Can a Christian be a Buddhist? Vice-versa?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

Where's the tolerance in that response though? A simple no would definately be better.

---

I have spoken the truth. I did so with emphasis. My tolerance of others belief's is basically, you believe what you want, but I don't have to listen to it. Any religion formed by man's philosophies, I am adamantly against. I know little about Buddhism and I don't want to know. The only time I would speak to one is to open up their eyes. I have zero tolerance for other religions other than my own belief in Christ. My tolerance of them is they can believe in their own god and I can believe in my God. I don't stop them but I don't have to get along with them other than say hi and bye. And my answer stands.

I know this is not popular into today's "get along" "mingle" "whatever" society, but so be it. I'm not here to please people who want their ears soothe with sweet nothings.

Shadows

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Comedian

I really think that Paul was just askin' for civility. The poster's "No Way in hell. That's an abomination. . ." is antagonistic. He could have expressed with something like "No. Because the essential nature of Christianity is faith in the truth of Christ's divinity, his resurrection, and his ministry. While Buddhist and Christian morality may have some similarities, as faiths, their doctrines are incompatible and therefore one cannot be a fully practicing member of each. . . ."

---

That's your opinion. You make it antagonistic by labeling it that way. It's simply my answer. To me that's loving another God. In my religion that is an abomination. All religions basically teach people to be good, moral, whatever. But there are no good people, are there? Who's holy? Who hasn't sinned? You make generalizations about Christianity, but if you really knew about it, you'd know my answer is correct.

The question is poorly defined.
Option A) Can you be social interactive as Christian and Buddhist? Yes.
Option B) Can you learn wisdom from both at the same time? Yes.
Option C) Can you be a student of a great human in both at the same time? Yes.
Option D) Upon mastering both or either can you be both? No. At the point you fully opened your capacity for loving yourself, loving others, accepting life for what it is, and learning to endure the pain that comes with life, you would no longer be either. You would have transformed into an enlightened being. Could you go to two colleges at once? Yes. Could you be students of both AFTER you finished both? No. You would have moved on to greater things. And YES, very few people ever attain enlightenment, so from your point of view - becoming fully human would seem an impossible dream. Sadly, in many ways it is. Jesus and Buddha would appreciate that you try and become fully loving and understanding and compassionate. Neither would fault you for your noble quest. Most people are born to follow and never lead. If you are born to follow, never forget that the other students around you are only child-mind students; they will be cruel to you. Life has lots of cruelty. It is their path. Be compassionate towards them. They do not have the power to snap their fingers and attain true enlightenment.

JamCrackers, I can find no fault in anything you wrote. We can become enlightened with a Divine Spirit but not within ourselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

How does tolerance even apply here. Just because someone chooses to be emphatic about an answer does not mean that they are intolerant about someone else's belief. Why shouldn't I be allowed to say that by no means can someone be a Christian and a Buddhist? I get sick of the over use of the word tolerance, which to some people means...you can't voice your opinion.

---

Can a Christian be a buddhist? No Way in hell. That's an abomination to Christian thought

The implication of this post is that Buddhism is anathema to Christianity - the use of the word hell is significant in suggesting the outcome and I think abomination is a word that could be applied to war crimes, serial killing - things like that, but not to Buddhism. Emphatic? What about definately not?

Why shouldn't I be allowed to say that by no means can someone be a Christian and a Buddhist?

I thought we were talking about Shadowscool? If you read previous posts from ages ago, you'd see that I agree with that. I take issue with the way it was said.

I get sick of the over use of the word tolerance, which to some people means...you can't voice your opinion.

I'm really not sure who or what you're beefing about with intolerance. Cool's attitude to me suggests an attitude intolerant to Buddhism. I'm not even sure why you decided to wade in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Comedian

I really think that Paul was just askin' for civility. The poster's "No Way in hell. That's an abomination. . ." is antagonistic. He could have expressed with something like "No. Because the essential nature of Christianity is faith in the truth of Christ's divinity, his resurrection, and his ministry. While Buddhist and Christian morality may have some similarities, as faiths, their doctrines are incompatible and therefore one cannot be a fully practicing member of each. . . ."

---

Cheers Comedian - I should have read your post first and just referred to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadowsCool

I have spoken the truth. I did so with emphasis. My tolerance of others belief's is basically, you believe what you want, but I don't have to listen to it. Any religion formed by man's philosophies, I am adamantly against. I know little about Buddhism and I don't want to know. The only time I would speak to one is to open up their eyes. I have zero tolerance for other religions other than my own belief in Christ. My tolerance of them is they can believe in their own god and I can believe in my God. I don't stop them but I don't have to get along with them other than say hi and bye. And my answer stands.

I know this is not popular into today's "get along" "mingle" "whatever" society, but so be it. I'm not here to please people who want their ears soothe with sweet nothings.

Shadows

---

The truth is a moot point - so we can leave that.

My tolerance of others belief's is basically, you believe what you want, but I don't have to listen to it.

True - you don't have to listen. But it's nice that others can believe what they want.

Any religion formed by man's philosophies, I am adamantly against. I know little about Buddhism and I don't want to know.

Are you still saying we can believe what we want? If you are happy in your religion - fine - good for you.

I have zero tolerance for other religions other than my own belief in Christ.

So now we can't believe what we want?

My tolerance of them is they can believe in their own god and I can believe in my God. I don't stop them but I don't have to get along with them other than say hi and bye. And my answer stands.

Ah - we can believe what we want. That's ok then.


I know this is not popular into today's "get along" "mingle" "whatever" society, but so be it. I'm not here to please people who want their ears soothe with sweet nothings.

I live in a multicultural city that has Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus Muslims, Bahai, Zoroastrians and others. We mingle and get along. What's wrong with that then?

They don't ask me to believe what they do. I don't ask them to believe what I do. I call that tolerance and respect.

I get sick of the over use of the word tolerance, which to some people means...you can't voice your opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

I'm really not sure who or what you're beefing about with intolerance. Cool's attitude to me suggests an attitude intolerant to Buddhism. I'm not even sure why you decided to wade in.

---

I'm wondering why you suggest I'm "intolerant" with Buddhist, after you gave a sermon about people who can't voice their opinion. Can I not say what I believe? This is not about my views of Buddhism, it's about the Bible's view regarding man's own vain religions except the Word. So your labeling me as something you don't understand yourself. All religions don't have to agree with each other, do they? Cause they don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadowsCool

I get sick of the over use of the word tolerance, which to some people means...you can't voice your opinion.



I'm wondering why you suggest I'm "intolerant" with Buddhist, after you gave a sermon about people who can't voice their opinion. Can I not say what I believe? This is not about my views of Buddhism, it's about the Bible's view regarding man's own vain religions except the Word. So your labeling me as something you don't understand yourself. All religions don't have to agree with each other, do they? Cause they don't.

---

The use of the word hell and abomination suggests an intolerant attitude to me.

As I said to Bien, I agree with you that there are major differences between Buddhism and Christianity. It's more about the way you said it. Hell and abomination? Why use those words?

So your labeling me as something you don't understand yourself.

How do you know that?

All religions don't have to agree with each other, do they? Cause they don't.

Yes - though I don't recall saying that they did. They don't have to agree - but respect is a good start and tolerance is better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

The use of the word hell and abomination suggests an intolerant attitude to me.

---

Should I suggest another word? I could but it fit the description I described. I'd rather not say anymore. I'll be tolerant as you say.

You have a God given right to be a Buddhist and I being choosen a Christian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

Can a Christian be a buddhist? No Way in hell. That's an abomination to Christian thought

The implication of this post is that Buddhism is anathema to Christianity - the use of the word hell is significant in suggesting the outcome and I think abomination is a word that could be applied to war crimes, serial killing - things like that, but not to Buddhism. Emphatic? What about definately not?

Why shouldn't I be allowed to say that by no means can someone be a Christian and a Buddhist?

I thought we were talking about Shadowscool? If you read previous posts from ages ago, you'd see that I agree with that. I take issue with the way it was said.

I get sick of the over use of the word tolerance, which to some people means...you can't voice your opinion.

I'm really not sure who or what you're beefing about with intolerance. Cool's attitude to me suggests an attitude intolerant to Buddhism. I'm not even sure why you decided to wade in.

---

Trying to combine any other religion with Christianity is an anathema. It seems that you are arguing over a definition of terms. Although I would choose another wording (as I did), I'm not going to jump all over another for what I consider rather tame language (in comparison to language that I've seen from others). As far as using the word 'abomination', it is used in the Scriptures to show that something is defiling another. Combining Buddhism with Christianity defiles the main point of Christianity, which is redemption. I don't see where Shadows was being intolerant. However, it seems that the "Toleration Card" was pulled on him. THAT is what I get sick of.

Christianity has been falling off a cliff for a long time. These days, it is hard to even find one who didn't convert to Judaism. They spend most their days praising their Pharisee leaders and worship of Israel. Many PROUDLY deny Christ on a trip to Israel to prove their faith. As a rule, when you meet a Christian whose knowledge on the topic is what they teach to 6-9 year old kids in Sunday school... well there it is. They have the barest child-version understanding. Religion is like this: There is a bronze statue of Pythagoras. Most his followers polish the statue and put flowers on it. Other followers have clubs and they beat people who laugh at the statue. Other followers scream at people to believe Pythagoras was real and a real man inspired the statue. His one and only TRUE STUDENT studied and mastered geometry, did his geometry homework, then left to learn his trigonometry. The true student never cared less if Pythagoras was real or not. He was too busy learning geometry. The ghost of Pythagoras smiled upon his one and only student, the one who understood, the one who learned the geometry. Do yourself a favor, avoid his followers - they are not nice people and they are not wise and they care NOTHING for Pythagoras. They wanted to be seen in public as his loudest club wielding flower dresser.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamCrackers

Christianity has been falling off a cliff for a long time.

---

What cliff are you supposing Christianity is falling off? I disagree vehemently with that assumption. Christianity is just not understood by many who talk about it.

:biggrin5: I respect your point of view.

The cliff of compassion and wisdom. Fallen so low, his few remaining followers struggle and fail to get people to stop dropping bombs on women and children in his name. America TORTURES. America has no Christian monuments on public land. Only Jewish monuments go on public land, like the 50 foot high candlestick on the White House lawn. Attendance at church is very low. There is a TV show called Christian *****ES. The EU recently said you don't even have the right to wear a cross to work. And I noticed you deliberately avoided the part of studying the TORAH Old Testament. Torah is Judaism. Christianity is New Testament. This is where the failed Christians defend the glory of Pharisee and explain how Jesus wants us to practice the murderous slavery hate of the Old Testament.