Focus Must Be on God, Not Self

Chuck means well, but he's just slightly missing the point. And anyone who would argue religious semantics with him is missing the point, as well.

What's the point?

Using a dog-training metaphor, if a puppy's mind is trained using fear as a motivation, you might get a LOYAL dog, but you're also most likely going to get an aggressive dog, merely reflecting the fear and ignorance of its master.

If, on the other hand, a puppy's mind is trained by a wise "pack leader" who applies strong leadership and loving guidance, you will get a well-behaved, loving, and loyal dog.

There is nothing to be so afraid of in life as to justify teaching through avoidance and fear instead of through approach and love. What the fearful don't understand is that any time we teach using fear as our motivation, we are also reinforcng that same fear in ourselves. There has to be a way to RETRAIN our minds to learn the value of peace over conflict, forgiveness over holding grievances, and love over fear.

Consider this:

Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God.

Simple, yet very powerful.
And it can be learned by anyone who truly wants to find the peace of God.

"Always and only at the last possible moment."
-- Buckminster Fuller

Just to get a last word in... :o)

In reference to my earlier post about the passage in Luke: since 'among' and 'within' were the same word to the Greek author/transcribers of Luke, how can we know exactly how to interpret it now? Particularly since our modern worldview is so fundamentally different.

Also in regards to the previous post, if the bible contradicts itself, how can we interpret it "wholly"?

Oh, and my understanding of Revelation is that the author was expecting (as did Paul) for his prophesies to happen soon and that they were written to specific church communities, so we often interpret them out of context. 2000+ years later definitely ain't 'soon'.

Ahmed,

Yeah, I saw Jesus walking down the street the other day. He says hi. :) just kidding. But to clarify something there is No two versions of that verse. The greek word for among and within are the same but if you refer that word among other scripture it clearly shows that the word should be translated to "among." Yes, your right in saying that the original scriptures have been translated numerous times but indeed like in any language there are descriptive words that do not have a complete translation into english. But if you verify the meaning by looking at the original language it all makes sense.

Also, if you believe in Adam you must believe that we are born into sin because of Adam. You speak of freewill and that freewill has caused us to sin seperating us from God. Your right in saying that we need our egos to die because how can we fully understand God unless we humble ourselves to recognize that we cannot be God. But, the Kindom of Heaven is not within us unless we believe in His Son. Yep, Adam really screwed it up for all of us. We would have had it so much easier. I hope that apple was worth it.

So, just to let you know you can't believe in parts of the Bible that you like and discredit the ones you don't for the sake of your comfort. Either believe in it wholly or don't believe at all.

Revelation 22:18-19

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

I see from the above postings two versions of Luke 17:21 ; 1) 'The kingdom of God is within you', and 2) 'The kingdom of God is in your midst'. So here is the problem when we have no real true version of the original script that Jesus actually said coz a) here it is reported by Luke and not Jesus himself and b) it is a trnaslation of a tralslation of what was said by Luke. So, as one can see we have at least two versions and there is a tremedous difference between the two. As for me I truly believe that the Kingdom of God lies within each person as a right of birth for we are all children of Adam and as such we have a rightful claim to our inheritance, namely to belong to The One and Only God and seek spiritual connection with Him/Her. We can only do that by surrendering our freewill back to Him, for it was He who gave it to us in the first place. Ego and God can not exist in the same heart. One of them must die and since God can not die then it must be the Ego that must perish. When we learn to do so, then we can see The Truth, not before. But we can philosophise about it a lot!! Here is a question: Have you actually seen Jesus?

JWS,

Just for your information on the correct translation of Luke 17:20-21.

[21] Among you: the Greek preposition translated as among can also be translated as "within." In the light of other statements in Luke's gospel about the presence of the kingdom (see Luke 10:9, 11; 11:20) "among" is to be preferred.

Renee has it right. Why would Jesus say that the Pharisees had the Kingdom of Heaven "within" them if they were not believers in Jesus? It makes more sense with "among" and is also consistent with Lukes other statements about the Kindom of Heaven.

Luke

I wish to respond to a couple of your comments previously. While I was not involved in any previous posts, I ask that you would extend me the courtesy of reading my response. I understand that there is no such thing as a theological/religious vacuum where information presented has absolutely no slant/bias. Therefore I offer the following "disclaimer": This response is written from a Christian, who maintains a Christian/Biblical worldview, and holds a classical high view of the Holy Scriptures. Thank you.

One statement you said was "I just wonder how one justifies what is for oneself and what is for God. Ultimately, isn't everything for oneself if it isn't in selfless service?"

Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a truly altruistic action. Whether it's giving food to the poor, exercising for good health, assisting a neighbor with yard work, there is always some sort of personal gain. As the Bible states, "no one does good" (Psalm 14:1-3, Romans 3:10-12) But, those who are "in Christ" are made into a new creation. (2 Corinthians 5:17) Upon this happening, the ability to live for Christ is found. How does one do this? The Bible says "whatever you do, do all to the glory of God" (1 Corinthians 10:31) I believe, from statements made in the context of this verse, that one way to do this is to give thanks to God for the ability to do certain things. This is how I would offer to you that one can jog or dance for Christ. To realize that He is the source of your ability to perform a particular act, and to thank Him for that.

Another question you asked was " Isn't the purpose of belief in Jesus to avoid an eternity in Hell?"

My short response to that would be no. The following is my best attempt to briefly explain why. As stated previously, mere belief in Jesus is not enough for avoidance of hell, so I am going to assume the statement was worded "Isn't the purpose of being a Christian to avoid an eternity in Hell?" Please pardon me if you feel this is an inaccurate reworking. Some may view calling themselves a Christian similar to a monopoly "get out of jail free" card, only they receive a "get out of hell free" card. I believe anyone who believes in the reality of hell as described in the Bible would say they do not want to be there. However, there is much more to being a Christian. In the Bible, Jesus says "I came that they may have life and have it abundantly." (John 10:10) If one were a follower of Jesus only to get out of hell, then they would not see the love of Jesus until they died. A life as a follower of Christ is a full life. It is one with hope, a life that we can know for CERTAIN that better days are ahead. The verse mentioned above regarding abundant life comes within the context of Jesus declaring his provision and watchcare of those who are His followers. These are the benefits of a Christian life. While I can not speak for the veracity of another's claims regarding their relationship with Christ, I will say that anyone who claims to be a Christian merely so they can avoid hell, does not have a proper understanding of the life, here and now, that Jesus can offer.

I am going to stop now because I am afraid I have written too much. I appreciate you taking the time to read this, and if there is any other questions I will gladly do my absolute best to offer an answer. God bless!

--- Andrew ---

"The issue is not techniques used for spiritual attainment; the issue is the object of those practices. For the Christian, at least, the total aim of prayer, fasting, meditation, solitude, reflection, and even self-mortification is to draw closer to the Creator God of the universe, the one true God. It is to focus not on self but on Him.

The Christian lives not by mysticism, but by God’s revealed truth. In this sense, therefore, Eastern practices would be wholly contrary to Christian spiritual exercises."

Mr. Colson, if the premise were correct, you might have a point.

However, it appears that ignorance of a subject is not any impediment to your expression of an opinion on it.

Sure, some people engage in meditation to relax or to better understand themselves. Some engage in yoga for exercise and some because they believe that being respectful to one's body is a part of what God wants. Most of what people do when connected to religion is to express their faith -- usually that is faith in God, not themselves.

Why do you feel compelled to utter completely baseless nonsense?

The fact is that Christianity is a religion unto itself and each denomination within it has particular characteristics. Therefore, someone who is practising Islam or Judaism is doing something just as inimical to Christianity as someone who practices yoga or meditation as a religious exercise (assuming they do that).

It is astounding that you have no shame about parading your ignorance.

if you beleive in any gods or goddesses, you are simply a freaking idiot. has it ever crossed any of your feeble minds that the only reason you beleive what you do (about religion) is that your parents brainwashed you to beleive it?!? if you had been born in Mecca, do you really think you would be a Christian? how is is possible that in this day and time anyone still beleives in gods? in a few hundred years (if this world still exists), man will look back on this time as we look back on the ancient Greeks, and think, 'well, they just didn't know any better'. GROW UP PEOPLE !!! STOP LYING to your children and stop re-brainwashing each other (church) ! whether you agree with me or not, mark my words -- the only way to stop terrorism is to reeducate; the only way to reeducate is to stop the brainwashing, which means, all religios schools must be shut down. Christian, Jew, Muslim, ALL OF THEM!! this is the only way. if this does not happen, the current world war (III) we are in will last forever!! sad; the goal of most religion seems to be to save the world, yet they are doing the opposite!!! YOU FREAKING IDIOTS!! BELEIVE IN YOURSELVES, NOT MAKE-BELEIVE DIETYS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Brambleton,

I'm interested in why you think I need a hobby.

Please explain.

Any road* I've got one: bashing Xians in these threads.

Best wishes.

* Yorkshire-speak for anyway.

I believe you could say that the Eastern Spiritual practices have the goal of having the individual self realize identity with the supreme SELF and merge with that supreme SELF which is eternal Love, Bliss, and Wisdom.

The Abrahamic religions do not accept this possible unity and insist that God and Man are different and separate; the attainment is to align with God and do as God would do as proper actions with the reward being the attainment of eternal bliss by being in the direct presense of God.

The practices may have similar methodologies, but the goals are not the same at all! Each must choose the path to the choosen goal.

"For the Christian, at least, the total aim of prayer, fasting, meditation, solitude, reflection, and even self-mortification is to draw closer to the Creator God of the universe, the one true God. It is to focus not on self but on Him."

So are you doing this for your benefit, or for God's? If it is for your benefit, then I dont see how the focus is not the Self? If it is for God's, dont you think it is rather arrogant to believe that God needs us humans to "draw closer" to him?

Just a thought, what would the discussion be if the question was turned around. What if the question had been "Can a Buddhist, Muslim or Jew embrace Christian spiritual practices -- Bible study, prayer, worship, for example -- and remain true to the laws of the Allah or yourself? How tolerant do you think the panelist would be? Or of the people posting here? Everyone is so eager to have us Christians give up our fundamental beliefs and just go with the flow they forget what they are asking of us. Reversing the question points out how difficult and untrue to our faith the compromise is.

JMAC.

Take me for example I can not see myself where I am today spiritually without looking inward. Martial Arts led to meditation which led to spiritual study which led me to where I am today. Christianity never inspired me the way other things have. If it were not for inward reflection I would be less caring, loving, aware and compassionate than I am today. I would not have evolved.

Today I look at many religions and teachers for guidance. The Christians have even taught me a few things 

Whether focusing on God or self is useful depends on your belief. If you believe that you are separate from God then you would look outside yourself. If you believe that you and God are not separate but all part of the whole then looking inward may serve you better.

So JMAC is there nothing more to be learned than what is in the Bible? (Or religious writing of one’s choice.) That is a complete and accurate account of God and the metaphysical and spiritual realms. That’s it! A few pages from history?

We have more detailed, accurate and in depth information on Medicine, physics, biology that we have discovered. That is infinitely more information that the grand truth of creation spirit and God who is everything?

I have a hard time believing that. I think we have so much more to learn than what is in all of our religious writings. That does not rendered religious teachings obsolete. They may merely be incomplete. That’s my belief.

I would love to hear your thoughts?

peace.

Luke wrote:

If the experience presented itself, I would (and have) tried to view it as an act of God - but I can always prove otherwise, so I wholeheartedly believe that he does not exist.

To respond (just for the sake of musing of course):

Why is the picture one paints of God is one who involves Himself in one's life only occasionally rather than constantly? Why is the picture one paints of God as one whose existence is proved when no other thing can explain it? A God of the gaps so to speak?

I think much of the framing of the Whether-God-exists debate lies in preconceived notions of what God is. If a preconceived notion is inconsistent with who God is, then doesnt that require a re-examination of the arguments (for and against)?

I realized that it sounds strange to say I am an atheist but that I am open for God to prove me wrong, but I don't mean to contradict myself. If the experience presented itself, I would (and have) tried to view it as an act of God - but I can always prove otherwise, so I wholeheartedly believe that he does not exist.

An issue that I am having is the talk of "if you know Christ, you know God and you know love". This is difficult to understand. I have never experienced divine intervention, or anything of the sort. I am open and willing for God to prove me wrong, but he does not. No pastor's words have ever touched me, and the idea of a spiritual experience is particularly elusive. I don't love most of the people I see everyday, so how could I love someone I've never met, who has no contact with me? I was saved when I was very young, but I have no idea what "saving" means. I was open and willing and believed in God, but I felt nothing. On the contrary, I see many ways that God is not particularly loving, although I hear the statement that it is man that is evil, not God. Isn't indifference worse than hate? It is said that he who hates fervently must once have loved deeply. I am not attempting to attack your faith or discredit it, but I have heard these words so many times, and I have to believe that you believe them, but cannot understand the metaphysical experience of which you speak. That is why in some ways - I am "doomed" (although I rather enjoy it) to be an atheist.

Luke wrote:
Isn't the purpose of belief in Jesus to avoid an eternity in Hell?

Many Christians believe in Christ only for the exact above reason. Unfortunately, solely believing in Christ is not enough. That is Step 1. , Knowing Christ and resisting sin is what is needed. When you know Christ you know God and you know love. When you love God then you will be taken into the kingdom of Heaven.

All Christian denominations believe in the above but differ on the ways to know and express God's love.

If you only believe in Christ but dont love him and value the personal relationship between Him and you, why would you even want to spend an eternity with Him in Heaven. As for the suffering in Hell, my personal belief is that physical suffereing described in Revelations may be symbolic since we will have no bodies but will be spirit. I think the suffering will be the detachment of oneself from God's love with the full knowledge of that detachment. For an interesting personal view on Hell read The Great Divorce by CS Lewis.

Brambleton I understand what you are saying to some degree (as much as an atheist could, I suppose). I just wonder how one justifies what is for oneself and what is for God. Ultimately, isn't everything for oneself if it isn't in selfless service? Isn't the purpose of belief in Jesus to avoid an eternity in Hell? I think what I am getting at is that ultimately Christianity is more about the avoidance of Hell - so doesn't that make it kind of selfish because it's purpose is for oneself to avoid something unpleasant, or is there something I am missing? I used to be very religious, but I cannot remember why I was other than an absolute fear of an eternity in fire.

to terra:

Interesting you mention the topic of truth and the exchange between Pilate and Jesus:

"You are a king, then!" said Pilate.
Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."

Boy, has the quality of questions on this forum reached a new low.

How can anyone claim to know God? Isn't that a perspective? Isn't that a personal evaluation? So Paul had a vision and from then on spoke for Jesus...He never met the man. People have visions all day long, they do not call it The Truth and make a religion out of it.They usually go to therapy.

Jesus said to split wood and there he would be...well in my perspective that makes him the God of Vegetation.

Why limit god into a box...can not all people experience godhood in their own perspective and be right. Truth is realative. The old question, What is truth? That is what Pilate asked Jesus...now I would expect if jesus was in fact who his followers later said he was, he knew the truth, but he kept silent.

But the silence of Jesus does not keep his followers from telling it to everyone they meet, as though they had the absolute truth. But there is no absolute truth, there is only realative truths, and we need to do the best we can with them. Dogmatism hurts the real discovery and questing for truth, there is too wide a range of possibilities. There is truth in all religions...like a necklace of pearls...its the thread that runs through them all that is the truth.

terra

"Someone claims I have green eyes while others claim that I have brown eyes . Assuming I do have green eyes then the first person has a monopoly on truth, and correctly so."

Bobby, that analogy is not valid for claims about the supernatural. There is no way to verify such claims with one's senses. There is no way to scientifically test such claims. So how can there be such a thing as truth when talking about the supernatural? One is certainly entitled to believe in a single god or many gods or no god, but such belief does not constitute truth or fact for other people.

It is astonishing how the most smugly self-certain posters on these blogs are invariably the ones who just know that if there is an absolute truth it is not found in Christian doctrine.

"Within you" is a possible translation for the passage in Luke but "among you" or "in your midst" are better because they fit the context. The healings and signs of the Kingdom of God were performed right under the noses of thsoe looking for some other sign.

The Gospel of Thomas was certainly not the oldest gospel and any claims for its accuracy are risible. It contains mostly aphorisms, some of which appear authentic (and can be found in the canonical gospels) and others that are typical of second and third century gnostic thought.

Roy,

Could you explain to me how identifying something as contrary to a particular opinion is intolerant? Webster's defines the term tolerate as "to allow the existence, presence, practice, or act of without prohibition or hindrance; permit." Please tell the class what Mr. Colson said, specifically, that indicates that any Eastern spiritual practice should be prohibited.

Luke,

Ok, I gotcha. I've never practiced yoga or done any research on it so I probably shouldn't comment. I think of being "closer to God" in the same fashion as my wife. Let's say I'm out of town at a conference Mon-Thurs. Friday I go to work then play in a doubleheader softball game that night. Saturday I take the kids to whichever sports practices they have and then I'm in a golf tournament. Sunday I go to church and then drive a couple of hours to my brother's house and help him build an addition. Are any of these activities inherently wrong or sinful? No, of course not. But the week has passed by and I've spent absolutely no meaningful time with my wife. Our intimacy level is a Zilch. They same can be said about God. It is imperative that we find time to listen to Him and hear the plans that He has for us. That is, we need to be in constant intimacy with Christ.

Roy wrote, "More intolerant ignorant blather from a Christian extremist."

Doesn't sound too tolerant either champ.

*Eastern practices would be wholly contrary to Christian spiritual exercises* More intolerant ignorant blather from a Christian extremist.

I should have specified - I was referring to JMAC's comment "But to those of us who are Christians, He is everything to us and anything that diminishes that or takes our focus off of Him and onto ourselves (i.e. yoga) is wrong." I was just asking since yoga is not necessarily a spiritual practice - does that mean that these other things (i.e. video games) are wrong as well? How do you determine what is bringing you closer to Christ and what is pulling you away? Can you go jogging for Christ or go jogging against Christ? Dance for Christ and dance against Christ?

Aren't the true words of Jesus go something like this, from the gospel of St. Thomas, the oldest most accurate:

"Jesus said the kingdom of God is inside you, and all around you, split a piece of wood and I am there, lift a stone, and you will find me..."

Truth is, how can a religion that didn't even involve the America's when written get absorbed by so many? ARe people that desparate for something better? BLha blah,

Tonio wrote:

JMac, no religion has a monopoly on truth.

That may seem like a moderate position, but what if a certain religion explains the TRUTH itself. Truth is what is real, not what is hypothetical or what people deem it should be.

Although one can argue that some elements of different religions may have value in society, at the end of the day either none of the religions are correct in what they describe as the nature of God OR only one of them is. 0 or 1, the binary code of truth.

For example, if Christianity's truth declares that God loved the world that He sacrificed His son Jesus and resurrected Him to defeat sin and give us a chance at eternal salvation THEN it cannot be reconciled with the truth according to Islam that claims Jesus was a mere prophet and not the sole reason for our reconciliation with God

I respectfully disagree with Tonio. Either God does not exist or only one religion does have a monopoly on the truth of God and His relationship with us.

Truth is a description of reality, what IS. someone claims I have green eyes while others claim that I have brown eyes . Assuming I do have green eyes then the first person has a monopoly on truth, and correctly so.

God is not mercurial, He is what He is.

Luke,

The question posed to the panel has to do with embracing sprititual practices of other theologies. Cooking, reading and playing video games does not fall into that realm.

Norrie,

You really need a hobby. You stated, "These are speculative and perhaps nonexistent objects of the Christian meditator's attention." They are only nonexistent to those who have no faith and don't believe.

EFav,

Prayer and meditation are two of the most influential means for me to grow closer to Christ.

Janelle
I'm happy for you that the experience of the Holy Spirit is so readily accessible to you. That isn't true for everyone, so isn't it a good thing that there is a range of methods to attain that daily communion you seem to take for granted? I am not being sarcastic. Some people really do need help to slow down and listen to His voice.

If you only focus on Christ and not yourself, does that mean you can't work out, cook food you enjoy, read a book you are interested in, play a video game, or the like?

Studying Scripture and prayer is how we "attain a better understanding of Christ." I'm a Christian, but I wouldn't agree with "attaining an awareness of Christ." Understanding is wanting to learn and know about him, whereas we are already aware of him, so to speak. If the Holy Spirit dwells in us, that is where our awareness of Christ comes from.

I've got to say, Colson often surprises me with his open-mindedness.

E Favorite
Good question. I would also like to know what is the preferred alternative for Christians to build awareness and understanding. I think Alm and Tonio are definitely headed in the right direction...

JMac, no religion has a monopoly on truth. You are certainly entitled to to pursue a "better understanding and awareness of Christ." But your personal religious beliefs have no bearing on anyone else. That goes for everyone's personal beliefs, including my own.

Jmac, I'd be interested to hear how Christians, or you personally, go about ataining a better understanding and awareness of Christ.

Sigh.

Tonio says:
"While I'm not a Buddhist, I don't understand what the problem would be with attempting to 'attain higher states of personal perfection and awareness.'"

The problem is that as a Christian we don't aim for a higher personal awareness, our goal is a better understanding and awareness of Christ. For those of you who are not Christians, you won't agree, you won't understand, and that makes sense because Christ doesn't mean anything to you.

But to those of us who are Christians, He is everything to us and anything that diminishes that or takes our focus off of Him and onto ourselves (i.e. yoga) is wrong. You can disagree, you probably will, but truth is truth no matter how you debate it. That will never change.

Sounds like just another version of certain Christians calling things and people they don't understand 'selfish' because they don't involve dependence on their dogma.

The point of many spiritual disciplines such as he decries is in fact to improve health and focus, the *better* to exercise compassion and awareness of others, and, yes, in some cases, Gods.

In most religions, that's a *good* thing.

In fact, a great lot of this stuff was expressly-developed for the purpose of seeing *through* the self, and all the confusions of mind.

What's to be afraid of there, for someone who say he has 'all the answers?' People seeing clearly and with less fear?

Oh. Could be.

Just stop portraying people who don't happen to worship at your altars and how you want as "selfish," there, sir.

Ahhh, biblical interpretation is a slippery slope. I did not misquote: the NIV version I have uses "within". Can a modernist, such as yourself (or myself), really know what Jesus was saying when he spoke metaphorically? I'll have to defer to biblical historians to put it in historical context, especially since I am not fluent in Greek or Hebrew.

Besides, is there really a difference between within and among us?

JWS misquoted Luke 17:21
"nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or 'There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst." - NASB

Jesus was telling the Pharisees that the kingdom of God was in their "midst" not within themselves. He was referring to Himself. God will not be found inside us until we invite Him in through saving faith.

I practice regular meditation focusing on the Name of Jesus Christ as my mantra. It is inevitable that by so becoming absorbed in Christ that we would attain attributes of Christ. I think St. Paul said as much. And many who deny mysticism, I believe misunderstand what mystical states involve, which is a heightened awareness of Divinity, both within and without.

From Luke 17:20-21...

"Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

So contrary to Mr. Colson's assertions and according to Jesus, the kingom of God IS *within* us....

I think the Hindu/Buddists just may have gotten it right all along... (well, at least as far as this issue is concerned).

I have a problem with Chucky boy's philosophy that it relies on God, and not within oneself.
Why not? When was the last time you ever depended on yourself for anything? when was the last time you asked God for help? Why ask someone that isn't going to answer? The answers my friend come from within.
Ever notice how athletes thank God when they score or win a big game? Why not thank God when they lose also? Seems like God had a good reason for them to lose. Focus on your own inner strength and abilities. It will help you through more in life than getting down on your knees and begging someone else for help. Crutches only help you get back on your feet. After you are healed, you have to walk on your own.

While I'm not a Buddhist, I don't understand what the problem would be with attempting to "attain higher states of personal perfection and awareness."

My issue with Colson's post is with his claims of "one true God" and "God's revealed truth." I may be reading him incorrectly, but he seems to imply that humans have no moral right to follow religions other than Christianity.

"The Christian lives not by mysticism, but by God’s revealed truth. In this sense, therefore, Eastern practices would be wholly contrary to Christian spiritual exercises."

Buddhist practices are not mystical. They are intended to advance a human's understanding of reality, including the reality and actions of the mind.

Christian meditation seems more mystical to me, because "in the case of the Christian, it is to focus his every thought and affection on his love for the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God made flesh in Jesus."

These are speculative and perhaps nonexistent objects of the Christian meditator's attention, while the Buddhist meditator's attention is focused on what is, on reality.