It's a weird thing I've noticed. They all like "Christ the Eternal Tao," and I've seen multiple Orthodox post about the Tao Te Ching on this board. I remember one time being in a thread where an Orthodox flag posted about the Tao Te Ching, and I responded with something like "I've seen you before, Orthodox Taoposter" (something along those lines) and he responded with something like "you're mistaken, I've never posted about the Tao before" and then ANOTHER Orthodox poster came in saying he's posted about the Tao before and I was probably thinking of him. (This all happened maybe a few months ago).
I finished reading David Bentley Hart's New Testament, he says the only Bible that comes close to properly rendering "logos" (word in English Bibles) is a Chinese translation which renders it "Tao."
I was listening to Hank Hanegraaff the Bible Answer Man's conversion story to Eastern Orthodoxy, he says one of the big things that inspired him to convert was an evangelical trip to China where he saw the love they had for Christ.
This all is doubly weird for me, because I'm kinda a Chinaboo and I'm considering converting to Eastern Orthodoxy (but not one as a result of the other). It's a really weird coincidence for me. Does liking China make you like the Eastern Orthodox, or does being Eastern Orthodox make you like China? It seems to go both ways, Hank Hanegraaff likes Orthodoxy because of China, and David Bentley Hart likes China because of Orthodoxy. I just like the two separately, neither one impacted my view. I can't speak of these Orthodox Taoposters, I don't know what order they came to it.
What's going on?
Why are modern Orthodox such Chinaboos?
most likely due to the fact that everyone you interact with on this message board is autistic, but besides that, i can't say i'm familiar with any extra-ordinary china love. i don't really have an opinion besides pray for the faithful there.
A woman who is a catechumen in my parish is an ex-Taoist and still talks about it (and about China) a lot. You might be onto something.
I've literally never heard "Christ the Eternal Tao" or anything else related about Tao from any Orthodox Christian, so I don't know what are you on about.
I think its a few things coming together. From my experience Orthodox more than other denoms discus the origins of other religions and the concept of spermatikos logos. I'm a little hesitant in comparison to some other orthos, but I do think that Toaism is one of the religions where it is easier to see hints of this, which is why it gets the most attention. The other aspect is that Father Seraphim Rose's works have had a very large effect on internet Orthodoxy along with the works of those who followed after him. Christ The Eternal Tao is own of those works so it has prominence, and Rose studied Taoism in quite some depth in his pre-Christian life, so many are very curious how it affected him. Finally in the book there is actually quite a bit of pages dedicated to Orthodox theology and uncreated light. This topic is really deep enough that it shouldn't be spoken of loosely on the internet, but recently people have done the exact opposite and have had long cringy dialogues about it, so this appeals to that side of internet Orthodoxy also.
I'm not opposed to it and as someone who read the Toa Te Ching while I was studying world religions, before reading Christ The Eternal Tao, I do think there's more there than with most religions, but saying things like it's closer to the truth then protestantism or some other nonsense is retarded
This is stuff I’ve heard before though. Christ the Eternal Tao is a book on Taoism by an Orthodox writer. I’ve seen it recommended here by Orthodox posters
I used to be a Buddhist before converting to Orthodoxy, so OP, you might have some point.
As for why, I don't know.
Story time?
Seriously though im curious cause i've heard that father Rosa was hindu/buddhist, before converting to orthodoxy. So, i don't quite get it but ima have to get his books, and if you're willing got a personal story to go with that?
My parents were non-practicing Christians. Or at least had been raised that way. They had me baptized to placate my dad's parents, but never took us to church or did anything religious.
I ended up becoming an atheist as a teenager pretty much by default. The whole time, I was looking for answers, but really just digging deeper into philosophy never provided them. I got deep into Nietzsche, then Schopenhauer.
My last year of college, I picked up a copy of Reign of Quantity by Rene Guenon. That changed everything. It's hard to explain, but before that, I assumed that materialism and empiricism was the only legitimate way of explaining reality. Physics and metaphysics were the same thing. After, the concept of metaphysics made sense to me.
I read everything I could from Guenon, and later the other Perennial Traditionalists. Evola's Doctrine of Awakening convinced me that inspired me to find esoteric knowledge for myself.
I'm not entirely sure why I ended up going from there to Buddhism. Initially I got involved in both Raja Yoga, which is a meditation practice tied to the Advaita tradition of Hinduism, and simultaneously became involved in Tibetan Buddhism. I guess Guenon’s dismissal of Christianity initially made me think there wasn’t much there. And I had zero intention of going Sufi like he did. So it was Eastern woo or bust.
Lots of Westerners think (wrongly) that Buddhism is non theistic navel gazing. It really isn’t, but that’s another matter. Tibetan Buddhism is emphatically different. The Buddha’s philosophy was grafted on to the native religion, Bön. So there’s a layer of shamanism that underlies a lot of the practices. Meditation often involves mantras dedicated to particular deities, or hours long offering sessions to the same. The tradition holds that the mantras become efficacious when they’re empowered by a lama who provides them to a student.
I was involved in that for about two years. I think there are two issues that came up more than anything else. First, it’s hard for Westerners, me included, to really grasp some of the underlying concepts. We have too strong of a sense of self to really think the self is illusory like Buddhism contends. And don’t even get me started with an idea like Sunyata. Even if you’re coming to it with a blank slate and take it seriously (which 90% of White Buddhists really don’t), it’s hard to wrap your mind around it.
The second is that it’s really uncomfortable from a moral standpoint. I tend to assume that good and evil are ontologically real. Not really the case with Buddhism. Good action matters of course, but only on a personal level. And because there’s not really a good sense of what is evil, some really dark stuff gets mixed in. So you eventually realize that the most powerful deities are wrathful beings like Yamantaka or Palden Lhamo. I got increasingly uncomfortable the deeper I got in to it.
I came across Nihilism by Seraphim Rose’s books on accident. He had been mentioned as close to the Perennial Traditionalists and I thought he might be able to provide an alternative path. So I decided, why not try Orthodoxy?
I think the first Divine Liturgy I went to at an Orthodox church was the first time I realized that I was not searching for *a* truth, but *the* truth. It was as powerful of a spiritual experience as I had seen with the Buddhists, but the feeling was totally different. No sense of discomfort or unease. When I came home that day, I prayed to God for the first time in my entire life. I didn’t immediately decide to convert, but from that point, I came to the realization that Christianity was true. After considering Catholicism and studying the theology, I settled on Orthodoxy.
Very interesting, i'd always held faith me personally, but in past i always had issue with the old testament. Like in high school i'd always thought that believing in the old testament was partially intellectual, and social suicide. Which im starting to overcome on the social issue, and still working the the intellectual right now.
But, when reading my apologetic, this really hit me recently and i might make this into a plaque as a reminder to the virtue of humbleness.
*If Jesus is who he claims to be (and remember, no leader of any other major religion has even pretended to be God), as my Creator he rightfully deserves my allegiance, obedience, and worship.*
I think that's all of us as teenagers, user. The explanation is pretty easy, I think, teenagers are sponges, they don't think for themselves, even though they think they do, ergo, daddy issues because school tells them their parents are old fashioned.
Good read overall mate. Eastern doctrines are weird; I get where you're coming from with Sunyata. It's spooky stuff, I've gone within before, finding what feels like a deep, black lake and diving in there. Tough to maintain, have to force yourself into it, but deuce if it's not an entire new world to explore. Also tough as deuce to re-enter, impossible if you're relapsing on porn.
You could call me a perennial traditionalist and I am an eastern Catholic and also very familiar with Daoism and Buddhism. Daoism talks about the manifestation of the Unnamable Name and is pretty similar to Platonic Christianity, which Eastern Christianity basically is.
You might be onto something seriously legitimate. I think it is because some people are naturally drawn to mystical, energetic, theosis-oriented traditions, and Chinese religion and Eastern Orthodoxy are both like that.
Western Latin Catholicism, with its rigid dogmas and highly nitpicky metaphysics, is fairly far away from this. Protestantism, with its sentimentalism and literalism, is also not at all like mysticism. So the only option you have left would be Eastern Orthodoxy (or Eastern Catholicism).
Yes, i've noticed this to. From listening to my studies from jay dyer, and just reading the orthodox study bible. That in a metaphysical world. The idea of the divine, of being a holy creation comes into a logical conclusion. For instance idols! Even the very simple nature of painting an idol of the saints, or Jesus Christ is completely different in nature on the metaphysical, philosophical, and dogma in the west compared to the east, no wonder people take up materialism.
Yes, I think the material realism of Thomas Aquinas played a big role in modern day materialism. Western Europe is Aristotle-land, and Eastern Europe is Plato-land.
He was a Mystic
I'm very familiar with his works. He has a lot of good metaphysics. Doesn't change the fact that his approach is very easy to transform into materialism. And also don't change the fact that his remembered legacy on the Catholic church is different from his body of philosophy.
Does 道 really apply? Would 理 be a fit for logos?
The book is written by Hieromonk Damascene, who was a student of Hieromonk Seraphim Rose.
Personally, I became familiarized with Taoism while studying Freemasonry and Traditionalists like Guenon before I had even heard of Orthodoxy. Fr Seraphim also studied the Traditionalists before becoming Orthodox. I didn't know there was a phenomenon of other Orthodox 'chinaboos.' Like I said, I was into Taoism beforehand, but Lao Tzu always fit the 'virtuous pagan' bill for me, and I feel as if he's religiously compatible in the same way as Plato.
Looking at and you can see the common threads here.
That's an interesting description. Tell me, what do you think of the embedded video?
Pretty good movie. I loved the soundtrack.
o shit dood. yuo have opbened my eyes. I am orthogs and— yu'll never guess— I'm folowing a chinese anglican on twitter dot com.
I don't hold the common view that Satan and his demons spread out all over the world creating all the other religions. As in any system, satanic influence can corrupt these at all levels. Ultimately I believe a great many (though certainly not all) of these religious orders were genuine but necessarily imperfect attempts to reach divine understanding. To that extent I believe certain people who have understood the importance of not being of the world, of being selfless and compassionate will also receive salvation. They will see the glory of Christ on the day of judgement and immediately understand. For these people their compassion and hunger for divine love will make their reconciliation with God easy.
Now I can hear the proddies screech "But then what was the worth of Jesus' sacrifice!". I ask, could their be a more cynical and simple-minded question as this? In Christ we already have the perfect example, the purifying light of absolute virtue and love. Protestants and Catholics alike would want to reduce this spiritual contemplation to the acquisition of some information on a page. To intellectualize the passion as most Christians do, is to entirely diminish its true significance. Those who are capable of knowing the living God have this in in common: the recognition of the absolute integrity of the living God (yes, even in his mysterious absence) to the spiritual perfection of the soul. Why would someone, a Christian, who has walked with the Lord, who has his perfect example in mind and in heart ever turn away to chase exotic beliefs? Why would someone who has known the world intimately, who lives in the midst of satanic influence jeopardize their soul in this way? Yes, some unfortunately, have had to live without the name and example of Christ and we must pray that their hearts are not hardened against the Lord. But of those, many have desperately called upon his influence. For those Christians who think otherwise, understand that salvation is not something you can attain by merely reading a book and observing a few ceremonies.
I was hoping for your opinion on that scene in particular actually but I'm glad you liked the movie.
What? I have never met another orthodox person in my life who says anything like that at all. OP, you must be interacting with some weird people or something.
Because slavs have mongol genes.
I actually had to google who that was
I don't know how smart you can be if your religious preoccupations are so legalistic you'll do anything to geographically cut people off from any opportunity of salvation. You are nothing but a bureaucrat and a coward!
I recant this statement. I had a powerful experience in which I learned the truth. Before I had my thoughts turned to the world. I looked at salvation as a numbers game. But dear friends its not true. But what else isn't true is that you can go on sinning or living worldly while holding one false doctrine or another. Those who follow after the narrow way are rare. You wont be saved by reading The Bible nor by any sacraments nor church doctrine. You must be moved by the holy spirit. Jesus bless you.
I appreciate how Evola is much more compatible with Orthodoxy than with Catholicism/Protestantism. From a Spenglerist perspective, if any part of Europe is to have a future, it will be both far-right and mystical, which is yet another argument that Orthodoxy is the only right path.
I believe it's mostly a western thing. Since many on the west abandon their Christianity in search of something more spiritual, they often get involved with eastern religions. But many of them come back to Christianity after they discover Orthodoxy.
As a Greek Orthodox, i haven't got any encounters with Christians admiring eastern philosophy. Their man-oriented mysticism is very shallow compared to ours anyway.