Can people mix diffrent religions???

[Riverwolf]

Well, I can say that Christianity and Buddhism can easily be combined, since Christ tells you how to act to your neighbors and to God, and Buddha tells you how to find inner peace. I think they can be combined. I combine some religions to form my own beliefs.

 

[Starfish]

A Christmas "tree" and the lights on it are pagan..Trees had nothing to do with Christ..Nieither did hanging things on it..

And if you are talking about Buddah?.....He and Jesus had very similar minds...

Blessings


Dallas

Was Buddah an actual man? Or is/was he a god? I really know nothing about him. If he is/was a god, I've heard the theory that he possibly could be Jesus Christ. That possibly Christ visited the people in Asia (as we LDS believe he visited his "other sheep" or the people on the American continent after his death) and this is how Buddah began.
Anyway, just sharing an interesting theory.

 

[DallasApple]

Was Buddah an actual man? Or is/was he a god? I really know nothing about him. If he is/was a god, I've heard the theory that he possibly could be Jesus Christ. That possibly Christ visited the people in Asia (as we LDS believe he visited his "other sheep" or the people on the American continent after his death) and this is how Buddah began.
Anyway, just sharing an interesting theory.

From what I understand Budhha is not considered a God..and in fact he didnt preach there was a single God ...I believe he is what you would call the enlightened one.Also he was a prince.

But from even there births..to when they begin their teachings..and what they taught..were strikingly similar..In many cases identicle meanings just phrased differently..

Examples..

Jesus.."do unto others as you would have them do unto you"
Buddha.."consider others as yourself"

Jesus.."give to anyone who request it"
Buddha.."give when you are asked"

Jesus.."if anyone strikes you on the cheek,offer the other also"
Buddha..""if anyone should give you a blow with his hand,with a stick a knife,you should abandon any desires and utter no evil words"

Jesus.."your father in heaven makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good and sends rain on the righteous and and on the unrighteous"

Buddha..."the great cloud rains down on all whether their nature is superior or inferior.The light of the sun and the moon illuminates the whole world,both him who stands high and him who stands low.

Those are just a few..

Blessings

Dallas

 

[Starfish]

From what I understand Budhha is not considered a God..and in fact he didnt preach there was a single God ...I believe he is what you would call the enlightened one.Also he was a prince.

But from even there births..to when they begin their teachings..and what they taught..were strikingly similar..In many cases identicle meanings just phrased differently..

Examples..

Jesus.."do unto others as you would have them do unto you"
Buddha.."consider others as yourself"

Jesus.."give to anyone who request it"
Buddha.."give when you are asked"

Jesus.."if anyone strikes you on the cheek,offer the other also"
Buddha..""if anyone should give you a blow with his hand,with a stick a knife,you should abandon any desires and utter no evil words"

Jesus.."your father in heaven makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good and sends rain on the righteous and and on the unrighteous"

Buddha..."the great cloud rains down on all whether their nature is superior or inferior.The light of the sun and the moon illuminates the whole world,both him who stands high and him who stands low.

Those are just a few..

Blessings

Dallas

Well then, there you go. Thanks Dallas.

 

[DallasApple]

Your welcome..I think its fascinating..

Blessings

Dallas

 

[logician]

Actually, all of teachings of Christianity were taken directly from teachings of preexistent religions, or other philosophies, there was nothing original in Christianity.

 

[DallasApple]

there was nothing original in Christianity.
__________________

Well I think Christ Himself was what was original about it.

But yes its apparent..that people on Earth before Him tried to get people to understand the principles of love and selflessness..and tried to teach it by living it.

Someone correct me if Im wrong but I believe Budhha was born 5,000 years before Christ.

Blessings

Dallas

 

[Storm]

IIIRC, it's more like 500

 

[DallasApple]

IIIRC, it's more like 500

OOPS...

Well I was only four thousand five hundred years off..pretty close right?

Blessings

Dallas

 

[Storm]

hey, I could be wrong, myself.

 

[DallasApple]

hey, I could be wrong, myself.

Thanks for trying to make me feel less dumb..:rainbow1:..thats very charitable of you..Very compassionate.

Blessings

Dallas

 

[Smoke]

Well, I can say that Christianity and Buddhism can easily be combined, since Christ tells you how to act to your neighbors and to God, and Buddha tells you how to find inner peace. I think they can be combined. I combine some religions to form my own beliefs.

They can be combined if you're willing to disregard Christian dogma, but most Christians would say the dogma is essential to Christianity.

 

[Izdaari]

Actually, all of teachings of Christianity were taken directly from teachings of preexistent religions, or other philosophies, there was nothing original in Christianity.

However, Christianity is not primarily about its teachings, but about Jesus Christ as the second person of the Trinity. That Christianity is not original is actually part of Christian dogma, that God's Law is written in the hearts of men, so that even without Christianity we still know God's Law... and universally fail to follow it. That universal failure is why we need Christ to reconcile us with God.

 

[Izdaari]

They can be combined if you're willing to disregard Christian dogma, but most Christians would say the dogma is essential to Christianity.

And I would say so too. That's why I can use only those parts of Buddhism that don't conflict with Christian dogma. But I do find some benefit in using those parts.

 

[mudge991]

However, Christianity is not primarily about its teachings, but about Jesus Christ as the second person of the Trinity. That Christianity is not original is actually part of Christian dogma, that God's Law is written in the hearts of men, so that even without Christianity we still know God's Law... and universally fail to follow it. That universal failure is why we need Christ to reconcile us with God.

LOL Are you kidding?
Christianity is not primarily about its teachings, but about Jesus Christ as the second person of the Trinity.

The bible specifically states that it is to be used for teaching.

"All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

That Christianity is not original is actually part of Christian dogma

Again, the bible does not at any point accept any other form of belief.

Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7

that God's Law is written in the hearts of men, so that even without Christianity we still know God's Law

If that were true, evangalism wouldnt be needed, and you wouldnt have churches asking for money to spread "gods word"

Nobody gets to Heaven based on obeying what they know, for nobody fully obeys what they know. With God’s standard of perfection, Heaven would be empty of human beings. (Rom 3:9-24)

You may want to actually read the bible at some point.

 

[Izdaari]

LOL Are you kidding?
Christianity is not primarily about its teachings, but about Jesus Christ as the second person of the Trinity.

The bible specifically states that it is to be used for teaching.

"All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

That Christianity is not original is actually part of Christian dogma

Again, the bible does not at any point accept any other form of belief.

Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7

that God's Law is written in the hearts of men, so that even without Christianity we still know God's Law

If that were true, evangalism wouldnt be needed, and you wouldnt have churches asking for money to spread "gods word"

Nobody gets to Heaven based on obeying what they know, for nobody fully obeys what they know. With God’s standard of perfection, Heaven would be empty of human beings. (Rom 3:9-24)

You may want to actually read the bible at some point.

Your condescension is neither helpful nor appreciated. No, I'm not kidding. The argument I made is also made by C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity, and is quite orthodox. Being able to quote scripture without understanding it does not make you an authority.

Oh, and welcome to my ignore list.

 

[mudge991]

Your condescension is neither helpful nor appreciated. No, I'm not kidding. The argument I made is also made by C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity, and is quite orthodox. Being able to quote scripture without understanding it does not make you an authority.

Oh, and welcome to my ignore list.

I am aware of your scource. I dont think that it lends credibility though. Your ignore comment is typical though, as sticking your head in thes makes silliness more palatable for some.

 

[Smoke]

LOL Are you kidding?
Christianity is not primarily about its teachings, but about Jesus Christ as the second person of the Trinity.

No, she's not kidding. What the New Testament says about how to live your life is strikingly unoriginal stuff about loving your neighbor, doing your duty, and living chastely, honestly, and simply. Most of the mythological tales about Jewish and Christian heroes, like Moses and Jesus are mirrored in other myths.

The distinctive feature of Christianity is belief, and not just belief, but belief in a particular set of dogmatic teachings about the Trinity. The history of Christian theology is full of questions like:

• Has Jesus a divine nature or a human nature or both?
• Has he a divine will or a human will or both?
• Is the Holy Spirit a person or an impersonal force?
• Is Jesus the Son of God by nature, by birth, by adoption, or what?
• Is the God of the New Testament the same god as the God of the Old Testament?

It's not for nothing that the historical churches, in every service, have the faithful stand up and recite, "I believe ..."

• In one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
• In one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages, Light of Light, True God of True God, being of one essence with the Father.
• In the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets.
• In one holy, catholic, and apostolic church. And so on.

Most expressions of Christianity are primarily about intellectual assent. This is what you must believe. You must show your belief by repenting, by being baptized, by accepting Jesus as your personal savior, or whatever your particular brand of Christianity deems appropriate.

What Thich Nhat Hanh misses, what a lot of people miss, is that you can show all the parallels you like between the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of Shakyamuni, but Christianity is not about the teachings of Jesus. The teachings of Jesus are largely superfluous to Christianity, and there are many churches where you can attend faithfully and never hear Jesus quoted for weeks at a time. If you do hear Jesus quoted, it's most likely to be a quote about belief and assent:

• "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
• "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
• "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned."

Evangelical Christianity, one of the most noxious forms of Christianity ever devised, has even made it all about "accepting Jesus as your personal savior," a concept that is found nowhere in the scriptures.

That's what the problem really is. You can find some common ground between Shakyamuni and Jesus, though there are contradictions, too. But you can't find much common ground at all between Buddhism and Christianity. The only Christians who can appreciate Buddhism are mystics and people with a mystical bent. The very things that are important about Christianity for most Christians are not only foreign to Buddhism, but incompatible with it.

 

[Izdaari]

The only Christians who can appreciate Buddhism are mystics and people with a mystical bent.

Hmm, I'm a Thomas Merton fan...

Guilty as charged.

Evangelical Christianity, one of the most noxious forms of Christianity ever devised, has even made it all about "accepting Jesus as your personal savior," a concept that is found nowhere in the scriptures.

It can be, though I find a lot of good in it too. Even though I'm a member of an evangelical denomination, I'd call myself evangelical only in the sense that I believe in the Great Commission. If I need an adjective to describe what kind of Christian I am, I like charismissional. But I agree about the "personal savior" formulation. This is about as close as it comes:

Romans 10:9-10 (New Living Translation)

9 If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by confessing with your mouth that you are saved.

 

[mudge991]

I wonder if the bible has nothing to say about people that believe and follow only parts of it they agree with......
Do you think that its acceptable to take only parts of it to be the infallible word of god?

(and yes, I know what it says about it)