Buddhist vs. Daoist

[Bak Kuei]

I was wondering how many people on this forum consider themselves to be either Buddhist or Taoist, either in religion or simply outlook on life and how this affects your life. Thanks. :)

[Code Fu]

I'm Roman Catholic and I study Northern Shaolin and Chen Pan Ling Tai Chi. Believe it or not, they mesh pretty well.

I think Christianity and Buddhism are quite similar. The main difference that I can see between the two (aside from the obvious) is their definition of compassion. But to me that seems mostly semantic anyway.

[David Jamieson]

What you wanna do is find an interfaith chat room or something.

[Water Dragon]

Roman Catholic. It affects my life in that I try to submit to His will and walk with Him. Anyone who knows me knows that I stumble a lot :)

[Shaolinlueb]

muslim, christian, judaism, all the same, all believe in the same god and are used as scapegoats and grossly misinterpretted. buddhism and taoism follow some of the same principles. im a religious person, but you wouldnt know it, i just take what i like and believe it. im not one of those pressuring religious people that are like come to church with me and argue about it all the time. i met this beautiful columbian girl one time, but it didnt work out :( she was always like come to church with me :). :( so :(

so in the end. all religions are the same, jsut minor differences.

[SPJ]

My mom is a Christian. My father is a Buddhist.

My Wushu teachers are mostly Daoists in life philosophy and not in religious sense.

Guess what I am all blurred.

On a personal level, I believe there is God. Yes, I am a Christian.

However, I also know a lot about Buddhism and Daoism.

When you do Chan meditation, you have to study the book of Change, which means daoist thinking is merged into Chan since the beginning in Shaolin Si 1500 years ago.


:)

[FngSaiYuk]

I'm not religious, I don't like blind faith. I tend to have a Taoist outlook on life, a philosophy of life of sorts. But really I haven't studied Taoism in enough depth to really, trully consider myself a Taoist. If anything I'm rather faithless, believing more in consequence and responsibility for actions. So it sort of chimes in with the description of Karma.

[rubthebuddha]

Christian, but the nomenclature means little. how you live is important, and a good person is the same no matter which affiliation they choose.

[Fu-Pow]

Buddhist/Taoist.

Truth/Wisdom and Empathy/Compassion.

What else do you need?

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow


What else do you need?

Flaming Hot Cheetos and Dr. Pepper?

[Shaolinlueb]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
Flaming Hot Cheetos and Dr. Pepper?

or cheese covered ninjettes :cool:

[FngSaiYuk]

Mountain Dew for me please... but can't get enuff of them flaming hot cheetohs!!

[Meat Shake]

Bring me the tenderloins from the grill and the churros from the oven!
Soon, lunch... soon.

I think, therefore I am.

[Volcano Admim]

i was a dude of the roman catholic, like... whatever 80 or 90 percent of everyone

then i set free

hey,
as for buddhism and catholicism being related or a lot in common
they are not

all religions are diferent
quit trying to this nice sheyt of "oooh all religion we all is no nice we do so good for the world we have such good will"
there wont be an unified religion
we dont want an unififed religion
people are diferent
religions are diferent

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
Flaming Hot Cheetos and Dr. Pepper?

Good point.....:D

[yutyeesam]

as far as spirituality is concerned:

labels...suck.

i remember hearing something like:
religion is an extrodinairily awesome concept. unfortunately, man f*cked it all up by organizing it.

123

[Water Dragon]

John 15:12 "This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you.
John 15:13 "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.

Ever notice how there is some variation of this Law in every major religion?

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
John 15:12 "This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you.
John 15:13 "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.

Ever notice how there is some variation of this Law in every major religion?

It's the feel good law.

I've always liked the following variation-

'Be excellent to each other.... And party on dudes!'

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
John 15:12 "This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you.
John 15:13 "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.

Ever notice how there is some variation of this Law in every major religion?

Its called Empathy ie putting yourself in someone elses shoes.

Its what the Buddhist are trying cultivate because it ultimately leads to Compassion ie relief of suffering.

It makes sense that if you see suffering and you see that as your own suffering then you will do something to help it.

If you see it as something different than yourself than you may or may not feel like you need to do something.

Why are Empathy and Compassion important?

Because they lead to a better world for humans and other creatures on all levels.

However, the Buddhists will also tell you that Empathy and Compassion must be tempered with Wisdom.

That is, sometimes you must be cruel to be kind. It is the motivation that is most important.

Hence, the paradox of martial arts and Buddhism is resolved.

If everyone was a Buddhist we'd have no reason to learn martial arts. But seeing as everyone is not and there will always be strife on some level we must learn to defend ourselves and those who cannot defend themselves.

That's my philosophy in a nutshell.....

[Water Dragon]

Bro,
He speaks to all of us, just not in the same way.

[Volcano Admim]

yeah, He told me to go look for my knife
its hard to meat without it

[Vash]

Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
I don't like blind faith.

Do you mean faith supported and touted without thought to the contents of the system and/or the opposition thereof, or faith maintained despite an overwhelming lack of proof in the system?

Me, I'm a Christian, I guess. I love Christ, He's my savior, but I don't adhere to the teachings of any one church or organization. I read my Bible ( I prefer the King James version) and meditate upon the lessons therein.

[Vash]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
Bro,
He speaks to all of us, just not in the same way.

Water Dragon has taken the correct and offered it a clarion indulgence. :eek: :D ;)

He is also quite right.

And, as an aside, Jesus could've kicked Buddha's @$$. Just look at His abs! They're ripped!

[Volcano Admim]

man, the real jesus was more like bin laden style looks
shorter beard maybe

but he would just "turn the cheek" or some
not that good on fights

[AmanuJRY]

Where to start?

To me, all representations of god, either in polytheistic or monotheistic religeons, are man's attempt at personifying god, bringing it within man's ability to understand god. God is beyond comprehention, that is why there are so many similar but various religeons. I like the way the Dali Lama put it when he said that 'love and compassion are the universal religeon'.

As for philosophy, you could say I'm an 'existential-budhi-taoist' whith just a touch of hedonism. Like Egg (from the movie 'Big Trouble in Little China') said, it's like a buffet, you take a little of what you want from each.:D

[blooming lotus]

lol @ the Jesus vs Buddha main event :D


Ch'an Buddhist myself, but I think we all have the right to practice or not what we chose. My 10 yr old daughter is greatly catholic ( thx to my father ) and I allow her to practiceand have her own beliefs. I even organise for her to go to church if she wants and speak freely with her about hers mine or the differences between philosophies and practice of each. We have a mutual respect this way and a nice spiritual intimacy and understanding. I think there is a place for all religion and belief.

practice what brings you peace and if kungfu is all that does that for you , work hard and do what brings you to your bliss. ;)

:cool:

[Ray Pina]

That's a beautiful relationship that you have with your daughter.:)

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by blooming lotus
lol @ the Jesus vs Buddha main event :D


Ch'an Buddhist myself, but I think we all have the right to practice or not what we chose. My 10 yr old daughter is greatly catholic ( thx to my father ) and I allow her to practiceand have her own beliefs. I even organise for her to go to church if she wants and speak freely with her about hers mine or the differences between philosophies and practice of each. We have a mutual respect this way and a nice spiritual intimacy and understanding. I think there is a place for all religion and belief.

practice what brings you peace and if kungfu is all that does that for you , work hard and do what brings you to your bliss. ;)

:cool: That's this thread down the ****ter.
:rolleyes:

[Mr Punch]

But before Toby/cerebus arrive...

The only deep probelm I have with religion is with people who think their belief in an afterlife/salvation/a higher being somehow absolves them in any way for taking responsibility for their own action/lack thereof on earth. Which means, although I'm the ultimately tolerant (if you were to put a label on me...!) Anglo-christian-ethic-Pagan-animist-Buddhist-Taoist kind I would probably advocate armageddon against 90% of all Jews, Christians and Moslems. Especially those who support Bush, any of the mad mullahs, Sharon or fat people. If they can just keep the armageddon between themselves and leave the rest of us to fish, tend the herbs and get on with getting on.

:D

Little bit of politics, a half-baked lefty rant a la Kung Lek's usual style... just pressed the flush handle...!:D

[blooming lotus]

I think you were looking for the chan thread if it was clarifcation on how that effects my world you wer after. I will say though that as a ch'an buddhist I am effected by changes of priority. Shaolin has three treasures its ' practioners cultivate,
1. doctrine ( becomming familiar with and getting a perspective on writings by other practicioners on how to bring yourself into a state of ch'an awareness and stay there )
2. gongfu ( because as a chan buddhist health is utmost and this personally is part of one of the best ways to cultivate that healthy body)
3. Sangha ( community which (as having and cultivating universal awareness) the entire world becomes , and
understanding impartially , making a contribution to and preservation and education of that world to the point where I'm now sub-conciously and in my concious daily life, geared toward little else.

[FngSaiYuk]

Vash,

Blind faith, in this context, would be acceptance without question. I can understand how the vast majority of people need something to believe in to live with care and purpose. Myself, I don't like to just believe something without it making sense. Basically, it needs to satisfy all my reasoning and logic and cannot contradict reality.

Yes, life and people are complex, so these subjects are equally complex - far more than a few posts could explore. Basically, as long as no one is harming anyone else (in the context of, extreme physical and emotional harm, unwanted physical and emotional harm, etc) things are cool and whatever belief system you live by is cool.

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by Mat
The only deep probelm I have with religion is with people who think their belief in an afterlife/salvation/a higher being somehow absolves them in any way for taking responsibility for their own action/lack thereof on earth. [/B]

BINGO! Whatever belief system one lives by, there must be responsibility for their actions, there must be acknowledgement and forethought for the consequences of their actions and there must be forethought and acknowledgement of their effect on their environment and those around them. Ultimately, everything we do affects everyone else, and so should consider the harm we may be subjecting others to.

Of course, again, life and people are complex, and as similiar as we all are, there are still quite enough differences between upgringing, belief systems, culture, etc. I say best thing is to just tolerate, provided no one is hurting anyone.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by Mat
But before Toby/cerebus arrive...

The only deep probelm I have with religion is with people who think their belief in an afterlife/salvation/a higher being somehow absolves them in any way for taking responsibility for their own action/lack thereof on earth.

The Bible actually addresses this a lot. Read what the Word has to say about hipocrates and Pharisees. It's not a pretty picture.

[Taomonkey]

Fu-Pow said "Its called Empathy ie putting yourself in someone elses shoes"

I would have to disagree a little bit. Most people miss the simple and profound nature of Love your neighbor as you love yourself, and its not just empathy. Actually it is one of the most taoist statements Jesus made.
to paraphrase...
If you truly love your neighbor as yourself, than you begin to put into practice the concept that as I and my father are one, you and I are one.
If you are I are truly one, and I love you as I love myself,,,why would I ever lie to myself,,it makes no sense. Why would I harm or steal from myself? Why would I covit myself. We should begin to see that our actions upon others are as actions upon ourselves. (karma et. al.) This simple statement takes care of most of the ten comandements.
We back that up with the #1 Love God above all, and follow it with #3 judge not lest the be judged.

Christians have the most basic message and they miss it. The esoterics of Christianity are meaningless untill we master these three simple comandments. Most do a fairly good job of the first one ( love God) we fall short of the second (love your neighbor...) and fail misserably on the third. (judge not)

[Taomonkey]

FngSaiYuk said "I say best thing is to just tolerate, provided no one is hurting anyone."

To follow my premise of Love thy neighbor. If your actions harm yourself they also harm me as well. Tolerance is an over used concept to basically allow people to do what ever they want whenever they want as long as "it doesnt harm anyone else" Rarely do we see the consiquences of our actions before we commit the action. But we have to balance this with Judge not.
Only God has all the pieces of the information, only that which made you can know the thoughts in your heart, the path that lead you to a point, and thus only "I am" can truly judge.

[FngSaiYuk]

Taomonkey, I agree... and my previous posts support your statement on those who harm themselves. 'As long as it doesn't harm ANYONE' includes the self. Of course everything within reason -

[Taomonkey]

Father Guido Sarducchi once told of a story that life is a job and we recieve payment for each days work, then at judgement we must "pay for our sins" Big sins like murder or adultry carry high prices but small sins like masturbation are only like $0.25
Then if you have money left you can enter Heaven.

He feared that after the final talley he would be short a quarter.

[Water Dragon]

lol. Anyone got $ .50 I can borrow?

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Upon close examination of the scriptures "omitted" from the commonly used text referred to as the Bible, the Gnostic Gospels.. we can see the enlightened Christ, a truly enlightened being.. but, that image and those teachings were counter to the best interests of an established religious system.. The portrayal of Jesus by the Gnostic Gospels has a decidedly Taoist flavor..

It is my personal belief that Jesus ascended to his birthright (Son of "God") upon his enlightenment.. his time with the Essenes (sp), his unaccounted time of his teens and twenties, are subject to speculation.. There are some credible accounts of travels to far away places.. but, it is at his baptism by John the Baptist, the "The Lord" spoke, "this is my Son.. in whom i am well pleased".. this, at a time consistent with a well traveled and learned Christ's enlightenment.. if one chooses to indulge their curiosities.. i sense that we are ALL "Sons (and Daughters) of God", Jesus simply had the awareness and will to claim his birthright.. and, he taught ancient Hebrews according to their customs and cultural beliefs (when in Rome do as the Romans do)..

Be well...

[Volcano Admim]

Originally posted by Taomonkey
Father Guido Sarducchi once told of a story that life is a job and we recieve payment for each days work, then at judgement we must "pay for our sins" Big sins like murder or adultry carry high prices but small sins like masturbation are only like $0.25
Then if you have money left you can enter Heaven.

He feared that after the final talley he would be short a quarter.

lol man

[Gunnar]

I am so excited to have finally found a place such as this, a place where people can share thoughts on religion without trying to proove who is right and who is wrong!

Yay for you guys!

I also believe that all religions are describing ONE God. That different prophets have come to bring people from different times and different cultures to God, and thats why they differ. I think that much is to gain by studying ALL religions BUT meditation is the KEY to ENLIGHTENMENT.

OR prayer. The request line, call up the, call up the line, its the request line.......

Peace

[Water Dragon]

This is just one thread Gunnar, if you want to talk more religion within a fighting board, come here (http://www.mma.tv/TUF/index.cfm?ac=SetMasterFrame&FID=71&PID=2)

[Fu-Pow]

Originally posted by Taomonkey
Fu-Pow said "Its called Empathy ie putting yourself in someone elses shoes"

I would have to disagree a little bit. Most people miss the simple and profound nature of Love your neighbor as you love yourself, and its not just empathy. Actually it is one of the most taoist statements Jesus made.
to paraphrase...
If you truly love your neighbor as yourself, than you begin to put into practice the concept that as I and my father are one, you and I are one.
If you are I are truly one, and I love you as I love myself,,,why would I ever lie to myself,,it makes no sense. Why would I harm or steal from myself? Why would I covit myself. We should begin to see that our actions upon others are as actions upon ourselves. (karma et. al.) This simple statement takes care of most of the ten comandements.
We back that up with the #1 Love God above all, and follow it with #3 judge not lest the be judged.

Christians have the most basic message and they miss it. The esoterics of Christianity are meaningless untill we master these three simple comandments. Most do a fairly good job of the first one ( love God) we fall short of the second (love your neighbor...) and fail misserably on the third. (judge not)

That's what I said.

Truth/Wisdom and Empathy/Compassion.

Love is too ambiguous of a word.

I "love" lots of things and in different ways and for different reasons.

Empathy and Compassion are more universal.

[FngSaiYuk]

Or, for the selfish types - Karma - what you do affects everyone else and what everyone else does affects you (paraphrasing)- so you better be good for goodness sake!

Then again, there are always those that just enjoy having a crappy time and see everyone else have a crappy time ...

[Gunnar]

Hey guys check this out!

I have checked to see if some of this stuff pans out and it is kind of ify but you decide!
http://www.forteantimes.com/articles/183_jesuseast1.shtml
Gunnar

[FngSaiYuk]

Gunnar, interesting stuff...

I've read and have been told of stories implying that Jesus travelled eastwards towards india. Most of what I've read (looong time ago) implied that Jesus travelled to India during his 'desert wandering years'. He studied under a yogi and advanced in training rapidly before heading back west.

There's all this 'evidence' that's pointed out, but I never really researched any of it. Was interesting, tho'.

[Vash]

That is some interesting food for thought and research. I'll have to start looking into that.

As an aside, I used to have an article by a lawyer who noted that there was more documented evidence of Jesus Christ than there was of Julius Ceasar.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by TaiChiBob
The portrayal of Jesus by the Gnostic Gospels has a decidedly Taoist flavor.

In the contrary, I think overall Orthodoxy is much more amenable to Taoism than Gnosticism is.

On this account, comparing Gnosticism and Orthodoxy respectively: man is a duality of mind and body versus man is a unity of spirit, mind, and body; matter is inherently evil and seperate from truth versus there is a unitary cosmos which is fundamentally good; salvation is limited to a tradition of the elect versus salvation arises from nature to everyone.

The only point of Gnosticism I can think of that is arguably more amenable to Taoism than Orthodoxy is the Gnostic belief that salvation is accepting one's place in the world and suffering is freedom versus the Orthodox belief of the exact converse.

Of course, there are other differences between Gnosticism and Orthodoxy, but they mostly relate to issues like Christology which are not easily comparable to any position in Taoism.

[Vash]

On the bit of Gnostic Gospel which I've read, I've this to say:

It doesn't "feel" the same as, say, a random book from the Orthodox Christian Bible. From what I read, I got the same feeling as I did when reading Nietchse's later work. Not to say the authors of the Gnostics were insane, just a similar emotional response.

[FngSaiYuk]

Vash, what kinda response was it? Depressing, empty, bored?

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
The Bible actually addresses this a lot. Read what the Word has to say about hipocrates and Pharisees. It's not a pretty picture. LOL, it may be one word to you, but it's hundreds and thousands of them to me... :D And don't forget that many of these Words were transcribed from campfire stories a couple of hundred years after the events... by crackpots, agitators, empire builders, empire destroyers etc... I prefer to get my enlightenment from sweeping the floor for an old lady up the road (if possible - I'm still working on the details!), it's not as noisy as all those ancient voices in my head...

And besides, I'm not gonna read the whole **** thing again: would you mind pointing out a couple of relevant passages old chap?

They'd better be good... I know the Bible has a lot to address about a lot of things, but my issue is more with those who maintain they are following the Bible, and behave like complete barstards. As a religion Christianity seems to work fine (well, like Marxism, in theory if not in practise), but as a moral code, I wish that people would work out what's decent for themselves and through that take some responsibility for their lives.

In terms of moral (as opposed to spiritual) guidance, Jesus was a decent bloke, it seems, but I'd prefer to take my stock from someone who lived a bit more recently, with a bit more relevance to modern times... like Gandhi, or Mandela. That's if for some reason I wake up one day and forget that I shouldn't steal, kill people or treat people badly.

[David Jamieson]

:p

sorry, I can't stand threads like these.

First of all, you cannot avoid the "what ifs" because that is all there is. There is nothing solid and there is no gaurantee that the stories of the lives and deeds of religious figures is true.

Oh sure they may have existed according to historical record, but armchair theologians tend to lose their bait early and leave that line dangling.

What i find to be true about these threads is that they are generally either not in agreeance, in agreeance, backslapping or attacking and seeking to be validated for a belief or belief system.

Most of the people including myself who have written in this thread are NOT and I repeate NOT serious students of religion.

Of sure, I took religious studies in Uni some 20 years ago, and probably a lot hasn't changed, but it is a whole lot of what ifs.

Anyway, like I said, you should hit an interfaith chat board where people can speak with authority in regards to the circular logic of belief and the leap of faith you need to make because there is no actual solid proof of any of it. :p

cheers

[blooming lotus]

I agree and it's sort of leant towards a christian maers chat - room, but we have ours, so I say, just let em have it :cool:

[Vash]

Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
Vash, what kinda response was it? Depressing, empty, bored?

The response: a strange feeling of minor annoyance. I don't know, I guess I was wrong in comparing my response to the later works of the big N. They were, more to the point, reminiscient of the Book of Mormon. Seemed a bit contrived.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by Kung Lek

sorry, I can't stand threads like these.



Then don't participate in them. Why do you always have to be an ass man?

[Water Dragon]

Mat, you could have just asked me which verse, and I would have happily posted it. As is, quit being a jerk man. We're just trying to have a decent thread here.

[David Jamieson]

Why do you always have to be an ass man?

well, I was a breast man for a while, but I switched later in life.

Ha!

Look, if i want to be sardonic i can't think of a better place than a public forum, so pike off!:p

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Vash
On the bit of Gnostic Gospel which I've read, I've this to say:

It doesn't "feel" the same as, say, a random book from the Orthodox Christian Bible.

It depends alot on what you're reading. Gnostic collections tend to include broad mixtures of noncanonical Christian texts to Hermetic mystery literature to Judaic speculative work to Plato. For instance, compare the Gospel of Thomas (http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gosthom.html) to the Thunder, Perfect Mind (http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/thunder.html) to the Hypostasis of the Archons (http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/hypostas.html), all from the Nag Hammadi library.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
Mat, you could have just asked me which verse, and I would have happily posted it. As is, quit being a jerk man. We're just trying to have a decent thread here. I do quite sincerely apologise. Though in all fairness, although I was being flippant, I wasn't trying to wind anyone up, and I do stand by what I said.

I do not believe in the Bible as any more than a very very biased and distorted set of personal and very second (third)- hand histories. That's not to say I'm trying to belittle Christianity, nor is it to say that my opinion (albeit rather crassly put for which I apologised) should be valueless on this thread, or seen as an attack.

The original point I was coming back to in my third paragraph was that I would personally like people to take more responsibility for their lives, and the problem with organised religions based on an almighty being is that they give too many people get-out clauses. That's what I really wanted to stress, and that's why I'd be even more interested to read the passages you mentioned WD.

I'm not coming at this from a complete ignorant or unspiritual aspect either: my grandfather was a very pious vicar, and athough my upbringing was very much about leaving my spirituality to myself, my strongest moral/spiritual influence was probably my widowed grandmother, also very pious, and quite genuinely one of the most intelligent, informed, and downright nice people you could ever wish to meet (unfortunately, that didn't rub off on me!). I was well-read in the scripture (tho I was also well-read in Agatha Christie and books on dinosaurs, but I can't remember them either!) and wrestled for some time with faith. It choked me out. I then found Buddhism and the Tao.

I'm not just taking the ****, but then I don't have the time or inclination to justify myself again, so while I would be interested in reading your recommended passages on the subject, that's about it for me on this thread unless it turns back to the original subject.

[Kristoffer]

I'm borned in to a prothestant christian society. I don't follow or beleive in any religion though.

But I celebrate mid summer by dancing the 'small frog dance' around a big cock made of wood and flowers that's showed down the earth.

http://www.vilstasporthotell.nu/bilder/midsommar.jpg

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Mat
I do not believe in the Bible as any more than... second (third)- hand histories.

Isn't the New Testament written in the first person, rather than being a record of an oral tradition?

[ZIM]

Not Buddhist, but I like this site (http://www.do-not-zzz.com/index2.html) :)

[David Jamieson]

Isn't the New Testament written in the first person, rather than being a record of an oral tradition?


There are many passage from the bible that are written in both first person tense and third.

But that doesn't mean the authors were at the scene.

Especially in the case of the New Testament which was written approx 100 - 300 years after Jesus was said to have walked the earth. And further copied and embellished over time as it was copied and copied againa and again until eventually a few accepted editions made it to a printing press. Many of the hand written copies are completely lost in antiquity somewhere.

It is known that the Gospel according to Mark was the first one written and that the later versions were practically copied verbatim from it and massaged to fit the zeitgeist of their time.

Particularly Matthew's gospel which directly targeted the teachings of the Pharasees.

So, it's pretty much all still second and third hand knowledge that was brought out of an otherwise oral tradition.

Scholastically speaking that is. As I am not Christian, I can't speak to the validity of the content regarding the deification of Jesus. Other than it is not part of my core belief system.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
There are many passage from the bible that are written in both first person tense and third.

I didn't mean literary sense, I meant literally written by the alleged author as a written work.


Especially in the case of the New Testament which was written approx 100 - 300 years after Jesus was said to have walked the earth.

The academic consensus I am familiar with tends to date the books of the New Testament to the first century, contemporary to their alleged authors. Examples are Galatians at 49 AD, 1 Thessalonians at 51 AD, Mark at 68 AD, Matthew between 70-85 AD, and Luke between 80-95 AD (1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_testament#Date_of_composition)).

Perhaps you are confusing the canonization of the New Testament in 397 AD (2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_testament#The_canonization_of_the_New_Testatme nt)) with its writing?


And further copied and embellished over time as it was copied and copied againa and again until eventually a few accepted editions made it to a printing press.

While there are certainly editions of the Bible which are many edits away from the originals, there are also earlier editions, in English translation even, which are available for study in themselves or for comparison to these later works. For instance, these people (http://www.lxx.org/) are offering a translation of the Septuagint (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint), an edition of the Old Testament which is dated to 300-100 BC. A similarly conservative edition of the New Testament is available in English translation here (http://www.buenavistaco.com/GOC/HRDPUB.HTM).


It is known that the Gospel according to Mark was the first one written and that the later versions were practically copied verbatim from it

I presume you mean that Mark was the earliest gospel written, as opposed to the earliest New Testament text. It is believed that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source (3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markan_priority)), but not that the other twenty-four books of the New Testament did. I'm not sure why this you imply this is problematic.


<Matthew and Luke were> massaged <from Mark> to fit the zeitgeist of their time.

Given that Mark is dated to 65-80 AD (4 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark)), Matthew to 60-85 AD (5 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew#Authorship)), and Luke to 40-150 AD (6 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke#Date_of_composition)), this doesn't seem like a reasonable thesis.

[Water Dragon]

Luke 18:10-14

"Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 'I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.' "But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, the sinner!' "I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."

[FngSaiYuk]

Originally posted by Water Dragon
Luke 18:10-14

"Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 'I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.' "But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, the sinner!' "I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."

So basically as long as you understand that what you do for a living to support yourself and your family does harm to others, yet you have no other recourse - AND as long as you understand that this equates to having to do something bad and really feel for those that you harm.... then you're OK?

Just the first interpretation that went through my head after reading that.

[Kristoffer]

http://www.second-skin.net/details.php?item_number=201
http://www.second-skin.net/details.php?item_number=200

[AmanuJRY]

Well, now we know where Kristoffer does his shopping (and surfing).:D

[Kristoffer]

hey, I felt i should add something to the discussion

[AmanuJRY]

Just trying to 'fill the holes' in the topic, eh?


:D :D :D

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist that one.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by FngSaiYuk
So basically as long as you understand that what you do for a living to support yourself and your family does harm to others, yet you have no other recourse - AND as long as you understand that this equates to having to do something bad and really feel for those that you harm.... then you're OK?

Just the first interpretation that went through my head after reading that.

What I get from the passage is the person who says, "Hey everybody, look at me! Look how holy I am. I'm glad I'm not a terrible person like all of you." is missing the point and not a good person at all.

But the person who says, "Lord, I know I mess up, and I know that I have done bad things, but please have mercy and show me the way." is the one who gets it.

[cerebus]

LOL! How did a question about Buddhism/ Taoism turn into a thread on Christianity? :p

[Water Dragon]

Bro, read the first reply on the thread. We've been talking about Christianity along with Buddhism and Taoism since page 1.

[cerebus]

Exactly! Check out the very first post. It doesn't look like he's aking about Christianity. LOL! :p :p

[Mr Punch]

Cheers WD, that's not quite what I was getting at. Do you have any more chapters you can point me to (I'm not testing your knowledge of scripture so if you don't offhand don't worry about it!!) which may be of further relevance to people practising what they preach?

TBH, I'm more interested than the people doing good bit than the whole dialogue with the Supreme bit.

The thing that really turned me off Christianity was that if I just go about my life doing good things (even if sure, I know I mess up) and never set foot in a church... I'm not gonna make it in the afterlife.

I guess it's the metaphysical equivalent of Groucho Marx not wanting to be a member of any club that would accept him!:D

BTW do you guys have an image of the afterlife you wanna get to, or is it just a warm fuzziness? And do you have an image in your mind (of God?) when you pray? Of course, if you don't wanna answer on a public forum, I understand...

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Mat
The thing that really turned me off Christianity was that if I just go about my life doing good things and never set foot in a church... I'm not gonna make it in the afterlife.

This is more of a Protestant thing specifically than a Christian thing generally.

[Serpent]

"Even as a tree has a single trunk but many branches and leaves, so is there one true and perfect Religion, but it becomes many religions as it passes through the human medium. The one Religion is beyond all speech; imperfect men put it in such language as they can command and their words are interpreted by other men, equally imperfect. Hence the necessity of tolerance, which does not mean indifference to one's faith, but a more intelligent and purer love for it. True knowledge of Religion breaks down the barriers between faith and faith."

Mahatma Gandhi.

[David Jamieson]

It is also notable that no matter who you are, when you selflessly help someone, you yourself feel better about yourself.

That is human nature. What better way to feel better than to make someone else feel better?

hmmm? :p

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Christopher M
This is more of a Protestant thing specifically than a Christian thing generally. Really? For clarification, do you mean my attitude is more of a protestant thing, or that the quoted attitude I oppose is? I'm guessing the latter, but why do you say that?

[Vash]

I'm Protestant, Baptist to be specific, and I've never heard of the no church = no heaven fine print.

[cerebus]

When themeecer was posting on here, that was his point of view. He was a member of the true branch of the true church, so regardless of how bad he was or how good anyone else was, he was going to heaven and everyone else was going to Hell.

If that were truly the case, I would have to tell god that he's a stupid, illogical sumb!tch.

Fortunately for me I'm not religious. :D

[Vash]

Ah, gocha.

[Mr Punch]

Ahh OK, maybe I've mislead you. The 'no church no heaven' would seem to be be a bit daft, but the ascetic tradition still alive and well in Catholicism, and Protestantism and whatever other ism I would imagine, so that wasn't really what i was talking about.

What I was really getting at was not literally 'not setting foot into a church' but more, for example:

I go to church, I accept God into my heart, but maybe I'm not ready/interested in accepting that Jesus is the Son of God (that was another stretch for me but I understood the idea of faith so was quite prepared to do it but didn't, and we'll leave that discussion for now), then I quit going to church because I want to lead a simple life looking after animals, people and stuff, and never go back, never preach, never think about/worship God/Jesus/heaven again. Then I die and go to Hell?

[Vash]

Point of Fact:

God is Illogical, God has an Ego the size of bush's, and He's not afraid to say so. Why, just ask my neighbor's dog.

In all seriousness, I have a semi-agnostic point of view on the nature of God (not by choice, but coincidence): God works in a different manner than we do. Physiologically, mathematically, we cannot honestly say we make sense of Him. Working on this premise (or idea, or set of facts and figures, or words, or whatever) that He functions in a different manner than we, and exists in an equaly different manner, it is unlikely, if not impossible, that we will be able to grasp the concept of Him in it's entirety. But, I'm not entirely certain that bothers Him.

Bah. Jesus saves, all others roll d20.

[Vash]

Originally posted by Mat
Ahh OK, maybe I've mislead you. The 'no church no heaven' would seem to be be a bit daft, but the ascetic tradition still alive and well in Catholicism, and Protestantism and whatever other ism I would imagine, so that wasn't really what i was talking about.

What I was really getting at was not literally 'not setting foot into a church' but more, for example:

I go to church, I accept God into my heart, but maybe I'm not ready/interested in accepting that Jesus is the Son of God (that was another stretch for me but I understood the idea of faith so was quite prepared to do it but didn't, and we'll leave that discussion for now), then I quit going to church because I want to lead a simple life looking after animals, people and stuff, and never go back, never preach, never think about/worship God/Jesus/heaven again. Then I die and go to Hell?

I believe the accepting God into the heart is corrolary to accepting Jesus being the Son of God (and at the same time, a literal aspect of Him) and being saved by Him.

As for your question, whether real or rhetorical, in my belief the answer is yes. However, I'm not clear for myself on what in the Bible is meant to be literal, what is figurative, and what is actually both. And also, I'm also unclear on the spiritual "fate" of those never exposed to the Bible, etc.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Mat
do you mean my attitude is more of a protestant thing, or that the quoted attitude I oppose is?

The quoted attitude you oppose.


why do you say that?

It's a manifestation of the doctrine of Sola Fide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_fide), which was one of the key points of the Protestant Reformation.

[Mr Punch]

Thank you. I skimmed it, and'll go back to it later. Interesting reading, and I'd never heard of it.

Was there not an equivalent doctrine for the Catholic church?

[bungle]

We are god. We are god and we're pretending we're these fragile bodies with limited minds. It's just a ******* game.

Re read what jesus said and only what jesus said with this in mind and it will make total sense. Same goes for Lord Vishnu, the buddha, any free one.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Mat
Was there not an equivalent doctrine for the Catholic church?

No: this was the greatest dispute between Catholics and Protestants, perhaps matched in significance only by Sola Scriptura (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_scriptura).

The Catholic understanding differs not just in rejection of this doctrine, but in disagreement with many of the underlying assumptions. The faith in question means, for Protestants, the belief that God will treat them as without sin because of Christ's action; while for Catholics it means a belief in Revelation, General (the divine truth evident in Creation by virtue of it being created by God) and Special (the divine truth revealed to prophets, through Jesus, and through Tradition). For Protestants, the resulting justification is understood as certain, while Catholics believe justification is fundamentally uncertain. For Protestants, justification is a binary condition, while Catholics believe it to be progressive. Thus, for Catholics, faith (and works) is a development of the soul, whereas for Protestants it is the placing of the person among the elect.

While the Protestant catch phrase is 'faith alone', the Catholic one is 'faith and works,' where works refers to good actions. Given the various nuances above, though, it may begin to be clear that this is an inaccurate formulation -- insofar as, for the Catholic, it is not as if there are two things which are required, faith and then works, but rather one thing, which may be described by the compound phrase faith-and-works. Similarly, it is sometimes remarked that the Catholic position is precisely the Protestant position with the additional belief that something more, good deeds, is also required for justification. Again, following the above, this is incorrect.

They are long and dense, but for the sake of citation see the appropriate entries in the Catholic Encyclopedia for their understanding: Justification (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08573a.htm) and Grace (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06701a.htm).

[kfson]

Have you noticed a different approach in kung fu and life between these two peoples and more specifically to the people who post on this forum?


Yes, I know there is a mixture.

[uki]

Have you noticed a different approach in kung fu and life between these two peoples and more specifically to the people who post on this forum?and some folks think words are not a manifestation of character and spirit...

[David Jamieson]

not to mention military styles. :p

[uki]

not to mention military styles.and canadians...

[David Jamieson]

and canadians...

Canadians are god's gift to humanity! :p

[hskwarrior]

too many canadians :(

[uki]

too many canadians...so little time. :D

[David Jamieson]

too many canadians :(

what choo talkin bout willis!

you got more people in that hophead state of yours than there is in all of Canada.

dang californians. :mad:

:p

[David Jamieson]

so little time. :D

for what? to bow to each of us? I agree. It will take you a while. And shine my shoes will you? thanks. :) :D

[Kpower]

The problem with canadians is they look just like regular people.

[Siu Lum Fighter]

I've noticed little difference in the way Daoists and Ch'an Buddhists approach kung fu if those are the Buddhists you're really talking about here. Most other Buddhists are totally non-violent and don't practice any fighting styles.

[RickMatz]

Have you noticed a different approach in kung fu and life between these two peoples and more specifically to the people who post on this forum?


Yes, I know there is a mixture.

A very interesting read is: Buddhism and Taoism Face to Face: Scripture, Ritual, and Iconographic Exchange in Medieval China by Christine Mollier. (http://www.amazon.com/Buddhism-Taoism-Face-Scripture-Iconographic/dp/0824834119/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264733203&sr=8-1)

[taai gihk yahn]

Ch'an is kinda like the Chinese "Tao-ization" of Buddhism;

or as they say, "That was Zen, this is Tao."

(groans fill the room)

[uki]

labels, labels, labels... all are labels... labels only stick if you allow them to.

[Scott R. Brown]

Canadians are god's gift to humanity! :p

That is supposed to be, "Canadians are Gods gift to Canadians!"


dang californians.

For those of use that live in rural California it is, "Dang Los Angeles/San Diego Metroplex and Dang Bay Area!!!!:mad:


The problem with canadians is they look just like regular people.

...but we all know they are the Reptilians disguised as regular people just waiting to take over mankind and enslave us for food!


Ch'an is kinda like the Chinese "Tao-ization" of Buddhism;

or as they say, "That was Zen, this is Tao."

(groans fill the room)

Once again I will steal your mojo for my own!!!!:p:p:p:p:p:D


labels, labels, labels... all are labels... labels....

...and not a drop to drink!!!:)

[kfson]

A very interesting read is: Buddhism and Taoism Face to Face: Scripture, Ritual, and Iconographic Exchange in Medieval China by Christine Mollier. (http://www.amazon.com/Buddhism-Taoism-Face-Scripture-Iconographic/dp/0824834119/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264733203&sr=8-1)

Ah, thanks, will read!


In Forbidden Kingdom, isn't Chan a Daoist and Li a Buddhist? Do you think the characters would be any more believable if the roles where reversed?
Do you think Chan would have been a better actor for Li's character in Tai Chi Master?

Jet Li vs. Jackie Chan (Forbidden Kingdom)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXp3bhfbnVo


Are there any Chinese jokes about a Daoist and a Buddhist like:
A Protestant minister, a Catholic priest, and a Jewish rabbi were caught in and elevator....... ?

[Scott R. Brown]

Do you think Chan would have been a better actor for Li's character in Tai Chi Master?

No! Jackie doesn't have the tai chi training Jet received and his movements, while graceful, are of a different quality than a person as schooled in tai chi as Jet Li.

[kfson]

No! Jackie doesn't have the tai chi training Jet received and his movements, while graceful, are of a different quality than a person as schooled in tai chi as Jet Li.

Good insight, there.

[Scott R. Brown]

Good insight, there.

Well that's what you end up with when you are forgetful!;):D:)

[kfson]

Well that's what you end up with when you are forgetful!;):D:)

Oh ya, thanks for reminding me.

See?

[bawang]

taoist suxx buddhism beat taoist in a wrestling match in the song dynasty
tru story

[Scott R. Brown]

Oh ya, thanks for reminding me.

See?

Not really...I already forgot what we were talking about!:D:p

.......and.......what did you say your name was? :)

[uki]

No! Jackie doesn't have the tai chi training Jet received and his movements, while graceful, are of a different quality than a person as schooled in tai chi as Jet Li.an iteresting note about jet and jackie is i am pretty certain they are opposites according to chinese astrology with jet being a rat and jackie the horse... anyhow, please continue. :)

[cerebus]

"Shaolin vs. Wu Tang"!!! Kung Fu theater... :D

[taai gihk yahn]

Well that's what you end up with when you are forgetful!;):D:)

try to remember that...

[Hardwork108]

Canadians are god's gift to humanity! :p

God should have asked humanity first before deciding to give them this gift! :D :p.

[Hendrik]

Ch'an is kinda like the Chinese "Tao-ization" of Buddhism;

or as they say, "That was Zen, this is Tao."

(groans fill the room)




That is not consistence with both the Zen and Tao at all.

[mawali]

It is capitalismfu that turns the wheels of the present society!
Daoism and Buddhism is just another 'ism in the greater scheme of things.

[zerojjc]

or as they say, "That was Zen, this is Tao."

Hahahaha! Thats a good one, i haven't heard it before. :D

[taai gihk yahn]

That is not consistence with both the Zen and Tao at all.

oh, just shut up already :rolleyes:

[David Jamieson]

A priest, a buddhist monk and a rabbi walk into a bar...

the bartender looks up and says; "what is this, a joke?"


:p

[kfson]

A priest, a buddhist monk and a rabbi walk into a bar...

the bartender looks up and says; "what is this, a joke?"


:p


I don't know how to type my laughter.

[Scott R. Brown]

That is not consistence with both the Zen and Tao at all.

Hendrik....you are an idiot and here is why.......

All you do is make stupid, canned wisdom-like statements without ever explaining why you think your view is correct. The proof you are an idiot is that you don't explain yourself which implies you cannot explain yourself which then supports the view you don't know what you are talking about. Anyone can make stupid, canned wisdom-like statements and this is about all you do!

Also...idiots do NOT recognize HUMOR when it dances up to them with a dead fish and slaps them up-side the face!

His comment WAS A JOKE!!!!!

GET IT.....A JOKE!!!!!

Now YOU are the joke.....AGAIN!!!!

If you are going to continue pretending to have an understanding of Ch'an and Tao perhaps you should remember that HUMOR is one of the strong points of the Masters!

I agree with TGY, only I'll go one better and suggest you not only shut up, up also stick your head back up your A$$ and contemplate your colon a little longer:p

[Scott R. Brown]

It is capitalismfu that turns the wheels of the present society!
Daoism and Buddhism is just another 'ism in the greater scheme of things.

That is not consistent with Daoism, Buddhism, or Capitalism!

[Hardwork108]

.idiots do NOT recognize HUMOR when it dances up to them with a dead fish and slaps them up-side the face!

What is so humorous about getting slapped in the face by a dead fish?:confused:

[uki]

What is so humorous about getting slapped in the face by a dead fish?the simple fact of someone allowing themselves to be smacked with a dead fish. :D

[taai gihk yahn]

What is so humorous about getting slapped in the face by a dead fish?:confused:

this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9SSOWORzw4)

[Scott R. Brown]

this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9SSOWORzw4)

Linked like a true Master! I bow to your web-fu!!:)

[Dragonzbane76]

it is strong in this one. :)

[SPJ]

Have you noticed a different approach in kung fu and life between these two peoples and more specifically to the people who post on this forum?


Yes, I know there is a mixture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8jH5G2H4SU&feature=related

a dance is just a dance. so much so, a fight is just a fight.

1. Christian priest may say that dun like some of the moves

2. Buddhist may say it is a distraction, drinking wine, dancing wildly-- they are hurdles/hindrance to your enlightment

3. Daoist and most people would say it is just a dance.

MJ enjoyed dancing and music, his audience enjoyed what he did also.

there are times for sobering meditation, there are times for dancing and having fun with no specific reasons--

---

[uki]

having fun with no specific reasonsand that's what it's all about!! :D

[Scott R. Brown]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8jH5G2H4SU&feature=related

a dance is just a dance. so much so, a fight is just a fight.

1. Christian priest may say that dun like some of the moves

2. Buddhist may say it is a distraction, drinking wine, dancing wildly-- they are hurdles/hindrance to your enlightment

3. Daoist and most people would say it is just a dance.

MJ enjoyed dancing and music, his audience enjoyed what he did also.

there are times for sobering meditation, there are times for dancing and having fun with no specific reasons--

---

Touche'

However any Buddhist who "...may say it is a distraction, drinking wine, dancing wildly-- they are hurdles/hindrance to your enlightment" is just a fool bound by the paramitas, etc!

Except for any Buddhist who may be offended by my comment.....those are all just holy holy guys!!!!!!:rolleyes:

[uki]

those are all just holy holy guys!!holy holy guys tend to drain themselves pretty fast...

[Scott R. Brown]

holy holy guys tend to drain themselves pretty fast...

I guess that's why they don't drink then.....they get tired of cleaning up the mess!:eek:

[Hardwork108]

this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9SSOWORzw4)

It is humorous when you are watching but not so humorous when you are getting slapped in the face by a fish.:D

[David Jamieson]

I'm not down much with religious doctrine that drives you away from the simple pleasures of being alive.

Buddhism has too much denial of your natural self like any other religious practice.

Don't do this, don't do that, don't eat this, don't get a boner, don't play with your boner, don't put your boner into something you would like to put your boner in and so on.

religion comes down to two things:

1) what happens when you die because a book says so

2) what not to do with your boner because a book says so

The rest is fudge. Well actually, fudge is better. It comes in different flavours and tastes great! But religion? It's always seeming to be about being less than what you are.

No want!

*I'll take my God without all the paper work and bleating priests of amun*

[Scott R. Brown]

How about just ignore the rules you think are stupid and follow what makes reasonable sense to you!:)