SINS - Creating the "New" Christian Church, Is it a Resurrection or Just Clinging to an Old Habit ?

Back to Spiritually Incorrect Front Page



Creating the "New" Christian Church
Is it a Resurrection or Just Clinging to an Old Habit ?


Crucifixion of Jesus, with Habit NearbyThe resurrection of Jesus Christ may be possible, but not the resurrection of Christianity. There is a great movement among Christian theologians, and they are making desperate efforts. Their very efforts show that they are going to fail. In fact their efforts are ridiculous.

There is one theologian who says, "There is no God, and we have to accept godless Christianity." He knows that it is impossible to prove God to the coming generation; to the young and the fresh mind it is impossible to prove God. And the days of belief are over. It is a scientific age: you must prove, give the evidence; nobody is going to accept something just by your saying it. So he is ready to sacrifice God to save Christianity. What will Christianity be without God?

There is another theologian who is ready to believe that perhaps Jesus is only a myth, he never existed. It is as difficult to prove Jesus' existence as the existence of God, because none of the literature of his time even mentions his name. There is no proof other than those four gospels of his own disciples — they cannot be called proof. This theologian is willing to drop Jesus to save Christianity—but what will Christianity be without God, without Jesus? They are so desperate to save Christianity that they don't see the implications of what they are doing.

Another theologian says there have been no miracles; all miracles are just inventions of the followers. Up to now, for two thousand years, Christianity has depended on the miracles of Jesus. Those were its foundation, the basis on which to prove it a superior religion to any other religion — because Gautam Buddha does not walk on water, Mahavira cannot revive a dead man, Krishna cannot heal the sick just by touching them, Mohammed cannot make wine out of water.

These miracles have been, for two thousand years, the proof of the superiority of Christianity over all religions; otherwise what has Christianity got? But he is ready to drop the miracles because now they are continuously hammered. Nobody is ready to believe in them — they go against the very way things are. And nature does not change its rules, its laws, for anybody; it does not take anybody as an exception. So the contemporary theologian feels embarrassed. He himself knows that it is impossible to prove the miracles. But you don't understand the implication: without miracles Jesus means nothing.

Without miracles Buddha remains the same, because he never did any miracles in the first place. People loved him not for his miracles; people loved him for his clarity of perception, of seeing into the very root of things, of giving insights to people to transform life. Walking on water is simply stupid. Even if you can do it, then too it is not a miracle, it is simply stupidity, because you will remain the same. You will not come out of the water a transformed human being.

Christianity has depended on these miracles in proving its superiority over other religions; in fact those religions are far superior, because they don't depend on such stupid, childish ideas. So there are theologians who are ready to drop all miracles. But if you drop all miracles then Jesus is left naked; you have taken all his clothes, he has nothing to give to the world.

One theologian takes God away, another theologian makes Jesus himself a myth, another theologian takes miracles away, and the fourth theologian takes religion itself away; he wants a "religionless Christianity" — but Christianity has to remain! I don't understand: when you have taken all the contents, why cling to the box? Now even religion has to be taken away because half of humanity is already religionless.

The communists don't believe in religion, and the communists are not only in communist countries; communists are in other countries also. In fact, three-fourths of humanity has already dropped religion. The remaining ones are only formally religious. They are not much disturbed by the idea of taking religion out. But then what remains?

It seems you are clinging just to the label, to the name "Christianity." It is a desperate effort, and stupid too. Why not accept that Christianity is dead? God is dead, miracles are dead, religion is dead, Jesus is no longer born out of a virgin Mary — so what are you saving?

I have been looking into all these theologians who are prominent people in the Christian world. They have taken all the contents; only an empty box... But why carry on this empty box? For what reason? Just an old habit, an old attachment.

Jesus is missing, God is missing, miracles are not there, the Virgin Mary is not there. All that was Christianity is not there; then why are you carrying this empty box? So there is another effort going on, side by side, to fill the box with something. Christian theologians are studying other religions, so as to have something similar. It is going to be an imitation, inauthentic, because it is not their experience. They call it "comparative religion"; in all Christian colleges they study comparative religion.

I asked the professors and the principals of those colleges, "Why should you be worried about other religions? — you have Christianity." But the problem is that they have to fill the box with something, so from other religions they are collecting ideas.

They are studying psychoanalysis. Every Christian preacher has to study psychoanalysis. Now, what does psychoanalysis have to do with religion? But the problem is, what religion used to do was to console people in their misery. Now they don't have that religion at all, so they have to find some contemporary way to console people. And psychoanalysis is a thriving business all around the world; the most highly paid professionals are psychoanalysts. So Christians think, "They must be doing something for people. Let us learn their art and use it to save Christianity." But they don't understand that Freud was against religion, the whole of psychoanalysis is against religion. They cannot use it.

They are studying Karl Marx because the man has something — the idea of equality of human beings. Although he is against religion and against God, he has certain values; those values can be taken.

They are collecting all kinds of things in the box where Christianity used to be. It is so eclectic that it does not make one organic whole. If you look into the box you will get into a madness, because the things they are taking belong to different systems. Within their own systems they have a living quality; outside of those systems they are dead. Somebody's eyes, somebody's hand, somebody's legs, somebody's heart....

And do you think in your box there will come a man, because you have arranged everything that is needed for a man? — hands, head, eyes, heart, everything is there. But it is just nonsense. Those eyes were able to see in an organic unity, in a body; now they cannot see. There is no organic unity, and you cannot bring an organic unity to it.

Christianity is dead.

Their desperate effort to save it simply confirms that it is dead.

It is better to simply get out of the old habit. These are just old habits. I don't know why Christian priests', nuns', bishops' clothes are called habits — I don't know. But one thing I know: just drop the habit! — whatever it means. Just be natural and human.

And it is not only a question of Christianity; the same is the situation with other religions. Man has come of age, and he does not need those old, superstitious religions; he needs a more scientific approach to explore his being. And that will be possible only if he gets rid of the old habits. And they are very dirty, because for thousands of years the same habits have been used by so many people. They are stinking!

Get out of those habits as quickly as possible.

arrow_l.gif (91 bytes) Back to the Original Sin

arrow_d.gif (88 bytes)
The Spiritually Incorrect News Service


Courtesy osho.com
Copyright © 1999 Osho International Foundation

Spiritually Incorrect® is a registered trademark of Osho International Foundation, all rights reserved.