"Us" and "Them"

"Us" and "Them". Or perhaps the sheep and the goats. Or maybe the lost and the saved.

But one joker once said:- "There are only two kinds of people in the world - those that divide the world into two kinds of people and those who don't"

Ha ha!

Myself, I think we must first touch base, or in other words, first we must know at the deepest and most authentic level that we are all "one", equal. Having touched based, knowing this deeply, then perhaps we can differentiate, recognise differences. This recognition will not then be judgement but will always be coloured by empathy.

Which is why from a Christian perspective the only viable theology is Universalism. All are elected. A perspective that grows by the day by many who by study and knowledge, recognise such as a widespread teaching/belief within the early Church.

But Christian or not (and I am not) to see that we are One is the heart of any genuine spirituality - while those who believe in an eternal and ultimate division of human beings into the lost and saved will totally miss the heart no matter how pious they presume themselves to be.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

JollyRoger · 70-79, M

I agree TOTALLY (almost)! However, I sense that you are trying to label Christianity as 'good Christians' and 'bad Christians' i.e., that to be Christian a person must accept that there is a 'good path' and a 'bad path' and that all who tread on the bad path will be damned. I'll caveat my response here by saying that I do not read the Bible as the 'undisputed word of God', but as a guideline. That said: The person who quoted Christ obviously felt Christ was categorizing people; I read the 'sheep and goats' paradigm as Him laying out a path for people to follow i.e., "Follow me" in the path of doing good to and for each other; not looking to lay blame on each other but to lead by example in ways that others might respect as versus doing your own 'thing' for your own self-gratification. Also, Christ allowed for repentance of sin - to permit us to make mistakes and not be damned. Therefore, I agree that we must look at each fellow human as an equal AND that we must not lay blame, i.e., judge others for their behaviours based on our limited human knowledge and our own inherent weaknesses which will from time to time - mine occur quite regularly, occur. I do not think that claiming Christ as my saviour is limiting me from looking at other people of any faith or non-faith as my equal. I believe that we were put in this world by God who gave us our souls and that the reason we are here is to prove our souls as worthy - worthy to God - nobody else. And that by doing good for each other, our souls will be judged and find eternal life in His company. Everyone is capable of being worthy!
Religions only serve to guide us along a particular pathway. As we know, there can be many pathways to a common goal.

SW-User

@JollyRoger Thank you.

I would only say again, that if diversification follows from an initial seeing and knowing that all are "one" then it is of another order to division made prior to such.

That said, being a non-dualist I do not really see life as posing some sort of test to become "worthy". Once again, surrender of "self" and all its own likes and dislikes, judgements or whatever, comes first. "Goodness" belongs only to the ultimate Source.

Edit. Just to add. This all involves the simple fact that the causal basis of "salvation" is purely Grace, the very nature of God (the Ulltimate Source) Not "works" of any kind, however deep our commitment to becoming "worthy".

Calvin saw this. Salvation was purely by Election, irrespective of anything else. Luther saw this when he said that in a sense Jesus did not die for everybody. As both were committed to the interpretation of the Bible that suggests a double destination they were left with the question (as anyone else will be) :- WHY a God of Love, who "wills that all be saved" does not elect all.

Universalism answers that conundrum. It calls for a simple reordering of the mind, or as T S Eliot says in Four Quartets- "A condition of complete simplicity (costing not less than everything)"

The zen master Dogen faced the very same question from the Buddhist perspective. If "Original Enlightenment" is so, why did the Buddhas of old.practice? Why indeed! We all face that question. When the Buddha himself was asked he answered:-

Out of compassion for the world

Being "one' with the very nature of God.

JollyRoger · 70-79, M

@SW-User And so? Who's in disagreement? The only person, among all of your quotables, who is categorizing Christianity as dualist (good versus bad) is you! Both Calvin and Luther were Christian and you quote them. Others in the Christian world may have a dualist attitude, but that is not Christianity itself.
On the matter of 'worthiness': What is your purpose in life? Do you have a choice? You obviously have made a choice and I commend you for it. Others make their choice (election) yet there is evil in the world. Will (and I don't know) God accept those souls into His kingdom? So worthiness is something that gives us purpose in life - it's a philosophy that even you strive for, perhaps subconciously.

SW-User

@JollyRoger You are simply missing the paradox. Missing the point about the "right" time for diversification. You seem unable to understand. Maybe I am unclear, but I can make it no clearer.

Christianity, in most of its expressions, IS dualist. When so many - here and elsewhere - are perfectly happy to speak of (and believe in) ultimate and eternal divisions between human beings, to suggest otherwise is simply ridiculous.

My purpose is to recognise my being "one" with the Source. Ethics, morality, or as you speak of, "worthiness", are only ever by-products of such. When they become an aim in themselves we fall from the path of Grace.

P!ease don't try telling me what I sub-consciously strive for, simply because you seem unable to grasp or understand what is being said to you.

It really does seem that many are totally blind to the realities of Grace. They prefer "works" and cling to them.

Edit:- Really, we would need to relate to the Pure Land Buddhist way of "hakarai" (no-calculation) where things are made to become so of themselves. But as a half-way house, try lookng up "Wisdom in emptiness", a dialogue on The Fall between Thomas Merton and D.T.Suzuki to be found in Merton's book "Zen and the Birds of Appetite".

But frankly, I'm tired of this. Having some people here as good as rejoicing in the damnation of others is a sickening stench I can do without.

JollyRoger · 70-79, M

@SW-User You are right: I cannot see why you insist that only your interpretation of my faith is right! I am not knocking any faith's beliefs but you are trying to insinuate that because Christianity recognizes that there is a good path and a not so good path in which to live (is that not true?) that we are being judgemental on an interpersonal level. I'm try to say that by choosing to do 'good' is leadership and by leading, hopefully, others will follow Christs message to love your neighbour as you would (and should) love yourself. I hear you saying that we are all equal whether we respect others or not. For that lack of respect I will 'turn the other cheek' but I will not trust that person and will not follow their path. Hopefully though, my meekness would incite them to look twice at me and judge their own behaviour. If you are now going to say that I have demeaned them - say it! I'll retort that you would be a hypocrite to say that you would still trust them.

JollyRoger · 70-79, M

@SW-User I hope you see that your faith is different from Christianity, but that Christianity is as good as is your faith. Few people here have been as patient with you trying to 'convert' us away from our faithas I have. Unfortunately you have sealed your fate in this debate by not treating us as equals:

But frankly, I'm tired of this. Having some people here as good as rejoicing in the damnation of others is a sickening stench I can do without.

SW-User

@JollyRoger I'm leaving Similar Worlds. I really have had enough.

"Sealed my fate"!!!! "Trying to convert away from your Faiths"!!!! Utter nonsense.

All I have done is offer the option of Universalism. This WAS, Has Been, and IS, very much a part of the Christian Faith. Simply because you are unwilling to take a look at the multitude of books and information now readily available (I offered to recommend a few) and therefore remain ignorant of the full width and depth of you own Faith (which has "many mansions) please don't start such nonsense as that I am seeking to convert!

Again, others here have declared Universalism to be false. Explicitly. You state you are "unsure". Thus others - maybe yourself - are explicit dualists. Double destiny. An eternal division. Yet you claim that I am the "only one" who is dualist!!!!! My own diversification is made within the context of an ultimate Universal Salvation of All; of course in our world as we see it and experience it there is division! You appear incapable of even grasping such a simple point.

Yes, those that insist upon, and even look forward to and rejoice, in the eternal damnation of others DO create a sickening stench. Your attempt at a pious acceptance of diverse opinion is in direct contrast to your ludicrous words of my own "sealing of my fate".

Anyway, bye. I will not respond again.

PS .Try "That All Shall Be Saved" by David Bentley-Hart.

JollyRoger · 70-79, M

@SW-User Good bye again, Telegram Sam. No doubt we'll see you again in another incarnation.