Thoughts on Buddhism

[Abracadabra]

I personally don't even trust the "quotes" to be verbatim and correct. In fact, it would be utterly foolish to do so. These authors are clearly making up these quotes based on their own biased views. Changing just a few words only slightly can imply a totally different meaning that the man Jesus might have actually meant

By this you mean that the passage as you quoted as evidence for ignorance as an excuse is included? What is your basis then for judging what is truth and what not? You do not have any ground for arguing any point, my friend

No, not at all. On the contrary you're totally not comprehending what I'm saying. And that's no surprise, because you're clearly locked into a mindset where you believe that these tales must be meaningful.

If you "dismiss" the quotes I point to on the grounds that they must also be included in my assertion that all the text in these fables is meaningless and untrustworthy, then of course I would agree with that. Let's just toss the entire fables away then if we are going to agree on that.

However, if you are going to demand that these fables have meaning, then you must accept the meanings that they claim even when they contradict themselves.

In fact, that's going to be your eternal problem. You're attempting to defend a collection of fables are riddled with contradictions. You will never be able to justify that.

I simply point out these contradictions. And since they clearly exist, then if I wanted to be as ignorant as you and "pretend" that I can uses these fables to make claims about what God would supposedly do, then I can point to any statements in these absurd contradicting fables and proclaim, "For the Bible Tells us so!"

That is my point.

You can root though these texts finding verses that support your demands that Jesus and this God are hateful entities who are chomping at the bit to condemn people to eternal damnation of every little thing.

I can root through the very same texts finding verses that support precisely the opposite conclusions.

So it basically boils down to the individual. You can make it into a hateful religion by choosing which verses you support and how you personally interpret them. Or you can make it into a loving religion by focusing on choosing other verses that support a more loving picture of a God.

That choice is entirely up to you. The actual cannon of fables is riddled with enough contradictions to support whichever view you prefer to support. A hateful God, or a loving God.

If I were going to support these fables I'd support the loving interpretations.

However, I personally don't believe that these fables make enough sense in any case to even bother supporting at all.

Even Jesus was said to have told his very own disciples that they do not understand what he is saying. And we're supposed to believe that the authors of these fables understood?

If you do not understand much of magnetism, does it make magnetism untrue?

That's totally irrelevant. This isn't about YOU understanding anything.

I said, If Jesus proclaims in these tales that his very own disciples do not understand him, then why should anyone believe that the authors of the New Testament would have understood him any better?

This goes to the heart of the matter of whether or not these hearsay rumors have any credibility at all.

It has absolutely nothing at all to do with what you may personally understand or not understand.

The problem that I see is that you want to “read” your flavour of Buddhism into the Bible, accepting what you like – but the two faiths are poles apart- Buddhism is based on works and Christianity the opposite – with undeserved grace.

I don't "want" to do anything. It has simply come to my attention that Jesus as a Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva makes the most sense to me.

The idea that he is a totally made-up fictional character makes no sense to me because I can't personally imagine why anyone would write such a fucked up story from pure scratch. Someone suggested in another thread that these were desperate times and these people just made up a 'deliverer' from Roman occupation. But that makes not sense to me. Why would they make up a totally fabricated story of a 'deliverer' who ends up being beaten and nailed to a pole by Roman Soldiers.

So to me it makes more sense that these are superstitious rumors based on some real event.

You say

- but the two faiths are poles apart- Buddhism is based on works and Christianity the opposite – with undeserved grace.

You are focusing on stuff that came long after the events of Jesus. Christianity didn't even exist at the time of Jesus.

Yes, Buddhism is poles apart from the teachings of the Torah. And that's what existed at that time.

And YES, the teachings attributed to Jesus were indeed poles apart from the teachings of the Torah.

In fact, that's a large part of why I'm convinced that Jesus could not possibly have been the demigod son of the God of Abraham.

Whether he was a Mahayana Buddhist or not is another story. But he clearly wasn't the son of the God of Abraham from the Torah, because he renounced the commandments given by that God.

Yes, Jesus was indeed poles apart from the teachings of the Torah. That's a given even according to the gospels themselves.

Christians are also called to live holy lives, with care for our enemies – whereas with Buddhism “ Benevolent action in behalf of those who are suffering is not a Buddhist value as such action would undo the consequences of negative karma)."

What are you talking about? Mahayana Buddhism absolutely supported the concept of a Bodhisattva. All you're doing here is displaying a gross ignorance of what Mahayana Buddhism stood for.

Again two poles apart. I know which one I would want to live in – where people are kind and care about misfortune– whether others deserve it or not. Jesus should have said to the woman called in adultary" You get what you deserve" ? Please enlighten me what a proper response in your view should have been?

What you say here has absolutely nothing at all to do with Mahayana Buddhism. Where do you get the idea that Mahayana Buddhists would go around telling people they are getting what they deserve?

That's probably your own gross misunderstanding of Buddhism in general. In fact, you probably get that idea from Zen Buddhism, which is quite different from Mahayana Buddhism. A modern Zen Buddhist may very well take a position of non-intervention with others, and possibly just view their misfortunes as a result of their own bad karma that they brought upon themselves. However, Zen Buddhism (which doesn't truly represent that mindset anyway) is actually worlds apart from Mahayana Buddhism.

Trying to compare Zen Buddhism with Mahayana Buddhist would be like comparing Islam with Christianity, or something like that. They aren't even on the same wavelengths at all really.

As I see it, a Buddhist will eternally be condemned as we all know that many of our works are evil and thus never reach perfection (to the contrary, it seems to get worse and worse). No escape, no forgiveness. In contrast to this, Jesus offers
Mat 11:28 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest

Well, again, this stems from your own negative views of Buddhism. You're pushing your negative views onto Buddhism.

I can easily see a Mahayana Buddhist saying the words of Matthew 11:28 with no problem. Jesus, as a Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva is offer to explain to people how to live a life that will indeed produce good karma.

And thus in doing so these people who were previously heavy laden with problems will find rest.

So as far as I'm concerned the verse of Matthew 11:28 fits in with Jesus being a Mahayana Buddhist perfectly. That particular verse is not a problem at all.

In fact consider these two verses of John.

John
[47] And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
[48] He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

In the first verse Jesus makes it clear that he is not judging anyone.

In the second verse the makes it clear that what he is saying will ultimate be the the "judge".

In other words, if you do the things he teaches you will create good karma and you will find rest and peace.

On the other hand, if you don't do what Jesus teaches, then you will create bad karma and suffer the consequences of that.

In other words, Jesus is saying here that he has not come to judge anyone. That's not what this is about. What he has come to do is to teach people how to create good karma and thus save them from themselves.

If you do as he teaches you'll save yourself from bad karma.

If you reject his teachings and fail to do as he teaches you'll create bad karma and suffer the consequences.

This is in perfect harmony with the way I would expect a Mahayana Buddhist to teach.

So what your objections have more to do with is your misunderstanding of what Mahayana Buddhism stood for more than anything else.