Replies

"Sanatan Dharma" means "Eternal Truth" in sanskrit. It is what is called "Hinduism" in the West. A part of the Sanatan Dharma is the teaching that different people need different methods of teachings, based on their personalities and abilities. But what is never disagreed about is that there is only one goal - one God. This is not pantheism - each of the many "gods" of Hinduism represent methods of personal worship used to bring a person to the one God - and this is openly and uniformly admitted.

Thus there are three main "paths" to God in the Sanatan Dharma - action, wisdom, and devotion. From these, there are finer and finer branches that represent deeper and deepr focus.

So, from the Hindu point of view, the difference between "faith alone" and taking refuge in saints and sacraments is merely one of a person's chosen path. Jesus even said in Matthew 13:11-13, "To you [disciples] it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand."

In other words, Jesus spoke to the people in parables because that's what worked with them - that's what they could understand. If He spoke to them plainly, as He did to the disciples, they wouldn't understand. And worse, they'd get confused and misunderstand, and therefore "from the one who has not [understanding], even what [understanding]he has will be taken away." But to the disciples, He spoke plainly, and He no doubt spoke to them without words, through direct spiritual experience.

But Jesus never, ever said one was superior to the other, that one mode of learning should be accepted and the others destroyed. And also, think about what a parable accomplishes - it is a story many people hear and each takes away from it what it says to them. Does Jesus belabor his parables with strict instructions as to what they mean? No - His power is that when a person contemplates one of His parables, he reaches out to them and gives them the understanding they need through it.

That difference in need for the form of spiritual teachings and practice is what the Sanatan Dharma acknowledges. One is not better or worse than another, as long as all are focused on reaching God, and all are respected. But the Sanatan Dharma also teaches that one must be extremely careful in how one treats another's path. For if the other person is genuinely trying to reach God, one who interferes with them will receive damage to their own path, and their own ability to open up to God's love. Again, Jesus spoke of this when he said in Matthew 18:6 "If anyone causes one of these little ones - those who believe in me - to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."

And look at the author of this article. After stating how "Self-professed Christians have used [sola fide] as an excuse to not care for the disadvantaged, to engage in profane sexual activity, etc. – the list goes on and on" - in other words, completely gutting the entire legitimacy of every Protestant as a Christian in the entire world, he then hypocritically states "If someone takes away the eternal significance of our actions, they rob us of any real purpose: we all just become random, faceless, unimportant beings."

There are two modes of thought on this kind of behavior - either the author knows this is exactly what he just did, and is hypocritically declaring his victims have done what he just did to them in order to hide his actions against them through cognitive dissonance, or he has become so blind to his own hypocrisy that he can no longer see it (personally, I believe there's a third mode of sociopathy that combines both of these explanations).

In any event, erasing the "eternal significance of [someone's] actions... robbing [them] of any real purpose" is profoundly hateful, and this driving emotion is confirmed by the final statement of the author: "Now, you know why I hate it."

And yet, though the hate is admitted, its reason is not. The real reason for hate is that Christianity has devolved into not merely separate beliefs about the teachings of Jesus - but the dependency of each mode of Christianity to exist alone, and to negate, destroy or defeat any other beliefs about the teachings of Jesus. This isn't about faith - it's about politics. It's about getting enough votes for your religion to "beat" the other religions, and gain the most world power through the number of your believers. And it's wrong.

And I believe God is punishing Christians, and American Christians especially, because of this nonsense. Yes, punish - the steady march of socialism and now parts of communism is punishment. The election of an openly communist president is a punishment. The destruction of our school systems and the encroachment of murderous sharia law is an punishment. The stomping of our economy through the manipulations of corporate communism is a punishment.

People love to refer to Jesus as "infinite." But they also love to hate - literally hate, in Jesus's name - another person who actually believes that Jesus, in all of His infinitude, might be reaching out to them in a different way. Not in an unAmerican way. Not in a lawless way. Not in an abusive or murderous way. Just differently then them. Infinitely powerful Jesus couldn't and wouldn't do such a thing. So - hate.

And as these Christians argue and fight, the liberals and Leftists and treacherous muslims and illegal Mexicans and communists and Democrats and RINOs laugh, and laugh, and laugh, and laugh, and laugh.

And Jesus weeps.