[MF] faith, hope and love

[Muzikhed at aol.com]

In response to Kevin, 

dmb  said:
OK. We're all concerned with our lives. Hard to argue  with that. But again, 
what's with the idea of "something...that has the  power to sustain our 
being"? Something tells me he's not just talking  about a nice sandwich or 
any other kind of lunch. Are we talking about God  here or what? In that 
case, does "honor and respect" really mean "worship  and obey"? And while the 
emotional appeal of a meaningful and purposeful  life isn't always a bad 
thing, I think that ultimately, if we're trying to  talk about spirituality 
or whatever, even the desire for purpose and  meaning is a trap insofar as it 
is a desire. And conversely, as static  creatures, we fear meaninglessness. I 
mean, in terms of enlightenment,  this sort of quasi-theological talk is 
basically aggrandizing the very  thing that is to be overcome. It feeds the 
ego and bolsters the  conventional self while enlightenment is said to be 
just about the  opposite.

I realize this stuff means something to you, Kevin, and  you're just trying 
to spread the joy. But as I understand it, "faith" is  not a good thing. At 
least not Fowlers quasi-fascist, spiritually retarded  version of it.

Thanks.
dmb



Ted writes:
Clap.  Thank you David.  I am with you, and well said, meaning  your whole 
post. 
It seems that, as with the Intelligent Design issue, there has been some  
move by Christian leaders to extract God during the initial phase of the  sales 
pitch.  Could it be they found it turns people off before they can  get them 
hooked (emotionally committed)?  Better to start with  something that is vague 
and undefined that can sustain our being, something  awesome and powerful.   Is 
the old "Love Bomb" being re-marketed with  more faith-based finesse?
 
Clearly my longer post (earlier today) about a real Christian  community 
demonstrates the case of what David described as
      
"... a recipe for spiritual death on a personal level and fascism on  the 
collective level. Its 
all about loyalty and attachments, the good guys  and the bad guys and seems 
to construe "faith" as a matter of picking sides  in the world of static 
values. And insofar as fear and desire are the cause  of all suffering, its 
not very Zen either. Fowlers words are real fine and  pretty on the surface, 
but it makes me shudder to see what's under all that  talk about purpose and 
meaning. This guy has the talent to be a cult  leader..."
 
Indeed.  Thanks for the reminder that the Buddhists see  loyalty, attachment, 
fear, and desire as the sources of  suffering.   Right on.   
 
My [MF] post echos are delayed many hours, sorry if they arrive out of  
sequence.

- Ted