If Jesus suddenly came to earth, would he approve of modern Christianity?

The question could of course, and with good aim be carried over to other religions ...

Would Jesus approve of Buddhism, of Hinduism, of Islam, the Bahai Faith, Theosophy, the Christian Scientists, etc.

Likewise, one might ask what Buddha thinks of modern events, religions, politics, movements and ideologies, etc. Or Krishna, or Mohammed.

I think the bullshit begins to really show, however, if we are willing to talk about these men - and women [Hypatia, Joan of Arc, Teresa of Avila] ... and what they taught, yet continue to speak only in terms of hypotheticals, and great big proverbial as-if's.

The only as-if that I have ever been taught which makes GOOD SENSE is the one whereby we are supposed to ACT as IF we are actually, already, disciples ... meaning pure of heart, noble of character, worthy of spiritual guidance, inspiration and literal, Divine CONTACT.

The rest ... seems like a whole buncha footnote. At least at times. ;)
 
It's been awhile since one of my mammoth posts. Forewarned is four-armed! Or something like that ... :p

I kind of like Charles Leadbeater's chart, as it is verified by his own Teacher, and other sources both within and serving the spiritual Hierarchy. It's very clear about things.

cwl-ch2.gif

cwl-h2.gif

The color-coding itself may or may not be mine. I think it is, or I may have simply added the text commentary. But I will include CWL's original chart, for clarity.

The four stages of spiritual progress leading up to the Fifth or Adept Initiation, are not included in this chart, but are included in the book Masters and the Path, and are given in the Christian motif as The Birth of the Christ in the human heart, The Baptism or Purification of the lower man, The Transfiguration of the entire personality nature [the lower man] ... and finally, The Crucifixion or Renunciation experience - which leads to the direct Incarnation of the Divine Principles within Man.

The Pali and Sanskrit terminology can be given, and each conveys the same Wisdom in another motif, with another set of imagery. For example, The Birth of the Christ is the equal of Stream-Entrant, and the Transfiguration is called Hamsa, or Swan, while the Arhat or Great Swan [Paramahamsa] is the stage which follows.

Many Christians might find parts of this chart strange. Usually Christ and Jesus are equated as one individual, yet this is not the Theosophical presentation, and many esotericists do believe that they are two individuals. The chart shows the relationship between the Christ, the Buddha, and Jesus as all of these beings are now, rather than thousands of years ago.

The challenge, which esotericists do invite people to consider, regardless as to their religious background - or none - is the idea that `Christ awareness' is a potential within us all, as St. Paul was well aware, and as he indicated in his many teachings ... especially where he was addressing the people of Ephesus, or of Corinth, and others with a background in the Mystery Traditions.

Thus you have, in Ephesians 4:13, a reminder and a direct calling forth of this recognition, by and of and mystically within the Christ-Being - a LIVING, REAL and PRESENT Being, and not a dead, murdered, long-gone abstraction ... since either the Christ is real and present, and is accessible TO us all, or else - with no point of contact, no such fiction exists at all, being no more than another chimera of our sub-conscious, like Santa Claus, or perhaps the Easter Bunny.

As someone with a Theosophical background, yet remaining OPEN to further illumination, insight, and even direct Teachings from Jesus Himself - via some of His Followers ... as well as other expressions of the Wisdom Tradition, I can say that I have seen dozens of examples where either this Great One, the Galilean Master, has indeed made His thoughts plain [sharing them, for us to consider] ... or else where a DIRECT experience of, with and in the pleasant company of the Adept of Galilee has been attested to.

It is also possible to demonstrate where, and that, the Christ Himself is a being even more progressed along the path of evolution than Jesus, yet this can become confusing, as even when we show a common set of experiences between Jesus, Paul, the Magi, some of the Greek philosophers and Teachers of the Eastern Traditions, the tendency is to become lost in the differences and variation in Teaching techniques, rather than to consider that Christ is the Lord of Lords, yet that surely we are fortunate if we happen to know any of these other Lords - for we would do well, if one of them happens to be OUR Teacher, to attend well [to] his or her instruction.

It simply amazes me, sometimes, that we lose track of the point altogether, and so I know that while charts do not appeal much to some of us, neither did the Buddha, holding up that lone, single Flower way back when, succeed in reaching every single member of his greater audience - with the exact same message, or in the exact same way.

The Glory, as I believe I have indeed experienced - and still experience it - is that when a Bodhisattva [Messiah, Christ, World Teacher, Saoshyant, Imam Mahdi, Kalki Avatara] speaks, or Teaches, all those present do hear, do have an understanding, and ARE reached, on whatever level, or in whatever way is most uplifting and elevating of their own awareness, and evocative of the Christ within, or `Buddha-nature' - Bodhichitta. Thus, at the Flower Sermon, the Buddha - likewise - had a similar impact on us all, whoever we may have been in that incarnation, present and accounted for [even if I myself do not think I was present for that one, much as I might have wanted to be, had I known about it].

One explanation for the many, many individuals who come into contact with their Teacher again in this lifetime, is that they were present with him, or her, some number of lifetimes ago - as when a great and world-changing Work was being performed. This applies, as elsewhere, to the Initiate Jesus, except that if indeed He was the vessel of the Christ, in ways both literal, mystical and occult, then the result is that a *tremendous* energy was made to move through our world - truly the expression DIRECT and incarnate of the 2nd Aspect of the Logos, both Planetary AND Solar. That, I am fairly certain, is something Planet-changing ... as we continue to WITNESS.

Buddha, combined with the impact and effect of Moses, can be said to have brought the LIGHT - of the Holy Spirit, the 3rd Aspect - into definite impact, or in fact INCARNATION ... on our planet, many hundreds of years prior (even thousands). That culmination made the work of the Christ much easier, yet we notice - Christ did not succeed, if we assume that his mission was somehow to suddenly, once-and-for-all make `little Christs' of us all. The mission was cut short, and Humanity would not have it. But I do believe the current cycle will allow Him to fulfill His Work, wihch is God's Work, and which is - also, I hope we therefore realize - OUR WORK. There can be no greater service than to Serve one's fellow Man [person] with Intelligent LOVE. Dying daily, as St. Paul attested, is part of this experience.

Yet the Christ reappears (into public awareness - as He has *never* left us, even while Buddhists think of the Bodhisattva as existing in Tushita Heaven, not unlike the Christian teaching `seated at the right hand of the Father,' for where else would the very `Love of God' reside?) ... the Christ reappears - DAILY - and increasingly, so much more fully, even, in the modern world, given our progression toward globalism and Unity, such that this Appearance will hopefully be more widely witnessed, and PARTICIPATED IN, yet we shall see and experience a New Factor - as even the Christ or Buddha did not formerly express or incarnate to such a degree.

And this is what the Christian calls `the Will of the Father,' as God does - indeed - emanate, potentially incarnate and obviously HAVE - because as the 1st Aspect the Logos IS - this WILL. We cannot say we know what it is, or even be much certain at all about it, although I would venture to suggest that God's Plan does NOT involve or include the endless, insane, destructive cycles of murder and mayhem, rampant environmental devastation and materialism, apathy, ignorance, oppression, separateness, or hatred.

Rather, it is safe to say that God's Plan DOES involve and include the increasing expression of INTELLIGENT LOVE, whereby Humanity IS ABLE to put the work of the Buddha and also of the Christ, both preparatory work in one sense - helping pave the way for Humanity's future evolution - into direct, PRACTICAL USEFULNESS. Do not think that this involves you, or me, or ANY of us being swept away into some highest heaven, or Nirvana, or even the sudden and complete transformation of our planet into a veritable Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, overnight. For even the Christ, as also His Brother the Buddha before Him, has already taught you, taught US, taught me ... that such a Divine Kingdom - is already here, and that yes, we CAN ALREADY access it, manifest it, or LIVE it, as some have said. This does not mean waiting until we are dead, and this, every earnest Christian and Buddhist has already - probably - long realized.

So that's my box for the moment. And it should well be obvious by now, that while you don't have to believe one word of it ... it still, remains the `Gospel' - as well as I know it, or have experienced, and/or can testify to it.

I challenge you to prove me wrong - and here I mean on a friendly basis - for I care not (believe you me) to quibble over one word or even subtle point - out of all I might say. I have no more expertise than anyone, or for certain you can believe that if I do, it is not provided for fluff and fancy, meant for idle curiosity, or intended as a show of anything other - than an ardent, steadfast FAITH. And this, as also whatever gnosis may be mine, shall never diminish, nor ever wear out.

Thus I am a Christian, and I am a Buddhist, and I am a Hindu, and I am an atheist, and I am a gnostic, and I am a warlock, and I am a mystic, and I am an occultist ... but I do not dabble in practical magick, or the so-called occult arts, and I am not interested in psychic development, for it is the `Gifts of the Spirit' which we are once-blessed, twice-blessed, TRIPLY-blessed to receive or to attain ... and these, not because I am `told' but because I KNOW, I can say, do maintain, or remain, between all of our births, into - through - and beyond 2nd Birth, as even the Baptism and Transfiguration will but Seal the Gifts into our spiritual Being, where they are InHERENT, if presently Latent, and needing only awakening and development by ourselves in order to unfold and express (`The Lord helps the one ... that helps, him or herself,' just as verily, the Teacher does appear when the student is ready).

And yes, I have no current membership, but I do try to be a good Theosopher, or student of the Wisdom of God - even while 1000-armed Avalokiteshvara once told me a secret about the Brahmarandra/Sahasrara ... which both Siva and Yahweh kind of hinted was spot-on. Christ dwells within every one of us, and the proof - as always - will be in the pudding. Isn't that so, Mr. Cosby? ;)

Be a good tree, and watch how the people will Flock to land within your branches, within Strawberry Fields, and pick your good fruits. Be as fully a good follower of St. Francis, of Assisi, and equally see how even the animals will attend your every word, knowing as well as you do your every intention, and every movement. Saints are not born; they are made. Christ taught this. Buddha taught this. And although I am no saint, I will go to my grave defending the Good Honor of every single Teacher I have had the privilege to know, or to read, or to study, or to seek to emulate. While I cannot, and will not, seek to explain away or excuse either my own errors, or those of others, I do know that Forgiveness is an expression of God's Highest Law, and yes, I know that we too can seek to emulate, and to FORGIVE. Learn how to do this, forgiving both self and every other, and you will find yourself in the closest, and truest interpersonal relationship with both God and all of God's many Servants (Servers of every type) - that you had ever dreamed possible, or imagined.

The New World, the New Era, the New Age is here. We are already part of it, and for those with a fraction of a shadow of a fart of a hint of a doubt, I encourage you to LIVE like it, and to prove it to and for yourselves, first. Only thus might you hope to share that with even ONE other person. And take it from me, I do know what I'm talking about.

Do I look enlightened to you? Or even close to Buddha-material, or Bodhi-{sattva}-stuff [chitta]? Probably not, but I will insist, that what's in my head, heart and spirit are not quite what some call fluff. As cloudlike as I can manage at times, this much is true, but I'm only one person, seeking to play my own part ... and I believe this is also true for *you*?

Namaskar/God Bless
 
Here again, I challenge the hypothetical nature of the discussion ...

Suppose Jesus is here. As was put aptly in a lyric by the band `The The':
"If the real Jesus Christ were to stand up today
He'd be gunned down cold by the C.I.A."
Most of us can probably acknowledge that under ordinary conditions, this is absolutely so.

Therefore, and especially if you have Faith - meaning even just a little bit, nevermind a good bunch - therefore, surely it is prudent to know that, I mean, to believe that OF COURSE Jesus is completely aware of what is going on on our planet, in both general brushstroke, as well as - when necessary - the finest of detail. Here, I mean exactly what I say [type].

Wouldn't it be more worthwhile to ask, and not simply as a hypothetical, since Jesus does know what takes place on our Earth, and in every Nation, as well as within every Human heart ...

What DOES Jesus think of modern Christianity? And what IS He doing about it? And then, further, depending on our answer to these two questions, what are WE willing and able to do to change that (assuming we need to or should do anything)?

Those few questions appear to me to have far more poignancy than the original `What If' ... but then, I'd like to see Nick, Thomas, wil, and others weigh in and make a comment or two, if inclined. :)

Taijasi, I think you have forgotten that Jesus was a Jew whose Faith was Judaism and Judaism does not adopt the Christian doctrine of resurrection. According to Isaiah 26:14; II Sam. 12:23 and Job 10:21, no one once dead will ever return. Throughout this post of yours above, you use the present tense as if Jesus lives right now and is aware of what is going on. Jesus has been dead for about 2,000 years and the only evidence to the contrary is faith which is akin to a false theory.
y.
 
I don't think so because Jesus would soon find out that Christians were using him to preach against his own Faith which was Judaism. Let alone the millions of his brethren who were murdered throughout History through pogroms, blood libels, Crusades, Inquisition and the Holocaust.

Justice is hardly murder. A very fanatical view.
Pogroms against Bolshevik-supporting revolutionaries who wished to overthrow the Russian Government.
Not a libel and not protected by the good (different era).
Crusades and Inquisition were against Islam and its supporters.
and the Holocaust was a unscientific fabrication.

More like the Churches would disapprove of Jesus and Magdalene and his attending lap dance clubs. Morality and Ethics?
 
"...the Holocaust was a unscientific fabrication."

--> Do you mean the Holocaust was perpetrated by unscientific people, or the idea of the Holocaust is nothing more than a fabrication?

Or are you just being sarcastic?
 
If you know Jesus, or the Christ, you know that [Jesus, Christ] lives. If you do not know this, you do not know Jesus. Period. End of story. Sometimes, being dogmatic may be the only way to suggest to some people that they are really clueless, regardless as to how educated - or well-read - they may be.

I heartily recommend, Shibbolet, that you get to know Jesus. What you think you know, you do not. I assure you that this is the case, and will have no further dialogue with someone so closed-minded, and closed-hearted. Good luck on your search ... although for someone who has things laid out so cut-and-dried, what - I would ask - could you possibly be searching for?

Not to search, in this case, implies you know [something]. But Friend, I can see quite plainly already, that you do NOT know what you think you know, and you are going to get NOWHERE with people on this forum. Others have told you this, often, and yet you persist. You pretend, I suppose, or else you have simply satisfied yourself with some head learning which - devoid of heart KNOWLEDGE - is really - quite useless. Please keep seeking. Until then, your views on Jesus - either historical or subjective - are really quite empty, and useless, for the rest of us. You are spitting in the wind (I'm being polite, here). And me?

I'm way upwind from you, brother. WAY upwind.

Namaskar
 
Justice is hardly murder. A very fanatical view.
Pogroms against Bolshevik-supporting revolutionaries who wished to overthrow the Russian Government.
Not a libel and not protected by the good (different era).
Crusades and Inquisition were against Islam and its supporters.
and the Holocaust was a unscientific fabrication.

More like the Churches would disapprove of Jesus and Magdalene and his attending lap dance clubs. Morality and Ethics?

I don't care but in some countries you could be arrested for denying the Holocaust.
 
If you know Jesus, or the Christ, you know that [Jesus, Christ] lives. If you do not know this, you do not know Jesus. Period. End of story. Sometimes, being dogmatic may be the only way to suggest to some people that they are really clueless, regardless as to how educated - or well-read - they may be.

See what I mean now? You are using a Jew to preach against his Faith which was Judaism. Jesus has been dead of 2,000 years.

I heartily recommend, Shibbolet, that you get to know Jesus. What you think you know, you do not. I assure you that this is the case, and will have no further dialogue with someone so closed-minded, and closed-hearted.

I don't believe you have got frustrated because I can't agree with your attempts at Replacement Theology. Is that what Interfaith is?

Please keep seeking. Until then, your views on Jesus - either historical or subjective - are really quite empty, and useless, for the rest of us. You are spitting in the wind (I'm being polite, here). And me?

Jews are not interested in proselytizing but you can't persuade a Jew by using other Jews to work against his Faith.

I'm way upwind from you, brother. WAY upwind.

Not good for your health. Take a pill of patience and interfaith understanding and you will feel better tomorrow morning.
 
Hypothetically of course, if Jesus suddenly came to earth, he would first wonder about the founder of the Christian sect because when he died there were only three sects of Judaism: The Sect of the Pharisees, that of the Sadducees and that of the Essenes. He would also wonder about the Sect of the Nazarenes which part was destroyed by the Romans in the BarKochba war of 134 ACE and the rest joined the Christian Sect of Paul. (Acts 11:26) He would read the gospel of Paul and wonder about this Greek also called Jesus but akin to a Greek demigod which is the son of a god with an earthly woman. Well, it is enough to go berserk, he would say, and would prefer to head back to the grave before the Romans caught him again. He would not even waste his time to research further and learn that the Romans were no more. And the hypothesis was over.

I agree except I like Paul and consider him to have been entirely orthodox.
 
I don't care but in some countries you could be arrested for denying the Holocaust.

The Holocaust is important since it occurs in a Country mostly comprised of nominal Catholics and especially German Lutherans...

...and indirectly or directly casting aspersion upon their theologies.
 
I agree except I like Paul and consider him to have been entirely orthodox.

As Christianity was concerned, not Judaism. And BTW, he was very orthodox indeed but as Replacement Theology was concerned.
 
The Holocaust is important since it occurs in a Country mostly comprised of nominal Catholics and especially German Lutherans...

...and indirectly or directly casting aspersion upon their theologies.

Was Pope Pius XI just a nominal Catholic? I don't think so as he signed with Hitler a Concordat never to interfere with the Nazi policy of Jewish extermination in exchange for preserving the states of the Church.
 
It's easy to forget that Christianity didn't exist in Jesus' lifetime. While the saying "upon this rock I will found my church" (Matthew 16:18) is attributed to Jesus in conversation with the apostle Peter, Jesus as described in the gospels doesn't seem to have left any detailed prescriptions for this new religion. Even after a Christian movement was ongoing, I doubt hardly anyone from back then would have recognized the medieval Catholic church, much less the religion's many modern forms.

Institutionalization may have drawn on the Jewish idea of worship centered arount one temple, adapted to model successful Roman organizational techniques of delegated authority. But uniting the independent congregations, a task undertaken beginning in the 2nd century, took a long time, as different powerful bishops from Rome, Antioch, Carthage, and Alexandria vied for control.
 
Hi Hatshepsut –
... Jesus as described in the gospels doesn't seem to have left any detailed prescriptions for this new religion.
Well He detailed the new covenant on which the church is founded. He detailed the new 'Mysteries' in His name, and He spoke at some length about the life and what is expected of the faithful. In the ancient churches, the doctrines are founded on Scripture.

Even after a Christian movement was ongoing, I doubt hardly anyone from back then would have recognized the medieval Catholic church, much less the religion's many modern forms.
But then we might assume that Our Lord has insight that sees beyond the forms. He knows His flock.

I've studied the oldest liturgies – the earliest elements dating to perhaps 60AD – and they are in line with the traditional practice of the ancient denominations.

The same can be said of early catechesis – the Didache dates between 50-150AD and again, the catechumen raised on the Didache would not find him or herself at odds with the ancient churches.

It's after the Reformation that things start to go off the rails.

If by 'modern Christianity' we mean the proliferation of denominations in the last couple of centuries, the 'prosperity gospel' et al, then no, He would not approve, but that's not to say He would condemn those 'of good heart', no matter what denomination, nor indeed, no matter their religion.
 
Thanks for calling my attention to Didache. It was probably a mistake to name a specific branch of Christianity in my last post, as this can give the impression that I wish to attack Christians with whom I disagree. The issue I had wanted to explore was the difficulty of reconstructing anything about Jesus himself or about the early church. Some American viewpoints resolve text-critical problems by stating that God wrote the Bible directly into American English word for word, his spirit moving the hands of original authors and translators. I don’t debate with persons holding that view since most of them seem irrevocably committed to it, yet few biblical scholars hold it today. In other words, the biblical materials and related classics have come down to us from multiple traditions and a lengthy redaction process. This applies also to Didache, a text known only since MS discovery in 1873.

Johnathan Draper (The Didache in Modern Research, 1996, p. 245) points out estimates of composition date ranging from 50-70 AD (Auden) to late 2nd or 3rd century (R.H. Connolly), and argues alongside C.N. Jefford that Didache 11 in particular, as a community rule, reflects a process of trial and error instead of single authorship (pp. 341-342). Alan Garrow (2003, review in Biblica 86(3), p. 438) contends the gospel of Matthew shows text dependence on Didache rather than the other way around as most other analysts think. I have no idea, yet it’s clear that the earliest Christian groups did not all possess identical scripture sets, cf. the Johannine tradition attested in Egypt ca. 125 AD.

Of course, I’m not proposing correct resolution for any of these issues, which lie beyond my expertise. But just perusing the text itself reveals a bevy of apparent early habits contrasting with ours, many things we don’t do on a regular basis: We no longer fast. We no longer receive travelling Christians into our homes, declaring them false prophets if they ask for money or fail to depart before three days’ time, yet allowing some to stay on as paid craftsmen. While we baptize, only those American literalists now prefer the river as venue. And other things. ;)

We also shouldn’t forget that much similarity of tradition we see when we read a text like Didache is an artifact of translation. We must use modern words to render ancient words, with the glosses and meanings in context necessarily remaining highly uncertain for any ancient culture, where we cannot consult living speakers of the languages in question. Didache itself probably did not represent episcopal ruling, but only the opinion of the local congregations first keeping the text. If it was indeed adopted later on a broader scale and used as source for other Christian writings, not much evidence of possible quotation survives.

I think we underestimate the vast gulf of knowledge and culture that separates us from the worlds of 2000 years ago, and that if given time machines, neither we nor they would easily recognize things seen in a trip to the other’s lands.

Regards, :)
 
It's easy to forget that Christianity didn't exist in Jesus' lifetime. While the saying "upon this rock I will found my church" (Matthew 16:18) is attributed to Jesus in conversation with the apostle Peter, Jesus as described in the gospels doesn't seem to have left any detailed prescriptions for this new religion. Even after a Christian movement was ongoing, I doubt hardly anyone from back then would have recognized the medieval Catholic church, much less the religion's many modern forms.

Institutionalization may have drawn on the Jewish idea of worship centered arount one temple, adapted to model successful Roman organizational techniques of delegated authority. But uniting the independent congregations, a task undertaken beginning in the 2nd century, took a long time, as different powerful bishops from Rome, Antioch, Carthage, and Alexandria vied for control.

The idea of Jesus as the Messiah and son of God was fabricated by Paul when he started his ministry about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. (II Tim. 2:8; Acts 9:20) Therefore, the saying "upon the rock" was attributed to him by the Hellenists, former disciples of Paul who wrote the gospels about 50+ years after Jesus had died and, Jesus never even dreamed that the NT would ever rise.
 
Back
Top