Being a practicing Buddhist, I can tell you that I see a lot of similarities between Buddhist and Christian teachings. There is one huge difference though - we're non-theistic.

Dharma, that's true. Buddhist philosophy is non-theistic, but Buddhist practice is agnostic in principle. My point is that when both Eastern and Western wisdom is merged, we can attain a more enlightened perspective of reality. I don't think that we should claim that any one religion has a monopoly on the Truth. That's what gave Christianity such a bad name. Christianity has been through it's learning curves, and Buddhism doesn't have to take the same route.

Consider the following words from Zen Buddhist Master, Thich Nhat Hanh: “Real dialogue makes us more open minded, tolerant and understanding. In a true dialogue, we allow the good, the beautiful and the meaningful in the other's tradition to transform us. ... When we have peace within, real dialogue with others is possible … The career of the practitioner is the career of enlightenment. Enlightenment here means ‘Touching the ultimate’.”

Hahn continues, “When we touch the ultimate dimension of reality, we get the deepest kind of relief. Each of us has the capacity to touch Nirvana. … Christian contemplation includes the practise of resting in God which I believe is the equivalent of touching Nirvana. …. The Kingdom of God is available here and now. The energy of the Holy Spirit is the energy that helps us touch the Kingdom of God. … I do not think there is that much difference between Christians and Buddhists. … A truly happy Christian is really a Buddhist. And vice-versa". (taken from his book, ‘Living Buddha, Living Christ’)


While a theist might say that God exists "up there and out there", a Buddhism might describe God exclusively as "the Ground of Being". According to Christianity revelation, both are true and neither is wrong.

What's more, Jesus said, "The Kingdom of God does not come visibly. No one will say 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!'; because the Kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17.21)

It doesn't surprise me at all that the major religions of the world have so many common ideals. If God created a literal or figurative "Adam & Eve", then He would have taught them truth, and all religions that have evolved would eventually go back to that truth.

If god is just a creation of man, then whoever first thought up the idea would have taught basic principles, which would have evolved into all the religions of the past, present and future.

Whether we look to science or the divine for answers to our questions, the search seems universal among all races of humans. It makes sense that those who turn to the spiritual would come to many of the same conclusions. Even if the path leading to those conclusions differs so greatly.

if it's all from the same god, then the god must suffer from MPD

It might be humans that have MPD, rather than God. God remains the same, regardless of what humans say or write about Him / Her. Holy Scriptures are our written foundation of religious belief, said to inspired by God and giving insights into God’s promises and plans. Yet the Scriptures themselves are written by the hand of man. We can therefore expect some misguided insights somewhere down the line.

What are your views on verses such as Exodus 32:27-29, Deuteronomy 21.18-21, Numbers 15.32-36, in contrast to verses like Luke 6.27 and 1 John 4.16? How do you think they can all be right?

science is fallible man's fallible attempt to understand the universe with fallible senses and fallible equations

Science is the enterprise which explores God’s Creation. There’s no need for contradictions. In the Bible, metaphorical statements and poetic imagery are often used to reflect deep, spiritual truths. Check out this blog which shows how evolution can enrich Christian faith https://www.joeuser.com/Forums.aspx?ForumID=6&AID=64817 (I'm not blowing my own trumpet. I'm just showing that evolution can be Christianity's ally.)

How could somebody who's a theist believe that atheists are right too?

A lot of Buddhists say that they are atheistic. But the difference between Buddhism and atheism is that is that Buddhists believe that there is cosmic purpose to life, and that the ultimate dimension of reality is Spirit.

Atheists believe that there is no such purpose. So from a religious point of view, it could be said that atheists (of the non-spiritual kind), are “misguided”. An atheist would also say the same thing about a religionist, of course. But we’re all subjective beings, with freedom of choice and freedom of interpretation. Logic dictates that some people’s interpretation of ‘What Is So’ will be more aligned with the Truth than others. It’s all a question of faith, at the end of the day because ‘the Infinite’ transcends our finite minds. But strictly speaking, it’s more a question of spiritual growth and enlightenment.

Christianity claims that Christ is the only way to God, yet Christianity also proclaims that Christ is God. In my opinion, all religions embrace Christ, whether they recognise Him as Jesus or not, (this is the great “I AM” - to which the wisdom of the ages refers), only from a different perspective and cultural context.

Yes, there's common ground, just like there is common ground between men and women, but there's also many differences, so we can't just say that men and women are the same.

That’s what makes life so rich. There's many different forms of manifestation. It’s part of our journey on the road to enlightenment to decipher which of humanity's views are aligned with ‘What Is So’, and which views are misguided. We are all at different stages of growth in the spiritual life, so we can expect some contradictions and discrepancies in different people’s views. The key lies in finding inner peace with our own particular interpretation, and to keep an open mind and a willingness to grow.

I just wish that some Christians could see the same thing

Me too Dharma!

Since Buddhism predates Christianity by about 600 years, wouldn't it be a better question to ask whether or not Christianity is a threat to Buddhism, or if Christianity might be a harmonious ally to the older philosophy/religion

Good point Myrrander. History has shown that Buddhists are a lot calmer and more laid back than Christians, so I'm sure a Christian wouldn't "threaten" a Buddhist's point of view anyway, (as long as she's a mature Buddhist.) Can you imagine a Buddhist crusade which involved killing non-Buddhists in an attempt to get people to see their point of view. It doesn't add up, because Buddhist philosophy is all about inner-peace and harmony.

Yet this is exactly what the Christian crusades were about, all those centuries ago. The crusades were driven by fear and paranoia. However, it’s unfair to identify Christianity with those early tyrannical fundamentalists, because humanity has grown up a lot since then. I believe that Christianity will adapt a more wise and mature interpretation of traditional doctrine because of Christianity’s misspent youth, rather than in spite of it. We’ve been there and done it, and a lot of wisdom can be drawn from those early days.

Although, in my studies, I have found Buddhism and Taoism to be the closest to logical and sane out of any of them.

You’re right, but it depends on the interpretation. If you compare Buddhism and Taoism to a fundamentalist interpretation of Christianity, (i.e. a literal 7 day creation account etc.), then you’d conclude that the former is more sane. But there are more mature and wise interpretations of Christianity / Islam etc. arising in human thought today, which I believe will continue to mature.

I disagree that all religion is a threat to rational thought. I think it’s more a threat to the human ego, which presently assumes that humanity has got it all wrapped up. “God is dead”, thinks the ego. But remember that the ego is still a little child, and the human heart has yet to have its day. Only when we can distinguish the cleverness of the head from the wisdom of the heart - and combine them both - will our traditional religions have their day. Then the Heavens will rejoice.

“We must not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we began, and to know the place for the first time.” - T.S. Eliot.

I think it’s more a threat to the human ego

I disagree. I feel like religion is the ultimate attempt for humans to feel "special" or "chosen" by some otherwordly being, whereas a non-theistic thought process doesn't necessarily make the human into a god, it puts the human into his/her place within a larger system -- not special at all, just surviving.

Silver Ravelwolf's

I find her work to be a bit sugarcoated, what do you think?

For me, Buddhism sums itself up in one of the most popular mantras "Om Ah Hum" Om -- for the kaya (body), Ah -- for the vak (spoken word or speech) and Hum -- for the citta (spirit or mind). This is the truest "trinity" you might know, as we can know all three things both in the physical world and in the world of metaphysical and theoretical thought.

I dunno about that.....I know quite a few Christians who live in fear of faiths they know little to nothing about. Instead of trying to understand what different faiths are all about, they just condemn them

You’re right Dharma. We still haven’t got there quite yet, but I’m giving Christians the benefit of the doubt. I’m an optimist, and I’m projecting my thoughts into the future to be honest. I believe that as long as humanity survives the journey, we’ll learn that love is the answer. We’re still a long way off from that at the moment, and as long as we believe that only one view is right, there’s still room for growth. The number of tyrannical Christian fundamentals is diminishing in the modern world. But Christians today still get identified with them, which is sad. (Well, it depends on your point of view whether it’s sad or not.)

I've stopped telling people that I'm Buddhist because I find that it tends to mar people's perceptions of me.

Buddhism is cool. It’s true that some people become Buddhist for the wrong reasons – they see the likes of Madonna doing it, or Britney Spears, and think of it as a fashion statement. But as long as your heart’s in it, it’s a quality practice.

I think it’s more a threat to the human ego

I disagree. I feel like religion is the ultimate attempt for humans to feel "special" or "chosen" by some otherwordly being

Yes, I see what you mean. But religion can make people feel "special" because they learn that there is intrinsic, cosmic purpose to their life, as opposed to a finite kind of purpose, which one might impose on their limited life. There's a difference between believing that there is transcendent, intrinsic purpose to life, and believing that there is only finite, self-imposed purpose. (Both are valid in my view. It's all a question of faith, because it depends on your belief regarding the nature of 'the Infinite'.)

As to the threat to the human ego, I was talking prematurely again. Assuming that humanity’s spiritual awareness will continue to rise, (and I believe that it will due to the laws of growth), more people will return to traditional religious doctrines, yet this time with a more mature interpretation. This is when religion will become a threat to the human ego, speaking on a global scale. It’s speculation of course, but I’m just sharing my beliefs.

For me, Buddhism sums itself up in one of the most popular mantras "Om Ah Hum" Om -- for the kaya (body), Ah -- for the vak (spoken word or speech) and Hum -- for the citta (spirit or mind)

There you show that different practices suit different people. Buddhist practices suit some people to the ground. For others, they would prefer to talk to Jesus. It’s all a matter of personal taste and preference. Yet that’s the beauty of having so many views in the world. Wiccan is a good example, and allows people to get in touch with the Feminine. We’re not separate, ultimately, and I believe that all such views are in touch with the same Spirit.

Since Buddhism predates Christianity by about 600 years, wouldn't it be a better question to ask whether or not Christianity is a threat to Buddhism, or if Christianity might be a harmonious ally to the older philosophy/religion

Even though Buddhism began 600 years before Christianity, it's only just taking root in the West. Many Christians find this threatening. But I believe that Buddhism is Christianity's harmonious ally. Like Dharma said, it just needs more people to explore it and try to understand it.

the idea of an "Infinite" clashes with true atheist, and especially materialism

This isn’t really true. Many atheists believe that the universe has existed forever - an infinite universe, without purpose and without a transcendent God. It’s still belief in the nature of the Infinite.

It's pretty clear when the Bible is being literal, figurative, or poetic. If Genesis is figurative, then death, disease, and everything that supposedly came with sin has existed long before Adam did anything wrong.

But if you’d been born into a Muslim household, you wouldn’t care about what the Bible says, (unless you were open minded and wanted to explore other views to see what they had to say). As a Muslim, you’d believe that Adam and Eve was created at the outset in Heaven, because that’s what the Qu’ran says. That makes better sense to me, in context with the larger cosmic story, than belief that the Garden of Eden existed on earth. (Islam is our latest world religion in the evolutionary line, and as evolution denotes growth, we can expect some fruitful insights to be contained therein.)

How do we know what's valid and what isn't?

Apply common sense, intuition and spiritual awareness. What makes sense to you? What does your head and heart have to say? (This principle can be applied to those Bible verses I mentioned earlier). Don't worry about what other people think - including me. I'm just an oaf sharing my views on JU. It's in our interests to be at peace with our own views, and to align whatever we hear with our own personal preference.

In my opinion, your Christian views aren’t wrong. I’m a Christian, and I believe they’re right. I also believe that many Buddhist views are right. The smaller our scope, the more contradictions we'll find, (even within the Bible from an exclusive Christian scope). The wider our vision, the less we'll worry about peripherals, and the more we'll see common ground, which is broad and rich and spans across all religions. What more, the more we'll see harmony and coherence in the bigger picture, and in our religious revelations. In my opinion, our world faiths are harmonious allies, which together expand human understanding beyond the scope of an individual faith system alone.

Surely nobody here has a monopoly on truth, right? So this idea that all religions come from the same god is no more valid than the idea that Christianity is the one true belief or a strict materialist view of the universe.

Truth is Truth, (otherwise there would be nothing at all). It's part of our spiritual journey to discern "the Truth". and to be a compassionate, loving, good natured person on the way. (The latter is the goal, in my opinion.)

Isn't this what gave Christians gave a bad name?

Applying coercive force and intolerance to force their views is what gave Christianity a bad name. To apply love, compassion and understanding would give Christianity a good name.

I've just re-read that last post, and I come across as an arrogant twat.

Note to self: Room for growth. Be more compassionate.