It's more than evident that I'm off on one of my tangents. I steer clear of the issue for a time, then we find a flurry of posts critical of Christianity, in specific, and religion, in general. The impetus for these tangents usually is some "major" political or quasi-political debate raging across the country in which we find rabid fundamentalists yelling and screaming about something real OR perceived. The two big issues right now center on the anti-immigration furor and the objections of some to a Muslim Cultural Center in the vicinity of the former World Trade Center.
While I have deep-seated objections to the Christian belief system on a number of grounds, there is no question whatsoever that the fundamental and/or evangelical brand of that religion irritates me to no end. From my humble perspective, these people talk out of both sides of their mouths simultaneously. On one hand, they want us to believe that theirs is a religion of hope, salvation and love; yet almost every word out of their mouths is negative and hateful. They put the snark in snarky!
Look, if Christianity provides your life with meaning, then more power to ya! We're each searching for some meager answers or ideas of how to make sense of things beyond our comprehension level. If this belief system helps you to be more whole and grounded, then who am I to question it?
But please, let it inform your life as to how you speak and act in the diverse commons area. You need to do a better job at modeling what you believe to be true rather than merely talking about it!
If you believe that proselytizing others -- sharing the "good news" -- is of paramount importance, then do so by the way you lead your life as opposed simply to flapping your gums.
I write a tremendous amount on the topic of philosophical Taoism, but I don't run around the world beating people over the head with it. YOU have to take the time to come here and, if YOU decide you're not interested, you are free to leave. That's quite a bit different from the proselytizing Christian. That sort of person sticks there head into discussions far and wide to tell people they are going to hell in a hand basket if others don't believe precisely as they do!
If you are a fundamentalist and/or evangelical Christian and you want people to take your beliefs seriously, LIVE THEM. If people you come in contact with on daily basis see that you are a pillar of inner strength and you exude a sense of compassionate purpose, THEY will seek YOU out. THEY will ask YOU to share with them your secrets for staying sane in an insane world. At that juncture, you can then pore out all the "good news" you can muster and few people would begrudge you.
But running around the world attacking people with vitriol, negativity and outright hatred, while at the same time proclaiming that your God is love incarnate, is a recipe for disaster! Why should anyone take you seriously if you can't model the very things you say you believe in?
While I have deep-seated objections to the Christian belief system on a number of grounds, there is no question whatsoever that the fundamental and/or evangelical brand of that religion irritates me to no end. From my humble perspective, these people talk out of both sides of their mouths simultaneously. On one hand, they want us to believe that theirs is a religion of hope, salvation and love; yet almost every word out of their mouths is negative and hateful. They put the snark in snarky!
Look, if Christianity provides your life with meaning, then more power to ya! We're each searching for some meager answers or ideas of how to make sense of things beyond our comprehension level. If this belief system helps you to be more whole and grounded, then who am I to question it?
But please, let it inform your life as to how you speak and act in the diverse commons area. You need to do a better job at modeling what you believe to be true rather than merely talking about it!
If you believe that proselytizing others -- sharing the "good news" -- is of paramount importance, then do so by the way you lead your life as opposed simply to flapping your gums.
I write a tremendous amount on the topic of philosophical Taoism, but I don't run around the world beating people over the head with it. YOU have to take the time to come here and, if YOU decide you're not interested, you are free to leave. That's quite a bit different from the proselytizing Christian. That sort of person sticks there head into discussions far and wide to tell people they are going to hell in a hand basket if others don't believe precisely as they do!
If you are a fundamentalist and/or evangelical Christian and you want people to take your beliefs seriously, LIVE THEM. If people you come in contact with on daily basis see that you are a pillar of inner strength and you exude a sense of compassionate purpose, THEY will seek YOU out. THEY will ask YOU to share with them your secrets for staying sane in an insane world. At that juncture, you can then pore out all the "good news" you can muster and few people would begrudge you.
But running around the world attacking people with vitriol, negativity and outright hatred, while at the same time proclaiming that your God is love incarnate, is a recipe for disaster! Why should anyone take you seriously if you can't model the very things you say you believe in?
Well I suppose I'm Christian since I was raised a Catholic - and my kids go to a Catholic school.
ReplyDeleteI'm also a big believer in doing your own thing and leaving everyone else alone. I don't try to push my beliefs on people (frankly, I don't even know what I believe myself).
I try to be open-minded but refuse to accept that there is any "one correct" religion. I'm interested in what others believe and how it could relate to me and I don't see why I shouldn't be allowed to believe in several if I feel like it. Religion to me is a personal choice - not one inflicted by a ruling body such as a church or a spiritual leader. They are guides only, not rule makers.
I don't believe that the world is better off without religion because sometimes you need something to fall back on.
I don't believe in political correctness either because that's just wearing a "goody-goody" mask over the top of your true feelings.
Finally, I don't believe that people are inherently evil any more than animals are. Bad things happen, people take advantage of others and everyone strives for the best for themselves at the expense of others.
I'd love to learn about Taoism but thus far all I've discovered here is that it's got a whole lot of quotes. I'm not finding that Taoists live their lives radically differently to everyone else.
You talked about border control in one of your other posts. I found that really interesting. What would you do? Would you remove the borders? How would a Taoist deal with the social changes which would result? Would it be fair? Would people be happier or not?
I'm seeing a lot of "Christian-bashing" happening here. I don't know if that's the Taoist way or not. I guess if we're looking at behaviour rather than scripture, then it means that it is part of Taoism.
I'm interested - but I'm much more interested in reality than quotes. (and yes, that goes for Christianity too).
Gavin,
ReplyDeleteOf all my recent posts on this topic, I think this bashes the least. Thus, I'm a bit perplexed as to why you affixed that comment here.
If you're interested in seeing how Taoist principles apply to one life (typically mine), you should check my Real Life Tao series.
Hello, I've been a daily reader for the past couple months and finally feel inclined to ramble along with you. One of the best Daoist blogs out there… perhaps a little too left-wing democrat at times. I personally do not like to associate Daoism with any particular party or modern political viewpoint. It is so much deeper than “democrat” or “republican.”
ReplyDeleteThis particular post inspired me to write about a Daoist ideal from a very non-Daoist source: "Dune" by Frank Herbert.
The opening chapter puts our hero, Paul, in particularly complex test for survival. He is to place his hand in a box. If he removes his hand from the box at any time, he will instantly be struck in the neck with a poisoned needle. As time progresses, his hand begins to feel warm, than hot, than burning, finally he can feel his hand melting, the flesh dripping oh his body... but he does not remove his hand. Finally the pain ceases, his hand is okay, it was all in his head... he passed the test.
The test was conducted to prove that Paul is human and not an animal.
Humans rationalize fear, accept change, and understand consequences. Animals do not. Humans have higher level thought, social reasoning, love for one another, and an ability to be humble that animals do not have.
Whenever I am faced with a social, political, or moral question I like to ask myself: "What would a human do? / What would and animal do?"
Gay rights:
Animal: this social minority in the heard would be ostracized and left to die for the betterment of the group
Human: embrace the change in society as a good thing and allow it to organically mold the group into something new and better
Religion in politics:
Animal: the thoughts of the pack majority prevail and are forced upon those with no voice
Human: who are we to cast our beliefs upon the masses? The morality of a person lies within that person and can only be taught to others through passive example. Not forced upon them.
Very complex subjects that deserve more discussion, but I wanted to give a baseline example.
My point is that part of being human is to passively convey your morality, thoughts, and opinions. Speak softly and carry a proverbial humble stick. Wolf pack leaders tear into other wolves to make their point and assert dominance.
The best Daoists never admit they are Daoists, never discuss it, and keep it all within themselves. When someone walks by / interacts with them, they are left thinking: “wow, there is really something about that person…”
This is why you do not see Daoists behaving any different from anyone else.
I'm with Gavin. I found _The Tao of Pooh_ over the weekend and came across your blog looking for more of the same. I figure I can't really understand Taoism directly, so I'll find a Taoist blogger and soak in some ideas by osmosis.
ReplyDeleteBut it seems like all you do is post quotes and rail against Christianity. I don't understand why Christianity is even mentioned, as (I would imagine, given this is a Taoist Blog) it would be off-topic.
Matt,
ReplyDeleteInteresting perspective. The only thing I would caution is that you're applying human characteristics to animals and then judging animals based upon them.
BTW, I neither consider myself a Democrat or a Republican. If I had to give myself a political label, I'm somewhere between a green anarchist socialist. :)
Amy,
As to the quotes, they are part of two different series. The chief one of these is going through the Tao Te Ching line by line. I offer the quote and then a little or a lot of commentary.
As to the railing, I'm OCD. I tend to obsess on different topics. You happened to arrive when I'm going off on Christianity. If you look back through the archives, you'll find I go off on different things at different times.
There are times in which I write quite a bit about my autism. This tends to occur when something unsettles me and I write about it as a form of catharsis.
More than anything else, I'm obsessed with philosophical Taoism. Hence, this blog.