>jesus was buddhist acolyte
where does this meme come from?
>>493535
It comes from new age hippies who aren't able to critically contrast religious systems and instead rely on the trope of perrenialism as a substitute for examination.
>>493535
It comes from lay misunderstandings of serious work from people like Prof. Zacharias Thundy
>>493535
>Hey dude, nice weed you have here.
>Hey thanks man, you know like Jesus and Buddha said some of the same things yaknow?
>Like, yeah man, you know those years between Jesus being a kid and adult and stuff? I bet he went and studied with the Buddha you know. India's way cool like that.
>Yeah. Dude weed lmao.
>Lmao weed.
Well Buddha was born on Christmas day, and so was Jesus, and Zoroaster. Watch Zeitgeist.
The similarites exist because they are the same truths. While Jesus is trying to make people understand the concept of God, Buddha was flat out denying God and giving a very scientific approach to understanding divinity.
Just think of everything Jesus did, he broke tradition, broke the rules and taught a philosophy based on peace, love, faith and charity. He is basically the opposite of everything modern Christianity is. But because people fail to understand the language used in the Bible, people take things too literally and not in the mystical way it was supposed to be taken as it was by a culture exposed to Greek philosophy as well as Buddhist, Zoroastrian and Egyptian mythology and ideas.
>>496826
>he broke tradition
What traditions did he break?
>>496836
Jewish laws concerning the sabbath. Spitting in the faces of the pharisees and sadducees.
>>496836
Traditional interpretation and use of Jewish scripture.
The reason he got crucified was because of his very liberal interpretation of the Torah (all food is clean, sabbath was made for man and not the contrary, god is love, etc) and claimed to be the messiah.
>>496775
>>493550
/thread
>>496826
You write this as if there is historical that "Jesus" even existed. Remember to give credible sources for your historical claims in this /his/ board.
I've yet to seen any historical evidence that a person like Jesus even existed.
We wuz budha n shiet
>>496911
If Jesus didn't exist, why are there records of "Christians" existing in the centuries after him?
>>496911
Paul converts around 35AD, and kills people before this date for believing Jesus was their Messiah.
Also Nero persecuted Christians in 64AD
>>496846
>Jewish laws concerning the sabbath.
In the case of plucking grain, Mt 12:1-2, Mk 2:23-24, Lk 6:1-2, it turns out that Ex 34:21 does not prohibit plucking, only reaping.
Concerning the healing on the Sabbath, Jesus is accused of breaking the Sabbath in Mt 12:10, Mk 3:2, and Lk 6:7, but in Mt 12:13, Mk 3:5, and Luke 6:10 no work is done, the injured limb is restored (ἀπεkατεστάθη).
The account in John 9:14-21 tells that the Pharisees themselves were investigating during the Sabbath, but was it legal in the 1st century? Later rabbis (y. Sanh. 4.6) forbid courts in session not only during but also around the Sabbath.
>Spitting in the faces of the pharisees and sadducees.
Where?
>>496849
>all food is clean
That's not what Jesus said, it was "to eat with unwashed hands does not defile" (Mt 15:20).
It's because in Mt 15:2 they accuse him, since his followers don't wash their hands, but Ex 30:17–21 is a Temple law, dealing with the business of priests.
>sabbath was made for man and not the contrary
Six days you are to do your work, but on the seventh day you shall cease from labor so that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your female slave, as well as your stranger, may refresh themselves. (Ex 23:12)
Sound like it was made for man, and ox and donkey.
>god is love
Ex 34:6-7
>claimed to be the messiah
He does in John 4:26, where he was speaking to a woman. His disciples are puzzled (v. 27), when she repeats what he told her to the nearest city's populace (vv. 28-29), where the notion apparently is so outrageous that nobody gives a damn and quietly leaves (v. 30).
Guys, Jesus is the most orthodox Jew and the best Torah teacher in the stories told in the four Gospels.
Pharisees, Scribes and what John calls
"the Jews" are the heretics distorting the teachings, not him.
The numerous accusations Jesus faces serve only to prove that Jesus is the smart Rabbi that did his homework.
>>496811
What fucking significant parallels are there?
Perrenialism is literally pop-religious theory for hippies and new age bums who refuse to critically examine religious texts and doctrines in a competitive manner.
>>496969
So, basically, if you were an Apostle and had, say, a half burnt copy of the book of Exodus with you, maybe even the Greek Septuagint translation, it would have been enough to prove how full of shit were the Pharisees, Sadducees, etc. every single time.
>>496999
what is the point of competitive consideration? this isn't an arms race. it's like you don't consider - or even understand - the AIM of religion, which is what perennialists primarily concern themselves with.
>>496969
You're obviously a jew posting the all too familiar jewish talmudic rhetoric but I'll bite.
>it turns out that Ex 34:21 does not prohibit plucking, only reaping.
The word for "reaping" is actually "harvesting". Picking heads of grain is harvesting.
http://biblehub.com/hebrew/7105.htm
>Jesus is accused of breaking the Sabbath in Mt 12:10, Mk 3:2, and Lk 6:7, but in Mt 12:13, Mk 3:5, and Luke 6:10 no work is done
You don't get it, if Jesus was using his magic to perform some action, then it was considered "working" regardless of what the Greek translation is. He even reaffirms this by talking about saving a lost sheep in a hole, he says that it is good to do good on the sabbath.
>Spitting in the faces of the pharisees and sadducees.
>Where?
Jesus regularly denounced the teachers of the law as hypocrites, liars, whitewashed tombs and dens of vipers, even calling them the sons of satan.
>all food is clean
>That's not what Jesus said, it was "to eat with unwashed hands does not defile" (Mt 15:20).
Jesus said it's not what goes into the mouth that makes you unclean, but what comes out of it that makes you unclean.
>>496999
Both Jesus and Buddha said the kingdom of Heaven is within you.
>>497051
Comparative*
Perrenialism is a religious doctrine of its own and Perrenialists are known for making shit up to promote their beliefs.
Case in point:
Jesus was Buddhist or heavily influenced by Buddhist ideas.
>>497061
>Both Jesus and Buddha said the kingdom of Heaven is within you.
Source?
But more importantly -- simply because charismatic religious figures use similar phrasing at times does not indicate an overall similarity of doctrine.
An even cursory examination of the texts we have would indicate that.
Furthermore when you say "Jesus taught" or "Buddha taught" you are buying into a narrative that indiscriminately accepts a certain narrative as authoritatively true(The New Testament as an accurate record & The Pali canon as an accurate record, for example). The fact of the matter is there are/were many different competing texts and organizations which claimed status as heirs and custodians of the Buddha or Jesus religion.
>>496999
Plenty of similarities.
Christians sometimes honor Mary and Buddhist will honor a mother of Buddha's both to embrace the feminine aspect of Spirit.
Jesus teaches the Way, Buddha teaches the Dharma.
Essentially, if you can read one, you can understand the other.
And don't confuse teaching with popular religious sects, this is a big problem when it comes to explaining what Christianity is supposed to be.
>>497071
I think you have a fixation with falsehood and doctrine, as well as an axe to grind against perrenialism. I don't know whose work you've been reading but a perrenialist (or anybody involved in spirituality) worth a shit doesn't fabricate lies in order to sound more correct.
Also, the Buddha and the Christ were both talking about the ultimate goal: union with God. Of course there will be differences in doctrine; time, location and culture all apply in influencing this. B speaking as someone who's vested alot of time into studying mysticism, the truth of their goal is self-evident. Piety is the same regardless of doctrine.
>>497108
>Plenty of similarities.
>Christians sometimes honor Mary and Buddhist will honor a mother of Buddha's both to embrace the feminine aspect of Spirit.
>Jesus teaches the Way, Buddha teaches the Dharma.
>Essentially, if you can read one, you can understand the other.
>And don't confuse teaching with popular religious sects, this is a big problem when it comes to explaining what Christianity is supposed to be.
1. Wow! A religion honors its founders mother they must be somehow doctrinally related!
2. Wow! They both teach doctrine!
3. Claim. "Understand the other" is religiously loaded terminology -- you are claiming there are some truths being transmitted in these texts and that these truths are similar.
4. Blah. Meaningless claim.
Essentially in order to prove your claim(that Buddhism & Christianity teach the same thing) you are relying on the premise that they are similar enough to compare in the way you do.
All the evidence we have indicates that as products of human culture these religions, historically, claimed radically different doctrines as true.
>>497093
>Source?
Buddha said "The practice to which I devote myself is truth. The topic of my conversation is truth. My thoughts are always in the truth. For lo! my self has become the truth." It doesn't sound the same at first but it's very similar to Jesus's I am the way the truth and the life.
>But more importantly -- simply because charismatic religious figures use similar phrasing at times does not indicate an overall similarity of doctrine.
Pic related.
>I think you have a fixation with falsehood and doctrine, as well as an axe to grind against perrenialism. I don't know whose work you've been reading but a perrenialist (or anybody involved in spirituality) worth a shit doesn't fabricate lies in order to sound more correct.
>Also, the Buddha and the Christ were both talking about the ultimate goal: union with God. Of course there will be differences in doctrine; time, location and culture all apply in influencing this. B speaking as someone who's vested alot of time into studying mysticism, the truth of their goal is self-evident. Piety is the same regardless of doctrine.
>>497133
I don't care that "I think you have a fixation..." that is dog shit tier rhetoric. Your speculations about me and my "fixations" are meaningless attempts to redirect the conversation.
Fundamentally the claims Perrenialists make lack evidence -- present such evidence.
Again, your own religious beliefs about "union with God", " the truth of their goal is self evident" might have gotten in your way to think critically about the subject you claim knowledge in -- namely a competitive study of the doctrines in Christianity and Buddhism.
Smoke enough grass and you'll believe anything you're told.
>>497157
Yeah man just compare them why not you shouldn't have to speculate so much
>>497179
At least stoners know how to compare and contrast
>>497165
Again, you are cherry picking which doctrines to compare and furthermore you refuse to investigate the context of these very things.
The fact that Buddha and Jesus are both ascribed sayings to the effect of "Do no harm" is useless on its own as a basis for comparative analysis.
What did they mean by "Do no harm" -- what authority did they claim when they said thus?
If you even begin a cursory examination of a quote such as that you will see that the historical communities, and the texts themselves paint a completely different picture of what it means to "Do no harm".
Ultimately though you are choosing some of the most shortest expositions on doctrine these respective figures have been traditionally ascribed. Why not compare the doctrines expounded in say Jesus' " encounter with Satan" with Buddhas "Teaching at Deer Park"
The similarities are few.
>>497190
All it takes is too read a Buddhist teaching and a phrase in the Bible or something and meditate
It's very easy
>>497157
you just proving you don't know the first thing about the esotericism of either religion, which is the essence of their teachings. your contention is that they do not teach the same thing, yet you do even not comprehend what they were teaching.
you're only scratching the surface, nit-picking about basically semantic details that are extraeneous
>>497196
Again; instead of proving your claim all you do is claim you have access to "muh secret esoteric secrets" which is not an intellectually rigorous thing to say.
I don't deny that in your imagination and in your new age perennialist church you pray to Buddha and Jesus and maybe even Mohammed to but a competitive analysis of them reveals no such similarities as you claim
>>497203
Both teachings of Buddha and Jesus transcend the paradigm of logic, in a way that is still logical, but beyond the basic sense of human consciousness.
>>497210
Oh yeah? My "savings and investment scheme" transcends logic too -- so invest now today!
Such bullshit you hippies peddle.
>>497203
You're approaching this from too logical a standpoint. To understand passages from the bible or quotes from buddha requires alot of heart feeling, to feel in your heart and to think with your heart is not something you rush into, it's a slow process of understanding which takes time and alot of humility. When you read these famous figures words correctly, the same sensations click between the different authors messages. It is through these heartfelt sensations that you realize that they were saying the exact same thing all along, just in a different style and language.
>>497223
Again you're making shit up.
"Feelings" aren't the basis for discovery of knowledge. Plenty of people say they know Hitler was right, or Sasquatch exists because they "feel" it.
Your beliefs are a sham -- some bozo duped you into accepting his claims as true and now that you realize they are baseless claims you try to say that you "feel" they are correct.
>>497218
Hey man I'd rather be a stupid hippy and be able to compare and contrast than a "smart book worm type" that can't
>>493535
Its the extension of 19th century meme of comparative theology's obsession with proving that Christianity is not Christianity.
>>497061
>You're obviously a jew
I'm flattered that I capture the Jewish distaste for these straw men so perfectly, that I'm indistinguishable from the real thing.
Jesus blowing the fuck out of the Pharisees and Sadducees certainly would have impressed his immediate Jewish followers as he clearly was the best man for the job they had.
>http://biblehub.com/hebrew/7105.htm
>what is reaped
Does it mean τίλλω?
>if Jesus was using his magic
If. The Gospels don't claim he did anything.
When healing Jesus says: "your faith has healed you" over and over again.
>Jesus regularly denounced the teachers of the law as hypocrites, liars, whitewashed tombs and dens of vipers, even calling them the sons of satan.
Because these 1st century rabbis you read of in the Gospels are either Saturday morning cartoon villain straw men, some of the worst teachers in the history of Judaism, or both.
It would have been unorthodox not to call them out on their bullshit.
>Jesus said it's not what goes into the mouth that makes you unclean, but what comes out of it that makes you unclean.
There's nothing innovative about prioritizing spiritual purity over physical purity:
Although most of the many people who came from Ephraim, Manasseh, Issachar and Zebulun had not purified themselves, yet they ate the Passover, contrary to what was written. But Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, “May the Lord, who is good, pardon everyone who sets their heart on seeking God—the Lord, the God of their ancestors—even if they are not clean according to the rules of the sanctuary.” And the Lord heard Hezekiah and healed the people. (2 Chr 30.18–20)
Needless to say that our beloved Gospel villains do the opposite.
The New Testament writers are familiar with the Old, and they show it.
>>497235
Your "ability" to compare and contrast is severely lacking as you don't even know what to compare and contrast to verify your claims.
But congrats though on convincing yourself you have some type of knowledge! Not many people nowadays have such hubris to claim that they have access to muh secret feelings esoteric doctrines.
>>497243
It's not lacking. I don't need to speculate the whole "Christ and Buddha can't be related because I don't know how to think of this"
Just read a little bit if both and sit down for a while it'll be good for you
>>497255
I read plenty of both and sit down plenty, furthermore I studied the texts with a critical lens that doesn't accept as true the doctrines that have been propagated about the texts.
I, however, don't claim that such activity leads me to fantasies that are beyond the realm of critical analysis.
>>497269
Just read a little bit about Jesus and a little bit about Buddha and meditate.
>>497271
Lol. Why not just tell me to smoke weed and "see" the connections?
Furthermore, a good deal of religions believe that "sitting quietly" is somehow a magical experience and that you can communicate with the divine by engaging in it.
Kind of like Rastafarians but with meditation.
So you have no actual evidence for your claims beyond -- "I believe it so it must be true"
>>497286
Ever read "living Christ living buddha"?
>>497223
and you from too intiuitive a standpoint. in mysticism the brain is trained in such a way that logic fulfills intuition and intuition fulfills logic. both hemispheres of the brain must work in unison with each other, in the same way it does when a person plays music on an instrument, to achieve the Great Work. zen koans are a method of teaching this mode of thought.
the point of mysticism, which is the depth and origin of all religion, is in more modern terms is similar to transformational psychology. it is the elevation of human consciousness, into complete psychic awareness of oneself, culminating in what saints generally call transcendence of enlightenment, which is breaking through animal mind into universal mind. this is what all religions began in, and what buddha and jesus both taught. all great teachers of mankind point to this. it isnt bound to purely logical proofs - though there is an abundance of dense spiritual philosophy and theology that sates the rational mind
or to intuiton alone - though Spirit is real, and it is in the heart that we feel the vibratory emanations of gods love
god is beyond paradox
>>497218
you're asking for intellectual rigor without knowing the subject matter.
>>497293
No, as its a doctrinal book written by a religious guru-for-hire filled with religious platitudes and elementary school level comparison.
The claims he makes in the book aren't novel and original, but they certainly still lack the same support you do.
>>497310
You are full of claims but the only thing you have demonstrated is your inability to substantiate them.
>>497320
From my perspective, it just seems like you aren't going to change your opinion either way.
I gave you a source and you don't want to read it. It just shows how a mind with so much logic sometimes lacks in seeing two simple things that go together.
Just seems like you want to argue with people
>>497327
>autism
>>497346
"From my perspective" is what clouds your judgement and addles your mind. You are unable to critically examine the doctrines you hold as sacred.
Yes -- you gave me a source but a god awful source for proving your claims. The only people who accept that Buddha and Jesus were teaching doctrinally similar messages are those without either the motivation or ability to rigorously examine the doctrines they hold dear. Case in point: Thich Nat Hanh.
I'm really not all that interested in arguing with people at all -- I'd far more enjoy learning something new about something I thought I had a pretty decent grasp on understanding.
If you want an academic source de-bunking some of your myths just go on JSTOR and search for articles by Russel McCutcheon or J.Z. Smith -- the latter has some weird baggage of his own but the former is pretty solid on scholarship.
>>497203
>Praying to Buddha
Wat
>>497381
It doesn't cloud my judgement. I am happy to be able to see the similarities that's all.
If you discredit my source why would I give credit to yours? At least Thich Nat Hanh is qualified to talk about Buddhism, way more than an "academic" source who studies information and come to their own conclusions.
>>497383
Given that prayer is defined by the participants belief that they are 'communing with the divine' religious forms of meditation emphasize the aspect that one is 'communing with ones Buddha Nature'.
Simply because the 'divine' one claims communion with is not a deity does not make it any less a form of prayer.
>>497398
Just a couple quick questions: Your Christian, right? If so, what sect?
>>497390
>It doesn't cloud my judgement. I am happy to be able to see the similarities that's all.
Yet you are unable -- or unwilling to see the vast differences that exist doctrinally. Your "seeing" is not a seeing at all.
>If you discredit my source why would I give credit to yours? At least Thich Nat Hanh is qualified to talk about Buddhism, way more than an "academic" source who studies information and come to their own conclusions.
False. Thich Nat Hanh is no more qualified to talk about Buddhism than Billy Graham is to talk about Christianity. He is a Christian sure and makes claims about Christianity but his status as a Christian don't make his claims inherently true.
Critical investigation of the claims that are being made is the only barometer for the "credit" of a source.
J.Z. Smith & McCutcheon consistently meet that standard.
>>497407
Not a relevant question to our discussion.
>>497320
>>497286
>I study this stuff
>but I don't want to hear the side of those who believe it, eww
>>497421
No. I have heard plenty of the claims that are being made about the supposed similarities in doctrine between Jesus & Buddha.
Thich Nat Hanh, however, is
1) Not an academic source who cites his claims
2) Doesn't make any unique or different argument that I haven't already addressed.
>>497412
>mfw when Christian
>mfw when reading about buddha.
4 vows in Buddhism:
>to enlighten
>to cease passions (bad habits)
>be one with dharma (law and righteousness)
>be one with Buddhist truths
In Christianity likewise
>we try to wake people up to recognize their Spirit
>Stop sinning
>be one with God's will (law and righteousness)
>seek out the truth
>>497417
Not trying to derail this thread, just trying to get some context together for your last post. I would say my question is very relevant. Individual Christian sects seem to hold relatively different views on what prayer is and isn't.
>>497431
I know, I'm just saying, refusing to read up on authors who aren't actually academic sources but are still seen as central to the ideas certain people have, is just refusing to learn what fuels said ideas simply because it's not academical or factual at all.
But I might have misread. I am but a wandering shitposter and I was checking if /his/ could take filesize this big. sorry
>>497432
Once more you are only capable of comparison at the most basic and meaningless level of discourse.
If you want an idea what higher level discourse is like about comparative religion then perhaps ask the following questions!
Textually speaking -- what sort of beliefs are presented in the Pali Canon about "passions" and "Buddhist truths" how might these compare with the claims made in the Christian NT about "sin", and "God's will".
Even such a basic inquiry reveals how shallow your supposed comparison is.
The claims being made about passion and righteousness in one set of scriptures is completely different than the claims made in another.
>>497433
Not a Christian, still not a relevant question.
>>497451
They hold a lot of similarities
>>497443
Oh I definitely get that but what I'm saying is that there isn't much a difference from linking to someone blog and saying ""Read This 4 Truth!"" and recommending some self-help book by a "Guru" given that neither of them have any form of academic sourcing or critical examination of their respective subject matter.
But in terms of the claims Hanh makes, yeah, I've read them and he kind of just repeats the same old claims that New Agers tend to make about religion.
>>497456
Lol. Seriously are you guys all parrots?
You keep on repeating that but when asked for evidence you run away only to return to say the same thing.
>>497460
I know, and it tends to be a waste of time, but when you end up discussing such things with people who seriously believe in it, it gives you a major advantage. Although it only happens on Chinese cooking imageboards.
>>497464
no you're just autistic my friend
>>497464
Your not really making a good counter argument either.
>mfw when Christian incorporating Buddhists teachings
Cause that is really all it takes
>>497474
Lol yeah these Vietnamese "gift box identifying" boards definitely throw me for a loop sometimes.
>>497485
Like I said above -- there are plenty of contemporary Christians who like to "mix and match" religious doctrines with those of the Orient and pretend that they are compatible doctrinally.
The texts that we have in the NT and Pali Canon, however, indicate completely different and contradicting world views.
>>497505
They're both still alive through their teachings and wisdom
>>497051
Buddhism and Christianity have different aims, though. Referring to the purpose of religion in general is ridiculous because what are called religions usually don't structurally resemble each other much until you force them to because of some after-the-fact framework imposed by anthropologists (the bane of spirituality everywhere) or missionaries.
>>497578
a salient point. i agree. it was for the sake of discussion that i referred to the spiritual traditions as such.
>>496826
>>497108
>>497133
As others have pointed out, the reason is because people compromise on critical stances and adopt a wider range of lines that are similar enough.
>adopt hitler was a vegan and had dogs as pets
>generic vegan has a dog as pet
>therefore they are both similar
Same lack of critical thought leads to this type of comparison. The reason why the jesus/buddha is more popular is because they are head of world religion and people make compromises because they either are too much of a metaphorical pussy or they literally lack critical thinking skills.
Beyond the petty "they both said to love others" or "they both had mothers", the fundamentals are very much different. Its very possible that christianity had some buddhist influence like rosary/monastic/barlaam-josaphat stories, but these are mostly superficial influences.
If Buddha never preached his teachings, do you guys think people would lack the understanding of Jesus' preachings?
>>497787
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, do you think we'd all have a merry Christmas?
http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2000/02/Jesus-And-Buddha-The-Parallel-Sayings.aspx
They are in the sense that they promoted non-violence.
Also salvation is much like nirvana in the sense that you never take material rebirth again. Heaven is the place where the spiritual afterlife is, and nirvana, after all karmic debts are paid they are free of bonds.
The only difference is void versus the spiritual.
Buddha and Jesus would get along. Them arguing about God would be like a Christian and an Atheist today, but the principles of peace are the same, as well as other concepts.
Why does anyone think Jesus ever existed? His whole life reads like a Judaic, shitty metaphor for the sun, not unlike other savior figures/cult patrons at the time.
Christianity was probably just a shitty mystery cult that got out of hand when Paul decided to pacify the goyim and rewrote the doctrine.
>>496911
More proof of Jesus than Aristotle, m8
>>493550
Mme Blavatsky predated new age hippies
>>497846
Every slut in history predates new age hippies
>>497907
The only reference to the persecution of Christians under Nero (Tacitus) is an obvious fake. Try harder.
>>497948
How is it fake did you see it? Are you a historian? What type of credentials do you have?
Paul's conversion date and persecution of Christians before/after ç.35AD is enough for anyone to have faith that Jesus was a real human being who walked on this Earth. This and revelations from Jesus, which is what happens to Paul and is the reason why he converts in the first place.
>>497962
>y-you don't even have a phd!
The Tacitus mention is an obvious forgery, probably by some butthurt monk.
For example, Pontus Pilate wasn't a prosecutor. Or, "Christos" was actually "Chrestos", before some fat bishop smudged the letter.
Also, the followers of "Chrestos" were pretty hated in the empire, probably because they were a Judaic rip-off of Roman mystery cults.
>>496999
Perennialism has been a thing since the mystery religions. You've got perennalist Sufis from a thousand years ago for fucks sakes. Next time do your homework tripfag
>>498028
There isn't anything against the Tacitus document being real.
Pontus Pirate had authority at the time, and therefore is responsible for the decision of Jesus being crucified.
Isn't the sound "crio" "criso" mean anointed, and the letters would have been greek, not in English, so you don't smudge an E to and I, even though they both "could" have a very similar sound.
>>498058
I'm saying the "e" was deliberately changed to a "I". I wonder why that is.
Also, why does no other historian or chronicler at the time mention Christ or Christians if their religion was blamed for the fire of Rome? Also, if they were as hated and as despised as Tacitus says they were, why is there literally no mention of them by anyone else?
>>497487
Worst tripfag on the board. You can tell he's never meditated or even tried to live the tenets of all these religions he's "critically studied". Way to completely miss the point of something you're supposedly so knowledgeable about lol. Like I'm gonna go to a fucking academic of all people to tell me about what saints and mystics REALLY meant
>>496811
>Christians should incorporate some of Buddhist teachings to expand their faith.
Before converting to Christianity I was on the point of going to a Buddhist monastery.. the concept of divinities - polytheistic hinudistic concept kept me skeptical...
And the core teachings of Buddhism is totally different from Christianity.
Like comparing methane with water.
>>496826
Gentleman's this is the average idiot :^).
But beware ! He has an opinion and doesn't want to listen others.
>>498115
There are multiple Buddhist schools, not all are polytheistic
>>498053
Yeah and it was just as nonsense then.
Where's my trip btw lol?
>>498093
>muh authority
You're not an academic here. You're a random anon who can make any claim, just like everyone else in this thread.
Also, I don't care what your qualifications to suck the mainstream cock are. I care about facts. If the facts are in conflict with your claims, I'll say you're full of shit regardless of who you are.
>>498124
Haha keep talking all this shit without ever backing it up brosef.
>>498093
Why the hell would I "live according to a religion" to study it? That is one of the most idiotic suggestions I continuously hear.
Religion is a product of human culture and can be investigated as such.
>>498125
Ivw read more religious texts than you bud, I can promise you that
>>498115
>And the core teachings of Buddhism is totally different from Christianity.
Both are materialistic death cults that probably both were created by the perversion of actual spiritual traditions.
Nirvana is annihilation and heaven is death.
>>498132
I'm not the one making the claim that "beneath all religions there is a Perrenial truth" dipshit.
The onus is on the people who make the claim the prove it.
>>498136
That's irrelevant if you don't have a PhD. I doubt those religious texts were by academics anyway.
>>497133
>ultimate goal: union with God
One religion sprouted from Hinduism and its concept of union is melting into Brahman because you were always of the same essence but for some reason you always contradict with others and nature itself.
In Christianity if you by grace go towards God you are like a sword which is put in fire and turns red and emanates heat.. it's almost like fire but it's not the fire.
>>498136
I don't think you understand.
You could be the pope shitposting between sermons at St. Peter's Basilica for all I care. If you make dumb arguments, I'll call you out.
>>498133
Kek, fucking autists
>all these concepts I read about are nothing more than pretty abstractions to me but I'm still qualified to talk about what they are or are not, and also disparage the credentials of actual religious people
Kill yourself. X
>>498148
>reading religious texts and practicing the tenets therein is irrelevant to knowing about religion
>academic texts take precedence over the primary source
Fucking lol
>>498161
>unless you fully devote yourself to a tradition, you can't debate any aspect of it
fucking autists. Since the thread is about Buddhism, have you achieved Nirvana yet? Because leave if you haven't delved completely into the religion.
>>498161
Religious people don't have "credentials" to talk about their religion dipshit.
They are products of institutions which exist not to critically examine the nature of religious narratives but rather to propagate them.
>>498154
>buddhism sprouted from hinduism
where are you getting these info?
Hinduism is from a vedic tradition. Buddhism is from a sramana tradition. Both are like twin trees that have intermingled, but ultimately I'd say sramana is an older tree and the vedic tree was planted next to it..Vedic religion has roots in middle east. Sramana is an indigenous older tradition.
>>498157
Not a single piece of textual evidence in these threads except for faggots like you waving your academic credentials around in between machiattos and thinking that's an argument
>>493535
Pic related is for the people denying the similarities between Christianity and Buddhism.
>>498217
I didn't say I was inherently more qualified. I said that a religious person isn't qualified inherently because of their status as a religious person to report on their religion.
Scientologists say whatever the fuck they want about Scientology but that doesn't make them experts or scholars on Scientology.
It makes them members of a religious organization engaging in public apologetics.
>>497618
You shouldn't do that in the future, since all you've done is muddy the waters.
>>498232
Your picrelated is a bunch of assertions sustained without evidence.
>>498217
Stop sucking on authorities asshole to make yourself feel better.
Just because some guy goes/doesn't go balls deep into Christianity says nothing about his understanding of the Bible. My understanding of doctrine doesn't rely on how many priest's cocks I've knobbed on.
>>498227
I was telling the credentials faggot to bugger off m8.
>Christians sometimes honor Mary and Buddhist will honor a mother of Buddha's both to embrace the feminine aspect of Spirit.
Christians do not do this to embrace shit, some Catholics pray to marry due to her high status and that's it.
>Jesus teaches the Way, Buddha teaches the Dharma.
NOPE! Jesus IS the way, he doesn't teach it he is it. Taoist Christians exist and have existed because they correspond the Tao to Jesus for this reason. The dharma is also vastly different in charateristic to the teachings of Christ and the Jews.
>Essentially, if you can read one, you can understand the other.
Not true at all, I bet you don't know that the Lord's Prayer contains a word which banishes spirits, and I bet you don't account for the polytheism inherently within Buddhism.
>And don't confuse teaching with popular religious sects, this is a big problem when it comes to explaining what Christianity is supposed to be.
No one here is doing this except you.
>>498238
Religious people hold more authority to speak of religion than someone who isn't religious and has "academic sources"
Primarily it is about the religious experience for each individual and where you get your ideals and philosophy from
>>498250
No they don't. You are claiming that there is such a thing as "religious experience" which generates authority for religious people to talk about religion.
Hogwash.
Religion is a product of human culture and "religious experience" is a buzzword that religious people use to describe perfectly ordinary and observable phenomena.
>>498250
just stop. You're not making arguments.
I was raised as a Christian and called myself such until my early 20s, even though I have never read even half of the Bible. Am I now more qualified to speak on Christianity than non-Christian who has read the Bible cover-to-cover and biblical commentary?
>>498248
Some Christians pray to Mary.
Dharma can mean a lot of things, and Jesus had taught Dharma as well, and His Dharma is easy, when you focus on His teachings.
>polytheism in Buddhism
For me, I have seen parallels between Buddhism and Christianity. As for polytheism in Buddhism, I guess it depends what kind of Buddha you are. You know, the Buddha's are sometimes just different aspects of the same teaching, but it can indeed turn into idolatry.
I am not promoting any popular religious sects ITT, I just think it takes a practical mind to see how the teaching benefit one another.
>>498250
Are you religious? What is your religion? You sound like a perennialist twat. I've had more authentic spiritual insights reading Hegel than I have reading the Gospel, and Hegelianism is two steps from atheism.
>>498242
The Four Noble Truths are extremely comparable with the concept of original sin, and the resisting thereof.
>>498278
Actually Hegel is two steps from hermeticism you utter pleb.
>>498278
I don't like to associate religious terms because they only create stereotypes but at heart I do believe in Jesus
>>498276
>His Dharma is easy
Do you walk the Way already? Do you even know what Dharma is? Christianity is precisely anti-Dharmatic. It's an explicit break with that kind of conception of worldly order. You're misinterpreting Christian doctrine here if you're actually equating the teachings of Christ with Hindu or Buddhist dharma.
>>498285
>I was baptized and went to mass every sunday
>I am now inherently more qualified to speak on Christianity than a non-religious biblical scholar
pls bugger off
>>498282
>The Four Noble Truths are extremely comparable with the concept of original sin, and the resisting thereof.
But original sin is taken care of by the blood of Christ.
>>498276
Dharma means "law". Jesus taught a "law" as well. The laws are not same, but the idea of law is same. Just like how Obama is the leader of US and the Xi Jinping is the leader of China. Both are leaders, but their view is starkly different.
You're right in saying you're not promoting any popular religious sects. You're promoting a half baked, half understood idea about what buddhism/christianity are. Syncretics have been around forever. The earlier I can recall is Mani. A syncretic of monotheism and buddhism. Gnostic is similar too. Neither represent either Buddhism or Christianity, its another religion altogether.
>>493535
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
i think he also studied hinduism
>>498264
So you "critically" read a couple of articles on something you dismiss out of hand and expect us take you at your word. Like its our problem you lack the discernment for it
>>496969
>Sound like it was made for man, and ox and donkey.
But it is also written:
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath unto Jehovah thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 for in six days Jehovah made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore Jehovah blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Ex 20)
It was clearly made for God
>>498311
>if you love God and know God in your experience you gotta testify man, there is no need for someone who "knows about the bible" but doesn't actually believe in it. That is a waste of time
You're ill m8.
Basically, if you believe in God, then any arguments against your faith are null, regardless of what they are. That's what I'm getting out of you.
>>498325
Buddhism is pagan.
>>498316
It is man that rests on each Sabbath, not God.
>>498311
How can you claim to be a Christian when you get your definition of righteousness from a religion other than Christianity?
>>498336
Yes, he doesn't rest for his sake, but for God's sake, otherwise he'd be able to rest another day. Sabbath wasn't created for man's respite.
>>498327
Wut? I'm not arguing with anyone, I am just saying if your atheist, your qualifications to speak of the Bible are so much less in value.
>>498330
Except when they deny idols and even the value of a soul.
Buddhism is spiritual atheism.
>>498339
Buddha is righteous, and Jesus is righteous.
If I learn some Buddhist teaching, it will help me expand my perception of Jesus's teachings.
We have to distinguish between the caricutarized god of the theists and the metaphysical God which is self-knowledge and the experience of Being.
This is because the idea of personal God, a judge or "keeper of the realm" on a cosmic scale, is actually not the greatest imaginable ideal. It's possible to perceive higher and higher states of consciousness until all descriptions putter out to ineffability. The experience of the Tao, Buddha-nature, being like a child as Jesus describes, even a few lines in Zarathustra, these all describe the same thing.
>>498362
Sabbath was mandated for man to worship His God. When God rests in Genesis He didn't give the Commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day. That isn't important till the Israelites receive the Old Law.
>>498285
Nope. I have as much authority as anyone else investigating cultural phenomena. You make up this sort of "inherent authority" that religious people posses.
Which is nonsense.
>>498282
False.
A cursory study of comparative doctrines reveals otherwise.
>>498372
>Except when they deny idols and even the value of a soul.
>Buddhism is spiritual atheism.
I'm not sure you understand what paganism is. Any non-Christian spiritual practice is pagan. Buddhism is a spiritual practice. I'm genuinely unsure why you think their treatment of idols matters; Buddhists don't worship the Abrahamic God and are therefore pagans, it's that simple. What kind of Buddhism are you thinking of, anyway?
>Buddha is righteous, and Jesus is righteous.
In the same sense?
>If I learn some Buddhist teaching, it will help me expand my perception of Jesus's teachings.
What makes you think that?
>>498381
Well yeah. A religious person says "I see a parallel between Buddhism and Christianity based on my religious experience"
>"no because academic scholars"
>There is no "religious experience" that's why I read the Bible
>>498299
And what did Christ teach to His followers?
>>498313
No.
You made up the category of "religious experience" and brought it in here as if it has any intellectual weight behind it.
Religion is a product of human culture. There is no evidence to the contrary and as such it can be investigated like any other product of human culture like golf, for example.
>>498389
I bet you think Hell is a literal place too.
>>498122
And at least in the Pali canon, Buddha doesn't even address whether or not there are Gods. The question wasnt useful to the purpose of ending suffering
>>498394
>s "I see a parallel between Buddhism and Christianity based on my religious experience"
The fact that they claim to see a connection does not mean one exists.
>>498394
Religious experience is literally not an argument, because it's 100% subjective.
That's like saying, Buddhism and Christianity *feel* the same.
>>498399
To believe in him.
>>498391
I don't worship the "Abrahamic" god either, if you consider YHWH to even be the real god. Not all Christians do
>What makes you think that
Experience, being Buddhist before being a born again Christian then reading Jesus teachings and being like "whoa that's like in Buddhism when..."
Instead of blaming God, I blame myself for the consequences to my own actions. And the selfless teachings of Buddhism and the path to waking up un-enlightened beings is alot like teaching people about Jesus to save their soul
>>498401
9/10 if you're not trolling
>>498421
Not an argument.
>>498276
>Dharma can mean a lot of things, and Jesus had taught Dharma as well, and His Dharma is easy, when you focus on His teachings.
It specifically means law and refers to their Buddhist laws and doctrine there is no question in this.
What you see is a western illusion precisely because you are not going strictly by the texts.
Buddha literally fights Brahma to prove his dominance in one text, you are also not even considering things like the cult of Tara. And it's not Christians it's a very small amount of Catholics, and the ones that do don't claim to actually worship Mary.
Jesus claims to be Lord of Creation and he need not prove and you need not test him.
Buddha considers himself a normal man enlightened who wants you to test some shit and what that shit is, is very different depending on which tradition of Buddhism you look at.
Christ is the very Logos, the platonic voice of God. Buddha is just a normal man who reaches an advanced state in a completely different system which has very different values and ideas.
Jesus would rebuke Buddha as a devil worshipper and Buddha would rebuke Jesus the same way he rebuked Hindu priests and aspirants.
>>498375
But given that the Decalogue is superior to other laws and was meant to specify the vague instructions given by God since then, previous interpretations contained in the Genesis are actually put away by the Old Law
>>498405
A gift can be refused, and God forbid everyone here to actually find something to feed themselves. If He forces them to do nothing, and this against their will, it's for His own sake, not theirs.
>>498415
>I don't worship the "Abrahamic" god
I have multiple reasons to doubt your understanding of Christianity going off this sentence alone.
>Instead of blaming God, I blame myself for the consequences to my own actions. And the selfless teachings of Buddhism and the path to waking up un-enlightened beings is alot like teaching people about Jesus to save their soul
But that's completely backwards, original sin is a Christian doctrine. There isn't anything like the doctrine of no-self in Christianity.
>>498372
Denial of soul doesn't make it atheism. I'd bring up the contentious of the "denial of soul" part as well, but its besides the point.
Buddhist clearly distinguish between gods and humans. Its more like Buddhists are anti-theists than atheists. Early Buddhist rejected the notion that people should worship gods and the power of gods to save humans (let alone themselves). The mahayana giants like Nagarjuna, chandrakirti, dharmakiirti, and others are strongly antitheists. They aren't atheist.
>>498433
Well yeah? Religion is an interesting cultural phenomena.
"Devotee of God within our spirit" is meaningless mumbo jumbo which doesn't hold up to the scrutiny of critical investigation.
>>498425
You haven't really studied or practiced any of this stuff, my man. It's all abstracted to shit in your autismal little mind. You just don't have any clue what youre talking about.
>>498439
>previous interpretations contained in the Genesis are actually put away by the Old Law
Interpretations of acts aren't the same as the acts they interpret. God rested on the seventh day, but not because He was obeying one of His Commandments.
>>498426
Not trying to support any popular culture or sect of Buddhism or Christianity.
Just saying, the teachings, the teachings, not the dogma
>>498452
Again you're making the argument that one has to "practice a religion" to understand it.
This is hinged on the authority which religions claim to have -- not on any actual argument.
>>498455
Then it all depends on whether God rested on the 7th day because he told it to a prophet or because Jews wanted to find a good excuse to tell people not to work too hard all week
>>498415
So you are a filthy pseudo-gnostic who hasn't even studied gnostic scripture.
In Buddhism that which brings the law is an impersonal force.
Compare to these.
Matthew 13:41-42, 49-50 “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Matthew 22:13 “Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Matthew 25:46 “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
Revelation 14:9-11; 19:3 “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name. The smoke from her goes up forever and ever.”
Luke 12:5 “But I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him!”
Does any of this sound remotely Buddhist to you?
>>498463
The meaning of Dogma is opinion, that is the opinion of the teachings of a religion.
The teachings are not similar, the dogma is not similar. You are a product of the west bastardizing these religions. You do not even know what the words you use mean.
>>498471
No, it depends on whether or not God rested because He felt obliged by rules He gave to men or because He felt like not doing anything after creating the universe. The latter seems more believable IMO.
>>498443
Gnostic Christian, the term "Abrahamic" is so small, and when you reseach YHWH and you see Genesis and other mistranslations..
The God all people should worship is the Holy Spirit, because that is the goal when worship of God is afterlife / freedom of reincarnation, and to embrace a wholesome spiritual experience.
>>498447
That is why I am saying your lack to speak about religious experience is faulty
>>498414
"Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." - John 14:6
We all know Jesus spake very metaphorically when speaking. I do believe in God, and I believe that union with Him is Salvation. However, wouldn't you agree that it makes more sense that union with God is essentially being in a state of spiritual well-being and virtue?
This is what I believe Jesus is saying. If you work towards the spiritual level of Jesus via charity, humility, love, and monasticism, then you will eventually attain Salvation. This is comparable with Socrates's method of acquiring happiness and the Buddhist belief of Nirvana.
>>498452
You're a moron. There is a different between objective spiritual experiences that can be repeated by anybody and vague, subjective schizo Christian delusions.
I meditate for 1 and a half hours daily and I can tell you there is a soul that you can learn to see, feel and manipulate if you really want to. This is entirely objective and can be done by anybody for the same results. There is no room for this kind of soul in Christianity. Your supposed "religious experience" is worthless, because there is nothing objective about it. It's just your Christian delusion.
>>498484
Nope. You claim "religious experience" is the barrier to entry for me; but you cannot define what "religious experience" is or how it is in any way a barrier to critical inquiry.
>>498483
Or because it was actually the first day of the second 6-days week but He choose not to tell anyone
>>498481
This is true. Ask an Asian Buddhist about Buddhism and you won't get this kind of shitty answer. You'll get a much more elaborate explanation about what Buddhist illusion actually is and, if you know the first thing about Western esoteric or spiritual traditions, you'll notice a pretty obvious distinction (the Absolute as absolute self and the Absolute as absolute no-self).
>>498484
This is disgusting. Read Plotinus. You know nothing about the philosophical foundations of Christianity or of Buddhism or of Gnosticism.
>>498504
>Buddha wouldn't read any of that
So you're not going to bother replying to it?
>"religion"
This is how I know your opinions are just opinions.
>>498484
You don't know jack shit about Gnosticism. The Crux of Gnosticism is that there is a false creator and a true God. The True creator is YHVH, while the false God is the creator of men "Elohim" who pretends to be YHVH.
Your ignorance on this proves much if you deny that the Gnostics believed YHVH was the true God. As this is clear from their gods and magic.
>>498493
I bet you don't even meditate properly, probably just "clear your mind" and you think that's what meditation is.
>>498496
>religious experience doesn't exist
>studies the Bible
>>498493
I'm not even Christian you hysterical faggot I'm arguing for exactly the kinds of experiences you're describing. But lol if you don't think Christian mysticism exists. Look up theosis
>>498473
>Matthew 25:46 “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
Resisting God's love and instead being antagonist towards it puts one in a spiritual state of Hell. Living without the love of God and then realizing how great union with Him would have been would arguably cause "weeping and gnashing of teeth".
>According to the saints, the “fire” that will consume sinners at the coming of the Kingdom of God is the same “fire” that will shine with splendor in the saints. It is the “fire” of God’s love; the “fire” of God Himself who is Love. “For our God is a consuming fire” (Hebrews 12:29) who “dwells in unapproachable light.” (I Timothy 6:16) For those who love God and who love all creation in Him, the “consuming fire” of God will be radiant bliss and unspeakable delight. For those who do not love God, and who do not love at all, this same 66consuming fire” will be the cause of their “weeping” and their “gnashing of teeth.”
https://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/spirituality/the-kingdom-of-heaven/heaven-and-hell
>>498517
Yeah? What of it?
>>496926
why are there christians now?
>>498439
>God forbid everyone here to actually find something to feed themselves
The goyim are not supposed to keep the Sabbath, only the children of Israel (Exodus 31:16).
>it's for His own sake
It's a covenant, it's reciprocal. I am yours and you are mine. (Exodus 31:17)
>>498486
>If you work
But salvation through work alone is not the teaching of any Christian denomination.
>you will eventually attain Salvation
Not without belief.
This is the unique feature of Christianity: "your faith has healed you."
>>498530
Sounds like a scam
>>498550
What, specifically sounds like a scam?
>>498553
Someone talking about the bible and claiming there is no religious experience
Also
>Buddha and Jesus don't make sense together because I said so
>Also academic scholars
>>498496
You retard if the most you've ever gotten out of your studies is "mumbo-jumbo" then you clearly don't known what the fuck you're talking about.
It's telling you don't have an argument but since you can't even anticipate a fucking argument. Talk about Theosis, Henosis, Freud's "oceanic states", talk about dervishes, talk about tantra and trance states, say something specific instead of advertising how little your study has penetrated
>>498516
>I bet you don't even meditate properly
>30 minutes pranayama(kapalabhati/alternate nostril)
>30 minutes hatha yoga
>sun mantra
>concentration exercise
I think I know better than you m8.
>>498525
>Christian mysticism exists. Look up theosis
Literally worthless. Are you going to open your chakras or learn to see and control your aura with that?
>>498548
>I have a pretty decent understanding
This is blatantly false.
>I put "religion" in quotes because usually people think you go to church and are stupid
I don't understand what you're trying to express with this sentence. Please clarify what you mean.
>>498565
>the desert fathers were new agers
Cretin
>>498559
I'd be more inclined to think a Bible-thumper yelling about religious experience is a charlatan than someone who just told me about the philosophical and ontological background of Christianity.
>>498559
Not really. People like to make things up or invent explanations for phenomena they don't understand. Sometimes people take a shit ton of drugs too and claim that what they see is somehow indicative of "higher" realities
>>497190
Satan must be really proud of you.
Good boy! ;)
P.S.: It's ironic how people know the Bible and other holy books from heart but never, ever understand what these books are about.
>>498561
There are plenty of cognitive hallucinations but just because a person says they are "religious experiences" doesn't mean they are and certainly doesn't in any way validate the claims they make about the world.
>>498547
>This is the unique feature of Christianity: "your faith has healed you."
"For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."
- James 2:26
>>498529
Again, eternity there is no lightness to this.
You would know what you just posted is garbage if you know the meanings of gehenna, hades and sheol.
>>498548
YHVH is HVHY, there is no difference and it is always the highest God of the Gnostics yet your ignorance proves you do not know this.
You are literally a product of western new ageism.
>>498568
How is that false? I have a decent understanding of Gnosticism (non canonical scriptures, also demiurge/evil creator god) which is why we should worship God as the Holy Spirit. I believe Jesus teaches us the Way to know God in the Holy Spirit, and that the OT and NT are not infallible documents.
Buddhism, when it preaches about peace, mindfulness, compassion, and nonviolence is the similarity between Christianity and Buddhism. You have to apply it to your religious practice in order to understand, otherwise it is just a bunch of words.
>"religion"
Because that word brings about stereotypes, I am a Christian but there isn't any specific kind of church that has "more salvation" than another, they all believe in the same God and Jesus but they're attacking eachother and do not see the pointless argument in front of them.
This is where Buddhist teachings would benefit Christians, so they can "let go of the argument" for the sake of peace
>>498591
>there is no difference and it is always the highest God
He's only the god of the jews and you should circumcise yourself if you want to continue worshipping him.
The sad thing is you don't even realize that jesus is the same sort of charlatan magician that moses warned you about. Get yourself a kippah and a nice jewish gf.
>>498577
Satan is a creation of mind as are "holy books" -- your claims are false and without evidence.
>>498573
Just saying man, if you believe in God you shouldn't take shit from people who don't like they know more than you.
Sure it is good to point out some things, but I know God to the extent of my ability and feel the Spirit from within, which the testimony between me and another actual Christian would be more valid than someone speculating on words they read in a "book"
>>498574
People also like to take things at face value without ever expanding their conscious.
>>498591
HWHY backwards means something else, and YHWH points to demiurge.
Still, if you worship God in Spirit, that should be the goal anyways
>>498583
You're so misinformed you don't even know Buddhism teaches to be on the lookout for exactly that, and to always maintain an objective, detached perspective on all mental events. Buddhist askesis is an entire system for spiritual development, as scientifically as any other. Or are you going to tell me self-knowledge is a hallucination or something
You don't know what you're talking about
>>498611
"Expanding ones consciousness" is another New Age phony belief that if you perform "x" activity enough you will be more wise and shit.
>>498587
And works without faith is even less.
>Now while Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very costly ointment, and she poured it on his head as he sat at the table. But when the disciples saw it, they were angry and said, “Why this waste? For this ointment could have been sold for a large sum, and the money given to the poor.” But Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why do you trouble the woman? She has performed a good service for me. For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me. (Mt 26:6-11)
You need faith to be saved as a Christian.
There is no works alone salvation. Working your way to Heaven results in what happened to the Tower of Babel.
>>498613
He obviously doesn't as he's a bible studies major, not a buddhist studies major.
>>498614
Have you tried it
>>498613
First off "Buddhism" isn't a monolithic entity and as a categorical descriptor is all but useless.
You're making the claims here buddy especially the whole "scientific" part: you have to provide the evidence all I have to keep on doing is asking for it and watching you run away.
Simply because your temple priest or whoever told you that Buddhism is "totes legit and scientific" doesn't make it so. Scientologists peddle the same claim.
>>498627
Neither thank you :)
>>498614
If it was "new age" it wouldn't have been going on since the beginning of time.
I do agree with the phrase "expand the consciousness" is new age, but the practice when done right.
The goal is to take the jivatman (living self/soul) and connect it to the paramatman (Highest self) and the "highest self/soul" is God's soul.
If you believe in God, your goal is to connect yourself to His effulgence while ago the same time recognizing your relationship to God and other beings.
When you act on lower energies (ignorance, passion, indulgence) you forget the relationship between you and God
Skeptics always suffer from not being in the real world syndrome. They have one field of domain they may have knowledge about and then apply the same knowledge set to all others.
A more reasonable approach would be to accept the lack of knowledge about the given subject and simply to either ask more information or to move on. Making baseless assumption merely creates the same person the skeptics usually fight off.
Its just a weird circle.
>>498623
>You need faith to be saved as a Christian.
I understand. However, it is meaningless to think that mere faith will save one. Despite my mysticism, I still see repenting as a necessary element of acquiring Salvation. However, repenting implies that one knows their actions are wrong and wish to change.
My point is that saying "I'm a believer so I get a free pass on everything" is entirely false. It is also wrong to do works for the sake of pride.
>>498632
There's nothing to "try": people who claim that you can " expand your consciousness" don't define what that is or how it might be observed.
It's the equivalent of missionaries saying "just believe you'll see the truth"
>>498654
There are entire systems honed over thousands of years of use at your fingertips and you come in here with this babbys first positivism shit and expect us to take you seriously. Good bait all around, I fell for it desu
>>498644
Need a bunch of sourcing on your "beginning of time" claim.
Your entire argument relies on the supposed truthfulness of a variety of premises(the divinity of the Vedas, the existence of a "soul", morality) which are faith based in nature and not demonstrable.
>>498666
Then provide the evidence buddy! People believing in this shit for thousands of years is no barometer of its truth.
Mysticism whether new age or old is based on faith and can't present its claims to critical interrogation.
>>498671
You demonstrate this experience on yourself.
You can't have someone "prove religion" for you, you have to take the first step and surrender to God and or be initiated by a Guru when you become one with the Guru's teachings.
>>498593
You have a decent understanding of a form of Gnostic belief that was widely condemned by everybody once that small sect was exterminated as it rightly deserved to be. Even the (worthwhile) Platonists took time out of their busy anti-Christian schedules to single out Gnosticism as particularly lacking in basis. Like I said, read Plotinus, understand what the philosophical bases of the beliefs you're referring to are (a chapter of Plato's Republic was among the Dead Sea Scrolls), then come back to me and talk about understanding Gnosticism.
Gonna be honest with you, I don't hear much about mindfulness in Christianity, and the forms of those things advocated by Buddhists (as others have pointed out, this is not a homogeneous group) are not the same as those advocated by Christians. Compare the things Buddhist and Christian monks do with their time. They aren't quite the same.
>fedora atheist in the thread
kek jesus christ
>>498693
Again you are assuming there is a God to surrender to.
You are saying that in order to prove God exists one must believe first in God. Which is circular logic.
You are also assuming that the Guru has some sort of special authority.
The only tool we have for determining the truth of statements is our critical faculty; you can't "will truth" into being or whatever.
>>498696
You don't just define Gnosticism it is an umbrella term, to essentially describe the difference between matter / Spirit.
>then come talk to me about Gnosticism
OR I could just not talk to you about it. I am describing something very simple here.
Christianity could benefit from the teachings and meditation of Buddhism, and they will collaborate very well.
>>498565
Ah so you practice the very basics of meditation, basic asana basic pranayama basic mantrayana and basic Dharana. Should I be impressed by your New York new ager meditation routine?
>>498611
The fact you think spelling the name backwards makes any difference proves you have no study at all of any source of merit on the Jewish faith.
>>498727
By that standard I'm a Gnostic too, it isn't like you're really that much of a special snowflake. This is literally an ancient heresy you're spouting. I'd prefer it if you didn't talk to me about it, tbqh.
>Christianity could benefit from the teachings and meditation of Buddhism, and they will collaborate very well.
I haven't yet seen you make a good argument for this position.
>>498710
Yeah I don't look at my guru as a normal person. The Guru passes down the discipline one guru at a time.
God proves His existence all the time, it just takes mindfulness to see it.
Saying God doesn't exist because there isn't physical evidence is like saying my butt hole isn't pink because I can't see it without looking at it in the mirror.
It's like saying a tree isn't alive even though it dies.
>>498732
It's more than just turning the name backwards...
>merit of Jewish faith
You're talking to someone who also strongly despises certain aspects of Judaism
>>498735
It's only a heresy because the church tries to take over Jesus, and because the people against the church wouldn't want you learning more about Jesus
I'm not really arguing with you
>>498745
You accept the authority of your Guru and the existence of God as givens despite you having no reason to.
Huh? Just get someone to take a picture of your butt hole if you are worried about its color.
Your tree analogy makes no sense. Trees live; trees die.
>>498754
I have plenty of reasons to trust God. I believe that each person has a soul, and it is their choice to recognize God's soul. If you choose not to, then you preach against God/atheistic standpoint "we can't prove it"
Matter doesn't come from no where. The universe didn't come into being without some implied force before it we cannot perceive.
Even the big bang, and before that and before that. No material life or object lasts forever
>>498638
Scientific in the sense one always maintains an impersonal objectivity in regards to all mental phenomena. How autistic are you that you're taking it so literally, it's just a rational investigation of the inner vs. the external
>Aloof from the pleasures of the senses, aloof from unskilled states of mind, he enters and abides in the first jhaana... (citta-viveka and viraaga)
>383. Exert yourself, O holy man! Cut off the stream (of craving), and discard sense desires. Knowing the destruction of all the conditioned things, become, O holy man, the knower of the Uncreate (Nibbana)! [26]
What about this is woo-woo to you? Use lots of detail. Like we're back in fucking middle school
>>498775
>I believe that each person has a soul
This is another one of your beliefs that stands without evidence which you use to confer imaginary authority to gurus and existence to deities.
It doesn't make sense to talk about "before the big bang". Also, our ignorance on a great manner things does not magically mean a God exists.
>>498785
This sounds like cessation of sin. Sin stops when you control your mind, senses, and the knowing of the impermanent material reality. When this is out of control, you take negative actions therefore negative consequences (karma/ cause and effect) and is true in Buddhism and in Christianity
This is one similarity
>>498752
You are really arguing with me, because you're spouting heresy that "the church" (a vaguely defined entity consisting of most denominations, in this case) rejects because you haven't taken the time to understand Christianity much. It also seems like you don't understand Buddhism.
>>498785
>Aloof from the pleasures of the senses, aloof from unskilled states of mind, he enters and abides in the first jhaana... (citta-viveka and viraaga)
There is no evidence "jnana's" exist. They are Buddhist doctrinal creations intended to serve as goalposts for the devotee.
>Exert yourself, O holy man! Cut off the stream (of craving), and discard sense desires. Knowing the destruction of all the conditioned things, become, O holy man, the knower of the Uncreate (Nibbana
Given that this is a commandment and not entirely a doctrinal exegesis all I have to is say "No".
The ontological and psychological claims the Pali Canon makes are entirely without substance and yet it(and you) claim it can stand up to rational investigation.
The premises are without substance.
>>498793
>he doubts people have souls
Either a ginger or a troll.
>>498793
>It doesn't make sense to talk about
Because before the big bang there must have been a bunch of other processes that can lead to God
Because science can't prove it. Science cannot prove God exists, meaning they have a limited knowledge of how to conduct this research.
>another one of your beliefs
I know you have a soul too
>>498807
No. If souls are defined as some sort of non corporeal entity we all possess that is eternal and unchanging then yes there are no souls.
>>498813
You have no proof to say there is no soul. Best you can say is there is no evidence of soul. Unless you claim divinity and omniscience.
>>498805
lol
>>498809
No. Talking about "before the big bang" makes no sense because time-space was thrust into being at the big bang.
You have yet to provide evidence for your claims beyond merely asserting it as truth.
>>498804
I used to help funeral processions and was raised Christian and have been religious for pretty much most of my life. My favorite lesson in Buddhism is that each day is the process of enlightenment and it doesn't matter how much one knows or doesn't know about enlightenment, because we are always a blank and unenlightened slate that becomes enlightened.
>>498820
The burden of proof is not on me. Just like the burden of proof is not on me to prove that unicorns don't exist.
It's on the person making the claim.
>>498823
>Because time space was thrust into being at the big bang
Source? There is no proof or evidence
>>498831
There is a shit ton of proof. Go on the scientific equivalent of JSTOR and search keywords "cosmic background radiation" "big bang" "universal Doppler effect".
>>498827
Souls are something you must have faith in, something defined.
The spirit as being part of the self is NOT something exclusive to Buddhism/Hinduism, this is an aspect of religion overall, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Daoism all make reference to souls.
>>498805
You don't know what you're talking about
>There is no evidence "jnana's" exist. They are Buddhist doctrinal creations intended to serve as goalposts for the devotee.
> In the second verse, the Buddha expands on Pañcalacanda's understanding of the practice of jhana by pointing out that it has to be endowed with mindfulness to be genuinely right concentration. This point is related to the fact that the various lists of activities constituting the path — such as the five faculties, the seven factors for awakening, and the noble eightfold path — always place right mindfulness before right concentration. It's also related to the statement in MN 44 that the four satipatthanas — establishings of mindfulness or frames of reference — form the nimitta, or theme, of right concentration.
>Researchers theorize that mindfulness meditation promotes metacognitive awareness, decreases rumination via disengagement from perseverative cognitive activities and enhances attentional capacities through gains in working memory. These cognitive gains, in turn, contribute to effective emotion-regulation strategies.
>More specifically, research on mindfulness has identified these benefits:
Less emotional reactivity. Research also supports the notion that mindfulness meditation decreases emotional reactivity. In a study of people who had anywhere from one month to 29 years of mindfulness meditation practice, researchers found that mindfulness meditation practice helped people disengage from emotionally upsetting pictures and enabled them to focus better on a cognitive task as compared with people who saw the pictures but did not meditate (Ortner et al., 2007).
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/07-08/ce-corner.aspx
read it and weep faggot
>>498848
*something defined BY faith, not proof
>>498824
I'm just not sure I understand why you don't think your version of Christianity is heterodox in a way most mainline Christians throughout history would deem unacceptable, or why you aren't bothered by this fact if you do realize it.
>>498843
So what happened before the "cosmic background radiation" "big bang" and "universal doppler effect"?
What happened before this?
What happened before that?
Science won't believe in God until they have physical proof (From a non physical source) but when they find the proof they then believe it. It could exist the whole time, but they don't have the intelligence to even begin to find God.
Meanwhile, people who pray and ask for God can testify He exists
>>498850
The fact that meditation has numerous health and psychological benefits does not in any way affirm the Pali Canon's doctrines regarding it as a vehicle to "nirvana" or the existence of mystic "jnana's" that can be unlocked.
>>498854
It isn't heretical, just perceived heretical.
