You pose some interesting perspectives and I see why you would opt out of Christianity in favor of Buddhism based on your philosophical foundation. But like Buddhism, Christianity means many different things to many different people. It looks like you took a narrow spectrum of Christian peoples into account for your analysis.
"One the most significant conclusions is that while in a Judeo-Christian world you make a trade with God (Be a good Christian and get Paradise), in Buddhism you work on becoming Buddha."
Most Christians (at least the ones I like) would say that being a good Christian involves a desire to be more Christ-like as they grow and develop.
"Which brings us to the concept of after life. It seems neither logical, nor just to suffer (or be rewarded) for all eternity based on what you did for a short period of time on earth. Would you have behaved the same way if you had been born in the opposite sex? Would a street kid have stolen if he had been born to better and more well off parents?"
I observed an weird argument between Christians and Muslims not too long ago in which the Muslims were arguing for a fig to be the forbidden fruit wherein Christians had promoted an apple.
So the natural question becomes, would God condemn trillians of souls for all of humanity in the fullness of time for the act of one, having tasted an apple or a fig at the center of the most perfect garden of delight imaginable.
I had to ask if this was a serious argument. It certainly seemed so. I asked that we review the texts. It seems that the Christian text actually suggested the phrase 'the fruit of knowledge about good and evil'. The Muslim text had Arabic language that eluded more to a sliding than a falling from grace. When you put these concepts together it actually makes more sense. Human beings have a gut feeling that they shouldn't indulge in lasciviousness and corruption and they instinctively know that something not good will come of it. In addition, we have stories that span time to give us examples, of how being tempted to engage in some 'sin,' will likely lead one from the enjoyment of the 'original' sin to more and more self destructive circumstances.
We can hear about fire, and we can look at fire, but we don't really understand how it can hurt until we reach into the flame. I view the story of falling from grace to be an allegory or parable that warns us not to taste of things we instinctively know are harmful (or have heard about from our guides/parents), once we do we will have knowledge of them but will have fallen from our natural state of goodness and grace. The results seem to be an attitude of enmity for one unto another, helter skelter like, which we then live with and suffer under.
Most Christians learned the story of Eden as children. If they have never revisited that as lucid adults they may never have thought it through with mature minds. I'm pretty sure seekers of truth from all religions are not stuck on whether it was an apple or a fig. Funny, because I know some who are not stuck on it but if you put them in a room of Christians and Muslims they will still argue over it.
I see the whole issue of considering how a fall from grace works as very purposeful. However, lacking the concept of eternity, such purpose becomes meaningless, as it also does not seem logical that we would be driven in our human nature by the need to be righteously human for no consequential reason. So, I'm a believer, one that can find a home in all of the major world views, and one that finds the religious authority from each group in a corrupted state. |
