Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

PeterB wrote:Agreed. Each spring has be traced back to its own source...or left alone.
During my involvement with Buddhism it was my contention that the same applied to the Mahayana and Theravada too.They each needed to be subject to their own lights.

I agree also, in that it is almost impossible to understand a religion from the other side.

Spiny Norman wrote:

barcsimalsi wrote:I think i will just follow the mainstream assertion that Jesus was a noble figure but the bible is corrupted.

Now why does that idea sound familiar?

Please get yourself brainwashed by Dr Naik.


I tried my best to find any professional debate between Buddhist Ajahns with Christian apologists but can't find any. Here's an amateur video i found that might be of interest:

barcsimalsi wrote:

Spiny Norman wrote:

barcsimalsi wrote:I think i will just follow the mainstream assertion that Jesus was a noble figure but the bible is corrupted.

Now why does that idea sound familiar?

Please get yourself brainwashed by Dr Naik.


I tried my best to find any professional debate between Buddhist Ajahns with Christian apologists but can't find any. Here's an amateur video i found that might be of interest:

phpBB .

Does this count? Mohottiwatte Gunaananda Thera and the Buddhist Re-awakening http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... ml#sect-33



"It was at this time, about 1860, that a young Buddhist saamanera named Mohottiwatte Gunaananda appeared on the scene and challenged the Christian missionaries to meet him in open-debate. This young novice had obtained his early education in Christian schools and had thus studied the Christian scriptures and was also well versed in the Buddha's teachings...

The Christian clergy at first took no notice of the challenge of this monk, but later, quite confident of their success they accepted the challenge. This resulted in three public controversies, one at Udanvita in 1866, another at Gampola in 1871 and the last at Panadura in 1873.The Panadura controversy, which lasted for a week, was the most important of them all. It was the culmination of his efforts and it led to a Buddhist reawakening..."

barcsimalsi wrote:I think i will just follow the mainstream assertion that Jesus was a noble figure but the bible is corrupted.

Whose "mainstream?"

I tried my best to find any professional debate between Buddhist Ajahns with Christian apologists but can't find any. Here's an amateur video i found that might be of interest:

phpBB .

There is not a thing of interest in this video. Why do you think that there is?

Kare wrote:If we study Buddhism from a Christian perspective, Christianity from a Buddhist perspective, Buddhism from a Hindu perspective .... etc. .... we are bound to get a distorted and lopsided view. We should rather study each religion partly from its own perspective, but mainly from the human perspective.

Couldn't have said it any better...

Kusala wrote: Does this count? Mohottiwatte Gunaananda Thera and the Buddhist Re-awakening http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... ml#sect-33

Thanks.

tiltbillings wrote:

barcsimalsi wrote:I think i will just follow the mainstream assertion that Jesus was a noble figure but the bible is corrupted.

Whose "mainstream?"

Buddhist, do we need to vote?

tiltbillings wrote:There is not a thing of interest in this video. Why do you think that there is?

Is it not to learn what an ex-buddhist is thinking when he decides to convert to Christianity?

What that tells you barcsimalsi is what an advocate of a particular form of protestant Christianity thinks. And one who shows a very shaky grasp of Buddhism, who thinks for example that Karma/kamma is a punishment.
As a former Buddhist who converted to Christianity I do not recognise his beliefs as representing any Christianity that I practice.

PeterB wrote:As a convert/... to Christianity I do not recognise his beliefs as representing any Christianity that I practice.

I ran into this trouble; it seems no one is allowed to say anything is "for-sure" Xianity these days. It isn't even "followers of what Jesus taught, at minimum" because that isn't agreed upon, as trying to read the Gospels has shown. Denominations abound; Jesus is everything from the Son of Yahweh to Krishna to Buddhist to Taoist... there are definitely shades of New Age thinking everywhere, where once there wasn't.

Modern thinking about Xianity is all over the map, it seems. "Xian" is (almost?) a meaningless term. It seems to mean monotheist inspired by Jesus and Pals.

PeterB wrote:Agreed. Each spring has be traced back to its own source...or left alone.
During my involvement with Buddhism it was my contention that the same applied to the Mahayana and Theravada too.They each needed to be subject to their own lights.

What made you convert from Buddhism to Christianity old friend?

PeterB wrote:What that tells you barcsimalsi is what an advocate of a particular form of protestant Christianity thinks. And one who shows a very shaky grasp of Buddhism, who thinks for example that Karma/kamma is a punishment.
As a former Buddhist who converted to Christianity I do not recognise his beliefs as representing any Christianity that I practice.

I agree with you about the guy who doesn't really understand buddhism while i'll be impatient to hear what was your thoughts(particularly about Christianity) that led you to convert.

I am trying to walk a fine line here. To correct obvious distortions while not losing sight of the fact that this is a Buddhist forum and I am a guest.
So apart from reiterating my agreement with the view that systems of spiritual thought can only be understood on their own terms, I have no desire to promulgate my views.

daverupa wrote: Modern thinking about Xianity is all over the map, it seems. "Xian" is (almost?) a meaningless term.

I think the same applies to "God", it seems to mean whatever people want it to mean.

daverupa wrote:

PeterB wrote:As a convert/... to Christianity I do not recognise his beliefs as representing any Christianity that I practice.

I ran into this trouble; it seems no one is allowed to say anything is "for-sure" Xianity these days. It isn't even "followers of what Jesus taught, at minimum" because that isn't agreed upon, as trying to read the Gospels has shown. Denominations abound; Jesus is everything from the Son of Yahweh to Krishna to Buddhist to Taoist... there are definitely shades of New Age thinking everywhere, where once there wasn't.

Modern thinking about Xianity is all over the map, it seems. "Xian" is (almost?) a meaningless term. It seems to mean monotheist inspired by Jesus and Pals.

You are absolutely right, but I think that something similar could be said about Buddhism. Even on this one Theravadan site, there are such profound differences of opinion as to the meaning and importance of particular ideas that they are identified by code words. I'm not sure whether this is due to the fact that we are dealing with huge and diverse religious and cultural traditions that have developed over thousands of years; or whether it is because we are applying a critical and restless western mindset to them.

binocular wrote:To me, being at peace with the idea that some people will suffer in hell for all eternity, with no chance of redemption, and that this is good and just, requires a bestial mindset.

For my part I think that it requires a "Holy Willie" mindset, consisting in a strong conviction that one is not oneself one of the hell-bound, a thankfulness that this is so, and a strong stomach. I doubt any beast could be so vicious.

• Holy Willie's Prayer
  
  by Robert Burns
  
  O Thou, who in the heavens does dwell,
  Who, as it pleases best Thysel',
  Sends one to heaven and ten to hell,
  All for Thy glory,
  And not for ony good or ill
  They've done afore Thee!
  
  I bless and praise Thy matchless might,
  When thousands Thou hast left in night,
  That I am here afore Thy sight,
  For gifts and grace
  A burning and a shining light
  To all this place.
  
  What was I, or my generation,
  That I should get such exaltation,
  I who deserve most just damnation
  For broken laws,
  Five thousand years ere my creation,
  Through Adam's cause?
  
  When from my mother's womb I fell,
  Thou might have plunged me deep in hell,
  To gnash my gums, to weep and wail,
  In burning lakes,
  Where damned devils roar and yell,
  Chained to their stakes.
  
  Yet I am here a chosen sample,
  To show thy grace is great and ample;
  I'm here a pillar of Thy temple,
  Strong as a rock,
  A guide, a buckler, and example,
  To all Thy flock.
  
  (etc. etc. for another twelve verses)
  
  http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/robertburns/w ... es_prayer/

In practice, however, my impression is that Holy Willie types (Fred Phelps and his horror-show of a family will serve as a good example) are not very common among Christians today. Rather, most hell-believing Christians are simply not at peace with their belief in a literal everlasting hell; they are tormented by it and resigned to being so.

P.S.

To Peter B. and any other Scotsmen here... my apologies for the englishing of the Burns extract. I just didn't think there'd be too many who'd know what 'ane', 'guid', 'wha', 'sic', 'frae', etc. mean.