Buddha and Christ identical Beings

[SalixIncendium]

I don't know what a grue is.

Grue (monster) - Wikipedia

 

[Vinayaka]

Grue (monster) - Wikipedia

Thanks.

 

[Vinayaka]

Glad to share views.

It was the unlearned Peter who recognised the true station of Christ not the learned Caiaphas.

. Baha’u’llah defines true knowledge as compared to acquired learning thus...

Consider, how can he that faileth in the day of God’s Revelation to attain unto the grace of the “Divine Presence” and to recognize His Manifestation, be justly called learned, though he may have spent aeons in the pursuit of knowledge, and acquired all the limited and material learning of men? It is surely evident that he can in no wise be regarded as possessed of true knowledge.

Whereas, the most unlettered of all men, if he be honoured with this supreme distinction, he verily is accounted as one of those divinely-learned men whose knowledge is of God; for such a man hath attained the acme of knowledge, and hath reached the furthermost summit of learning.

Not bad, just #56.

 

[Fool]

Yeshua warns in all 3 Synoptic Gospels (Luke 21:8, Mark 13:5-6, Matthew 24:4-5) that the deception will happen by the "I Am" statements.

Luke 21:8 He said, “Watch out that you don’t get led astray, for many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am (G1473 G1510) ,’ and, ‘The time is at hand.’ Therefore don’t follow them.

John is made up, first and last paragraph of Revelation are additions.

In my opinion.

the problem with the I AM statement is taking it in vain. god is not a respecter of persons, tribes, nations. that is the problem; when people inflate their importance against some other aspect that the Absolute created.

 

[wizanda]

The Baha'i view would reject the ancient religious perspective of the anthropomorphization of the 'Source' some call God(s).

Like saying because the Baha'i don't do exegesis properly, and have fallen for the antichrist's texts just the same as the rest; they're counted guilty like the rest for accepting the "I Am" consciousness ideologies.

Since a Baha'i has made this post on this specific contradiction as a way to correlate Buddha (who taught complete selflessness (Anattā) to the point of Nirvana being the ultimate goal (Øneness)), and Yeshua (teaching to hate self, and that the world would be deceived by "I Am" statements (Luke 21:8, Mark 13:5-6, Matthew 24:4-5)), it shows your confusion theologically.

In my opinion.

 

[shunyadragon]

I think their teaching if that is what's preserved in scriptures both common and rare, is more similar than some admit, but also the dissimilarities remain.

Ancient scripture by the evidence reflect what the believers believed from the human perspective of the time. Similar or dissimilar to what?

 

[sun rise]

But how do we know that? I'm not saying it's a wrong belief, but neither am I saying it's a right belief. If there is so much we do not know, then how can we make such claims? It seems to me that people project what they wist to be true on to the situation, rather than just saying, "I don't know." Personally, I don't know. But I guess if people do feel that they somehow do know, that is their right too.

From the historical point of view, we don't have evidence. So it comes down to a matter of belief.

 

[Spirit of Light]

[The best way to find answer is look within. When you can see the teaching within you then you realise we are all the same. Humans is humans a dog is a dog. Yes there are some different colors and sizes and shapes, but it is all the same, man is man, woman is woman, Cat is cat and so on.

 

[shunyadragon]

Like saying because the Baha'i don't do exegesis properly, and have fallen for the antichrist's texts just the same as the rest; they're counted guilty like the rest for accepting the "I Am" consciousness ideologies.

Since a Baha'i has made this post on this specific contradiction as a way to correlate Buddha (who taught complete selflessness (Anattā) to the point of Nirvana being the ultimate goal (Øneness)), and Yeshua (teaching to hate self, and that the world would be deceived by "I Am" statements (Luke 21:8, Mark 13:5-6, Matthew 24:4-5)), it shows your confusion theologically.

In my opinion.

The Baha'i who started this thread is a fallible human regardless of whether they do exegesis correctly or not is not the issue. Every diverse and often conflicting exegesis remains the human perspective and not God's.

The confusion lies in whether one believes in the harmony and unity of the evolution of the spiritual nature of humanity and the relationship with God, or not.

No confusion on my part, and "I am" statements remain a human ancient perspective of God, and not the 'Source' some call God(s).

 

[Vinayaka]

From the historical point of view, we don't have evidence. So it comes down to a matter of belief.

Yes, thanks. It's refreshing to hear.

 

[shunyadragon]

From the historical point of view, we don't have evidence. So it comes down to a matter of belief.

. . . from the human perspective.

 

[wizanda]

the problem with the I AM statement is taking it in vain.

"I Am" is something spoken by those relaying a message from the CPU speaking with authority to mankind, not a title.

In my opinion.

 

[shunyadragon]

"I Am" is something spoken by those relaying a message from the CPU speaking with authority to mankind, not a title.

In my opinion.

It remains the fallible human perspective regardless of whether the God, God(s) or the CPU? exists or nothing at all.

 

[wizanda]

The confusion lies in whether one believes in the harmony and unity of the evolution of the spiritual nature of humanity

Harmony exists, when we understand musical composition - which is all complex mathematics.

Trying to just place ideas on top of others, should cause a bad mathematical equation, that something doesn't fit.

the relationship with God

The CPU's relationship just is; whereas some of the statements in the religious texts have mandates, the idea Baha'i just ignore them is part of the problem.

No confusion on my part, and "I am" statements remain a human ancient perspective of God, and not the 'Source' some call God(s).

The "I Am" statements are contextual of God speaking, Yeshua uses it specifically in the Synoptic Gospels in parables to state the father.

If we do a Bible word search with a KJV+, you can see all usages of G1473 G1510.

In my opinion.

 

[Fool]

Like saying because the Baha'i don't do exegesis properly, and have fallen for the antichrist's texts just the same as the rest; they're counted guilty like the rest for accepting the "I Am" consciousness ideologies.

Since a Baha'i has made this post on this specific contradiction as a way to correlate Buddha (who taught complete selflessness (Anattā) to the point of Nirvana being the ultimate goal (Øneness)), and Yeshua (teaching to hate self, and that the world would be deceived by "I Am" statements (Luke 21:8, Mark 13:5-6, Matthew 24:4-5)), it shows your confusion theologically.

In my opinion.

unconditional love, no matter where it comes from, is selflessness. loving and serving all is unconditional love, selflessness.


unconditional love doesn't exclude anyone. that includes everyone..

 

[wizanda]

It remains the fallible human perspective regardless of whether the God, God(s) or the CPU? exists or nothing at all.

Our perspective can be shown from the many different religions around the world.

The CPU exists, as reality does.

Buddha called this the Universal Mind, Yeshua the God Most High (El Elyon), the term CPU is just more precise.

Take into account the periodic table is a mathematically equatable matrix, therefore everything is sequenced logical maths.

In my opinion.

 

[Jumi]

Ancient scripture by the evidence reflect what the believers believed from the human perspective of the time.

There's no other perspective that can be presented than human.

Similar or dissimilar to what?

To each other.

 

[loverofhumanity]

There you go. You response demonstrates that your beliefs are based on an attachment to and glorification of ignorance. Little discussion is possible when one has turned one's face away from learning and knowledge as a means to truth.

Baha’u’llah teaches that all humanity are ‘the leaves of one branch and the fruits of one tree’ and that all are one human family. Inconsiderate these views very profound and a remedy for our day and age.

You are free to dismiss these things as ignorance.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I don't know if they actually said that. I wasn't there to hear them. Apparently you were. You are a time traveler?

Why do you think, the recorded traditions about Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, all say they said 'i am the first and the last', if that is not what They actually have said? I guess, you think, other people made it up, and attributed an identical expression to each One of Them. It is hard for you to prove that. People who lived at the time and place of Jesus, were thousands of years and miles away from the Hindus, and you think somehow they made up myth with similar false story that Jesus and Krishna or Buddha said "I am 'first and last'!!!

I don't know what a grue is.

Guru. I think you can do better than just picking on typo it is like, i pick on your time traveler spelling. . Are you trying to show that because I have typos, i am wrong about other things as well?

 

[whirlingmerc]

Look at the statement of Buddha about Himself:


"I am chief of the world,
Eldest am I in the world,
Foremost am I in the world.
This is the last birth.
There is now no more coming to be."
Miracles of Gautama Buddha - Wikipedia


Now, compare and see how those statements are the same as what Jesus said about Himself:

1.
Jesus said, I am the first, before Abraham I was
Buddha said, Eldest am I in the world,

2.
Jesus said I am the Last.
Buddha said, This is the last birth, There is now no more coming to be."

3.
Jesus said, He is the King, as Messiah is the King by definition.
Buddha said I am chief of the world,


And in the words of Bahaullah:


"They are at the same time the Exponents of both the “first” and the “last.” Whilst established upon the seat of the “first,” they occupy the throne of the “last.” Were a discerning eye to be found, it will readily perceive that the exponents of the “first” and the “last,” of the “manifest” and the “hidden,” of the “beginning” and the “seal” are none other than these holy Beings, these Essences of Detachment, these divine Souls. " Bahaullah, Book of Iqan

The essential teachings and ministries of Jesus and Buddha cannot be reconciled or synthesized. No amount of religious tolerance or pluralism can erase the deep and sharp differences between these two identities, their worldviews, and their actions. By accurately defining these differences we do justice to both religious leaders while communicating the truth in love to those who would place them on the same plane.

— Douglas R. Groothuis

larger article
https://www.equip.org/article/jesus-and-buddha/