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 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?
I agree with you. Most Buddhists take a great deal on faith.
My bad all, I didn't scan the source like I promised yesterday due to a bit of a turn with my migraines. My apologies and I will endeavour to do so this afternoon.
Sorry to hear about the migraines dhammachick. I used to get those; can't recommend how to get rid of them as I am on so much medicine I don't know what does what.
@Theswingisyellow said:
"is pretty super judgemental and pretty unBuddhist"
But that's not judgmental?
In so far as valuing reason over faith or feelings, yea I am there.
Truth is, we invariably employ both in the same decision-making process. We oftentimes use rationalization in place of reason and many folks confuse the two.
I am a ordained Christian/Baptist minster, formerly a head pastor of four different churches. I have renounced organized religion as being primarily about money and mind control, have not attended a church service in two years. In the past and currently I have been treated with overt hostility by Christians when I share my admiration for certain Buddhist concepts and practices. I have been told I will go to hell and or laughed at as if I am crazy for seeking and seeing reality and truths outside the boundaries of their narrow dogma. My motto is God is truth and truth is of God where ever you find it. A spiritually mature individual can be recognized by their fruits of serenity/peace, love/compassion and humility. NOT one who parrots doctrines and claims they have perfected and exclusive spiritual wisdom.
Some Christians (my self included) suspect that if Jesus was present today, his Church would reject him and cast him out or worse. How would Buddhists today react if the Buddha was present in their midst?
@Citta said:
Surely they would reject him anyway Invincible _summer..the question was how would *Buddhists* react if the Buddha was among them..
Thank you Citta.
0
HamsakagoosewhispererPolishing the 'just so'Veteran
The Buddha would be criticized for rudely describing his attainments and/or for lying about having them. He would be told to get with a proper teacher and be told jokes about how much a person later appreciated being whacked with the teacher's staff for being presumptuous.
2
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
Either one of them would likely be treated the same as anybody else.
On the one hand, Jesus should expect no less as that is what he said he wanted. To be treated no better than what we see as the lowest of us. On the other, he likely hoped we would have no such conception these days.
As for Buddha, there is no separation.
If we want a world that would treat these two better, all we have to do is treat each other better.
As for how this Buddhist views Christianity... I prefer to do it from a distance as I honestly find the main doctrine to be irresponsible.
I find it interesting that this old thread about the Buddhist view of Christianity should have become a debate about scepticism. It may be necessary, as ever, to spend a little time considering how wide a range of definitions or applications there may be of scepticism. Do sceptics here believe that a sceptical approach can arrive at a truth or do they start from a position, exemplified by Pontius Pilate in the Gospels, of doubting that there is such a thing as truth? Before we can engage in genuine debate about the place of scepticism in Christianity (it has a place) or in Buddhism or, indeed, in any endeavour, we need to ask ourselves precisely this question.
For myself, I am taken by the story of Pilate and Jesus. Clearly, Pilate is asking as a well-educated Roman, versed in Greek philosophy, and addressing a person from Hellenic Galilee which was home to a number of sceptic schools. We can even find traces of sceptical dialogue and methodology in the stories about Jesus. The influence of philosophical scepticism on the development of Jewish thought which would bring the Talmud into existence is already to be found in Second Temple debates. What makes the Jesus-Pilate conversation interesting is that Jesus does not answer. This is not a dogmatic teacher but one who, by leaving space, encourages the listener to dive into the question for themselves.
Thus I have found, at different times across a lengthening life, that I have believed that there is truth to be found and, at other times, that there is none. I am now of the opinion that there sometimes is and sometimes isn't, depending on circumstances, context and the validity of the problem/question/statement examined.
0
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
edited July 2014
@Simonthepilgrim My short answer is that skepticism is an epistemological method of requiring sufficient justification and/or evidence for a claim before believing it. It's about making sure you aren't hoodwinked by the sea of ignorance that humans perpetuate, it's not about denying truths. We have thousands of religions, we have pseudosciences like homeopathy and astrology, and they're all put forth as "truth" by those who believe them. I want to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible (thank you Matt Dillahunty), and I've always looked with a critical eye upon the truth claims that humans make.
I think people in general are skeptical of everyone else's claims (new claims), but not those things they've been taught themselves (likely raised to believe). My parents are Christians, but they were never able to convince me that Christianity was the one true religion, with the one true god. While remaining skeptical, I've still come to be a Buddhist as an adult. Skepticism doesn't keep you from the truth, it just acts as a safeguard to keep you from believing unsubstantiated claims. The truth will win out. You still, of course, need to have the will to seek the truth... to test the claims. I'm sure there are "apathetic skeptics" out there, but I've always been driven to figure this life out. I don't think humankind would be so divided over religion if people could start thinking skeptically in regards to that one off-limits area: their own beliefs. At the very least they could take a step back and say "I may be wrong. At least I won't kill you because you believe differently. Maybe I'll even treat you as an equal."
That's all I care to get into right now. Hope it helps. You sound very reasonable @Simonthepilgrim and I might want to talk about it with you via PM, but most people have reacted very poorly and I don't want to get into that again on an open thread. The entire tangent came about as someone calling me out as being superior for posting that Christians take a lot more on faith than I do (an honest and true reply to the OP), and it's felt like one long personal attack.
1
SarahTTime ... space ... joySouth Coast, UKVeteran
What brought me to the wisdom of Buddhism was the Dalai Lama's words in "The Art of Happiness" explaining that it is helpful to already have a spiritual grounding and that this should be welcomed as a part of each individual and can be built upon with wisdom wherever it is found.
I happen to believe in a power greater than me and that that power loved me enough to become man so that I could learn of that love. I also believe that this power loves me enough to have put "The Art of Happiness" in my hands.
I am so saddened when "Christians" seek to judge. We are told "judge not that ye be not judged" (Matthew 7:1, Luke 6:37).
Old thread, I know, but can't we all make this world a better place together?
Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble.
Comments
Hmm Christianity and skepticism. Hot topics!
It's good to discuss. But when a discussion reaches a stale mate. Go drink green tea and meditate !
...
I agree with you. Most Buddhists take a great deal on faith.
Um, skeptics range. Being absolute anything is hard, especially if you hold yourself out as an expert one.
My bad all, I didn't scan the source like I promised yesterday due to a bit of a turn with my migraines. My apologies and I will endeavour to do so this afternoon.
Metta,
Raven
_ /\ _
Sorry to hear about the migraines dhammachick. I used to get those; can't recommend how to get rid of them as I am on so much medicine I don't know what does what.
"is pretty super judgemental and pretty unBuddhist"
But that's not judgmental?
In so far as valuing reason over faith or feelings, yea I am there.
What do you mean?
Many forum Buddhists seem to regard "faith" as a dirty word and quote the Kalama Sutta at every opportunity.
Truth is, we invariably employ both in the same decision-making process. We oftentimes use rationalization in place of reason and many folks confuse the two.
I am a ordained Christian/Baptist minster, formerly a head pastor of four different churches. I have renounced organized religion as being primarily about money and mind control, have not attended a church service in two years. In the past and currently I have been treated with overt hostility by Christians when I share my admiration for certain Buddhist concepts and practices. I have been told I will go to hell and or laughed at as if I am crazy for seeking and seeing reality and truths outside the boundaries of their narrow dogma. My motto is God is truth and truth is of God where ever you find it. A spiritually mature individual can be recognized by their fruits of serenity/peace, love/compassion and humility. NOT one who parrots doctrines and claims they have perfected and exclusive spiritual wisdom.
Some Christians (my self included) suspect that if Jesus was present today, his Church would reject him and cast him out or worse. How would Buddhists today react if the Buddha was present in their midst?
They would reject him if he was not a left leaning pacifist vegetarian.
Not in Colorado Springs.
From most churches I know and have heard of (both in Canada and the US), more likely rejected if he was indeed a lefty veggie.
Surely they would reject him anyway @Invincible _summer..the question was how would *Buddhists* react if the Buddha was among them..
Thank you Citta.
The Buddha would be criticized for rudely describing his attainments and/or for lying about having them. He would be told to get with a proper teacher and be told jokes about how much a person later appreciated being whacked with the teacher's staff for being presumptuous.
Either one of them would likely be treated the same as anybody else.
On the one hand, Jesus should expect no less as that is what he said he wanted. To be treated no better than what we see as the lowest of us. On the other, he likely hoped we would have no such conception these days.
As for Buddha, there is no separation.
If we want a world that would treat these two better, all we have to do is treat each other better.
As for how this Buddhist views Christianity... I prefer to do it from a distance as I honestly find the main doctrine to be irresponsible.
I can see why buddha prefers the great silence; no one to disturb him/her/it...
I find it interesting that this old thread about the Buddhist view of Christianity should have become a debate about scepticism. It may be necessary, as ever, to spend a little time considering how wide a range of definitions or applications there may be of scepticism. Do sceptics here believe that a sceptical approach can arrive at a truth or do they start from a position, exemplified by Pontius Pilate in the Gospels, of doubting that there is such a thing as truth? Before we can engage in genuine debate about the place of scepticism in Christianity (it has a place) or in Buddhism or, indeed, in any endeavour, we need to ask ourselves precisely this question.
For myself, I am taken by the story of Pilate and Jesus. Clearly, Pilate is asking as a well-educated Roman, versed in Greek philosophy, and addressing a person from Hellenic Galilee which was home to a number of sceptic schools. We can even find traces of sceptical dialogue and methodology in the stories about Jesus. The influence of philosophical scepticism on the development of Jewish thought which would bring the Talmud into existence is already to be found in Second Temple debates. What makes the Jesus-Pilate conversation interesting is that Jesus does not answer. This is not a dogmatic teacher but one who, by leaving space, encourages the listener to dive into the question for themselves.
Thus I have found, at different times across a lengthening life, that I have believed that there is truth to be found and, at other times, that there is none. I am now of the opinion that there sometimes is and sometimes isn't, depending on circumstances, context and the validity of the problem/question/statement examined.
@Simonthepilgrim My short answer is that skepticism is an epistemological method of requiring sufficient justification and/or evidence for a claim before believing it. It's about making sure you aren't hoodwinked by the sea of ignorance that humans perpetuate, it's not about denying truths. We have thousands of religions, we have pseudosciences like homeopathy and astrology, and they're all put forth as "truth" by those who believe them. I want to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible (thank you Matt Dillahunty), and I've always looked with a critical eye upon the truth claims that humans make.
I think people in general are skeptical of everyone else's claims (new claims), but not those things they've been taught themselves (likely raised to believe). My parents are Christians, but they were never able to convince me that Christianity was the one true religion, with the one true god. While remaining skeptical, I've still come to be a Buddhist as an adult. Skepticism doesn't keep you from the truth, it just acts as a safeguard to keep you from believing unsubstantiated claims. The truth will win out. You still, of course, need to have the will to seek the truth... to test the claims. I'm sure there are "apathetic skeptics" out there, but I've always been driven to figure this life out. I don't think humankind would be so divided over religion if people could start thinking skeptically in regards to that one off-limits area: their own beliefs. At the very least they could take a step back and say "I may be wrong. At least I won't kill you because you believe differently. Maybe I'll even treat you as an equal."
That's all I care to get into right now. Hope it helps. You sound very reasonable @Simonthepilgrim and I might want to talk about it with you via PM, but most people have reacted very poorly and I don't want to get into that again on an open thread. The entire tangent came about as someone calling me out as being superior for posting that Christians take a lot more on faith than I do (an honest and true reply to the OP), and it's felt like one long personal attack.
What brought me to the wisdom of Buddhism was the Dalai Lama's words in "The Art of Happiness" explaining that it is helpful to already have a spiritual grounding and that this should be welcomed as a part of each individual and can be built upon with wisdom wherever it is found.
I happen to believe in a power greater than me and that that power loved me enough to become man so that I could learn of that love. I also believe that this power loves me enough to have put "The Art of Happiness" in my hands.
I am so saddened when "Christians" seek to judge. We are told "judge not that ye be not judged" (Matthew 7:1, Luke 6:37).
Old thread, I know, but can't we all make this world a better place together?
In love - Sarah
Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble.
Joseph Campbell
Perhaps every myth has great value until it becomes a religion and then mixes with politics.