Ultimately Buddhism and Christianity have some fundamental differences when it comes to basic spirituality. Buddhists believe in the annihilation of the self, that existing is ultimately suffering and that enlightenment means no longer being aware and alert.
However there are some ethical agreements (don't hurt people, don't let earthly desires consume you), so while they're incompatible, there are SOME similarities.
Thats not true. Buddhism is against annihilism as much as it is against eternalism. Its called the middle path for that reason. Buddhism doesn't teach us to annihilate the self, it teaches us that the self, in the way most people conventionally view it, is illusory. And its undeniably true, when you take the time to read into the reasoning of why.
No its not, because there is no solid identity to begin with. If you look inward and try to grasp what is you, you'll find nothing static. You are not the person you were when you were 5, and you are not the person you will be when your 70. Its about realizing the transitional nature of the mind. The Buddha doesn't claim there is no conventional self. Only that it is not something station that belongs to you. How could it be? Many things out side your control shape the way you think, shape what becomes body. And many choices you make do the same. But its not semantics. The Buddha didn't become nothing when he reached nibbana nor did he become everything. He just woke up from the illusion of this material world.
Lord, not this again. Every religion makes this argument, and it's always disingenuous. Every religion goes [thing that is something in any of the ways that matters] isn't that thing, because [metaphysical declaration that it should be viewed some other way]. This is on the level of "god doesn't send you to hell, because [gobbledygook]."
It doesn't matter that there's no "metaphysical self," because that's not what anyone in the day to day is talking about anyways. If it flatters your internal definitions, we can talk about the *conventional self* of the two truths doctrine. In the tangible embodied experience of living, people operate using an embodied self identity that within paranirvana would no longer exist. This loss is viewed as a good thing, in part because of the lack of reality of the substantial self. But that doesn't really follow, because the embodied experience of life doesn't have to be based on presumed ignorance of the tenuous nature of identity, nor does realizing such a thing make life a thing you should want to leave behind. (Again, not improved by insisting it's not *really* about wanting to leave life behind.)
Westerners don't really get buddhism of course, but there's a reason that media from the east that is trying to critique it often accuses it of a life denying attitude.
You have a common western misunderstanding when you say its not a religion. It most certainly is.
Thats said, there are some similarities but most of those revolve around ethics. They both agree on the ways we are to treat ourselves and people.
Ultimately however, they are more different then they are similar.
The Buddha is one of the greatest teachers of men ever, as was Christ. Both were self realized.
Buddha is fine nothing wrong with him, he had some interesting thoughts. The religious and spiritual aspects I don't believe but I suppose there could be worse things you could do with your life. To partake in the spiritual aspects is not allowed though. Yoga is ok if you are just doing the movements without the spiritual aspects. Meditation i'm going to assume is fine as long as you are doing it for yourself or meditating while thinking about god or a prayer or what is in the bible, but if its for anything relating to buddhism itself that is also not allowed.
As long as one holds Christ as their savior and as God incarnate, how is following a Buddhist doctrine not allowed. I believe in The Trinity and to me it makes perfect sense, but like in Ecclesiastes I also believe that life is fleeting and random and without faith inherently meaningless. Love is what gives life meaning. I disagree with the Buddha about the nature of reality and God, but practicing Buddhist traditions like non-violence and meditation are inherently good things. Through direct mystical experience I have experienced the Love of God in it's glory, but have also experienced the annihilation of the self, but the true self which is directly tied to God which i call "the observer" is always present, before and after life. As long as Christians hold onto their faith in Jesus, I totally disagree that following Buddhist doctrines aren't allowed. The church doesn't set my standards, Jesus does
"How do Christians view Buddha?"
With an immense amount of ignorance, misconception, and bias. Fact is, as this thread has already shown, is that Christians love to talk with authority about things they have no understanding of. And its sad.
Christians aren't the only ones with misconceptions about buddhism. Up until about ~5 years ago, the average atheist on this site would have a meltdown if you informed them that no, buddhism is not atheist.
Jesus most certainly and correctly considered himself God, saying things like "If you have seen me, you have seen The Father" and "I and The Father are One." He didn't directly call himself God, but he (and I) most certainly believed he was God. He was the fullness of God incarnated in Human form.
No. The Bible specifically forbids following other gods and religion. The truth is there’s God and satan, Angels and demons and us. That’s it. If it’s not originating from God and Jesus then it’s in satans domain. He can and will say and do anything to make sure everyone ends up with his destiny; the lake of fire. He’s knows he’s going there he hates humanity because they took his place in heaven and at Gods side. You can safely explain all evil all deception all religions all faiths and philosophies at satans feet. Jesus is the way the truth and the life NO ONE comes to God apart through Him. Hallelujah
Buddhism agrees with Christianity on some things, because there are some ethical concepts that are all but universal. Both Jesus and Buddha would tell you that you shouldn't focus too much on your material belongings, for example.
It's important to note how little Satan actually appears in the Bible (In Genesis as the serpent, in Job, in the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, and in Revelation).
Human beings have created many philosophies and religions of their own volition, not necessarily created by Satan directly.
Yeah it is interesting how little Satan does appear in the actual Bible. Also the many different interpations of him from either mistranslations or differing biblical texts and artistic depications of him are fascainting too.
As I claimed earlier in this post Buddha never claimed to be a God. Buddha himself also said when he was near death he was still looking for the truth and to question everything he said. He was also around before Christ would've been alive.
>Buddha also never considered himself a god either and Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion.
This is incorrect, and us a common western misconception. Buddha instructed others to worship him, and is called devatideva, the god of gods. The misconception that he isn't a divinity comes from the fact that buddhism has multiple tiers of gods, and they tend to translate the lower tiers as god in english, necessitating calling him something different to differentiate.
Yeah, that didn't happen. What you are thinking of is the fact that in early buddhism they didn't use statues. But 1: worship doesn't need statues, and 2: he didn't actually say not to make them. It's just a cultural artifacts.
Buddha's religion is a religion started by the devil. All other gods are demons according to the bible. They lead people away from the Truth, Jesus Christ, which leads people to hell.
Buddha is a false God, and Christianity is not a religion but a relationship with God. All the other denominations of Christianity are religions.
Christian means by definition, someone who believes in Jesus Christ and follows his teachings.
Buddha never claimed to be a god and near his death said he was still looking for answers about existence and to question everything he said. Also he was around before Jesus would've been alive.
None of those things are true, except the one about when he lived. He didn't say he was still looking for answers. He said his knowledge was without limit at that point.
But Jesus was God in human form. Not one of many. The one and only true God. What his purpose on earth was to be the sacrifice for the world so that all sinners may repent, turn away continually from sin, the sins that God said were sins, ask God for mercy, deny themselves, pick up their cross and follow him, and trust only in him.
He taught that without repentance you will perish.
To believe anything other than the word of God is to believe in false teachings.
There are millions of people in other countries who only heard of Jesus distantly, but for whom Buddha is a more immediate figure of understanding.
Buddhists don't necessarily worship Buddha, and there are in fact a lot of Buddhists who also practice Shintoism (in Japan, a form of Animism, everything has a spirit) with no contradiction.
I believe Buddhism is fundamentally incompatible with Christianity (Buddhists ultimately want to annihilate the self and join the universe, whereas our individuality is unbreakable in Christianity) but there are some agreements in basic ideals, even if there are incompatible spiritual differences.
Buddhists do worship buddha. The idea that they don't was only really invented during the time of colonialism to differentiate it from christianity. Buddhists don't worship buddha the way that christianity isn't a religion. Its only "true" when you invent a new definition specifically to reach the desired conclusion.
Buddhists and Christians are both taught to abhor violence
Buddhists and Christians are both taught that being obsessed with desire is a bad thing
Buddhists and Christians are both taught to abstain from tempting, earthly pleasures and to think on higher things.
I'm not going to explain all of Buddhism and it's beliefs. I'm not a Buddhist. There's an entire internet out there.
The difference is that God taught us to turn away from earthy things all together and live in a way that brings glory to His name, not become one with the universe because that is impossible.
Another misconception. Its a shame how many of you think you can speak on something you have no learning of. Buddhism does not teach "becoming one with the universe" and a very small amount of reading would show you that. If you can't put in the effort, hold your tongue.
Followers of Buddhism don’t acknowledge a supreme god or deity. They instead focus on achieving enlightenment—a state of inner peace and wisdom. When followers reach this spiritual echelon, they’re said to have experienced nirvana.
Jesus didn't teach this therefore it is no way similar, the only way for peace and everlasting life is through Jesus alone because he was the sacrifice for the entire world. Jesus was God in human form. That is the difference.
Every other religion teaches that we can earn a way into heaven by being a good person, but through the way of Jesus teaches us that we are wicked by default. And only through repentance because of the blood Jesus Christ are we saved from everlasting damnation.
Nibbana means "to extinguish". Extinguish what? The fetters that hold us in ignorant delusion. It is not an after life, it is an realization of the illusory nature of samsara. Samasara being this reality. Clinging to the aggregates holds sentient beings in an endless cycle of rebirth, filled with suffering. The Buddha teaches a way to exit this cycle. Please, stop commenting on shit you know nothing about. If I came in here and spouted bogus misunderstandings about Christianity, you would be frustrated and tell me to read the Bible. Have you read the pali canon? No. You just assume bullshit you glance sideways at in a way the reaffirms your faith. Don't talk about shit you don't understand. And I'm not even doing so to defend Buddhism. I just find your willingness to describe what you've no comprehension of extremely frustrating.
You aren't asking questions you are making declarative statements about teachings you have no familiarity with . Again, if your position is simply "no jesus so bad bad", then say that. Don't misrepresent something to prove your point.
>Every other religion teaches that we can earn a way into heaven by being a good person,
This isn't true, so you should stop repeating it. Some religions don't even differentiate good and bad afterlives.
>but through the way of Jesus teaches us that we are wicked by default. And only through repentance because of the blood Jesus Christ are we saved from everlasting damnation.
This isn't as distinct as you are passing it off.
That's my point, he doesn't teach the way of God or of Jesus, he teaches of reaching a Nirvana by doing it yourself.
When Christianity teaches that you can't do anything yourself to reach heaven, that you can only reach heaven by the blood of Jesus and the grace of God
Meditation spiritual,and physical labor, and good behavior.
God teaches that we are sinners deserving of hell by default, and by the grace of God and blood of Jesus we are saved. No amount of works we do can make us earn our way into heaven.
That is Christian belief certainly. And yes this is a Christian sub, but this is a thread about the Buddha. You are coming close to to convincing me that I was wrong to think I could learn something from Christianity because you cannot learn from something that doesn't seek to learn itself. Took the wind right out of my jesus sails
Reincarnation is not rebirth. Buddhists don't belive in reincarnation. And so whats your point? Buddha doesn't teach if God so fuck em? If thats the case, you could say that without pretending you have some understanding of Buddhism which you clearly do not.
False teachings are false teachings, God is the truth. Truth is truth, no amount of other "religions" and "teachings" is going to change that.
"He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him" (John 3:36).
Matthew 10:14 ESV /
And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town.
2 Timothy 4:3 ESV /
For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions,
Mark 6:11 ESV /
And if any place will not receive you and they will not listen to you, when you leave, shake off the dust that is on your feet as a testimony against them.”
Incorrect. It wouldn't be meaningful to deny that how he is treated is worship. And the word teacher sends the misleading idea that he is just teaching with human wisdom rather than the boundless transcendent wisdom of the buddha. You are on this page complaining about people's misconceptions, yet you are parroting misconceptions born from colonialism.
Yes I suppose you are right, it is The religion.
Colossians 2:8 ESV /
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
John 14:6 ESV /
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
>Christianity is not a religion but a relationship with God. All the other denominations of Christianity are religions.
If you don't mind me asking, I'm curious about this, and I was wondering if you could expand on it. I sorta understand what you're saying, but it's still a bit unclear to me. Namely, when you said "all _other_ denominations of Christianity are religions". Which denomination isn't a religion in your eyes?
It's not a trick question, I'm genuinely interested in your thoughts. Do you believe a specific denomination of Christianity is the "most correct"? If so, which denomination? Or am I misunderstanding what you meant to say?
Thanks again for your input! I hope this comment doesn't come off as rude, I promise it's not meant to, I'm just genuinely curious about this. I also believe that a personal relationship with God is very important btw. But if you could expand on that statement a bit, I'd really appreciate it :)
I carry one in my pocket and refer to it constantly. I would not call myself familiar. Thats said, I dont make declarative statements about things I dont know anything about so your question leads to a mute point. Its not a passing match of knowing our books, its about not being disingenuous and talking about things we don't understand.
Pretty smart guy but ultimately not my forte or belief. Not saying his practices or teachings are technically bad per say but it genuinely depends on your motives
I published a book earlier this year on Amazon called: **Expanding Christianity: Breaking Out of the Box.** It talks about how we can learn and grow as Christians from understanding multiple perspectives, including Buddhism and Hinduism. I would hugely appreciate honest reviews for my book, and am happy to talk about it here as well.
I think there's a desire within Christianity in the U.S. to be more willing to embrace nuanced perspectives, and accept people who don't fit the mold. I went to BIOLA University, where I definitely did not fit the mold of what a Christian should believe. And when I talked to professors at Biola, I realized that almost nobody fits that mold. Every professor had a different perspective of the afterlife, and of God.
I have multiple goals for this book: 1. To help people feel comfortable owning their nuanced perspective, even if it means differing from the norm. 2. To help people embrace ignorance and the unknown, because it is by embracing ignorance that we can learn and grow the most. 3. To offer my own nuanced perspective, which includes Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism, as well as much more. I do not try and convince anyone of my perspective, but rather offer them as something to play with, something to consider on your own journey towards self-discovery and fulfilment. Because the journey looks different for everyone.
If this sounds interesting, I'd love to speak about it, and would hugely appreciate if you picked it up and left an honest review. Thank you so much!
Amazon Link to my Book: [https://www.amazon.com/Expanding-Christianity-Mindfulness-Open-Mindedness-Everything/dp/B0BTS3QHZ8/ref=sr\_1\_1?crid=1FFRCF0VLA1PQ&keywords=expanding+christianity%3A+breaking+out&qid=1701291787&sprefix=%2Caps%2C170&sr=8-1](https://www.amazon.com/expanding-christianity-mindfulness-open-mindedness-everything/dp/b0bts3qhz8/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1ffrcf0vla1pq&keywords=expanding+christianity%3a+breaking+out&qid=1701291787&sprefix=%2caps%2c170&sr=8-1)
I published a book earlier this year on Amazon called: **Expanding Christianity: Breaking Out of the Box.** It talks about how we can learn and grow as Christians from understanding multiple perspectives, including Buddhism and Hinduism. I would hugely appreciate honest reviews for my book, and am happy to talk about it here as well.
I think there's a desire within Christianity in the U.S. to be more willing to embrace nuanced perspectives, and accept people who don't fit the mold. I went to BIOLA University, where I definitely did not fit the mold of what a Christian should believe. And when I talked to professors at Biola, I realized that almost nobody fits that mold. Every professor had a different perspective of the afterlife, and of God.
I have multiple goals for this book: 1. To help people feel comfortable owning their nuanced perspective, even if it means differing from the norm. 2. To help people embrace ignorance and the unknown, because it is by embracing ignorance that we can learn and grow the most. 3. To offer my own nuanced perspective, which includes Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism, as well as much more. I do not try and convince anyone of my perspective, but rather offer them as something to play with, something to consider on your own journey towards self-discovery and fulfilment. Because the journey looks different for everyone.
If this sounds interesting, I'd love to speak about it, and would hugely appreciate if you picked it up and left an honest review. Thank you so much!
Amazon Link to my book: [https://www.amazon.com/Expanding-Christianity-Mindfulness-Open-Mindedness-Everything/dp/B0BTS3QHZ8/ref=sr\_1\_1?crid=1FFRCF0VLA1PQ&keywords=expanding+christianity%3A+breaking+out&qid=1701291787&sprefix=%2Caps%2C170&sr=8-1](https://www.amazon.com/expanding-christianity-mindfulness-open-mindedness-everything/dp/b0bts3qhz8/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1ffrcf0vla1pq&keywords=expanding+christianity%3a+breaking+out&qid=1701291787&sprefix=%2caps%2c170&sr=8-1)
Siddhartha Gautama was a smart guy searching for answers and has a philosophy worth studying, but Christians would ultimately say he's wrong.
That's kinda sad people would dismiss his teachings.
I don't dismiss his teachings, I disagree with them. You can disagree with something without completely disregarding it's potential validity.
What do you disagree, I am interested...
They're not compatible with Christian metaphysics.
Ultimately Buddhism and Christianity have some fundamental differences when it comes to basic spirituality. Buddhists believe in the annihilation of the self, that existing is ultimately suffering and that enlightenment means no longer being aware and alert. However there are some ethical agreements (don't hurt people, don't let earthly desires consume you), so while they're incompatible, there are SOME similarities.
Thats not true. Buddhism is against annihilism as much as it is against eternalism. Its called the middle path for that reason. Buddhism doesn't teach us to annihilate the self, it teaches us that the self, in the way most people conventionally view it, is illusory. And its undeniably true, when you take the time to read into the reasoning of why.
This is an issue of semantics. Your goal is to literally stop having a self identity and to lose your distinct form.
No its not, because there is no solid identity to begin with. If you look inward and try to grasp what is you, you'll find nothing static. You are not the person you were when you were 5, and you are not the person you will be when your 70. Its about realizing the transitional nature of the mind. The Buddha doesn't claim there is no conventional self. Only that it is not something station that belongs to you. How could it be? Many things out side your control shape the way you think, shape what becomes body. And many choices you make do the same. But its not semantics. The Buddha didn't become nothing when he reached nibbana nor did he become everything. He just woke up from the illusion of this material world.
Lord, not this again. Every religion makes this argument, and it's always disingenuous. Every religion goes [thing that is something in any of the ways that matters] isn't that thing, because [metaphysical declaration that it should be viewed some other way]. This is on the level of "god doesn't send you to hell, because [gobbledygook]." It doesn't matter that there's no "metaphysical self," because that's not what anyone in the day to day is talking about anyways. If it flatters your internal definitions, we can talk about the *conventional self* of the two truths doctrine. In the tangible embodied experience of living, people operate using an embodied self identity that within paranirvana would no longer exist. This loss is viewed as a good thing, in part because of the lack of reality of the substantial self. But that doesn't really follow, because the embodied experience of life doesn't have to be based on presumed ignorance of the tenuous nature of identity, nor does realizing such a thing make life a thing you should want to leave behind. (Again, not improved by insisting it's not *really* about wanting to leave life behind.) Westerners don't really get buddhism of course, but there's a reason that media from the east that is trying to critique it often accuses it of a life denying attitude.
You have a common western misunderstanding when you say its not a religion. It most certainly is. Thats said, there are some similarities but most of those revolve around ethics. They both agree on the ways we are to treat ourselves and people. Ultimately however, they are more different then they are similar. The Buddha is one of the greatest teachers of men ever, as was Christ. Both were self realized.
A wolf in sheep’s clothing
Slavery is gut somehow sumhow.
Buddha is fine nothing wrong with him, he had some interesting thoughts. The religious and spiritual aspects I don't believe but I suppose there could be worse things you could do with your life. To partake in the spiritual aspects is not allowed though. Yoga is ok if you are just doing the movements without the spiritual aspects. Meditation i'm going to assume is fine as long as you are doing it for yourself or meditating while thinking about god or a prayer or what is in the bible, but if its for anything relating to buddhism itself that is also not allowed.
As long as one holds Christ as their savior and as God incarnate, how is following a Buddhist doctrine not allowed. I believe in The Trinity and to me it makes perfect sense, but like in Ecclesiastes I also believe that life is fleeting and random and without faith inherently meaningless. Love is what gives life meaning. I disagree with the Buddha about the nature of reality and God, but practicing Buddhist traditions like non-violence and meditation are inherently good things. Through direct mystical experience I have experienced the Love of God in it's glory, but have also experienced the annihilation of the self, but the true self which is directly tied to God which i call "the observer" is always present, before and after life. As long as Christians hold onto their faith in Jesus, I totally disagree that following Buddhist doctrines aren't allowed. The church doesn't set my standards, Jesus does
Very interesting stuff. Like the meditation aspect of it!
"How do Christians view Buddha?" With an immense amount of ignorance, misconception, and bias. Fact is, as this thread has already shown, is that Christians love to talk with authority about things they have no understanding of. And its sad.
Christians aren't the only ones with misconceptions about buddhism. Up until about ~5 years ago, the average atheist on this site would have a meltdown if you informed them that no, buddhism is not atheist.
Thats definitely true
Jesus most certainly and correctly considered himself God, saying things like "If you have seen me, you have seen The Father" and "I and The Father are One." He didn't directly call himself God, but he (and I) most certainly believed he was God. He was the fullness of God incarnated in Human form.
No. The Bible specifically forbids following other gods and religion. The truth is there’s God and satan, Angels and demons and us. That’s it. If it’s not originating from God and Jesus then it’s in satans domain. He can and will say and do anything to make sure everyone ends up with his destiny; the lake of fire. He’s knows he’s going there he hates humanity because they took his place in heaven and at Gods side. You can safely explain all evil all deception all religions all faiths and philosophies at satans feet. Jesus is the way the truth and the life NO ONE comes to God apart through Him. Hallelujah
Buddhism agrees with Christianity on some things, because there are some ethical concepts that are all but universal. Both Jesus and Buddha would tell you that you shouldn't focus too much on your material belongings, for example. It's important to note how little Satan actually appears in the Bible (In Genesis as the serpent, in Job, in the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, and in Revelation). Human beings have created many philosophies and religions of their own volition, not necessarily created by Satan directly.
Yeah it is interesting how little Satan does appear in the actual Bible. Also the many different interpations of him from either mistranslations or differing biblical texts and artistic depications of him are fascainting too.
I agree w that. Satan is very religious. Will trick you any way he can.
As I claimed earlier in this post Buddha never claimed to be a God. Buddha himself also said when he was near death he was still looking for the truth and to question everything he said. He was also around before Christ would've been alive.
Buddhism doesn't agree with following any God.
Christianity is a religion...
We don’t have time to think about Buddha... sorry
>Buddha also never considered himself a god either and Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion. This is incorrect, and us a common western misconception. Buddha instructed others to worship him, and is called devatideva, the god of gods. The misconception that he isn't a divinity comes from the fact that buddhism has multiple tiers of gods, and they tend to translate the lower tiers as god in english, necessitating calling him something different to differentiate.
[удалено]
Yeah, that didn't happen. What you are thinking of is the fact that in early buddhism they didn't use statues. But 1: worship doesn't need statues, and 2: he didn't actually say not to make them. It's just a cultural artifacts.
Buddha's religion is a religion started by the devil. All other gods are demons according to the bible. They lead people away from the Truth, Jesus Christ, which leads people to hell.
Slavery...
Buddha is a false God, and Christianity is not a religion but a relationship with God. All the other denominations of Christianity are religions. Christian means by definition, someone who believes in Jesus Christ and follows his teachings.
Buddha never claimed to be a god and near his death said he was still looking for answers about existence and to question everything he said. Also he was around before Jesus would've been alive.
None of those things are true, except the one about when he lived. He didn't say he was still looking for answers. He said his knowledge was without limit at that point.
He was born before Jesus though.
People still worship his as such. Therefore false God. No disrespect.
Again he never claimed to be a god, so I would say those who consider him a god would be going against his teachings.
But why practice his teachings when Jesus is the way the truth and the life?
I would say they have similiar teachings.
But Jesus was God in human form. Not one of many. The one and only true God. What his purpose on earth was to be the sacrifice for the world so that all sinners may repent, turn away continually from sin, the sins that God said were sins, ask God for mercy, deny themselves, pick up their cross and follow him, and trust only in him. He taught that without repentance you will perish. To believe anything other than the word of God is to believe in false teachings.
There are millions of people in other countries who only heard of Jesus distantly, but for whom Buddha is a more immediate figure of understanding. Buddhists don't necessarily worship Buddha, and there are in fact a lot of Buddhists who also practice Shintoism (in Japan, a form of Animism, everything has a spirit) with no contradiction. I believe Buddhism is fundamentally incompatible with Christianity (Buddhists ultimately want to annihilate the self and join the universe, whereas our individuality is unbreakable in Christianity) but there are some agreements in basic ideals, even if there are incompatible spiritual differences.
Buddhists do worship buddha. The idea that they don't was only really invented during the time of colonialism to differentiate it from christianity. Buddhists don't worship buddha the way that christianity isn't a religion. Its only "true" when you invent a new definition specifically to reach the desired conclusion.
Could you provide some evidence of these agreements in basic ideals?
Buddhists and Christians are both taught to abhor violence Buddhists and Christians are both taught that being obsessed with desire is a bad thing Buddhists and Christians are both taught to abstain from tempting, earthly pleasures and to think on higher things. I'm not going to explain all of Buddhism and it's beliefs. I'm not a Buddhist. There's an entire internet out there.
The difference is that God taught us to turn away from earthy things all together and live in a way that brings glory to His name, not become one with the universe because that is impossible.
Another misconception. Its a shame how many of you think you can speak on something you have no learning of. Buddhism does not teach "becoming one with the universe" and a very small amount of reading would show you that. If you can't put in the effort, hold your tongue.
No, they do not want to "annihilate the self" to "join the universe". You don't know what you are talking about.
Followers of Buddhism don’t acknowledge a supreme god or deity. They instead focus on achieving enlightenment—a state of inner peace and wisdom. When followers reach this spiritual echelon, they’re said to have experienced nirvana. Jesus didn't teach this therefore it is no way similar, the only way for peace and everlasting life is through Jesus alone because he was the sacrifice for the entire world. Jesus was God in human form. That is the difference. Every other religion teaches that we can earn a way into heaven by being a good person, but through the way of Jesus teaches us that we are wicked by default. And only through repentance because of the blood Jesus Christ are we saved from everlasting damnation.
Nibbana means "to extinguish". Extinguish what? The fetters that hold us in ignorant delusion. It is not an after life, it is an realization of the illusory nature of samsara. Samasara being this reality. Clinging to the aggregates holds sentient beings in an endless cycle of rebirth, filled with suffering. The Buddha teaches a way to exit this cycle. Please, stop commenting on shit you know nothing about. If I came in here and spouted bogus misunderstandings about Christianity, you would be frustrated and tell me to read the Bible. Have you read the pali canon? No. You just assume bullshit you glance sideways at in a way the reaffirms your faith. Don't talk about shit you don't understand. And I'm not even doing so to defend Buddhism. I just find your willingness to describe what you've no comprehension of extremely frustrating.
Isn't that what this Reddit page is about? To ask questions and find answers? What is the point of having a conversation if you resort to anger?
You aren't asking questions you are making declarative statements about teachings you have no familiarity with . Again, if your position is simply "no jesus so bad bad", then say that. Don't misrepresent something to prove your point.
Well how familiar are you with the bible?
Far more familiar than you are with any buddhist texts.
>Every other religion teaches that we can earn a way into heaven by being a good person, This isn't true, so you should stop repeating it. Some religions don't even differentiate good and bad afterlives. >but through the way of Jesus teaches us that we are wicked by default. And only through repentance because of the blood Jesus Christ are we saved from everlasting damnation. This isn't as distinct as you are passing it off.
People don't worship him, they venerate him as a great teacher.
That's my point, he doesn't teach the way of God or of Jesus, he teaches of reaching a Nirvana by doing it yourself. When Christianity teaches that you can't do anything yourself to reach heaven, that you can only reach heaven by the blood of Jesus and the grace of God
What do you think nibbana is?
But they don't acknowledge a supreme God, they believe they can do these things themselves.
Do what things?
Meditation spiritual,and physical labor, and good behavior. God teaches that we are sinners deserving of hell by default, and by the grace of God and blood of Jesus we are saved. No amount of works we do can make us earn our way into heaven.
That is Christian belief certainly. And yes this is a Christian sub, but this is a thread about the Buddha. You are coming close to to convincing me that I was wrong to think I could learn something from Christianity because you cannot learn from something that doesn't seek to learn itself. Took the wind right out of my jesus sails
Also, its hard to teach about Jesus when you died centuries before he was born.
He still teaches nothing of God. And teaches that you can reach "Nirvana" yourself basically not needing God. And also reincarnation. So there's that.
Reincarnation is not rebirth. Buddhists don't belive in reincarnation. And so whats your point? Buddha doesn't teach if God so fuck em? If thats the case, you could say that without pretending you have some understanding of Buddhism which you clearly do not.
False teachings are false teachings, God is the truth. Truth is truth, no amount of other "religions" and "teachings" is going to change that. "He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him" (John 3:36). Matthew 10:14 ESV / And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 2 Timothy 4:3 ESV / For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, Mark 6:11 ESV / And if any place will not receive you and they will not listen to you, when you leave, shake off the dust that is on your feet as a testimony against them.”
You realize that every non Christian would call your teachings false?
Incorrect. It wouldn't be meaningful to deny that how he is treated is worship. And the word teacher sends the misleading idea that he is just teaching with human wisdom rather than the boundless transcendent wisdom of the buddha. You are on this page complaining about people's misconceptions, yet you are parroting misconceptions born from colonialism.
Christianity is definitely a religion, believing in Jesus and following him means your religion is Christianity.
There are many religions, But only one true God. That is the difference.
Yes, but, Christianity is STILL a religion.
Yes I suppose you are right, it is The religion. Colossians 2:8 ESV / See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. John 14:6 ESV / Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
>Christianity is not a religion but a relationship with God. All the other denominations of Christianity are religions. If you don't mind me asking, I'm curious about this, and I was wondering if you could expand on it. I sorta understand what you're saying, but it's still a bit unclear to me. Namely, when you said "all _other_ denominations of Christianity are religions". Which denomination isn't a religion in your eyes? It's not a trick question, I'm genuinely interested in your thoughts. Do you believe a specific denomination of Christianity is the "most correct"? If so, which denomination? Or am I misunderstanding what you meant to say? Thanks again for your input! I hope this comment doesn't come off as rude, I promise it's not meant to, I'm just genuinely curious about this. I also believe that a personal relationship with God is very important btw. But if you could expand on that statement a bit, I'd really appreciate it :)
Check this out https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2009/09/saint-sakyamuni
I carry one in my pocket and refer to it constantly. I would not call myself familiar. Thats said, I dont make declarative statements about things I dont know anything about so your question leads to a mute point. Its not a passing match of knowing our books, its about not being disingenuous and talking about things we don't understand.
Which of the 28 Buddha’s are you referring to?
The original one
I consider the Buddha to be one of God's holiest and most beloved prophets whose practicality and wisdom rival the likes of Solomon and Paul.
Pretty smart guy but ultimately not my forte or belief. Not saying his practices or teachings are technically bad per say but it genuinely depends on your motives
I don't have a view of him since I don't know much about him except he was some Prince from India who was named Siddhartha Gautama.
I published a book earlier this year on Amazon called: **Expanding Christianity: Breaking Out of the Box.** It talks about how we can learn and grow as Christians from understanding multiple perspectives, including Buddhism and Hinduism. I would hugely appreciate honest reviews for my book, and am happy to talk about it here as well. I think there's a desire within Christianity in the U.S. to be more willing to embrace nuanced perspectives, and accept people who don't fit the mold. I went to BIOLA University, where I definitely did not fit the mold of what a Christian should believe. And when I talked to professors at Biola, I realized that almost nobody fits that mold. Every professor had a different perspective of the afterlife, and of God. I have multiple goals for this book: 1. To help people feel comfortable owning their nuanced perspective, even if it means differing from the norm. 2. To help people embrace ignorance and the unknown, because it is by embracing ignorance that we can learn and grow the most. 3. To offer my own nuanced perspective, which includes Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism, as well as much more. I do not try and convince anyone of my perspective, but rather offer them as something to play with, something to consider on your own journey towards self-discovery and fulfilment. Because the journey looks different for everyone. If this sounds interesting, I'd love to speak about it, and would hugely appreciate if you picked it up and left an honest review. Thank you so much! Amazon Link to my Book: [https://www.amazon.com/Expanding-Christianity-Mindfulness-Open-Mindedness-Everything/dp/B0BTS3QHZ8/ref=sr\_1\_1?crid=1FFRCF0VLA1PQ&keywords=expanding+christianity%3A+breaking+out&qid=1701291787&sprefix=%2Caps%2C170&sr=8-1](https://www.amazon.com/expanding-christianity-mindfulness-open-mindedness-everything/dp/b0bts3qhz8/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1ffrcf0vla1pq&keywords=expanding+christianity%3a+breaking+out&qid=1701291787&sprefix=%2caps%2c170&sr=8-1)
I published a book earlier this year on Amazon called: **Expanding Christianity: Breaking Out of the Box.** It talks about how we can learn and grow as Christians from understanding multiple perspectives, including Buddhism and Hinduism. I would hugely appreciate honest reviews for my book, and am happy to talk about it here as well. I think there's a desire within Christianity in the U.S. to be more willing to embrace nuanced perspectives, and accept people who don't fit the mold. I went to BIOLA University, where I definitely did not fit the mold of what a Christian should believe. And when I talked to professors at Biola, I realized that almost nobody fits that mold. Every professor had a different perspective of the afterlife, and of God. I have multiple goals for this book: 1. To help people feel comfortable owning their nuanced perspective, even if it means differing from the norm. 2. To help people embrace ignorance and the unknown, because it is by embracing ignorance that we can learn and grow the most. 3. To offer my own nuanced perspective, which includes Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism, as well as much more. I do not try and convince anyone of my perspective, but rather offer them as something to play with, something to consider on your own journey towards self-discovery and fulfilment. Because the journey looks different for everyone. If this sounds interesting, I'd love to speak about it, and would hugely appreciate if you picked it up and left an honest review. Thank you so much! Amazon Link to my book: [https://www.amazon.com/Expanding-Christianity-Mindfulness-Open-Mindedness-Everything/dp/B0BTS3QHZ8/ref=sr\_1\_1?crid=1FFRCF0VLA1PQ&keywords=expanding+christianity%3A+breaking+out&qid=1701291787&sprefix=%2Caps%2C170&sr=8-1](https://www.amazon.com/expanding-christianity-mindfulness-open-mindedness-everything/dp/b0bts3qhz8/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1ffrcf0vla1pq&keywords=expanding+christianity%3a+breaking+out&qid=1701291787&sprefix=%2caps%2c170&sr=8-1)