Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Christianity as a religion
All religions have their ups and downs, and Buddhism is no exception. From my friends, I've learned a great deal about the Christian view on Buddhism. We hardly talk about religion so it's not anything like evangelization and I've only heard good things from them about Buddhism. I know that there are many people who aren't so open minded so to get both sides of the story, I would like to hear another Buddhist's perspective on Christianity
0
Comments
What is his religion? Judaism? The reformed version of Judasim? A belief system of faith in things without evidence in order to go to heaven and avoid hell?
What the crap is Christianity.. really??
I have a feeling I don't like it.
You can learn the basics of Christianity even if you only read the Wikipedia entry about it. Of course, you can go much deeper into it. It may be the most written about religion in the world.
And I think a more reasonable approach to religions other than your own is not to "not like" the religion, but rather to "not like" how some in that religion use their religion.
I am new go easy on new!
My Zen teacher once observed, "For the first four or five years (of practice), belief and hope are necessary. After that, they are not so necessary." Some people spend their whole lives enamored by the golden calf of hope and belief. It's a pity, but I think it is true. What then was my teacher suggesting? To my mind, he was suggesting that experience trumps belief. When you know something, there is no need to waste time believing it. It is through an actual-factual practice that experience is gained and the necessity of belief dwindles.
So ... belief and hope as a springboard for serious investigation strikes me as OK. But as a lifelong nesting place it strikes me as being on a par with stabbing yourself in the eye with a pencil.
She has some beliefs that don't mesh with mine, like being pro-life and not believing in sex outside of marriage. But we've come to accept that we're different and that these differences don't stop us being friends - indeed, they add to the friendship. Jesus was born a Jew.
Also, isn't Buddhism in some ways a belief system of faith in things without evidence in order to avoid rebirth as a hell being? We have no actual empirical PROOF that Buddha became 'enlightened' in the exact way in which Buddhists define enlightenment. Like Christians, we have a lot of writings about things that happened thousands of years ago and it is our choice to believe in them or not. Like Christians can't ask Jesus, we can't ask Buddha and so we have to give it all the benefit of the doubt to some extent.
Be that as it may, I think the key point is to judge the teachings, rather than those parts of the religion that cannot be proved. Of course, I think that is just as true with Christianity. After all, probably no one has seen scientific proof of almost anything we discuss. It's all anecdotal. But, we can interpret the validity of wisdom, and that's where the real value is.
I'm happy to take any heat that comes my way as a result of my post. Heat, cold, criticism, praise...it's all good, isn't it?
Jesus taught his dispels that there is a hell if they do not receive him as the son of god.
When Jesus let the people think that he was the messiah he was refuted by his own faith and crucified because he broke their creator god's man written laws.
The result: The crusades.
The inquisition.
The creedist fear of hell.
Fact: Zion teaches hate.
Fact: No body went to war for a Buddha. There is no hell for those who question a Buddha, in fact, inquiry is taught. The Buddha teaches bliss, mindfulness as a blessing supreme, and simplicity as the source to being. The Buddha taught that there are fruits are of contemplation in the here now, which precludes the attachment of trying to attain the unattainable view of creator god; still, The Buddha welcomes the three jewels to be incorporated in all religions, regardless of blind faith, because the Buddha taught selflessness.
Both the Jewish god and the Christian god openly express their literal hatred against religions who subscribe to images before them. They have openly expressed that there will be no marrying into different beliefs. Their god is the "I am."
Comparatively, Buddhism and Christianity may teach a lovingness; but, two different concepts.
One is selfless acceptance and the practice loving kindness and compassion. The other, obedient love and tolerance or "suffer the retribution of my will. The other Kamma.
The blind faith tenant does not bode well, at all. It never really did. The Christians that you know say good things about Buddhism, but their doctrines teach otherwise.
Namaste
First, as far as I am aware, you are correct that there have never been major battles "in the name of Buddha". That does not mean, however, that Buddhist countries have been any less war-like. Study the history of a Buddhist country like Thailand, and you will find frequent wars throughout its history, and even just a year ago it had protests that erupted into anarchy that were the worst since 1767, and it was another example of when hundreds of people simply "disappeared" by faithful Buddhists. Again, I realize that is different than fighting "in the name of Buddha", but Buddhist societies (including Sri Lanka, as another example) are not always peaceful societies.
Second, in all fairness, I think one has to differentiate between:
Old Testament Christianity versus New Testament Christianity.
Third, what I would call "blind faith" is present in Buddhism in many places. The various heavens and hells. The qeustion about whether or not the Dhamma -- although never recorded in writing in Buddha's time -- is actually what Buddha taught after hundreds of years of oral transmissions by dozens of followers.
Fourth, go to many mainstream Buddhist temples in Thailand and throughout Southeast Asia and see the MANY graphic depictions of people suffering in various Buddhist hells.
My conclusion is not that one religion is better than another, but that each has conflicting images within its structure. And also, that you and I don't KNOW what the ultimate truths are.
Nice guy, still friends.
Are you guys familiar with Elaine Pagel? She is a historian who studies Christianity (more the gnostic variety). Her analysis seems to point that Jesus's viewpoints were more in line with buddhism in many ways.
Also, it is worth looking at The Mythmaker (http://www.amazon.com/Mythmaker-Paul-Invention-Christianity/dp/0062505858). It basically builds a case that Jesus was a political activist for the Jews and the story of his life was massaged to suit Paul's (Saul's) own motivations. It is a good quick read that really casts some light on that part of history.
Doctrine is an event that happened. Disciples of Christ wrote the new testament and quoted his word. All the same the disciples of the Buddha did the same. Is what they said truth? That calls for individual inquiry.
In contrast, there is no doctrine where the Buddha claims to be a being to go forth and fight for. There is no doctrine of the Buddha that says to slay a "worldling." There is no doctrine that claims the Buddha to be a god that created hell; however, there are all of these claims and more in new testament doctrine and of course old testament doctrine.
Fact: There is no Old Testament Christianity.
Fact: There is only new testament Christianity.
Fact: Old testament is comprised of scripts of the Talmud, which is a Jewish Book of Laws and Lineage, and it was written by various scribes of Hebrew tribes; where as, the New testament was written by the 12 disciples of the Christ. Most Jewish will not subscribe to the New Testament; but, Christians subscribe to both Testaments.
Where Both of these compare, is that Both the Christian God and Jewish God are both self proclaimed gods and are the same; the only difference, one created Seoul (null and void) as retribution for in the after life and the other created a endless lake of fire (hell) as a retribution in the after life.
The Buddha never created any of that. There is a great difference in meaning here. Look up the etymology of the word hell. You'll find that it is not derived from neither a Tibetan nor Pali word, etc. Moreover, that kind of retribution is the one beings make for their selves, by means of attachments to cravings, that lead towards ill will. It is not a retribution for not worshiping and accepting a Buddha as god into your life.
People go to war because there is a ruler of it. Buddha is a teacher of peace. One is spiritual the other is political. Two totally different intentions.
However, it is agreeable that all religions have their flaws and neither religion is better than the other. "IMO," religion as a whole is a fundamental flaw to humanity that deals harm to us as a species. It is the great epic example of the fetters, which mean to be broken, both lower and higher.
Namaste
So, many Christians, even the fundamentalists, often have a sub-conscious view of the inherent goodness of Buddhism and (most) Buddhists.
The Christians subscribe to the creation "myth" written in Genius and by their faith believe it to be real fact. The Christians also subscribe to the 10 commandments. The Christians also pay reference to the exodus, judges, the story of Jobe, the story of Lot and Ruth, all of which strongly encouraged mass genocide, plaguing, and raping by the will of the god of Israel, the very god that they pray to in the name of Christ. All of which is old testament that the Christians show reference to during congregation gatherings. All of which teaches that war is blessed and glorious when t is in the name of god in christ's name.
The results of this blind faith is catastrophic, even today.
Namaste
Yes, Christians subscribe pretty much to the Ten Commandments. Which of the 10 Commandments do you think are wrong? Be careful, most are quite // to the Five Precepts.
All of the rest of things you mentioned couldn't be described or explained by the average Christian.
But I'm not clear why you care if they believe those things. You have a right to your Buddhist or any other beliefs. Don't they?
Not only do many Christians don't believe in the literal creation myth, but are quite liberal in what they believe when it comes to the Old Testament in it's entirety. A majority of Christians I know, know when to put religion aside and when it is appropriate to include. It just depends on the Christian, but most are flexible and rational just as a small minority of Buddhists are very "fundamental-like" in their viewpoint.
This may apply to many churches in the States. It does not speak for the "wider Christian world, globally."
It would bode well to research Christianity world wide.
It does not bode well to mix faiths, lest encroachment against the dogmas that each subscribe to. It is the suffering of confusion.
From talking to members of other faith and secular groups who have no personal contact via family or school, I have gained the impression that there is just as much mis- and dis-information, gossip and sheer ignorance floating around as we might have, say, about Zoroastrianism. A couple of times, while I was with Tibetans in MLeodGanj, it was remarked that I was among the few Christians they had met who didn't seem interested in 'converting' them. That 'missionary/evangelising' attitude appears to be how Western Christians are perceived: bunch of ambitious Jehovah's Witnesses.
Now. You and I know that this is a caricature, just like the fat man caricatures of the Tathagata. They arise out of ignorance and prejudice. I was struck by the openness of my Tibetan friends to engage in dialogue, to find ground we could share and to be understanding rather than critical of the many mistakes of the past.
So much good can come of it, and has... so much bad can come of it, and also has.