Which verse exactly are you referring to?
Christ was born of the Holy Spirit as Mary had no husband and was a Virgin.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How are these Great Beings explained?
- Thread starter loverofhumanity
- Start date
Which verse exactly are you referring to?
Christ was born of the Holy Spirit as Mary had no husband and was a Virgin.
Daniel 12:9
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.
Rev 5.1-5
1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. 2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof? 3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon. 5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
It’s clear from r above no man in heaven or earth includes the pope and all Christians on earth. The the interpretations of the prophecies can only be unsealed by the Messiah Himself when He comes according to the Bible.
I’m too confused.
This is a letter from the House of Justice about the Resurrection. If you have time you might like to have a glance at it one day.
Resurrection and Return of Jesus
Many people are in denial when it comes to any criticism. Rather than take it to heart, we can just fluff it off as somebody who has no idea what they're talking about. I think it part of the ego protection mechanism. It's incredibly difficult to be objective about yourself. Heck, some people can do this to professionals, like doctors. Doctor tells them what's wrong, and if they don't want to admit it, they call him a stupid doctor. Alcoholics are notorious for denial, for example.
The study of human behaviour is fascinating. Personally, I suspect the individual was subject to a lot of undue criticism as a child, and had to build up a barrier to introspection just to survive emotionally.
You get to decide? The reader or the person it was directed at has no choice? Reminds me of the school bully in the principal's office who says 'we was just foolin' around' , while staring angrily at his victim. Often that kid actually does believe they were just foolin' around.
In communication, by definition there is a sender and receiver, and often a neutral onlooker.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Hmm.
You have more knowledge of the cultural part than I do; and, they are intermingled with the belief and practice.
Here are some pictures. They were too big so I had to attach them.
This is me above, and two other people on either side cut out, where I took my precepts. I took them at a Zen Vietnamese mini temple near me. The Uposatha ceremony was on private property and only open to the public on holidays celebrations. I don't speak a word of Vietnamese so it's hard to learn the tradition. There are actually no books in worship. There are classes for children on how to speak Vietnamese. If it weren't so expensive by cab/taxi, I'd go there and sit with the children.
I cropped it below. The Gohonzon (in the Butsudon like the one you showed me) is from Nichiren Buddhism sect in Japan. I don't know if you heard of it. There is a schism between the different Nichiren Buddhist traditions if you looked it up online. This below is the Lotus Sutra depicted as the Ceremony in the Air where all the gods, devas, and humans (among others) came to hear the Lotus in which The Buddha taught. The Lotus Sutra is a compilation of all the Buddhist teachings in one book.
I went to a Tibetan temple Kadampa tradition. We received buddha Vajrasattva blessings there. In the middle is the teacher of the tradition. To the side bodhisattvas, I believe.
I'm more of a study person. I've never seen study in any worship ceremony in any of the temples I've been to. Usually they are in classes. The Thai temple I'd like to visit and the other one, I cant remember what language they speak, they speak broken English so I most definitely will visit there. Both have classes but the former they don't have translators like the latter.
I commend you in seeing god in Buddhist traditions. Personally, that is like going to a Hindu temple, seeing all the gods and goddesses statues, and saying, because they believe in god and you may have gone for years, you connect with the same god they do. While culture is a good plus, of course, understanding the belief is better, practice of it is the best teacher.
The Buddha did encourage spreading teachings. In Mahayana, it's spreading the teachings to all people so they become buddhas and bodhisattvas. Theravada is more self-enlightenment and instead of spreading the teachings as Jesus, interesting comparison, but they teach the Dharma from a monastic view rather than bodhisattva. They aren't evangelist. The buddhism you know is Mahayana.
I've learned the other way around. It doesn't put a barrier to my practice. Throughout the day, I'd take not of things that I may want to meditate on later in the day. Then later, after practice and dharma talk, I'd read the suttas and connect what I study to what I experienced doing the day.
It's different than reading books first and then going on the journey. The Buddha has a whole lot more suttas than the bible; so...
We have sacredness to. The books aren't sacred. The Jewels are.
I didn't care for Japanese Buddhism because of a lot of politics involved. I used to practice it years ago probably at 17ish. After surgery, I stopped. I never got formal training and practice as I probably would now in the Kadampa tradition. They too have political issues within the Tibetan Buddhism, so I dont want to give up though because of it.
Think about it.
Did The Buddha create suffering?
Did he create kindness and compassion?
These things already existed. He just said, "hey, suffering exists/first noble truth"; now I know the cause, I realized there is a solution, now I created how to go about the solution.
He created the solution not the nature of life, the problem and its cause.
No one enabled The Buddha to realize it. He did it for himself.
continued...
You have more knowledge of the cultural part than I do; and, they are intermingled with the belief and practice.
Here are some pictures. They were too big so I had to attach them.
This is me above, and two other people on either side cut out, where I took my precepts. I took them at a Zen Vietnamese mini temple near me. The Uposatha ceremony was on private property and only open to the public on holidays celebrations. I don't speak a word of Vietnamese so it's hard to learn the tradition. There are actually no books in worship. There are classes for children on how to speak Vietnamese. If it weren't so expensive by cab/taxi, I'd go there and sit with the children.
I cropped it below. The Gohonzon (in the Butsudon like the one you showed me) is from Nichiren Buddhism sect in Japan. I don't know if you heard of it. There is a schism between the different Nichiren Buddhist traditions if you looked it up online. This below is the Lotus Sutra depicted as the Ceremony in the Air where all the gods, devas, and humans (among others) came to hear the Lotus in which The Buddha taught. The Lotus Sutra is a compilation of all the Buddhist teachings in one book.
I went to a Tibetan temple Kadampa tradition. We received buddha Vajrasattva blessings there. In the middle is the teacher of the tradition. To the side bodhisattvas, I believe.
I'm more of a study person. I've never seen study in any worship ceremony in any of the temples I've been to. Usually they are in classes. The Thai temple I'd like to visit and the other one, I cant remember what language they speak, they speak broken English so I most definitely will visit there. Both have classes but the former they don't have translators like the latter.
I commend you in seeing god in Buddhist traditions. Personally, that is like going to a Hindu temple, seeing all the gods and goddesses statues, and saying, because they believe in god and you may have gone for years, you connect with the same god they do. While culture is a good plus, of course, understanding the belief is better, practice of it is the best teacher.
The Buddha did encourage spreading teachings. In Mahayana, it's spreading the teachings to all people so they become buddhas and bodhisattvas. Theravada is more self-enlightenment and instead of spreading the teachings as Jesus, interesting comparison, but they teach the Dharma from a monastic view rather than bodhisattva. They aren't evangelist. The buddhism you know is Mahayana.
I've learned the other way around. It doesn't put a barrier to my practice. Throughout the day, I'd take not of things that I may want to meditate on later in the day. Then later, after practice and dharma talk, I'd read the suttas and connect what I study to what I experienced doing the day.
It's different than reading books first and then going on the journey. The Buddha has a whole lot more suttas than the bible; so...
We have sacredness to. The books aren't sacred. The Jewels are.
I didn't care for Japanese Buddhism because of a lot of politics involved. I used to practice it years ago probably at 17ish. After surgery, I stopped. I never got formal training and practice as I probably would now in the Kadampa tradition. They too have political issues within the Tibetan Buddhism, so I dont want to give up though because of it.
Think about it.
Did The Buddha create suffering?
Did he create kindness and compassion?
These things already existed. He just said, "hey, suffering exists/first noble truth"; now I know the cause, I realized there is a solution, now I created how to go about the solution.
He created the solution not the nature of life, the problem and its cause.
No one enabled The Buddha to realize it. He did it for himself.
Monks, before my enlightenment, being myself subject to birth, aging, sickness and death, to sorrow and defilement, I sought what was subject to birth, aging, sickness and death, to sorrow and defilement.
Then I considered thus: "Why, being subject to birth... to defilement, should I seek what is subject to birth... and defilement? Suppose that, being myself subject to birth, having understood the danger in what is subject to birth, I seek the unborn, the supreme security from bondage, Nibbana. Suppose that, being myself subject to aging, sickness and death, to sorrow and defilement, I seek the unaging, unailing, deathless, sorrowless and undefiled state, the supreme security from bondage, Nibbana."
Then I considered thus: "Why, being subject to birth... to defilement, should I seek what is subject to birth... and defilement? Suppose that, being myself subject to birth, having understood the danger in what is subject to birth, I seek the unborn, the supreme security from bondage, Nibbana. Suppose that, being myself subject to aging, sickness and death, to sorrow and defilement, I seek the unaging, unailing, deathless, sorrowless and undefiled state, the supreme security from bondage, Nibbana."
continued...
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
...continued
As for The Buddha coming down like Jesus, that is the first I've heard of that and never read that in the suttas nor the sutras. When I'm speaking of The Buddha, I'm speaking of his enlightenment not Siddhartha, the person. It is our enlightenment not The Buddha's. In Tibetan Buddhism, there is a lot of visualizations to connect us to the different buddhas and their enlightenment and so to connected us with The Buddha's enlightenment. Siddhartha has nothing to do with it.
In my opinion, what you said sounds like a good assumption from a theist point of view. The Buddha wasn't an atheist; he was a theist. He was a polytheist not a monotheist. If anything, you'd have to find how the god of abraham has any connection with Hinduism and Brahma to understand the disconnection The Buddha has for Hinduism and why he left the view of Brahma and the role of Hindu gods to begin with.
That so sounds like theistic language to explain eastern concepts. Pure Land buddhism does talk as if The Buddha was a savior. The Lotus Sutra does too. There is a debate on if these two are real teachings of The Buddha since Theravada doesn't teach that and they go off suttas not sutras as in Mahayana buddhists do-Pure Land and Tibetan included.
The best way to say it is that Siddhartha Gautama didn't create anything is to think of reference to The Buddha as The Bodhi mind not the person Siddhartha. We are using The Buddha to reference the enlightened mind not Siddhartha.
Siddhartha was just a human prince who renounced his possessions and went to search the meaning of life for himself. While away in his search, he found that he was subject to age, sickness, and death (The god of abraham doesn't die).
How do you have a relationship with The Buddha. We can have a relationship with his awakened nature/his wisdom/his mind not Siddhartha himself.
People respect doctors because of the medicine. We are not cured by doctors but by the medicine. That's the difference.
The Buddha Siddhartha was a teacher.
"When this was said, he replied to me, 'You may stay here, my friend. This doctrine is such that a wise person can soon enter & dwell in his own teacher's knowledge, having realized it for himself through direct knowledge.' ~Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search
I don't know if I'd call The Buddha the messenger nor someone from any god. Worshiping Siddhartha is not what The Dharma teaches. The Buddha says to get the written/oral teachings from The teacher but the enlightenment is self realized. When we connect with The Buddha-we are saying we connect with his mind; the example of the awakened. Not apart of him like he is a god.
As for The Buddha coming down like Jesus, that is the first I've heard of that and never read that in the suttas nor the sutras. When I'm speaking of The Buddha, I'm speaking of his enlightenment not Siddhartha, the person. It is our enlightenment not The Buddha's. In Tibetan Buddhism, there is a lot of visualizations to connect us to the different buddhas and their enlightenment and so to connected us with The Buddha's enlightenment. Siddhartha has nothing to do with it.
In my opinion, what you said sounds like a good assumption from a theist point of view. The Buddha wasn't an atheist; he was a theist. He was a polytheist not a monotheist. If anything, you'd have to find how the god of abraham has any connection with Hinduism and Brahma to understand the disconnection The Buddha has for Hinduism and why he left the view of Brahma and the role of Hindu gods to begin with.
That so sounds like theistic language to explain eastern concepts. Pure Land buddhism does talk as if The Buddha was a savior. The Lotus Sutra does too. There is a debate on if these two are real teachings of The Buddha since Theravada doesn't teach that and they go off suttas not sutras as in Mahayana buddhists do-Pure Land and Tibetan included.
The best way to say it is that Siddhartha Gautama didn't create anything is to think of reference to The Buddha as The Bodhi mind not the person Siddhartha. We are using The Buddha to reference the enlightened mind not Siddhartha.
Siddhartha was just a human prince who renounced his possessions and went to search the meaning of life for himself. While away in his search, he found that he was subject to age, sickness, and death (The god of abraham doesn't die).
Monks, before my enlightenment, being myself subject to birth, aging, sickness and death, to sorrow and defilement, I sought what was subject to birth, aging, sickness and death, to sorrow and defilement.
How do you have a relationship with The Buddha. We can have a relationship with his awakened nature/his wisdom/his mind not Siddhartha himself.
People respect doctors because of the medicine. We are not cured by doctors but by the medicine. That's the difference.
The Buddha Siddhartha was a teacher.
"When this was said, he replied to me, 'You may stay here, my friend. This doctrine is such that a wise person can soon enter & dwell in his own teacher's knowledge, having realized it for himself through direct knowledge.' ~Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search
I don't know if I'd call The Buddha the messenger nor someone from any god. Worshiping Siddhartha is not what The Dharma teaches. The Buddha says to get the written/oral teachings from The teacher but the enlightenment is self realized. When we connect with The Buddha-we are saying we connect with his mind; the example of the awakened. Not apart of him like he is a god.
Last edited:
I can not see i missed any point, I am not confused. It is you that said it was confusion, it was you that posted you were confused and that the explanations cause the confusion.
The key here is, if Moses was right, Jesus was right, Muhammad was right, the Bab was right and Baha'u'llah was right, to name a few. The author of confusion is man not God.
I like it that many Teenagers teach these logical concepts to children and this process has been happening for over 100 years. There were Schools in Russia in the early 1900's that were seen as very progressive and the place to send your children, before wars took this all away in that country. They had certitude in this knowledge, there is no confusion.
I like it that many people that have not even heard about Baha'u'llah already have the Oneness of God implanted on their heart, I have seen this in many Forum replies over the years.
Regards Tony
Last edited:
How were the Babi, then Bahai able to hide the body of the Bab for around 60 years?
The guards explained away the dissaperance of the Babs Body as well
I like it that the story of the Bab, Mirrors the story of Christ.
Regards Tony
Last edited:
Im confused why you say your not confused when you said you were confused.
Im confused why I need to reply to such confusion.
Regards Tony
That would be that a material Body decays and goes back to dust.
I would offer no surprise if they find proof as to where the body of Jesus was layed to rest. But given that at one time only one Babi knew where the body of the Bab was, it is not unreasonanle that the same thing transpired in the time of Christ and the beleiver suffered a fate that did not allow the information to be pased on.
Regards Tony
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
@adrian009
To tell you honestly, all of the evangalist Buddhist sects like BDK (from their website), Kadampa (Im realizing), Nichiren Shoshu and SGI, the univeralism has a western and/political influence. Id suggest studying Theravada Buddhism first especially the suttas and not the sutras to get a feel of the basics in which the Mahayana sutras such as Pure Land has came from somewhat. I think Buddhism went to Shri Lanka first, China, and Japan way later. Japanese Buddhism got mixed with Shintoism, the religion before Buddhism came over.
I actually dont have much of the sutras. A lot of them are commentaries and others are written by recent monks revered today in Vietnamese and Zen Buddhism. I think Tibetan, Im not sure. Kadampa has guru reverences. Things like that.
Of course whatever sutras you use is your personal preference but like ones I use outside the Pali, its relevent mostly to the tradition you use not for buddhism as a whole. The Teachings of The Buddha, so far I read, js a good synapsis of The Buddha's teachings. The choice of words is different than Pali, so that kinda throws me off.
List of popular sutras. Mahayana traditions.
To tell you honestly, all of the evangalist Buddhist sects like BDK (from their website), Kadampa (Im realizing), Nichiren Shoshu and SGI, the univeralism has a western and/political influence. Id suggest studying Theravada Buddhism first especially the suttas and not the sutras to get a feel of the basics in which the Mahayana sutras such as Pure Land has came from somewhat. I think Buddhism went to Shri Lanka first, China, and Japan way later. Japanese Buddhism got mixed with Shintoism, the religion before Buddhism came over.
I actually dont have much of the sutras. A lot of them are commentaries and others are written by recent monks revered today in Vietnamese and Zen Buddhism. I think Tibetan, Im not sure. Kadampa has guru reverences. Things like that.
Of course whatever sutras you use is your personal preference but like ones I use outside the Pali, its relevent mostly to the tradition you use not for buddhism as a whole. The Teachings of The Buddha, so far I read, js a good synapsis of The Buddha's teachings. The choice of words is different than Pali, so that kinda throws me off.
List of popular sutras. Mahayana traditions.
I didn't know there were evangelistic Buddhists. Seems kind of off. The Buddhist monks I've met here and there seem so incredibly mellow. The one out at the retreat center near hear, just smiled with us, and said, "Come back any time." My friend did have another connection to the place though as he had done some finishing work on the very large standing Buddha there. They may have remembered each other.
You make some important points about how Buddhism has changed in Japan from what it originally was. We are reminded of how religion changes with time and the circumstances of the people. Buddhism and Shintoism co-existed in harmony for many centuries intermingling and influencing each other. Then religion can be politicised and used by those in power creating further distortions. Then there were all the adaptations to Buddhism that occurred before it even got to Japan. Yet despite these problems, Buddhism was been successfully established in Japan for over 1,500 years and is the main religion of the Japanese people.
So if I am looking to become a Buddhist, what does that mean and where do I start? There are many suttas and commentaries that are attributed to Buddha and His followers (over 12,000 pages if all the Pali texts were to be translated) but it is hard to be certain of their origins. Even if we could, would it be desirable to follow the Teachings that may have been applicable and revolutionary 2,500 years ago but may not be so relevant today?
So where is pure Buddhism practiced and is it still as relevant today as it was 2,500 years ago?
You have more knowledge of the cultural part than I do; and, they are intermingled with the belief and practice.
Here are some pictures. They were too big so I had to attach them.
This is me above, and two other people on either side cut out, where I took my precepts. I took them at a Zen Vietnamese mini temple near me. The Uposatha ceremony was on private property and only open to the public on holidays celebrations. I don't speak a word of Vietnamese so it's hard to learn the tradition. There are actually no books in worship. There are classes for children on how to speak Vietnamese. If it weren't so expensive by cab/taxi, I'd go there and sit with the children.
Cool picture. Are the men in robes monks? Accessibility is an essential part of religion IMHO. You may find a philosophy or religion that makes perfect sense but there are no Faith communities within travelling distance Then you have to start your own, and not everyone can do that.... or go online (not very satisfying).
Language is another barrier. Having texts that are written in English as well as services and meetings conducted in English would be ideal. I like the idea of hanging out with the children and learning Vietnamese.
My first contact with the Buddhists was through the Tibetan Buddhists. I used to attend meetings and the words of Buddha would be chanted (in Tibetan or Sanskrit I think, not in English) and we would have a talk given by Venerable Geshe Ngawang Dhargyey (One of the monks translated iinto English).
Dhargyey Buddhist Centre
After you mentioned the NIchiren Buddhist a few months back I asked my relatives. This group is seen as been somewhat extreme and fundamentalist.
Nichiren | Soka Gakkai International (SGI)
I'm certainly trying to get my head around the vastness of Buddhist literature. Your links are really helpful. Despite the shortcomings you have outlined with the BDK, 'Teachings of Buddha' is a good starting point for now, and conversations like these opens my eyes to what else is available.
It sounds like you have good access to a range of temples which is great. I think part of the journey at some stage is having a group of peers you click with.
I'm aware that there are competing views of theism and non-theism. For now I just study, meditate, and practice.
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Yeah. Im not familar with BDK. Nichiren Shoshu and SGI got mixed up in Japanese politics. The idea of Shoshu Buddhist is to spread Nichiren's teachings because they believe he is the reincarnation of The Buddha. Like protestants to Catholics, Shoshu had opposition with some o their own memebers. Those members and their head protested against Shoshu because Shoshu told then they couldnt be Buddhist unless they went theough the priesthood. The opposition was strong and the priesthood excummunicated the members and head in, I think, in the 1980s about (will get the date). Disaki Ikeda was one of them.
Ikeda formes an organzation called Soka Gaikai International (SGI). Ever since then both priesthood and SGI feel they have the true Buddha's teachings. SGI didnt believe the incarnation. Ikeda is seen close to a buddha in that he is revered even so far as all his works and books are written by him. They study his interpretation if Nichiren's teachings and interpretations of The Dharma.
Shoshu has been trying to gain members. They gave me a pamplet on how SGI is corrupt and they are the "true buddhist." SGI is 100 percept evangalistic. I read about their behavior in Japan and SGI members and their converts were forces to wear this and say that. In the US its not as strong. In Shoshu we had to sit certain ways and worship certain ways. As a priesthood that was understandable. In SGI, there are district meetings, they asked me weekly if I wanted to join them without any suggestion of hanging out suggestion of doing anyhing outside the groups since we are considered friends.
One lady I still chant with tells me her stories a lot. At the subnational district conference many people from various districts come. The testimonies they share are those who became good health after chanting. Others got money. Others good jobs. Many say they arent real Buddhist. There are ex-Shoshu and ex-SGI stories just as Bahai.
As for Kadampa, it sounds the same in regards to sensai (guru) reverence. But they do practice Buddhist teachings regardless the modernism.
The Vietnamese and Thai Buddhist I spoke with are extremely nice. I just think its Japanese politics since the scism was recent. Western culture influence evangalism more so of SGI than Shoshu in the states.
Both count how many members they have; they have monthly quotas of how many peole theybevagalize (shakabuku).
Its not Buddhism and Buddhist as a whole. Its the first time I experienced such a thing in Buddhism. I left because of it.
I would have left as well. Lots of Japanese in Vancouver, going way back. Not so many here.
InvestigateTruth
Well-Known Member
There is a similarity between seeing Jesus body and eating dinner with Him, and the event of Transfiguration on the Mountain, and seeing Moses and Elijah speaking with Jesus.
I quote Wikipedia:
The presence of the prophets next to Jesus and the perceptions of the disciples have been subject to theological debate. Origen was the first to comment that the presence of Moses and Elijah represented the "Law and the Prophets", referring to the Torah (also called the Pentateuch) and the rest of the Hebrew Bible.[23] Martin Luther, continued to see them as the Law and the Prophets respectively, and their recognition of and conversation with Jesus as a symbol of how Jesus fulfills "the law and the prophets" (Matthew 5:17–19, see also Expounding of the Law).[36]
The real presence of Moses and Elijah on the mount is rejected by those churches and individuals who believe in "soul sleep" (Christian mortalism) until resurrection. Several commentators have noted that Jesus describes the transfiguration using the Greek word orama (Matthew 17:9), according to Thayer more often used for a supernatural "vision" than for real physical events,[a] and concluded that Moses and Elijah were not truly there.[37]
Transfiguration of Jesus - Wikipedia
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
What does that have to do with the gospels? They are written to inform people about the things Jesus said and did? So any other events written in the gospels only symbolic and never really happened? Or, is the rest of the stories, other than the resurrection, accurate and historical?