Buddha vs. Jesus

[shunyadragon]

I don't know. I thought his summary of Buddhism was pretty accurate. (I'd leave out the word 'mere', but that's about it.) I think there are huge differences between Christian dogma and Buddhist dharma. Of course, I think they're both slightly nuts. No wait, I'll try again: I think both world views are inaccurate reflections of reality. There, that's better.

I agree based on the outward appearance of the religions today, but if one considered either of the doctrinal and dogma views of the nature of the spiritual reality as necessarily accurate from the fallibility of the ancient human or for that matter todays view in these matters as accurate or original I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn, you do not even have to move it you can visit it anytime you want.

Nonetheless there are a number of similarities between the Buddhist scriptures and the scriptures of the NT.

[pancreasman]

I agree based on the outward appearance of the religions today, but if one considered either of the doctrinal and dogma views of the nature of the spiritual reality as necessarily accurate from the fallibility of the ancient human or for that matter todays view in these matters as accurate or original I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn, you do not even have to move it you can visit it anytime you want.

Nonetheless there are a number of similarities between the Buddhist scriptures and the scriptures of the NT.

I'm confused here. You're suggesting that Buddhism and Christianity's main common feature is that they are both wrong? Could you please list a couple of commonalities (aside from trivial ones like sharing a few interpersonal virtues)?

[seer]

I'm confused here. You're suggesting that Buddhism and Christianity's main common feature is that they are both wrong? Could you please list a couple of commonalities (aside from trivial ones like sharing a few interpersonal virtues)?

I agree with you P, they really have nothing in common save a few ethical teachings. The worldviews are completely different.

[shunyadragon]

I'm confused here. You're suggesting that Buddhism and Christianity's main common feature is that they are both wrong? Could you please list a couple of commonalities (aside from trivial ones like sharing a few interpersonal virtues)?

Your sounding like a fundie. None the less as far as what is reality and fallible nature of human beings, everyone, and including every belief cannot be assumed to be necessarily even close to what reality actually is IF there is 'Source' some call God(s), or a spiritual nature beyond our physical nature. Your previous post before the last one was distinctly arrogant and egocentric, like you know absolutely that you are right and those who believe differently are loony, which is not much different than fundie Christians like Seer who fully agrees with you.

I will discuss similarities when come back down to earth from the Palladian Constellation.

[seer]

Your sounding like a fundie. None the less as far as what is reality and fallible nature of human beings, everyone, and including every belief cannot be assumed to be necessarily even close to what reality actually is IF there is 'Source' some call God(s), or a spiritual nature beyond our physical nature. Your previous post before the last one was distinctly arrogant and egocentric, like you know absolutely that you are right and those who believe differently are loony, which is not much different than fundie Christians like Seer who fully agrees with you.

I will discuss similarities when come back down to earth from the Palladian Constellation.

See Shuny, this is really disingenuous. You can not reconcile Christianity with Buddhism, or with the Bahá'í faith for that matter - the very teachings of Christ preclude that. I would have a lot more respect for you if you just said that Christ was full of it.

[Darth Executor]

Ignore shuny, he has to do his mandatory shilling for his fabricated idiot religion so he can keep up the absurd charade that he isn't an atheist.

[pancreasman]

Your sounding like a fundie. None the less as far as what is reality and fallible nature of human beings, everyone, and including every belief cannot be assumed to be necessarily even close to what reality actually is IF there is 'Source' some call God(s), or a spiritual nature beyond our physical nature. Your previous post before the last one was distinctly arrogant and egocentric, like you know absolutely that you are right and those who believe differently are loony, which is not much different than fundie Christians like Seer who fully agrees with you.

I will discuss similarities when come back down to earth from the Palladian Constellation.

Ah, name calling instead of answering the question. Cool. You want to count how many logical fallacies you committed in that short little passage?

[seer]

Ah, name calling instead of answering the question. Cool. You want to count how many logical fallacies you committed in that short little passage?

Humm... I thought the laws of logic were mere conventions? ; )

[shunyadragon]

Ah, name calling instead of answering the question. Cool. You want to count how many logical fallacies you committed in that short little passage?

You trumped logical fallacies in your prvious post. I was not aiming at a formal logical response. If you chose to present. Present a logical argument I will respond in like manner, but so far you have present nothing, but arrogant assumptions based the fact that you feel you believe what is true, or that one way or another must be true, and Seer is lapping it up..

[pancreasman]

You trumped logical fallacies in your prvious post. I was not aiming at a formal logical response. If you chose to present. Present a logical argument I will respond in like manner, but so far you have present nothing, but arrogant assumptions based the fact that you feel you believe what is true, or that one way or another must be true, and Seer is lapping it up..

I'm not making an argument. I'm asking a freaking question. YOU said:

Interesting, I have been a student of Buddhism for more than 40 years. and a Baha'i. I really do not consider Buddha vs. Jesus to reflect my view, because I do not consider it a conflict. I consider the universality of spirituality to be more the issue where the differences between religions reflect the culture and the fallible human view, and the time in which the religion began.

I'm asking you to back up that claim by citing what universalities you see between Christianity and Buddhism. Get on your high horse all you like. I don't care if Seer agrees with me. I'm not 10 and I'm not playing sides. There is nothing remotely 'fundamentalist' about asking you to support a claim. At first, it was out of interest. Your reaction has made it much more of an issue than it needed to be. As an observation, I note that anyone who disagrees with you tends to get labelled with that good old 'fundie' brush. I know you're spiritually advanced and all and much more knowledgeable than everyone. Answering the question should not prove so difficult.

[shunyadragon]

I'm not making an argument. I'm asking a freaking question. YOU said:



I'm asking you to back up that claim by citing what universalities you see between Christianity and Buddhism. Get on your high horse all you like. I don't care if Seer agrees with me. I'm not 10 and I'm not playing sides. There is nothing remotely 'fundamentalist' about asking you to support a claim. At first, it was out of interest. Your reaction has made it much more of an issue than it needed to be. As an observation, I note that anyone who disagrees with you tends to get labelled with that good old 'fundie' brush. I know you're spiritually advanced and all and much more knowledgeable than everyone. Answering the question should not prove so difficult.

No, you started the exchange with this, note highlighted . . .

I don't know. I thought his summary of Buddhism was pretty accurate. (I'd leave out the word 'mere', but that's about it.) I think there are huge differences between Christian dogma and Buddhist dharma. Of course, I think they're both slightly nuts. No wait, I'll try again: I think both world views are inaccurate reflections of reality. There, that's better.

[pancreasman]

No, you started the exchange with this, note highlighted . . .

I don't know. I thought his summary of Buddhism was pretty accurate. (I'd leave out the word 'mere', but that's about it.) I think there are huge differences between Christian dogma and Buddhist dharma. Of course, I think they're both slightly nuts. No wait, I'll try again: I think both world views are inaccurate reflections of reality. There, that's better.

Oh, I get it. You don't understand humor. It's ok, I understand. Pompous people seldom do.

[shunyadragon]

Oh, I get it. You don't understand humor. It's ok, I understand. Pompous people seldom do.

Responses dripping with sarcasm and spiked with irony bear no resemblance to humor. Your pomposity demonstrates that.

In reality the post could not logically lead to a constructive question. It was a statement of belief.

[pancreasman]

Responses dripping with sarcasm and spiked with irony bear no resemblance to humor. Your pomposity demonstrates that.

In reality the post could not logically lead to a constructive question. It was a statement of belief.

I'm rubber but you're glue.

[seer]

Nonetheless there are a number of similarities between the Buddhist scriptures and the scriptures of the NT.

It's time to deal with a couple of your assumptions Shuny. First, this is just false - at the heart of the NT and from which all in the NT flows, like ethical rules, is a personal God. A moral God. A God who reasons and acts in history. If memory serves Buddha was agnostic.

Second you like to label me a fundie - that is fine, I wear the badge proudly. However what I can't abide is your double standard - I have met few people on the web more dogmatic and closed mined when it comes to their religious beliefs than you.