation of the first, and the third is the earthly manifestation of the second. Furthermore, many Buddhists worship three-headed statues of Buddha.

The eternal cosmical reality , in my opinion,logically correlates to the Holy Ghost. The heavenly manifestation of the first correlates to God the Father. And the earthly manifestation of the second correlates to The Son.

So you can indeed say that Jesus was influenced by the Hindu and Buddhist trinity during his stay in India, and combined it to form the triune God of Christianity , Father , Son and Holy Ghost.

 

::nods:: On saint penants the words "Pray For Us" are written. Mary and the Saints are not divine...but are just channels through which you can reach the Divine...guidence. Think of them more as gurus and teachers than devas and devis

 

I think you are overlooking the possible influence of pagan mystery schools on Christianity.

Check out the mystery school of Eleusis for example, and also some of the ideas of Plato. It seems that an influence is highly likely, and that might account for a lot of the stuff which seems to cross over into other faiths.

IMO there is also a distinct possibility that Indian ideas reached the old pagan world, possibly via persia. Certainly, Plato's philosophy contains many ideas which are similar to Indian ideas, even a form of re-incarnation - something which is entirely lacking from mainstream christianity of all shades. However, back in the middle ages there were various 'heretical' sects such as the Cathari or Albigenses of southern France who did believe in re-incarnation.

 

Well, I clearly remember Jesus preaching celibacy in the Bible. Paul too advocates celibacy and life long continence to those who can do it.

Well, the Wikipedia doesn't state so.

Also the very fact that Mary is venerated shows that she is in some way divine.

God the Father is clearly personal. It is different from the Impersonal God.

Also Eckhart lived between 1260 and 1328. His works were condemned by the Pope as heretical.

I am speaking of the original teachings of Christ and his direct disciples.Not that of the many Christians theologians and mystics who came later with their view points and opinions.

 

I'd like to know where, as I've reaqd it from cover to cover and don't recall that.

Wiki is not that reliable - either way, I'm sure that as one who was educated partly by catholic nuns, I have a pretty clear grasp on the doctrines regarding BVM.

Yes, Eckhart was declared an heretic - but so were many other good and honest people. Joan of Arc for instance was burned alive as a witch, and later declared a saint.
Today his work is very highly regarded by christian contemplatives.

I'm interested to know why you think god the father must be personal?

We don't know exactly what the original teachings were. We only have an edited version in the Bible, and many of the gospels which were excluded - ie the gnostic gospels, contain teachings which are quite different from the cannonical gospels.

But even on the basis of the Bible, there is no evidence that Christ taught celibacy.

 

Thanks for that - it is a doctrine which seems to cause confusion among those not too familiar with the Catholic church.

 

Well, Jesus speaks against lust in the Bible. Also he was not married.Same with his disciples. And Paul too advocates celibacy.

The Wiki may not be reliable, but they certainly can't be far removed from the truth.

Well the reason why Eckhart was declared an heretic could be because he stated points which contradicted the Catholic teachings, which were not found in the teachings of Christ as interpreted by the Church.

I am not saying Eckhart is wrong as anyone can access the truth through contemplation or meditation.

This Supreme Cosmic Spirit or Absolute Reality called Brahman is said to be eternal, genderless, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, and ultimately indescribable in the human language. It can be at best described as infinite Being, infinite Consciousness and infinite Bliss. Brahman is regarded as the source and essence of the material universe. It is pure being.


Its pretty logical. The impersonal God is everything including you. It is subtly distinct from the personal God.

The personal God is a manifestation or aspect of the impersonal God, seperate from you.

Well , there ought to be in some form the original teachings of Christ. And it is logical to state that the teachings of the Catholic church is nearest to the original teachings of Christ.

 

Not really. You have to remember that there was a lot of corruption in the Catholic Church throughout history...so you can't necessarily claim that that was part of the teachings of Jesus. One could also argue that the Eastern Orthodox churches have the original teachings ...for Peter went to Rome and founded the Roman Catholic Church and Paul went to Antioch and founded the Eastern Churches and eventually they split due to differences of interpretation... so who's to say. The original Bible was translated over and and over and we all know that things naturally get lost in translation (not counting whether or not the translators removed this or that).

 

Could be true. I remember reading that some Christian sects such as the Theraputae, believed in reincarnation and they were not far removed from the time of Jesus's life . Lived in the 1st or 2nd century A.D. It was the Roman Emperor who declared reincarnation as heresy subsequently.

Here's what wikipedia has to say about reincarnation in Christianity.......


Several Christian denominations which support reincarnation include the Liberal Catholic Church, Unity Church, The Christian Spiritualist Movement, the Rosicrucian Fellowship and the Lectorium Rosicrucianum. The Medieval heretical sect known variously as the Cathars or Albigensians who flourished in the Languedoc believed in Reincarnation, seeing each soul as a fallen angel born again and again into the world of Matter created by Lucibel (Lucifer). Only through a Gnostic 'Rebirth' in the Holy Spirit through Christ could the soul escape this process of successive existences and return to God.

 

Here is a link to a website dealing with reincarnation in Christianity.


http://www.elevated.fsnet.co.uk/index-page14.html

 

Jesus also advocates marriage.
St.Paul advocates slavery and was himself married.

Eckhart was not actually banned during his own lifetime. The ban came from motives which were purely to do with the power of the church, which at that time was becoming increasingly narrow and intolerant.
It seems that Eckhart represents a lost thread of Dominican mysticism. There is absolutely nothing in his teaching which contrdicts an intelligent, ie symbolic reading of the Bible.
Today, Eckhart has been more or less re-instated, and is as I mentioned very highly regarded.

God the Father, and God the Son?

As SGB pointed out, there is no certainty about this. The Orthodox claim they are the original church.
Many catholic doctrines date from a time much later than the alleged life of Jesus, some from as late as the middle ages.

What you have to understand about western religion is that historically, it has been very different from eastern religion.
The church always sought to have a kind of monoploly on spiritual experience, and anyone claiming to have such experience was usually regarded with suspicion. Even Teresa of Avila, another prominant catholic mystic, was accused at one time of being in league with the devil, and subjected to reigorous examination (which she passed - they accepted her experiences as genuine).
In the case of the Cathari, it all ended in the Albigensian Crusade, when the church wiped them out in a very bloody manner. The final act was the burning to death in a single day of over 300 so called 'perfecti' - cathars who had taken the initiation known as the consolatumentum.
Implicated in this act of oppression and mass murder, was St.Dominic, and it led to the establishment of the office of the Inquisition, dedicated to root out heresy in all it's forms. Their methods are well known.

So when we speak of the catholic church, we have to bear in mind this long and bloody history of oppression and deviation from christ's teaching.

On the topic of re-incarnation, there is absolutely nothing in either the Bible or catholic/orthodox dogma to support the idea.

The protestent view of things is very different from the catholic, and may actually be more in line with Jeus intentions in some respects. For example, understanding the Bible. Catholicism teaches that only the church has the true interpretation. Protestantism allows more for freedom of interpretation by the individual.
It was only after the reformation that the Bible was even available to the ordinary person. Previously it was jealously guarded by the priesthood, and it was considered altogether inappropriate that ordinary people should even read it for themselves.

 

Maybe true, but Jesus also condemns lust. Also I don't think he has advocated marriage compulsorily for everyone.

Yes, both are personal aspects of God, and distinct from the impersonal God.

Well, then you can say that the teachings of the catholic church and the Orthodox church are the nearest to the original teachings of Christ.

And may I remind you that Christianity is Asian, not European or western. It has its origins in Asia in the Middle East.

Early references to reincarnation in the New Testament were deleted in the 4th century by Emperor Constantine when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire.

In the 6th century, in the year 553 A. D., the 2nd Council of Constantinople officially declared reincarnation a heresy and the doctrine of reincarnation was officially banished by the Christian Church. It was banished for no other reason than it was considered to be too much of an influence from the East.

Check out the link on reincarnation in Christianity which I have posted in a previous post.

 

Of course not. But there is nowhere in the NT where Jeus says celibacy is better or a requirement.
Also worth noting the story of the woman caught in adultery, who Jesus forgave after saving her from the stoning to death prescribed at that time by the religious authorities.
Also the miracle at the wedding at Canna, where he turned water to wine for the wedding guests.
None of this suggests to me that Jeus was teaching a form of ascetic rejection of life or it's legitimate pleasures.
When he speaks of 'lust' you have to remember that he could also mean lust for power, lust for wealth etc, not just sexual lust, which is a different thing anyway from sexual love.

That's not what I meant.
I meant the Father is impersonal, the Son is personal.

I don't really think so. As I said, protestantism may be closer in some respects, but actually, I think that the original teachings are lost and will never be recovered. I think it quite likely that the gnostic view may be much more in line with the original message than St.Pauls' version, which coloured the whole of the subsequent development of mainstream christianity.

A prominent Orthodox archbishop recently said that Krishna is 'satan'. There's a thread in here somewhere about it. So I doubt that they do have the original message.

http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134875

Benedict 16th, prior to becoming pope, declared that Buddhism is an 'auto erotic cult'.

I doubt very much this represents Jesus message.

Mainly, it was constructed in its present form in the west during the late Roman Empire period and the Middle Ages.

That itself contradicts the idea that the catholics or the orthodox have the original teaching - the very fact they 'edited' it all.

I can't see any way that re-incarnation can be fitted into mainstream christian teachings. The references that may have existed in the past were probably in gnostic literature, all of which is still rejected by the main churches.
In the Bible, there's nothing about it at all, and the implication is that we have one life, and at the day of judgement, the present body will be resurrected to be taken up to heaven or cast into the flames. That is the trad christian view, based on the book of Revelation.

 

Hinduism and Buddhism too advocates marriage as a sacred institution.

Just because Jesus advocated marriage doesn't mean that everyone has to do it . If so , he himself would have married.

It goes without saying that the Impersonal God is genderless. The term Father in itself is shows that it is personal and not impersonal.

I wish to add to this. When Hatha yoga ( the yoga of physical exercises )came to America, the Christian fundamentalists termed it as the 'devils exercises'.

Now Hatha yoga is a raging craze not only in America , but all over the world, due to its tangible benefits physically, mentally, emotionally, intellectually, socially, and spiritually.

Around 15 million people in the U.S., itself practice yoga.

Some Christian institutions have amalgamated Hatha yoga with the practice of chanting christian scriptural quotes , while doing the exercises, and they have termed this as Christian Yoga.

From 'devils exercises' to Christian yoga. What an irony!

The same thing happened when the Indian numeral system came to Europe.The Pope at that time condemned it as the 'devils numbers'.

Now these same 'devils numbers' are the core of western science and mathematics.

Albert Einstein has himself said , " We have to be grateful to the Indians for teaching us how to count without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made."

I think it is pretty logical to state that Indian numbers did have a role in ending the dark ages in Europe , through the subsequent role played by science (empowered by the Indian numeral system) in Europe.

'Devils exercises', 'devils numbers' , what next!!!!!!!






.

There is heaven and hell , both in the Hindu scriptures and Buddhist scriptures. (check out Paramahamsa Yogananda's "Autobiography of a Yogi".

However we do say that the soul suffers or enjoys according to its karma, in the heavenly planets or the hellish planets, and when the karma is exhausted, it returns back to earth where it is reborn again, till it is united with God permanently.

 

Yeah...but in Hindu and Buddhist scriptures...heaven or hell are not for eternity which is what Christianity teaches. You are made once, you live once, you die once, and whereever you go is where you stay forever. Where as opposed to Hinduism and Buddhism heaven and hell are temporary places...you eventually move somewhere else. The only thing of permenance is either moksha in Hinduism or nirvana in Theravada Buddhism or Buddhahood in Mahayana Buddhism.

 

I think heaven in Christianity is a metaphor for enligtenment.


The kingdom of God is within you. --Jesus Christ.

And this is what Hinduism teaches. God is within you itself. And through enlightenment or nirvana or moksha you become one with God within, and enjoy great bliss, joy and peace. And all enlightened masters have stated this.
Sat-Chit-Anand ---- Truth, Being, Bliss.

 

I know....I think a lot of it is symbolic...but just because we think it doesn't mean that that's what the Church teaches.

 

The church has a history of errors. So perhaps what the church teaches in this regard may not be very close to the truth.