Abraham's Feuding Children
Let me tell you a little story about this fella named Abraham. Some 6,000 years ago he started a small family, based on his beliefs in one all-knowing God, and a whole host of well meaning values and morals. His first born was Judaism. Then, some 2000 years ago he unexpectedly saw his second born come to life, named Christianity. Six hundred years after that, yet another child came to be, named Islam. Although different in their own small ways, Abraham's children were nonetheless offspring of their father, and all steadfast believers in the core values he instilled in them. Yet, despite their familial ties, they feuded. Oh, how they feuded.Judaism would do and say things like, "I'm the oldest, wisest, father's first...the chosen one"...to the resentment of the two younger children. Soon enough though, the second born would mature and start flexing his muscles, saying, "oh yeah, I'm the stronger, younger version of you, and father favours me." The youngest, Islam, would jump in and add "father wouldn't have had any more children if you two were so perfect...third time's a charm!"
Years would pass, and the children would fight...crusades this, holocaust that, september 11th this, settler-lands that...you name it...a three way tug-of-war for their father's love and attention, failing to see that they are all one family, fundamentally the same, and that their father loves them equally, despite their faults.
Today the feud continues, as childish as ever. Islam is outraged at Christianity's new hobby of drawing offensive caricatures of it, and publishing them for the world to see. Christianity tells Islam to grow up and get a sense of humour, and tries to explain the concept of free speech to the young one. So, after its initial violent temper tantrum, Islam takes a crack at edgy humour and holds a competition for the best cartoon depicting the holocaust, Judaism's darkest hour, and asks Christianity to publish the winning entry. Christianity agrees to do so, and the rivalry instantly transforms into an odd alliance, as blame is redirected to the oldest child. Fascinating behaviour.
As with any family fued, so goes this one. Alliances are formed and broken in an instant. Both the yongest and the oldest are at odds with the middle child, but still vying for their support, to shift the balance of power against the other. Father Abraham remains very disappointed, and is dreaming of a day when he'll be able to see his three children live peacefully, side by side. Who knows, that day may come soon enough, and if it doesn't, he can always propose a family retreat...maybe he'll suggest a hike to Sacrifice Mountain...if he could just remember where he put his knife.
posted by Desiderius1979 @ 2:13 PM
17 Comments:
If one were to bother reading between the lines, one would postulate that Buddhism is the way to go.
Did you intend that to be at least one of the conclusions to be interpreted by your post?
No, not specifically, but that's not to say that there aren't many elements of Buddhism that I admire and I see how the three Abrahamic (western) religions could learn a lot from it.
The main point of the story is very basic, that the three should stop fighting and actually start practicing what they preach (the good things)...cause they don't always. But, if read between the lines, I can see how a proponent of Buddhism could postulate that the story suggests Buddhism is the way to go.
Some religious theorists actually believe Jesus himself applied Buddhist principles to his teachings and his version of Judaism...which was a radical departure from traditional Juadaism, and thus eventually became Christianity. Again, good principles exist, but have they been readily applied by "believers"?! Not really.
The older and the younger child are fervent and resolved in their beliefs and it is admirable. It is out of true love and passion for the Father that their devotion manifests itself not as a religious side-dish, but as the essence of their cultures.
I think that much responsibility was given to the middle child, who controls the world today to a great extent. But he has failed to act as a conduit and re-direct both the older and the younger through a new peaceful route leading to the father’s way. He has failed because he has no authority, his example of integrity is poor.
It's a shame that the middle child became weak, living a dispassionate and in the closet life. No one is willing to die for, fight for, or even speak out publicly to defend the Father's honour! In Western lands, we love things of the world more than peace and truth, more than goodness. Why are Christians so watered down in their devotion? We fly beneath the radar, never really making convictions on platforms that matter. Sure in church we sing loud and pray hard, but in the street, in our work place in our schools, it’s ‘politically incorrect’ to show our devotion.
A Jew or a Muslim would die for God, kill for God, live his life according to God. A Christian will negotiate compromises that will no doubt exploit the situation to their advantage only because God has truly been absent from their agenda since the Crusades!
Christians do not have the moral strength to lead the older and younger child into peace because they have a new god …$$$$$$$ … and a new priority called Power! And there is always room for $-god with war/fighting and the sooner the younger and the older understand who is truly benefiting from all their drama, fighting will be the only practice!
What buddhist principals do you think would make a difference, if applied, to this feuding situation?
"A Jew or a Muslim would die for God, kill for God" ... is that really a good thing?
I realize there is a lot more to what you are saying but I'd like to hear your response to that part before commenting further.
I think in principal the willingness to give up ones life for God is a complete act of love, but not in a suicide bombing misguided kind of way!
I just mean that their devotion runs so deep that their life is worth nothing in defense of God's honour! As far as killing goes, people kill for less honorable reasons everyday ... a murder is a murder, but people keep pushing the buttons treating other people with indignation and then they are shocked when finally they retaliate like the animals they are treated as . Disrespecting beliefs, defiling what others hold as the most sacred thing in the world. They endure and endure and become so angry that the only thing left is to destroy that which persecutes them.
I read somewhere that in Israel, someone wrote in graffitti on a mosque that the Prophet Mohammed is a pig. COME ON!!! ???? I'm a Christian and I wanted to royally kick ass on that matter!
I feel for both the Jewish and Muslim communities ... and you ask if it's a good thing to die or kill for God ... as a Christian, didn't Jesus say, 'No greater love hath a man than to lay his life down for his friend". If this for his friend, what then for his God?
I don't condone violence, but is it not inevitible and even understandible under these circumstances?
I completely understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. However, I just cannot say that I agree.
Jesus may have said that "No greater love hath a man than to lay his life down for his friend" but wasn't he also quoted as saying something along the lines of "when someone slaps you on the cheek, turn and let them slap the other," regardless of how much they hurt you or insulted your beliefs?
I think by simply saying that violence is inevitable you/we are unforunately condoning it.
My opinion, and I stress the my opinion part, is that to truly love God and all of His creations deeply in your heart is complete enough. I don't believe God made us so that we could be walking advertisements for Him and I think we defend Him for our own satisfaction and validation, not His.
Don't get me wrong, I often find myself getting defensive about my religion despite telling myself constantly that it doesn't matter if people believe what or in whom I believe. However, that is something I'm trying to change not intensify in order to show my deep devotion.
I'd really like to think that God wants us to be kind and loving people who take every opportunity to learn about all of His wonders and who make the most out of the gift of life He's given us. I don't want to think He's selfish enough to need us to sacrifice our life for Him.
I believe the willingness to die or kill in the name of love is a human condition and although I have felt it, I don't think it's right.
"I'd really like to think that God wants us to be kind and loving people who take every opportunity to learn about all of His wonders and who make the most out of the gift of life He's given us. I don't want to think He's selfish enough to need us to sacrifice our life for Him"
The God of Abraham is gentle and merciful and kind but he is also a God of wrath and vengeance, he is a jealous God who demands to be the centre of our existence! And rightfully so, it is only by his grace that we so exist.
Christians, tend to forget this facet of God, they forget to fear him, to honour him. They look at the nice bible stories and even forget that Jesus himself was capable of rage. My point is, we should not be so complacent as Christians, God doesn't love us in any luke-warm fashion so why would it be ok for us to regard him with any kind of pacifist emotion.
It's the mark of money and western civilization that dilutes the fervor. Go to poorer countries where all they have on their side is God and it isn't hard to see why they would kill or die for Him.
I guess we have to agree to disagree :)
Way to duke it out...good points all around. I will comment on a few:
annonymous: You seem to be basing many agruments against Christianity on the American/English model of it, which I think is the worst one you could find. Other, real Christian cultures/nations, Catholics in particular, do not practice beliefs quite as watered down...and there is a noticeable difference.
As for Christians seeing their own religious expression as being "politically incorrect" (comment #3)...that again is an American product...they started seeing their religious expression as being politically incorrect, in an effort to not offend the non-Christians in their large nation. It's almost like they sacrificed their faith to please others. Again though, this is not the case everywhere, especially Catholic nations.
I use Catholic instead of Christian, because too many watered down sects/cults have been created in the west in recent times...all calling themselves Christians. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox are the only two original branches of the faith. Most of the modern ones have been created to make it easier to practice, while a few have gone radically in the opposite direction, making practice only possible in a cult-like setting.
Disclaimer: annonymous' jabs at Christianity while letting the other two Abrahamic religions off the hook, caused me to post this slightly pro-Catholic post. I guess they hit a bit of a nerve. Normally, I'm a critic of the Catholic church, because of it's obvious faults, but I will never go against the basic principles and beliefs of the faith, and will defend it when I think attacks on it are unjustified.
Don't worry annonymous, I feel a hint of devil's advocate in your comments, so no offense taken ;)
;)
Way to go boy!
The observations that I have made in the conversation between the three contributors to this debate is that there is a lack of distinction between faith and religion.
Faith is a metaphysical experience that is intangible and unstructured. It admits that we are weak and strong, it thrives on the inconsistencies and contradictions of human nature (hence your back and forth interpretations). But at the end, it states, "we're all in this together". We are striving for a better life, a better existence.
Religion has always been about harnassing faith and structuring it. It sold itself by raising expectations that if you just act this way, wear these clothings, recite these prayers that you will achieve a better life. And people bought it!! Yet the outcome is that it pigeon holes everyone! And allows no room for contradictions or inconsistencies! Totally against human nature.
Ok, so I can hypothesize that this kind of structure was was necessary when we were scattered and nomadic. They needed it to develop relationships with neighbours and thus build a community. The operative word here is: build. Services no longer required. We need something new that could maintain society and it ain't Christianity, Judaism, or Islam!
What we need is something that binds as all, like invading aliens. God, if you love us, send us aliens!
Good point...nothing brings humans together like a universal threat to their survival...yeah, especially an invasion by some damn non-god-believing aliens!
Ok, so you agree with me. And since our perception of aliens is usually that they are more evolved than us (at least in travel and technology)...does that mean we have to let go of this "God" thing in order to evolve? Historically, it makes sense.
First there were many Gods...got rid of them and just made one...now we just need to get rid of the remaining one...the trouble maker.
If it were only that simple. No, I don't fully agree with what you've said above. "God" whatever your definition may be, is just our collective, generic, attempt at understanding the cosmos and life itself (the physical, spiritual and all other dimensions of our world). We cannot abandon the widely accepted notion of God, until we have a full-proof new explanation of the way things are, and because we don't have that yet, it is not the time to fully rid ourselves of the remaining "trouble-maker" as you've put it.
I suppose I can understand that God is an entity to provide us comfort against the unknown. What I dislike is the rules that religion dictates, which I must follow in order to be worthy of that comfort. That's when He turns into the "trouble-maker".
Well I doubt that God made most of those "rules" you speak of. People made those up...people with considerable influence, and told others that God had said that...but did he really? The Gospel of St.Thomas speaks to this very well...and that's why it's existance has been denied, it's importance down-played and it was left out of the Bible, and deemed heresy.
Post a Comment
<< Home