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.
I tend to look at scripture instead of earthly manifestations and interpretations of these religious and spiritual path and ways. I think that both Christianity and Buddhism want us to be wise and compassionate. I think that the teachings of both point us in that direction. It is up to us to learn, compare, understand, study, reflect, practice and.......grow. I wonder if in the eys of anyone who needs wise counsel and/or compassionate understanding, love and action if it matters if the person who gives it to them is a Muslim, Christian, Jain, Buddhist, etc.......
I lived in a Buddhist environment, culture and country for over 20 years of my adult life. I did not see The Buddhist teachings as being a part of the laypeople's lives. Monks were given an influence, status and power which in my opinion was undeserving.......In my study of biblical teachings/truths/etc. I have seen a number of similarities in concepts to Buddhist teachings. In a recent exercise of mine, I summarized Christian teachings as put forth in the Bible. The summarization was submitted to a number of Christian clergy and responded to as being accurate. I think that if we compare them to the Buddhist Eightfold Path, we are more likely to see the similarities then the differences....They are as follows:
1. Renew and transform your mind 2. Be obedient to God and imitate Christ 3. Cleanse yourself 4. Practice wise and right speech 5. Practice humility 6. We are all imperfect, but we all have gifts 7. Refrain from judging or condemning others 8. Love, comfort and edify your brothers and sisters 9. Be sober, mindful, diligent and discerning 10. Seek out knowledge, understanding and wisdom 11. Know, recognize and abandon what is evil, sinful and ignorant 12. Know, recognize and cultivate what is good, righteous and fruitful
A "Christian' lady once told me I was going to hell and it still bothers me.
I will be there before you, when I become a Buddha. You won't be allowed in, I will be closing it down. Old Nick did a great deal with me, I sold him my soul and he agreed I did not have one to sell . . . :wave:
I lived, worked and travelled in Asia for 24 years. The behavior of the "Buddhists" there saddened me on a daily basis. Could I say that there are no Buddhists in Asia? Perhaps. We are all defiled. We are all incomplete. We are all imperfect. We are all ignorant. I think the objective is wisdom and compassion. I do not think that how we get there matters. I think that Buddhism lays out the teachings and path in an easy to grasp and understand manner. I think that searching out guidance and wisdom in The Bible and among Christians may be more difficult, but there have been corrupt Sanghas and monks also.....I think that one could, if one pursued such a thing, formulate a "Noble Eightfold Path" or a path of less or more steps based on biblical teachings. What would right understanding consist of? Not that we all suffer but that we are all imperfect and incomplete. We are all lacking. In biblical teachings that word most often used is "sinful". This word has too much of a negative denotation and connotation to it.....Good-hearted and well-intentioned people do not like to be described as being sinful nor think of themselves in such a manner.....Long before I went to live, work and travel in Asia it was Christians that showed me the insight, love, wisdom and compassion that I needed to get my life and mind in order. May God and the Buddha bless them and all........
i like them, my best friends are christian and they don't hold anything against my religion, i don't judge based on religion, as long as they respect my views i will respect theirs. just because they have chosen a different path doesn't mean they are bad people.
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
Church going Christians are some of the nicest people I come across in my life as long as I don't let them know I'm a Buddhist, believe in gay marriage, or believe in liberal politics in general.
In a way, I admire devout Christians who are able to give so much faith in what they believe to be a being that exists but has little physical evidence for existing. To be able to look at a bad situation and say "It's in God's hands. I trust whatever God will make of this situation." is pretty amazing, IMO.
I think people have the tendency to go to extremes - they feel either Christianity is totally wrong or it is no diff. from Buddhism. Both of these extremes must be avoided; the former because it is not our place to say what's right or whole. But the latter - that it is similar to Buddhism (or comparing it to any religion at all) - must also be avoided because there are way too many differences between various religions.
Just a simple list of the unique features of Christianity: concept of trinity (three persons, one essence, which is diff. from hindu concept of trinity), purgatory (which is unique to catholic theology and thus differs even from other denominations), justification by faith (where good works are seen as the FRUIT of a complete faith rather than the cause), strict monotheism (differs from other abrahmic religions because of the trinity concept, differs from pagan traditions also which may see 'gods' as diff. aspects of the divine), Eucharist (catholic transubstantiation vs lutheran consubstantiation, which in turn differ from other religions), original sin, second coming of Jesus where a new earth and new heaven are established, and so on.
All these are unique features of Christianity. To ignore all this or to draw parallels (such as 'Faith of Christianity=Shraddha of Buddhism', 'Sin of Christianity = Dukkha of Buddhism', 'Purgatory in Christianity = Various hells in Buddhism', and so forth) is totally unnecessary. Let us learn to celebrate differences that we find in various religions instead of artificially trying to synthesize them into one package.
I find that it is difficult for other religions to dialogue with Christians because of atrocities that have been committed in the name of Christ, and because of Christians' bad social/political behavior. I started this thread with the goal of learning first hand, what it is that buddhists and others struggle with the most about Christians/Christianity. (Christian magazines/articles sometimes attempt to address this issue, but their perspective is typically formed by their own conclusions, not by what other people actually think.)
Namaste,
I confess your perception of Christianity being difficult to converse with unsettles me slightly. I was raised in the Catholic faith by a Catholic father and a Jewish mother. I've also been involved in the Orthodox Jewish faith and to be perfectly honest, I believe that Orthodox Judaism would be the harder one to dialogue with on an interfaith initiative.
Atrocities both politically and socially are not restricted to Christianity, and I'd hazard a guess that the actions of both Jews and Muslims in Gaza would probably amount to more violence than Christians in the middle East or the West.
There are good and bad in all walks of life and all religions. We risk becoming as narrow minded as the fundamentalists in other religions when we start generalising or stereotyping.
From my direct experience, it seems to me that the Council of Nicaea codified a doctrine that soon morphed into hubris. It has excluded the Gnostics, and some other scriptures that have no more or less provenience than the Gospels that have been included in the Bible.
As a whole, Christianity remains a religion based on exclusion. In my thoughts, this is not what Christ taught.
As a whole, Christianity remains a religion based on exclusion. In my thoughts, this is not what Christ taught.
Okay. But why is that a problem? Anyone can decide to become a Christian...or not. Anyone can decide to practice Christian principles, whether or not they become a member of a Christian church...or not. How is it any different -- in that regard -- than Buddhism. Anyone can become a Buddhist...or not. Anyone can practice Buddhist principles, whether or not they become a Buddhist.
My girlfriend is Christian and it is hard to figure out how I can exist with her Christian friends as a Buddhist. I just had dinner with two of her friends and one was surprised that I was a Buddhist. We said a prayer before we ate. From my point of view I just don't want to reject or become rejected. So I just let her talk and it seemed fine.
3
HamsakagoosewhispererPolishing the 'just so'Veteran
Buddhism probably doesn't have an opinion about Christianity so you'll get several hundred thousand Buddhist person's opinions about Christianity LOL.
I've experienced the negative side of Christianity more than the positive in my personal life. My opinions are not nearly so open minded as others who haven't been at the wrong end of the Christianity stick.
In the great scheme of things, it is yet another grand formation and proliferation, just like Buddhism has become.
In the scheme of lives, I see too much damaging and destructive mind sets and the consequences of the destruction on people's lives. Then I met a wonderful Christian woman who has become a good friend. She lived abroad until 2008, and I've come to understand the Christianity I see as so destructive is a political subset particular to areas in the United States. In other parts of the world, Christians are a little disgusted with the political conservatism that has infected many Christians here.
2
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
I agree. Many devout Christians of my acquaintance here, find the insidious and prevalent extremism in America, both laughable and deplorable.
I have been fortunate to befriend several very good American friends IRL, and I should add, in fairness, that they share the above sentiments...
@qoheleth said:
Some Christian saints take happiness and loving-kindness to the next level.
St. Seraphim of Sarov greeted all with the words: "My joy!" To many he advised: "Acquire a peaceful spirit, and around you thousands will be saved." No matter who came to him, the starets bowed to the ground before all, and, in blessing, kissed their hands. He did not need the visitors to tell about themselves, as he could see what each had on their soul. He also said, "Cheerfulness is not a sin. It drives away weariness, for from weariness there is sometimes dejection, and there is nothing worse than that."
@ Citta, actually I did not say that. That is your comment regarding St Seraphim of Sarov.
I only said that the quote was inspiring. I did btw print it out and put it on my work desk. It is true that a cheerful attitude can be of great benefit to others and does add some positive energy. I have heard this very same theme from Buddhists.
The more mature Buddhists become in their practice the less it matters what religious beliefs others have (I think this is true).
@Lil, I did not say that you said anything. I will take responsibility for I said.
I was referring back to the OP.
I attempted to quote all of your post...but all that resulted were those words ' Lil said '
Which is the formula preceding all quotes.
0
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited June 2014
I've met Christians of all sorts, and the only thing I can say with any certainty is that they take more on "faith" than I do (some a lot more). In fact I'm pretty sure I don't take anything on that kind of faith, being also a Skeptic to the core.
Though to be fair to Christians, I've also encountered Buddhists that take things on faith, reasoning that if the Buddha said something then it must be true. It takes all kinds to make the world go round...
@AldrisTorvalds said:
I've met Christians of all sorts, and the only thing I can say with any certainty is that they take more on "faith" than I do (some a lot more). In fact I'm pretty sure I don't take anything on that kind of faith, being also a Skeptic to the core.
Though to be fair to Christians, I've also encountered Buddhists that take things on faith, reasoning that if the Buddha said something then it must be true. It takes all kinds to make the world go round...
And in the process, position whatever it is you see as "skepticism" to appear superior to both camps.
Very nice ;-)
0
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited June 2014
@Chaz Yes I see skepticism as superior to gullibility (or non-skepticism). Don't you? I think reason, logic, critical thinking and skepticism are all important skills. We need to be able to objectively evaluate the multitude of claims that people make every day, and without a proper toolset we'll be doing a poor job.
I'm unapologetically pro-skepticism and anti-faith, at least when faith means believing without sufficient justification (which is the opposite of skepticism). When it's used in other contexts to mean hope or confidence, which is often the case, that's another story.
@AldrisTorvalds said:
Chaz Yes I see skepticism as superior to non-skepticism (or gullibility), same as I see critical thinking as superior to non-critical thinking and rationality as superior to irrationality. So sue me. It's odd you bring it up, all judgey-like. Hope you don't feel too silly for doing that, now.
Well, sorry Aldris, but it's isn't really superior to anything. It's an extreme, the polar opposite of gullibility. The Buddha taught against clinging to extremes. That being the case, in a Buddhist context, you couldn't be farther off-base.
I hope you don't feel to silly .... ;-)
You are, of course entitled, to continue thinking that your favorite extreme is somehow "better" than it's antithesis. You are free to ignore the Dharma's teaching if that's the path you want to take.
At some point you have to accept skepticism when taken to its extreme (and it is not superior to anything btw - it's a conceptual reference point) leads you to one place, and that is complete self-doubt; but as that implies there must be its opposite self-belief, you can take the third option, which avoids the fallout.
1
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited June 2014
@Chaz Skepticism isn't a position you hold, it means to withhold judgment until sufficient evidence is available. If you don't know if something is true or false, you neither denounce it as false nor take it on faith as true. That seems awfully Middle Way-y to me. The best you can do is try to find out for yourself, to experience and know for yourself.
BTW saying skepticism is an extreme is exactly like saying logic, reason and critical thinking are extremes. Skepticism belongs among these. There is no middle that's a proper place to be; there's no halfway between logic and illogic, reason and unreason, critical thinking and non-critical thinking, or skepticism and gullibility. If you're in the middle, you're doing something wrong...
I was just answering the OP honestly with the only thing I feel confident saying about Christians (which includes my entire family, and most of my country). If you want to discuss the relative merits of faith and/or skepticism, please PM me instead of judging me publicly, which seems to be the pot calling the kettle black. Thank you.
Namaste... :om:
P.S. I recommend Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World" (to anyone interested) to illustrate skepticism, critical thinking, logic, reason etc., and how our misuse or non-use of these tools leads to faulty beliefs. It covers everything from pseudoscience and psychics to the vast tapestry of human religious beliefs.
There is a difference between any ism and evangelical form of that ism. I don't think anyone on the planet is totally non-skeptical. For example all of the internet scams. Nobody is totally a non-skeptic. I would say it is a little like being a gluten and a health nut. There is a spectrum and each person can go and find their little niche.
So as I was saying there is a difference between ism and an evangelical form of that ism. For example an evangelical would criticize others for believing in a Bible. A non evangelical would let them believe whatever they want and more importantly need to believe.
@AldrisTorvalds said:
Chaz Skepticism isn't a position you hold, it means to withhold judgment until sufficient evidence is available. If you don't know if something is true or false, you neither denounce it as false nor take it on faith as true. That seems awfully Middle Way-y to me.
Not if you compare contrast it to an opposite, like gullibility. THEN it becomes an extreme. And extreme that, in this case, you drew. I merely point it out.
The best you can do is try to find out for yourself, to experience and know for yourself.
But THAT is not skepticism.
BTW saying skepticism is an extreme is exactly like saying logic, reason and critical thinking are extremes.
They would be if you drew an oposite number for them.
It's also the samne if you were to view any of these as being better/worse that something else.
Skepticism belongs among these. There is no middle that's a proper place to be; there's no halfway between logic and illogic, reason and unreason, critical thinking and non-critical thinking, or skepticism and gullibility. If you're in the middle, you're doing something wrong...
Of course there's a middle. There is always a middle. The Buddha found it. The Buddha taught it.
I was just answering the OP honestly with the only thing I feel confident saying about Christians (which includes my entire family, and most of my country). If you want to discuss the relative merits of faith and/or skepticism, please PM me instead of judging me publicly, which seems to be the pot calling the kettle black. Thank you.
But I'm not, really judging you. If I'm judging anything, it's your position. And there's nothing wrong with your position. It's just not what you judge it to be.
Please Sir should I be skeptical in a gullible way or gullible in a skeptical way?
No view is the right view? Oh how theoretically advanced . . .
Me no understand . . . :buck: .
Where is the Buddhas Middle Way when you need it? Guys?
Be kind but only in the middle muddle . . . ? [some mistake surely]
2
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited June 2014
@lobster Try not to be gullible, maybe? That's all skepticism is, not accepting claims (especially extraordinary ones that fly in the face of everyday experience) until there's sufficient justification. It's being unafraid to admit "I don't know"... until you do know.
If someone tells you they got a flat tire yesterday, and they haven't lied to you in the past (and they actually do have a car!), it seems appropriate to believe their story unless new evidence proves otherwise. That's a very normal everyday occurrence that isn't that unlikely. If someone tells you there's a goddess named Shiva, a powerful being beyond anything you've experienced in your life, that's something that needs sufficient justification/evidence.
And as it turns out, there are thousands of gods/goddesses that humans have worshiped. Then there are psychics, Big Foot and the Yeti, the Loch Ness Monster, faith healing, aromatherapy, homeopathy, reiki, ghosts, alien abductions and/or probing... the list of what people believe goes on and on, so beliefs need to be better "vetted" than most people are doing. Carl Sagan covers it well in his book. We tend to want to believe a lot of things based on our shared human desires and fears (and being taught certain religions by our parents), but we also have a lot of cognitive biases working against us. How else could we be so divided over "beliefs" the world over, even when exposed to competing belief systems? We should be able to ferret out the truth, but instead we cling to our beliefs even more strongly in response to dissenting opinions.
But why should I have to defend skepticism? Feels like being asked to defend critical thinking and reason. I've always been this way, but if people actually know what it is (which doesn't seem likely given the responses), it's up to them to either embrace or reject skepticism as an epistemological tool. Anyone can always PM me, but I'm done with my part of this conversation. Namaste, all!
((( P.S. It should be especially telling that, even given my fondness for skepticism, I still have gravitated to and call myself a Buddhist. The truth will still win out if you approach truth claims with skepticism, especially if the truth is what you're seeking. You just won't be fooled in the process. )))
Lately I've been feeling that it's difficult to understand Christianity. I've tried to take a more figurative, modernist approach to the Scripture (a la John Shelby Spong), but that flies in the face of how nearly 95% of the Christians I know practice Christianity.
I guess it's arguable that religion and God are personal things (the concept of a personal God is especially important in Christianity), and we can make sense of them as we see fit. However, if the vast majority of people who claim the label "Christian" believe and practice and propagate a certain way of viewing their tradition, it makes it difficult to interpret the faith in a different way.
Buddhism is primarily about seeing reality for what it is. The way Christianity "is" right now (for the most part) is not figurative or modernist or fitting with the way I would like to express myself spiritually. Therefore, I don't feel that I'm that open to Christianity at the present time.
I still consider myself "half" Christian, and I interpret it the way I have experienced it...not the way the vast majority of Christians do. And, now that I think of it, that's a fairly Buddhist approach to Christianity.
DISCLAIMER - THIS IS ONLY MY VIEW. I DO NOT SPEAK FOR ANY CHRISTIANS OR CHURCHES, FAITHS, SECTS, BUSINESS, ANIMALS, CUSHIONS OR OTHER BEINGS, SENTIENT OR OTHERWISE ETC
Righto, now that we have that out of the way............... perhaps if we all could get off our high horses and take a few steps back? Good.
I think we can all agree that Christianity as it started out and as it is practised today make the Grand Canyon look like a crack in the wall. There have been so many schisms, changes, translations and the like that I think Jesus would shake his head and say "wtf is wrong with you lot?"
OT and mistranslations from the Torah and Tanakh aside (cause that shit just does my head in), the NT alone has over 500 CURRENT translations in circulation. How the hell is anyone going to know exactly what is the correct teaching? Secondly, the different denominations are too busy bitching and sniping at each other about the differences between each other - which to be honest is really pathetic - (gee sound familiar?) - rather than rallying together and focusing on the most important common bond (believing Jesus is Lord and Saviour and Son of God). Is it any wonder to them that the rest of the world looks at them as the biggest bunch of tools in existence?
Now, The Christian Bible in its entirety has been translated from Aramaic to Hebrew, to Greek, to Latin and various other language. AND.... let's not forget the good 'ol King James Version in 1625 that for some reason every frigging fundamentalist insists on using even though it has been vigorously debated by biblical scholars as to whether it is biblically sound - a good summary is printed in the foreward of the Catholic Bible with Deuteronical Canons - which I will scan when I get home and attach to this thread later on as a source for you all. (@federica can hold me to that). The other thing we need to remember is that modern Christianity is really what I prefer to call Churchianity. Whether this is a throwback from times when Church and State were one and ruled with an iron fist, I'm not 100% sure, but I'm willing to bet it is. Most people are more focused on what the rest of the people at church think, tithe to look good in front of others, dress in their "Sunday best" for appearances (that's where the term "Sunday best" comes from", would confess their sins for all to see (like the parable Jesus taught) and then would go and be an absolute bastard for the other 6 days of the week. Something a lot of Christians still do to this day.
Because Churchians are the loudest, all Christians are judged by them. And as such, it's easy to judge all Christians by Churchians. We do it all the time. Muslisms are a perfect example. As Buddhists, we are supposed to remember the Dharma teachings and try to be compassionate in dealing with all sentient beings, not just the ones like us or the ones we know and love.
So..... I would like to say (as respectfully as I can) that saying
Yes I see skepticism as superior to non-skepticism (or gullibility), same as I see critical thinking as superior to non-critical thinking and rationality as superior to irrationality
is pretty super judgemental and pretty unBuddhist.
So maybe we all need to take a deep breath and calm the f##k down cause really at the end of the day, does it really matter to your day to day life?
Metta,
Raven
_ /\ _
0
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited June 2014
I feel like the only one being judged. Would it be so if I said I think critical thinking is superior to non-critical thinking? Or reason superior to unreason? Or logic superior to illogic? I put skepticism in with those, and treat it no differently. It's a tool (among others) for coming to as many true beliefs and as few false beliefs as possible, and I'm not going to apologize for thinking so (I don't feel my comments deserved the tongue-lashing).
I second the calming down. I answered the OP honestly that Christians, and even some Buddhists, take more on faith than I do. People who value faith aren't going to take that negatively, they'll just think I'm missing out or am wrong about the value of skepticism. Are people discussing the relative merits of faith vs. skepticism? No, they're discussing me being superior. It was the comments about my comment that were "unBuddhist"... uncalled for, and I wish people would stop digging.
@AldrisTorvalds I have no problem with being skeptical. However, I do not think you were merely being saying you were being skeptical in this instance. If you have been misunderstood, then I'm sorry. Perhaps you need to re-read what you are writing too?...... For the record, I believe the OP is also a couched dig at Christians. And that's also not cool.
And if you think that's a tongue lashing, you need to go back and read some of my posts to other particular members here. I was not attacking you in any way. That is purely projection on your part.
0
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited June 2014
@dhammachick It's projection, but not on my part, because I didn't mean your post in particular... I meant all of them. And I have no desire to quibble over what people think I was being. I'm straight-up in what I say, and I didn't intend anything other than to point out the most obvious fact about Christians that seems to be universal (and is different from my own way of thinking). It wasn't a defamatory statement, it wasn't meant to harm anyone or cause a ruckus, it was just the only thing I could say about "all" Christians/Christianity, which includes my entire family and just about everyone around me. They wouldn't get so upset about it. They'd extol the virtues of faith, as they see it.
I find the responses here on a Buddhist forum just ludicrous, and maybe that's because I also said some Buddhists take things on faith too? Maybe they took it personally?
In any case it's not my problem. I'm not the one judging actual people, I'm only judging gullibility as obviously bad (if anyone has a problem with that, then talk about it!), everyone else is judging me for that and I'm quite frankly getting a bit sick of it. The judgmental stench is getting rancid, and I wouldn't have expected that on a Buddhist forum. Certainly not from as many people as have chimed in, but I'm not sure how many people are active here.
I'm done talking about this. If @federica or another mod or admin (I don't know their names) thinks I'm being a dick, then please delete my comments and let me know so I can adjust or leave.
Comments
1. Renew and transform your mind
2. Be obedient to God and imitate Christ
3. Cleanse yourself
4. Practice wise and right speech
5. Practice humility
6. We are all imperfect, but we all have gifts
7. Refrain from judging or condemning others
8. Love, comfort and edify your brothers and sisters
9. Be sober, mindful, diligent and discerning
10. Seek out knowledge, understanding and wisdom
11. Know, recognize and abandon what is evil, sinful and ignorant
12. Know, recognize and cultivate what is good, righteous and fruitful
Just a simple list of the unique features of Christianity: concept of trinity (three persons, one essence, which is diff. from hindu concept of trinity), purgatory (which is unique to catholic theology and thus differs even from other denominations), justification by faith (where good works are seen as the FRUIT of a complete faith rather than the cause), strict monotheism (differs from other abrahmic religions because of the trinity concept, differs from pagan traditions also which may see 'gods' as diff. aspects of the divine), Eucharist (catholic transubstantiation vs lutheran consubstantiation, which in turn differ from other religions), original sin, second coming of Jesus where a new earth and new heaven are established, and so on.
All these are unique features of Christianity. To ignore all this or to draw parallels (such as 'Faith of Christianity=Shraddha of Buddhism', 'Sin of Christianity = Dukkha of Buddhism', 'Purgatory in Christianity = Various hells in Buddhism', and so forth) is totally unnecessary. Let us learn to celebrate differences that we find in various religions instead of artificially trying to synthesize them into one package.
Namaste,
I confess your perception of Christianity being difficult to converse with unsettles me slightly. I was raised in the Catholic faith by a Catholic father and a Jewish mother. I've also been involved in the Orthodox Jewish faith and to be perfectly honest, I believe that Orthodox Judaism would be the harder one to dialogue with on an interfaith initiative.
Atrocities both politically and socially are not restricted to Christianity, and I'd hazard a guess that the actions of both Jews and Muslims in Gaza would probably amount to more violence than Christians in the middle East or the West.
There are good and bad in all walks of life and all religions. We risk becoming as narrow minded as the fundamentalists in other religions when we start generalising or stereotyping.
I think @Simonthepilgrim summed it up perfectly with:
There is not one single Christianity, any more than there is a single Buddhism..
YMMV
In metta,
Raven
As a whole, Christianity remains a religion based on exclusion. In my thoughts, this is not what Christ taught.
Kia Ora,
How do Buddhists view Christians/Christianity?
With compassion
Metta Shoshin
Not always so, sadly.
My girlfriend is Christian and it is hard to figure out how I can exist with her Christian friends as a Buddhist. I just had dinner with two of her friends and one was surprised that I was a Buddhist. We said a prayer before we ate. From my point of view I just don't want to reject or become rejected. So I just let her talk and it seemed fine.
Buddhism probably doesn't have an opinion about Christianity so you'll get several hundred thousand Buddhist person's opinions about Christianity LOL.
I've experienced the negative side of Christianity more than the positive in my personal life. My opinions are not nearly so open minded as others who haven't been at the wrong end of the Christianity stick.
In the great scheme of things, it is yet another grand formation and proliferation, just like Buddhism has become.
In the scheme of lives, I see too much damaging and destructive mind sets and the consequences of the destruction on people's lives. Then I met a wonderful Christian woman who has become a good friend. She lived abroad until 2008, and I've come to understand the Christianity I see as so destructive is a political subset particular to areas in the United States. In other parts of the world, Christians are a little disgusted with the political conservatism that has infected many Christians here.
I agree. Many devout Christians of my acquaintance here, find the insidious and prevalent extremism in America, both laughable and deplorable.
I have been fortunate to befriend several very good American friends IRL, and I should add, in fairness, that they share the above sentiments...
Some are nice.Some are not. Just human, like other people.
I love this. Kindness and cheerfulness can indeed be a pick me up. Going to read this again tomorrow when I start my day. Many thank yous!
I don't know if anyone noticed this thread is pretty old, 2010, not knocking it just wondering if the OP is here still.
No, but many contributors of last year, and this, are here. Thanks for the alert anyway...
.
There is a world of difference between this ( St Seraphim of Sarov ) and the Christianity of much of Protestant America..
And that's what makes an answer very difficult.
Christianity is not a single entity. Just like Buddhism.
@ Citta, actually I did not say that. That is your comment regarding St Seraphim of Sarov.
I only said that the quote was inspiring. I did btw print it out and put it on my work desk. It is true that a cheerful attitude can be of great benefit to others and does add some positive energy. I have heard this very same theme from Buddhists.
The more mature Buddhists become in their practice the less it matters what religious beliefs others have (I think this is true).
@Lil, I did not say that you said anything. I will take responsibility for I said.
I was referring back to the OP.
I attempted to quote all of your post...but all that resulted were those words ' Lil said '
Which is the formula preceding all quotes.
I've met Christians of all sorts, and the only thing I can say with any certainty is that they take more on "faith" than I do (some a lot more). In fact I'm pretty sure I don't take anything on that kind of faith, being also a Skeptic to the core.
Though to be fair to Christians, I've also encountered Buddhists that take things on faith, reasoning that if the Buddha said something then it must be true. It takes all kinds to make the world go round...
@ Aldris...the skeptic...I don't think it take people to make the world go round at all...
@Lii Oh ha ha.
And in the process, position whatever it is you see as "skepticism" to appear superior to both camps.
Very nice ;-)
@Chaz Yes I see skepticism as superior to gullibility (or non-skepticism). Don't you? I think reason, logic, critical thinking and skepticism are all important skills. We need to be able to objectively evaluate the multitude of claims that people make every day, and without a proper toolset we'll be doing a poor job.
I'm unapologetically pro-skepticism and anti-faith, at least when faith means believing without sufficient justification (which is the opposite of skepticism). When it's used in other contexts to mean hope or confidence, which is often the case, that's another story.
Well, sorry Aldris, but it's isn't really superior to anything. It's an extreme, the polar opposite of gullibility. The Buddha taught against clinging to extremes. That being the case, in a Buddhist context, you couldn't be farther off-base.
I hope you don't feel to silly .... ;-)
You are, of course entitled, to continue thinking that your favorite extreme is somehow "better" than it's antithesis. You are free to ignore the Dharma's teaching if that's the path you want to take.
At some point you have to accept skepticism when taken to its extreme (and it is not superior to anything btw - it's a conceptual reference point) leads you to one place, and that is complete self-doubt; but as that implies there must be its opposite self-belief, you can take the third option, which avoids the fallout.
@Chaz Skepticism isn't a position you hold, it means to withhold judgment until sufficient evidence is available. If you don't know if something is true or false, you neither denounce it as false nor take it on faith as true. That seems awfully Middle Way-y to me. The best you can do is try to find out for yourself, to experience and know for yourself.
BTW saying skepticism is an extreme is exactly like saying logic, reason and critical thinking are extremes. Skepticism belongs among these. There is no middle that's a proper place to be; there's no halfway between logic and illogic, reason and unreason, critical thinking and non-critical thinking, or skepticism and gullibility. If you're in the middle, you're doing something wrong...
I was just answering the OP honestly with the only thing I feel confident saying about Christians (which includes my entire family, and most of my country). If you want to discuss the relative merits of faith and/or skepticism, please PM me instead of judging me publicly, which seems to be the pot calling the kettle black. Thank you.
Namaste... :om:
P.S. I recommend Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World" (to anyone interested) to illustrate skepticism, critical thinking, logic, reason etc., and how our misuse or non-use of these tools leads to faulty beliefs. It covers everything from pseudoscience and psychics to the vast tapestry of human religious beliefs.
There is a difference between any ism and evangelical form of that ism. I don't think anyone on the planet is totally non-skeptical. For example all of the internet scams. Nobody is totally a non-skeptic. I would say it is a little like being a gluten and a health nut. There is a spectrum and each person can go and find their little niche.
So as I was saying there is a difference between ism and an evangelical form of that ism. For example an evangelical would criticize others for believing in a Bible. A non evangelical would let them believe whatever they want and more importantly need to believe.
Not if you compare contrast it to an opposite, like gullibility. THEN it becomes an extreme. And extreme that, in this case, you drew. I merely point it out.
But THAT is not skepticism.
They would be if you drew an oposite number for them.
It's also the samne if you were to view any of these as being better/worse that something else.
Of course there's a middle. There is always a middle. The Buddha found it. The Buddha taught it.
But I'm not, really judging you. If I'm judging anything, it's your position. And there's nothing wrong with your position. It's just not what you judge it to be.
Please Sir should I be skeptical in a gullible way or gullible in a skeptical way?
No view is the right view? Oh how theoretically advanced . . .
Me no understand . . . :buck: .
Where is the Buddhas Middle Way when you need it? Guys?
Be kind but only in the middle muddle . . . ? [some mistake surely]
@lobster Try not to be gullible, maybe?
That's all skepticism is, not accepting claims (especially extraordinary ones that fly in the face of everyday experience) until there's sufficient justification. It's being unafraid to admit "I don't know"... until you do know.
If someone tells you they got a flat tire yesterday, and they haven't lied to you in the past (and they actually do have a car!), it seems appropriate to believe their story unless new evidence proves otherwise. That's a very normal everyday occurrence that isn't that unlikely. If someone tells you there's a goddess named Shiva, a powerful being beyond anything you've experienced in your life, that's something that needs sufficient justification/evidence.
And as it turns out, there are thousands of gods/goddesses that humans have worshiped. Then there are psychics, Big Foot and the Yeti, the Loch Ness Monster, faith healing, aromatherapy, homeopathy, reiki, ghosts, alien abductions and/or probing... the list of what people believe goes on and on, so beliefs need to be better "vetted" than most people are doing. Carl Sagan covers it well in his book. We tend to want to believe a lot of things based on our shared human desires and fears (and being taught certain religions by our parents), but we also have a lot of cognitive biases working against us. How else could we be so divided over "beliefs" the world over, even when exposed to competing belief systems? We should be able to ferret out the truth, but instead we cling to our beliefs even more strongly in response to dissenting opinions.
But why should I have to defend skepticism? Feels like being asked to defend critical thinking and reason. I've always been this way, but if people actually know what it is (which doesn't seem likely given the responses), it's up to them to either embrace or reject skepticism as an epistemological tool. Anyone can always PM me, but I'm done with my part of this conversation. Namaste, all!
((( P.S. It should be especially telling that, even given my fondness for skepticism, I still have gravitated to and call myself a Buddhist. The truth will still win out if you approach truth claims with skepticism, especially if the truth is what you're seeking. You just won't be fooled in the process. )))
I think Jesus was a Bodhisattva
Lately I've been feeling that it's difficult to understand Christianity. I've tried to take a more figurative, modernist approach to the Scripture (a la John Shelby Spong), but that flies in the face of how nearly 95% of the Christians I know practice Christianity.
I guess it's arguable that religion and God are personal things (the concept of a personal God is especially important in Christianity), and we can make sense of them as we see fit. However, if the vast majority of people who claim the label "Christian" believe and practice and propagate a certain way of viewing their tradition, it makes it difficult to interpret the faith in a different way.
Buddhism is primarily about seeing reality for what it is. The way Christianity "is" right now (for the most part) is not figurative or modernist or fitting with the way I would like to express myself spiritually. Therefore, I don't feel that I'm that open to Christianity at the present time.
I still consider myself "half" Christian, and I interpret it the way I have experienced it...not the way the vast majority of Christians do. And, now that I think of it, that's a fairly Buddhist approach to Christianity.
DISCLAIMER - THIS IS ONLY MY VIEW. I DO NOT SPEAK FOR ANY CHRISTIANS OR CHURCHES, FAITHS, SECTS, BUSINESS, ANIMALS, CUSHIONS OR OTHER BEINGS, SENTIENT OR OTHERWISE ETC
Righto, now that we have that out of the way............... perhaps if we all could get off our high horses and take a few steps back? Good.
I think we can all agree that Christianity as it started out and as it is practised today make the Grand Canyon look like a crack in the wall. There have been so many schisms, changes, translations and the like that I think Jesus would shake his head and say "wtf is wrong with you lot?"
OT and mistranslations from the Torah and Tanakh aside (cause that shit just does my head in), the NT alone has over 500 CURRENT translations in circulation. How the hell is anyone going to know exactly what is the correct teaching? Secondly, the different denominations are too busy bitching and sniping at each other about the differences between each other - which to be honest is really pathetic - (gee sound familiar?) - rather than rallying together and focusing on the most important common bond (believing Jesus is Lord and Saviour and Son of God). Is it any wonder to them that the rest of the world looks at them as the biggest bunch of tools in existence?
Now, The Christian Bible in its entirety has been translated from Aramaic to Hebrew, to Greek, to Latin and various other language. AND.... let's not forget the good 'ol King James Version in 1625 that for some reason every frigging fundamentalist insists on using even though it has been vigorously debated by biblical scholars as to whether it is biblically sound - a good summary is printed in the foreward of the Catholic Bible with Deuteronical Canons - which I will scan when I get home and attach to this thread later on as a source for you all. (@federica can hold me to that). The other thing we need to remember is that modern Christianity is really what I prefer to call Churchianity. Whether this is a throwback from times when Church and State were one and ruled with an iron fist, I'm not 100% sure, but I'm willing to bet it is. Most people are more focused on what the rest of the people at church think, tithe to look good in front of others, dress in their "Sunday best" for appearances (that's where the term "Sunday best" comes from", would confess their sins for all to see (like the parable Jesus taught) and then would go and be an absolute bastard for the other 6 days of the week. Something a lot of Christians still do to this day.
Because Churchians are the loudest, all Christians are judged by them. And as such, it's easy to judge all Christians by Churchians. We do it all the time. Muslisms are a perfect example. As Buddhists, we are supposed to remember the Dharma teachings and try to be compassionate in dealing with all sentient beings, not just the ones like us or the ones we know and love.
So..... I would like to say (as respectfully as I can) that saying
is pretty super judgemental and pretty unBuddhist.
So maybe we all need to take a deep breath and calm the f##k down cause really at the end of the day, does it really matter to your day to day life?
Metta,
Raven
_ /\ _
I feel like the only one being judged. Would it be so if I said I think critical thinking is superior to non-critical thinking? Or reason superior to unreason? Or logic superior to illogic? I put skepticism in with those, and treat it no differently. It's a tool (among others) for coming to as many true beliefs and as few false beliefs as possible, and I'm not going to apologize for thinking so (I don't feel my comments deserved the tongue-lashing).
I second the calming down. I answered the OP honestly that Christians, and even some Buddhists, take more on faith than I do. People who value faith aren't going to take that negatively, they'll just think I'm missing out or am wrong about the value of skepticism. Are people discussing the relative merits of faith vs. skepticism? No, they're discussing me being superior. It was the comments about my comment that were "unBuddhist"... uncalled for, and I wish people would stop digging.
Namaste
@AldrisTorvalds I have no problem with being skeptical. However, I do not think you were merely being saying you were being skeptical in this instance. If you have been misunderstood, then I'm sorry. Perhaps you need to re-read what you are writing too?...... For the record, I believe the OP is also a couched dig at Christians. And that's also not cool.
And if you think that's a tongue lashing, you need to go back and read some of my posts to other particular members here. I was not attacking you in any way. That is purely projection on your part.
@dhammachick It's projection, but not on my part, because I didn't mean your post in particular... I meant all of them. And I have no desire to quibble over what people think I was being. I'm straight-up in what I say, and I didn't intend anything other than to point out the most obvious fact about Christians that seems to be universal (and is different from my own way of thinking). It wasn't a defamatory statement, it wasn't meant to harm anyone or cause a ruckus, it was just the only thing I could say about "all" Christians/Christianity, which includes my entire family and just about everyone around me. They wouldn't get so upset about it. They'd extol the virtues of faith, as they see it.
I find the responses here on a Buddhist forum just ludicrous, and maybe that's because I also said some Buddhists take things on faith too? Maybe they took it personally?
In any case it's not my problem. I'm not the one judging actual people, I'm only judging gullibility as obviously bad (if anyone has a problem with that, then talk about it!), everyone else is judging me for that and I'm quite frankly getting a bit sick of it. The judgmental stench is getting rancid, and I wouldn't have expected that on a Buddhist forum. Certainly not from as many people as have chimed in, but I'm not sure how many people are active here.
I'm done talking about this. If @federica or another mod or admin (I don't know their names) thinks I'm being a dick, then please delete my comments and let me know so I can adjust or leave.
Chill out dude. It's only the internet.
@dhammachick I'm being chill. I shouldn't be this chill with so many people dog-piling me just because I'm a Skeptic.