BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Christianity as a hollow spiritual experience.

 
  

Page: (1)23

 
 
ajm
15:47 / 19.03.04
"Christian civilization has proved hollow to a terrifying degree: it is all veneer, but the inner man has remained untouched and therefore unchanged. His soul is out of key with his external beliefs; in his soul the Christian has not kept pace with external developments. Yes, everything is to be found outside- in image and in word, in Church and Bible- but never inside. Inside reign the archaic gods, supreme as of old; that is to say the inner correspondence with the outer God-image is undeveloped for lack of psychological culture and has therefore got stuck in heathenism" (Jung, Psychology and Alchemy)
 
 
Jack Fear
16:54 / 19.03.04
And Jung knew this... how, exactly?
 
 
Foust is SO authentic
17:12 / 19.03.04
My paraprhase of GK Chesterton's response - Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has been tried and found too difficult.
 
 
Jack Fear
17:43 / 19.03.04
YES.
 
 
ajm
17:50 / 19.03.04
How is it difficult? All you need is faith that God has a son and he came down to earth, was nailed to a cross, bing, bang, boom, to heaven you go. This is what I have been told numerous times in the 20 or so years I went to church and Sunday School. Just have faith and you will be saved.

Also, maybe you never heard of Jung but he was a Psychologist/Philosopher/thinker who studied many myths and religions, including Christianity, very extensively, which may qualify him slightly.
 
 
Jack Fear
18:01 / 19.03.04
I know goddam well who Jung was, and Krishnamurti too. Christians aren't stupid, you know--whatever you may think.

But if you're going to make broad, sweeping statements about the psychological and spiritual makeup of millions upon millions of people, then you'd better be ready to back them up.

Even if you are Carl Jung. Who was a bright man, but often wrong.

As he was, I think, in this instance.
 
 
Jack Fear
18:03 / 19.03.04
Also: if having faith is so easy, how come you found yourself no longer able to do so?
 
 
ajm
18:09 / 19.03.04
Christians aren't stupid? How can you make giant sweeping accusations like that . This seems to be getting alittle hostile. I lost my faith because I saw that it was just a blanket excuse for an ideology that can't be accepted on it's own merit.

I'm not acting anyone here, just looking for a good debate on the topic. Also I'm speaking of Christianity and not the people who subsribe and I'm sorry if I offended anyone, as this is not my intention.
 
 
ajm
18:11 / 19.03.04
I meant I'm not 'attacking' anyone here (not 'acting').
Your welcome to attack my spelling errors.
 
 
Jack Fear
18:27 / 19.03.04
Where's the challenge? Fish in a barrel.

But you seem to be operating under the assumption that those who disagree with you must perforce be ignorant. That runs contrary to the very spirit of pluralism you are so enthusiastically espousing, doesn't it? Recognize, if you will, that people of good will can look at the same statements and disagree as to their import.

Back to Christianity: what "ideology that can't be accepted on its own merit" are we talking about here? Was it Love your enemies? Was it Judge not, lest ye be judged, or Give to the widowed, the orphaned, and the poor, or Don't be a self-righteous prick?

Or was it the "Non-Christians are all going to burn in Hell" canard? Because, you know, for all that I've heard people complain about that attitude among Christians, I have never, in nearly forty years, heard that sentiment put forth.

Maybe I haven't been paying attention, and missed that message.
Or maybe you haven't, and missed all the others.
 
 
ajm
18:42 / 19.03.04
You can't prove or reason that Jesus was the son of God who died for your sins. I think that is pretty obvious, which is why the church advocates faith. The only way a rational person can come to believe such a thing.

"Non-Christians are all going to burn in Hell" Yes I do hate this sentiment. I do hear from christians, even friends who I have good relationships with and whom I have good, logical, discusions.

You may, as you say, disagree with their import (whatever that is to mean), and I know people will disagree, but as to wether they can argue their own position is another matter.

(Fish in a barrel? I hope your not equating christians with fish)
I am sorry but your last post was a little cryptic for me.
Love your enemies; Judge not, lest ye be judged; Give to the widowed, the orphaned, and the poor, or Don't be a self-righteous prick. I agree with all of these, but these ideas didn't originate with the christians (except Love your enemies, the best thing that Jesus ever said, if he indeed say it).
 
 
ajm
18:50 / 19.03.04

Talk about thread rot.

How does the belief in Jesus and angels and the Trinity and Love your Neigbour as yourself have anything to do with an inner sense of spirituality. All this stupid intellectualization won't get us closer to God or truth. This quote is in reference to the fact that Christianity is caught up in the institution and rules and beliefs and doesn't even try to develop the inner spirit.
 
 
at the scarwash
19:19 / 19.03.04
I can bitch and moan about Christianity as well as the next lapsed Methodist, but what the hell are you talking about, ajm? You start with a generic Jung quote (without giving us any of his support for that statement) and then start asking us how anyone with any sense can believe that Jeebus was the son of the all-father (how can we really believe that the person whose face is on the money where you live really existed either, for that matter). Your first point really isn't a point, it's just a blanket statement that everyone, Christians and heathens alike has already heard, and if they have half a brain dismissed it as Jung being bitter about his dad. The second point is just plain irrelevant: people find their spiritual meaning where they find it. It doesn't matter what you think about it. If you want a good debate on the topic, come up with an argument.
 
 
Mourne Kransky
20:06 / 19.03.04
"I consider western Christianity in its practical working a negation of Christ’s Christianity." Mahatma Gandhi

I don't have any problem with Christianity, just with (some) Christians. Thus spake Xoc, with the addendum that I have known many admirable Christians. Every one of the admirable ones thought that Christ was more concerned with his followers laying up treasures on earth than he was with personal sexual morality.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:44 / 19.03.04
Ye gods, including Krishna but not Krishnamurti. I think we may be setting an exciting new standard for Head Shop discussion...

ajm, I'd like you to look over the Head Shop. Go back as long as you like. See how many threads have started with a quote, posted up indiscriminately without qualification or clarification. Imagine just how little some of the people who have spent their time and energy attempting to prosecute interesting and involved discussions might think of that, and how this might express itself in a somewhat dismissive attitude. Consider whether it is likely to lead to an interesting or worthwhile discussion, or a flurry of one-liners and insults. After that, take a look at the FAQs, and then perhaps - and only perhaps - there is a conversation about the experience of Christianity worth the having in your stars.

Everyone else - I'd suggest taking a breath here, and thinking about how, if you were *starting* this thread, you'd want to consider the experience of Christianity. Is it, for example, meaningful to describe a spiritual experience (which, by the way, Jung doesn't) as "hollow"? What's the basis for comparison?
 
 
40%
22:37 / 19.03.04
Or was it the "Non-Christians are all going to burn in Hell" canard? Because, you know, for all that I've heard people complain about that attitude among Christians, I have never, in nearly forty years, heard that sentiment put forth.

I would have (and did) 'put that sentiment forth' when I was a Christian. It seems kind of gutless not to, if you believe in the Bible, in which Jesus says that unbelievers will go to hell. What sort of Christians have you been talking to?
 
 
Jack Fear
00:23 / 20.03.04
The relevant passage is "No one comes to the Father except through me," and it's been interpreted various ways. The two basic, opposed doctrines are Justification By Faith vs. Justification By Grace.

Justification by faith holds that the passage quoted above means that, unless a person makes a full and conscious declaration of faith--"accepts Jesus as their personal saviour"--that person will not be Saved.

Justification by grace holds that redemption is a fait accompli--that we "come to the Father" through Jesus's sacrifice of Himself, that the crucifixion has paid the cost of our ticket now and forever, and even retroactively, back through time to the beginning of the world and forward to its end. By His suffering and death, the Christ has attained salvation for all of humanity, in perpetuity--believers and unbelievers alike. We all come to the Father, and we all come through Jesus--whether we know His name or not.

I'm a Grace man, from a tradition of Grace men. We cannot choose to accept or reject redemption: we have been chosen. Whether or not we accept the Christ into our lives is secondary to the primal truth that He has accepted us into His--undeserving as we all are.

It's still within our power to fuck everything up by sin and general moral turpitude--but to do so is to actively run away from God, to ignore His voice, which speaks in all of us.

What sort of Christians have you been talking to?

Ones who have a fuckin' clue, obviously. Grace vs Faith is, like, Theology 101.
 
 
40%
00:49 / 20.03.04
So are we all going to heaven Jack? Every last one of us?
 
 
Jack Fear
00:56 / 20.03.04
Would that be so terrible?
 
 
40%
01:03 / 20.03.04
Jack, please don't toy with me on such an important subject. Do you believe we're all going to go to heaven?
 
 
Jack Fear
01:15 / 20.03.04
Bottom line: I don't know. And neither did the disciples. And anybody who says s/he knows for certain is full of shit.

It occurs to me that I may have misspoken slightly above and given an incorrect impression: the doctrine of justification has to do,properly, with redemption--a prerequisite for salvation, but not quite the same thing.

Redemption, in Christian parlance, means being free of the stain of Original Sin--simply starting from zero. Folks who go for Justifcation by Grace hold that everybody starts on a level playing field, while Justifcation by Faith types say that unless you make a decision to invite Jesus into your life, you're screwed before you ever even sin.

So Faith vs Grace has nothing to do with your conduct in this world. That still counts--more for Grace types than for Faith types, arguably, since Grace folks believe in Salvation by Works even absent Faith.

In the end, though, the question remains: Why do you care who's going to Heaven and who's going to Hell? Worry about yourself and your own behavior.

I'm not big on Hell, myself: the idea that God sent His son to die for a human race that could not possibly merit such a sacrifice tends to support the argument that He treats people far better than they deserve.
 
 
wicker woman
02:52 / 20.03.04
"Ones who have a fuckin' clue, obviously. Grace vs Faith is, like, Theology 101."

I'd like to see some clarification on this... Grace vs Faith may very well be a cornerstone of spiritual learning by way of christianity, but it certainly doesn't mean Grace is correct.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:05 / 20.03.04
Well, no. and I don't think that Jack is suggesting that Grace is *correct* - in fact, he states very clearly that although he chooses to believe in justification by grace, he is not in fact entirely clear that this is correct and is deeply suspicious of anyone who claims to know. So, if we are talking about the hollowness pr otherwise of Christianity, we might want to look at the possible implications of the two strands for the religious experience, rather than try to establish with confidence which is right. On the other hand, a bit of history on the two doctrines might be useful - anyone want to do the church history bit? I'm a bit rushed right now...

So, for example, friends of mine certainly *have* believed that and expressed the opinion that without accepting Jesus into my life I am goign to go to Hell. And, because they are good people and they like me, and they do not want to see me burning in Hell for eternity (or until the day of judgement, depending on your theology), they have shared this concern with me. On the one hand I find this to be objectionable because it is proselytising, but on another it would seem terribly callous if they *didn't* - in the same way that if you believed a room to be full of poisonous gas and you failed to alert somebody you might be seen as remiss. So, in this case Christianity as an experience is forcing one through one's spirituality to care about the futures of those around you, however unwelcome to those bystanders the resulting attention may be...
 
 
40%
09:51 / 20.03.04
Couldn't have put it better myself Haus.

I don't think anyone believes in hell because they want to, at best it would be seen as a necessary evil. I'd like nothing better than to believe that we could all go to heaven. I'm just suspicious of the idea that that could possibly be consistent with even the most liberal reading of the Bible. Maybe Jack could suggest me a book that would outline the biblical argument for this view, or the justification by grace view generally, as I am not really aware of it.

Incidentally, if grace vs faith is theology 101, that must mean you're well aware of the faith position, and presumably the implication of hell that it carries. In which case, why did you bring it up in such a way as to suggest that it should be considered irrelevant?

As to Christianity as a hollow experience, I have some sympathy with Jung's statement that "it is all veneer, but the inner man has remained untouched and therefore unchanged" , although his reasons for saying that might be different from mine. They almost certainly are in fact. I would more say that the idea of "new creation" which is supposed to happen to believers is kinda dubious. No amount of trying to believe or practice things brought about this kind of change in me, and thus, my experience of Christianity was to a great extent hollow, and made me feel hollow.

But that is entirely my experience and no basis for talking about the Christian religion generally. As to the rest of Jung's statement, he simply seems to be imposing his own framework on the religion, defining it in his own terms rather in the terms of the people who believe in it. There may be some truth to some of his remarks, but he is quite deluded in the way he is presenting it as "the truth" about Christianity. He is subsuming the whole religion into his own particular meta-narrative based on psychology. And as Jack says, I'd like to know what research these views are based on anyway.

AJM - what kind of input do you want here? Do you want to know whether people's own experiences of Christianity have been hollow? Do you want a more general discussion of what lends depth and substance to a spiritual experience? Are we here to discuss Jung?

Oh, and also: "maybe you never heard of Jung"

Maybe you never heard of Jack Fear!
 
 
ajm
15:49 / 20.03.04
I have been a bit sneaky as this quote is what I'm supposed to discuss for a paper in my university class. I want to have a 'serious' discusion to flesh out my own ideas on what he said. I agree the quote is quite vicous, I've it I agree with it.

I find it interesting that the Christians and recent non-Christians get into discussing heaven and hell and who's going. I was in a cafe last week and there was two christians trying to calculate how many aborted babies were in heaven. These kind of discussion are what is meant by hollow. Not many Christians even no what is meant when one asks about spiritual experiences. "You mean, did I ever see God" one puts to me. "How much did the disiples know?", "Is it Faith or Grace".

To read the bible (for myself,as I can only speak for myself) is to read alot of old mythical stories with no relevence to how I can touch god, how I can speak with him and be with him in an immediate way. With all these stories it feels like I am being treated as a child how needs a bedtime story to fall alsleep quietly.

How, as a chritian do you get in touch with the spirit of your being?
Do you pray for things? Read the stories of the bible? Help the poor? Does anyone see what I'm getting at?

And by the way, if God created Hell it means he is a torturer of human souls, so he is God and the devil. The devil must be a part of him.
 
 
ajm
15:51 / 20.03.04
fuck, sorry for the spelling. Now you know how dumb i really am.
 
 
40%
16:24 / 20.03.04
Not many Christians even no what is meant when one asks about spiritual experiences.

What do you mean by 'spiritual experiences'?
 
 
Jack Fear
16:38 / 20.03.04
And this little bit...

...if God created Hell it means he is a torturer of human souls, so he is God and the devil. The devil must be a part of him.

...points up the intrinsic absurdity of trying to talking about God in rationalistic terms. Your "must" doesn't apply to God, if He is truly beyond all limitations. By His very nature, we can't figure Him out--because our knowledge is imperfect, and His is infinite.

It's a mystery, in the original sense of the term: it's there to be pondered, not to be "solved"--the value is in the pondering.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
16:53 / 20.03.04
Slightly relevant here - C+F topic on how the notion of Hell as a hot, fiery place where you have your eyes plucked out and stuff doesn't come from Scripture.
 
 
wicker woman
01:30 / 21.03.04
Hmm. My apologies; admittedly, I sometimes have difficulty getting my thoughts across properly. It wasn't my intention to imply that there was something 'wrong' with Grace as a theological principle, at least so far as I would see all avenues explored, just that the last statement in that post could be interpreted as saying that only christians who believe in 'Grace' as a guiding idea have any notion of what they're talking about.

Personally, it seems to me that Revelations provides sufficient evidence that the idea of salvation by Grace is flawed. That is, it points out that there is indeed a Hell and that some people will be going there. Here's where your name could've been in the book of life, and all that jazz.
 
 
ajm
01:36 / 21.03.04
Thank you Jack, I agree. Speculating about Heaven and Hell, God and the Devil is an obsurd and pointless act. We can't know or come to understand god in a rational way, but that is not to say that the truth is irrational. You label it as a mystery and say it can't be solved, so you unfortunitly are out of the running. Some said long ago the same things about the nature of light, weather, the stars, the shape of the earth, our origins and so on, and attributed it all to God. When people did final come up with answers they were heretics. I'm sure I don't need to go into details on those stories.

But then you again go on to make grand speculations about god as beyond all limitions and has infinity knowledge, which is a bold a statment as any. This is not to say we shouldn't ponder God's exstience and our own, we must. But to cloud these ponderings with the conclusions of other people, and to assume that everything is already figured out and we just have to fall in line is the end of lucid speculation.

Buddhists reflect on the divine by clearing their minds of all speculation and thought. Christians very early on stamped out the practice of meditation as a christian practice because, well why would anyone need the church if one could find spiritual enlightenment on their own? In zen they contemplate over paradoxes as they realize the divine is beyond the rational, which is to say not irrational (who needs zen when you have zen?). What's above the rational and irrational. Certianly something that needs to be pondered (without conclusions or beliefs).

So along these lines the experincing of the spirit of self cannot be described in words with any sort of accuracy, so it is described in the language of symbol and analogue (ie. in the Christian sense, the figure of Christ, the cross, the trinity...). Imagine trying to describe the experience of music to someone who's never heard sound, one must speak completely through the use of analogues (hard, soft, jerky, thrashy, groove, mellow...). So through the use of analogues and symbols, the message of Jesus is defined. But like the man who pointed in awe to the moon for the people to see, the people mistakened the divine for the finger, the symbol, the thing that points to the divine. The word, the symbol is not the thing, it is dead. Yet somehow, somewhere along the line the symbols became the holy/divine thing, and we are left with our immoral, sinful selves.
Christianity (like the Jewish and Islamic faiths and unlike Buddhism and Taoism) have divided life into the holy and unholy, good/evil, and thus turned the spirit into an intellectual matter (what's good and what's evil?). This single act is the very cause of so called evil (conflict) and which puts the spirit outside the self.

Everything and Everyone is God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Religion must go beyond the rational without becoming irrational.
One must have compassion for the smallest child to the largest child murderer to the rock between your feet.

That emptiness we feel, that makes us run to god, run to the church, to our ideas of atheism or satanism and all the other isms, that is what we need to build a relationship with, the emptiness. By accepting a myriad of myths and mythical beings into the pysche is meerly to run away from our true essence, the nothingness, and to run away from truth/god/'what is'.

"God is an idea depending on the climate, the enviroment, and the tradition in which you have been brought up.
The question of whether or not there is a God or truth or reality, or whatever you like to call it, can never be answered by books, by priests, philosophers or saviours. Nobody and nothing can answer the question but you yourself and that is why you must know yourself."
 
 
Francine I
04:42 / 21.03.04
I think the particular focus on Christianity as 'hollow' is a bit silly. Not that I don't have any sympathy for it; I used to carry a bit of a chip. It's just that, at the core of it, the problem(s) many of you are describing -- the ideological ones -- do not stem from Christianity, or Judaism, or any of that. The fuck if I know [i]exactly[/i] what it is, but I think that no human being actually has any more or less propensity to do this ( prejudice, unfairness, colonialism, whatever ) -- with the exception of one variable. Wealth. This is not to say that wealth on it's own brings the willingness to do some of these things. Rather, that there's a sliding scale. The more privilege you enjoy, the more discipline it will require to avoid it's abuse. Each of us is fallible. Most everything else is smoke and mirrors; heavy, heavy chips.

The set of symbols and the spiritual 'toolkit' offered by Christianity is in no way inferior to others ( were you to judge spiritual things ). As I believe Haus pointed out, the factors responsible for the horror inflicted by certain Christians do not have a causal relationship with Christian principle.

And not to argue from character, but this is coming from a bit of an ecclectic-something-or-other, closet tree-hugger living amongst tall buildings. As I see it, if modern Christians were as morally or spiritually bankrupt as so many seem to fear ( not necessarily here, but there's quite a lot of prejudice ), things would be quite a bit uglier. There are a bunch of Christians. Not to say that the highest office of the U.S. hasn't held consultation with Pat Robertson, or anything ( or so I hear ); but that's not really Christianity. That's just people. Or, rather, that's just Pat. And maybe George.
 
 
---
11:54 / 21.03.04
I'm not a Christian but i believe that Christ existed. I just see madness all over the place. What gives Christians the right to tell everyone else that they are going to hell i don't know. They should be more accepting of other religions/beliefs, and that goes for others aswell, such as Islam.

One thing, no two things i can't get my head around : the lack of respect shown to the feminine and the fact that Jesus in churches is nailed to a Goddam cross!!! I think it would be a lot more respectful if Jesus statues in churches where like the one in Rio, you know the one where he's stood there with arms out at his sides? I think that's a really cool thing. But no, it's as if the religion is saying look he died for our sins, but at the same time, you go start rebelling against the system and your gonna wind up dead like the dude on the cross.

Fire away at anything here you want, but myself, i'd forget about the literalness of the bible and belive in the energy inside myself.

You don't need a church when he's inside you, just like any other God's or Goddesses you pay respect to, it's the energy inside you that you share with Jesus and the rest of the universe that counts.

Oh and Hell? Seriously, read this :

Hell?

It could be wrong, but i tend to believe it. What kind of God is going to put you on this Earth and then send you to hell forever because you failed a test that he/she could of helped you more with in the first place? If God is all knowing, then God would see the future and know you weren't going to pass the test, therefore God could always show you the right way through the maze, but no, God knows whats going to happen to a part of his/her creation but still, is prepared to watch as that part gets sent to hell for all eternity for something that God could of prevented all along.

I don't care which way you wanna paint the picture : that makes God also the Devil. God is everywhere and in all things.

The teaching of hell is wrong. It is not eternal, it's how ever long you want to make it for yourself before you decide to wake up.
 
 
Char Aina
16:49 / 21.03.04
Your "must" doesn't apply to God, if He is truly beyond all limitations. By His very nature, we can't figure Him out--because our knowledge is imperfect, and His is infinite.

This is my favourite bit of christianity; its ineffability.
You can brush away a lot of doubt with a good enough broom, and ineffability is certainly that.
 
 
Char Aina
17:14 / 21.03.04
What gives Christians the right to tell everyone else that they are going to hell i don't know.

really? same thing as gives you the right to say


They should be more accepting of other religions/beliefs, and that goes for others aswell, such as Islam.



...

two things i can't get my head around : the lack of respect shown to the feminine

i think that's because its people again.


and the fact that Jesus in churches is nailed to a Goddam cross!!!


yep. definitely with bill hicks on this one.

I think it would be a lot more respectful if Jesus statues in churches...like the one in Rio

wasnt there a problem with that depiction of jesus? something about his open arms being open to the rich side of rio, and his back being turned on the poor?
yet another example of people fucking up what could have been a good thing, perhaps?

But no, it's as if the religion is saying look he died for our sins, but at the same time, you go start rebelling against the system and your gonna wind up dead like the dude on the cross.

nah, mate.
its there as a reminder that the bloke died in some of the most painful circumstances available at the time. (incidentally, i think this is the idea behind the movie of the passion; to remind you that it was pretty fucking hardcore dying he did for our sins) no one is threatening to crucify heretics.


Fire away at anything here you want, but myself, i'd forget about the literalness of the bible and belive in the energy inside myself.

my god... your god... whatever.

You don't need a church when he's inside you, just like any other God's or Goddesses you pay respect to, it's the energy inside you that you share with Jesus and the rest of the universe that counts.


see above.


...God could always show you the right way through the maze, but no, God knows whats going to happen to a part of his/her creation but still, is prepared to watch as that part gets sent to hell for all eternity for something that God could [have] prevented all along.

i make a computer.
i write my own operating system.
i then load a program of my devising that seeks out any glitches in my programming and flags them for deletion. i could have fixed many of these glitches by hand before running the program, but i dont. i have the knowledge, and the expertise, but i prefer to let the system test itself.

god is the great architect, or in modern parlance, the programmer.
he isnt going to stop his antivirus software from deleting a file because it used to be a beautiful picture he made, even if he does love it.



I don't care which way you wanna paint the picture : that makes God also the Devil. God is everywhere and in all things.

well, it does in your pantheon.
in mine, the devil is the good guy, and god is the manifestation of human patriarchy in heaven.
so, not the same person.


The teaching of hell is wrong.

you know what i'm going to say, dont you?
 
  

Page: (1)23

 
  
Add Your Reply