Is it possible to practice both Buddhism and Christianity?

[gord44]

I seem to recall Elijah, Enoch and Moses being taken into heaven without benefit of Jesus.

We also have the three wise men, who were Zoroastrian(!) priests, who came to give honor and gifts to the baby Jesus based on the scriptures of Zoroaster.

What about Noah? Job?

Perhaps "other sheep I have, also, who are not of this fold" refers to Muslims, Buddhists, Native Americans following their teachers of the "Great Spirit", and others following the same "I AM" that appeared in Jesus, to Moses, and the other Prophets of old?

You make good points. If one reads the Hebrew Bible he will see plenty of people knowing and being with the Father before Christianity came along.

 

[seashale76]

We recognize what people get right and recognize that everyone is in the image of God, and we believe that God is everywhere present. However, when you're not cooperating with that truth, and even reject it, and when you are thrust irrevocably into the presence of God and His love at the judgment- you will experience the state of 'hell' and it is entirely self-inflicted. Make no mistake- the Orthodox Church teaches that ONLY through Christ do we have salvation so that we may fully participate in the energies of God.

People will find themselves experiencing 'hell' for rejecting Christ. Sin is missing the mark, which is anything that is not in accordance with God's will, as we are called to live a life in Christ. They will not be prepared to deal with the light of Christ, kind of like the people who threw the three youths into the fiery furnace. The youths were prepared to handle the fire, but those who threw them in perished even being near it.

Also, this used to be on wikipedia at one time, but I can't seem to find it anymore:

"For many ancient Christians, Hell was the same "place" as Heaven: living in the presence of God and directly experiencing God's love. Whether this was experienced as pleasure or torment depended on one's disposition towards God. St. Isaac of Syria wrote in Mystic Treatises: "... those who find themselves in Hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in Hell are deprived of the love of God ... But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed!" This ancient view is still the doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church."

A Christian who rejects communion- where we know the truth to be- is absolutely rejecting Christ in him/her. We take this literally.

 

[smaneck]

We recognize what people get right and recognize that everyone is in the image of God, and we believe that God is everywhere present. However, when you're not cooperating with that truth, and even reject it, and when you are thrust irrevocably into the presence of God and His love at the judgment- you will experience the state of 'hell' and it is entirely self-inflicted. Make no mistake- the Orthodox Church teaches that ONLY through Christ do we have salvation so that we may fully participate in the energies of God.

But what Justin Martyr is saying is that since Christ is the Divine Logos we all participate in Him because the seed of reason (logos) is planted in all of us. The article I cited earlier also says:

"It is basic Christian doctrine that the Holy Spirit may act wherever and whenever. Presuming to constrain the activity of the Holy Spirit - to limit God Himself- is not the way. Orthodoxy recognizes and accepts the mandate to seek Truth and to follow the Holy Spirit wherever He leads, including in other religions or philosophies when his Truth is to be found there.

People will find themselves experiencing 'hell' for rejecting Christ.

I haven't heard much of anyone here talk about rejecting Christ, but in my religion to reject any Manifestation is to reject them all.

"Be thou assured in thyself that verily, he who turns away from this Beauty hath also turned away from the Messengers of the past and showeth pride towards God from all eternity to all eternity."
http://www.bahaiprayers.org/ahmad.htm

If one truly recognizes the light and not simply the lamp one sees the light wherever it appears. To worship the lamp is idolatry.

Also, this used to be on wikipedia at one time, but I can't seem to find it anymore:

"For many ancient Christians, Hell was the same "place" as Heaven: living in the presence of God and directly experiencing God's love. Whether this was experienced as pleasure or torment depended on one's disposition towards God. St. Isaac of Syria wrote in Mystic Treatises: "... those who find themselves in Hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in Hell are deprived of the love of God ... But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed!" This ancient view is still the doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church."

I can buy that.

A Christian who rejects communion- where we know the truth to be- is absolutely rejecting Christ in him/her. We take this literally.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by rejecting communion. Do you mean the Eucharist? Or do you mean in relationship like this article speaks of here?

"Yet, while the essence of God is beyond communion, God reveals Himself through His Glory. The human person participates in God's energies manifested as theophanies "The glory of the Triune God embraces the universe (ta pania) and brings all things within the scope of His love."[3] God's glory (doxa, kaboth, shekhina) is revealed to human persons in their true intimate relation as an, end and fulfillment of the original creation of man."

Or here?

"To be an authentic human being one must be in communion with other persons "loving one another in reciprocal relationship." The Christian way is in communion, each person with each other and all with God."

If the latter, has anyone here suggested we reject relationship?

 

[seashale76]

But what Justin Martyr is saying is that since Christ is the Divine Logos we all participate in Him because the seed of reason (logos) is planted in all of us. The article I cited earlier also says:

"It is basic Christian doctrine that the Holy Spirit may act wherever and whenever. Presuming to constrain the activity of the Holy Spirit - to limit God Himself- is not the way. Orthodoxy recognizes and accepts the mandate to seek Truth and to follow the Holy Spirit wherever He leads, including in other religions or philosophies when his Truth is to be found there.

We all participate insofar as we decide to cooperate- and there are a lot of people out there who choose not to cooperate. Yes, the Holy Spirit can act wherever. I did say that we recognize what is right in other religions, etcetera. However, we also DON'T believe that those religions and philosophies have the fullness of the truth and faith either. God knows hearts. In other words, only God knows EVERYONE who is in His Church. However, to reject Christ and His Church and the truth they represent is false. Why should anyone who has the fullness of the truth reject it for something that doesn't?

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by rejecting communion. Do you mean the Eucharist? Or do you mean in relationship like this article speaks of here?

"Yet, while the essence of God is beyond communion, God reveals Himself through His Glory. The human person participates in God's energies manifested as theophanies "The glory of the Triune God embraces the universe (ta pania) and brings all things within the scope of His love."[3] God's glory (doxa, kaboth, shekhina) is revealed to human persons in their true intimate relation as an, end and fulfillment of the original creation of man."

Or here?

"To be an authentic human being one must be in communion with other persons "loving one another in reciprocal relationship." The Christian way is in communion, each person with each other and all with God."

If the latter, has anyone here suggested we reject relationship?

Both Eucharist and communion. To reject Christ in the Eucharist IS to reject the other. You're espousing that it is okay for Christians to add to and take away from their faith and tack on other faiths. We absolutely reject this notion. All other faiths do not have the fullness of the truth to us. If one wishes to commune with us- then they HAVE to reject everything else and follow Christ and become baptized into His Church.

It's only inclusive if you have the right mindset and disposition of the heart. If you don't- then you have excluded yourself.

 

[smaneck]

I don't see this in the Bible sounds to me like a made up myth of someone that just happens to appear to tie into the Bible.

The only 'myth' in that story is that there were three of them. The Bible doesn't give a number but Matthew definitely mentions Magi and Magi are Zoroastrian priests. Read Herodotus who makes it clear that the Magi were the priestly caste of the Medes and Persians. However, by this time the word was also used to refer to magicians, so if you prefer to believe it was magicians who brought gifts to the Christ child, be my guest. But according to the Catholic Encyclopedia:

"The religion of the Magi was fundamentally that of Zoroaster and forbade sorcery; their astrology and skill in interpreting dreams were occasions of their finding Christ."
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Magi

saying you have the same God but rejecting Jesus proves you don't.

So far I haven't seen anyone reject Jesus. At most they don't believe the same things about Him as you do.

 

[smaneck]

Both Eucharist and communion. To reject Christ in the Eucharist IS to reject the other.

I don't take the Eucharist because Paul said we should take it until Christ returns. Since I believe He returned I no longer take it.

You're espousing that it is okay for Christians to add to and take away from their faith and tack on other faiths. We absolutely reject this notion. All other faiths do not have the fullness of the truth to us. If one wishes to commune with us- then they HAVE to reject everything else and follow Christ and become baptized into His Church.

It's only inclusive if you have the right mindset and disposition of the heart. If you don't- then you have excluded yourself.

Hmmm. I sense that Rev. Papademetriou as a very different "mindset and disposition of heart" than you.

 

[seashale76]

I don't take the Eucharist because Paul said we should take it until Christ returns. Since I believe He returned I no longer take it.

Hmmm. I sense that Rev. Papademetriou as a very different "mindset and disposition of heart" than you.

I sense that you're trying too hard to make people and what they say Bahai, when they aren't.

 

[dlamberth]

The problem we have with other religions seemingly the same is when they are confronted with the Gospel and their ideas of God are tested and they reject Jesus proves that their "god" isn't the one who saves them. In other words.... saying you have the same God but rejecting Jesus proves you don't.

For me, it's not Christ that's being rejected. I think it has more to do with how He is being limited and put into a box of correct beliefs and dogma that's being rejected. I tend towards experiencing a Christ that is not Biblically limited.

.

 

[dlamberth]

I don't take the Eucharist because Paul said we should take it until Christ returns. Since I believe He returned I no longer take it.

Could you, from the Baha'i perspective, please expand your beliefs that Christ has already returned?

.

 

[Sophrosyne]

For me, it's not Christ that's being rejected. I think it has more to do with how He is being limited and put into a box of correct beliefs and dogma that's being rejected. I tend towards experiencing a Christ that is not Biblically limited.

.

Christ is Biblically DEFINED in the Bible, the limits there are to prevent defining him improperly because of dire consequence in the fact that believing in something that is not "in the box of correct beliefs" (I try and avoid dogma) will end up not having the "correct" savior.
If I have three people and name them Jesus and tell you pick one they are all saviors yet when an authorized book by Jesus himself reveals all three of them are not the same as the one in the book are you going to go ahead and pick one of them or seek the one that is in the book?
There is enough about Christ that one doesn't need to look farther, typically those who do look farther find what they are looking for and it usually isn't God either.

 

[dlamberth]

Christ is Biblically DEFINED in the Bible, the limits there are to prevent defining him improperly because of dire consequence in the fact that believing in something that is not "in the box of correct beliefs" (I try and avoid dogma) will end up not having the "correct" savior.
If I have three people and name them Jesus and tell you pick one they are all saviors yet when an authorized book by Jesus himself reveals all three of them are not the same as the one in the book are you going to go ahead and pick one of them or seek the one that is in the book?
There is enough about Christ that one doesn't need to look farther, typically those who do look farther find what they are looking for and it usually isn't God either.

So you agree, Christ IS Biblically limited.

I don't see how God can be limited or bounded in any way, shape or form.

.

 

[Sophrosyne]

So you agree, Christ IS Biblically limited.

I don't see how God can be limited or bounded in any way, shape or form.

.

God is limited because there is good and evil and God isn't evil thus by NOT being evil he is limited. God also limits himself by his plans for mankind and also limits himself due to agreements he makes with men. In all instances God limits himself BY CHOICE. It it these limits that DEFINE him from being just some other generic idea of God into one that is more knowable. People want a personal God, and God limited himself in that he became a man and walked the earth as a man teaching and preaching about what his plans were for us and what he wanted us to be like and do while we live.
Finally God limits himself because he wants us to CHOOSE to love him therefore he limits his interference with mankind to allow the maximum amount of free will there is so we can choose to believe in and love him. It is because he limits himself that you are even allowed to believe in him being the way he is NOT and choose to want your idea of God instead of God himself.

 

[BruceDLimber]

[to a third party] Could you, from the Baha'i perspective, please expand your beliefs that Christ has already returned?

There are many, many prophecies in both the Jewish and Christian scriptures that point to this, and IOV they've been fulfilled.

Among other places, you can read the details here:

Baha'i: Prophecy Fulfilled Homepage

Peace,

Bruce

 

[smaneck]

I sense that you're trying too hard to make people and what they say Bahai, when they aren't.

LOL. I don't imagine our Orthodox scholar is Baha'i but he certainly isn't as exclusivistic in his thinking as you are. In fact your definition of Orthodox would place him beyond the pale.

 

[smaneck]

God is limited because there is good and evil and God isn't evil thus by NOT being evil he is limited.

Sounds very Zoroastrian. But what do you do with Deutero-Isaiah's rejection of dualism:

5 I am the Lord, and there is none else; there is no God besides Me. I girded thee, though thou hast not known Me,
6 that they may know from the rising of the sun and from the west that there is none besides Me. I am the Lord, and there is none else.
7 I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things. (Isaiah 45)

 

[dlamberth]

Among other places, you can read the details here:

Baha'i: Prophecy Fulfilled Homepage

Thank You!!

I'm just trying to understand please. In reading the link provided, Baha'i believe that Baha'u'llah is the second coming of Christ? Is that correct? From what I gather, Baha'i also believe that there will eventually be a single world wide religion. Am I getting the correct as well? Would that religion be Baha'i?

Rather than sending me to a link, could you explain in your own words please?

.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Sounds very Zoroastrian. But what do you do with Deutero-Isaiah's rejection of dualism:

5 I am the Lord, and there is none else; there is no God besides Me. I girded thee, though thou hast not known Me,
6 that they may know from the rising of the sun and from the west that there is none besides Me. I am the Lord, and there is none else.
7 I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things. (Isaiah 45)

I see you use the KJV..... which doesn't translate well in that verse today as "evil" is more correctly translated calamity or disaster. Newer translations are more accurate in this case the KJV is outdated as it was done in the 16th century.

here is a better more accurate translation:
Isaiah 45:7

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

7 The One forming light and creating darkness,
Causing [a]well-being and creating calamity;
I am the Lord who does all these.

 

[RosaryChaplet9]

We recognize what people get right and recognize that everyone is in the image of God, and we believe that God is everywhere present. However, when you're not cooperating with that truth, and even reject it, and when you are thrust irrevocably into the presence of God and His love at the judgment- you will experience the state of 'hell' and it is entirely self-inflicted. Make no mistake- the Orthodox Church teaches that ONLY through Christ do we have salvation so that we may fully participate in the energies of God.

People will find themselves experiencing 'hell' for rejecting Christ. Sin is missing the mark, which is anything that is not in accordance with God's will, as we are called to live a life in Christ. They will not be prepared to deal with the light of Christ, kind of like the people who threw the three youths into the fiery furnace. The youths were prepared to handle the fire, but those who threw them in perished even being near it.

Also, this used to be on wikipedia at one time, but I can't seem to find it anymore:

"For many ancient Christians, Hell was the same "place" as Heaven: living in the presence of God and directly experiencing God's love. Whether this was experienced as pleasure or torment depended on one's disposition towards God. St. Isaac of Syria wrote in Mystic Treatises: "... those who find themselves in Hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in Hell are deprived of the love of God ... But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed!" This ancient view is still the doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church."

A Christian who rejects communion- where we know the truth to be- is absolutely rejecting Christ in him/her. We take this literally.

That's why God gives us free choice ... You're allowed to study and explore other religions. As long as it brings you back to the truth. Whether it be Bahai, Buddhism, or a Pagan mystic.

 

[Sarah Sarah]

Buddhism is largely atheistic.
The Reincarnation aspect of it is another issue. Though some people argue that Christianity teaches Reincarnation in a different way but so that the tenets of Reincarnation remain the same at the core.

Is Buddhism Atheistic?

As seen in the Basic Points of Buddhism, one doctrine agreed upon by all branches of modern Buddhism is that "this world is not created and ruled by a God." {1}
According to BuddhaNet, a major Buddhist website:

There is no almighty God in Buddhism. There is no one to hand out rewards or punishments on a supposedly Judgement Day. Buddhism is strictly not a religion in the context of being a faith and worship owing allegiance to a supernatural being. {2}​

Hello all. Let me tell you where I'm coming from and why I'm asking this…

I am a Christian. I have no doubt God exists. I have no doubt the Bible is the word of God! HOWEVER… When it comes to denominations, this is where I struggle. I claim to be an Anglican, I was brought up in an Anglican household. After trying out many, there's only one church I would regularly attend near where I live and it's an Anglican church(I think I'd fit in in some Lutheran churches but the nearest Lutheran church to me is 50 miles away! I've also considered the Quakers as I share many beliefs with them but I've ruled that out as I'm not a strict pacifist). I am religiously(not necessarily politically) fairly liberal. I was speaking to a Buddhist friend of mine about something completely unrelated when they happened to mention that they're an atheist. I wondered how someone who identifies themselves as Buddhist could also identify themselves as Atheist(I don't know much about Buddhism). Looking into it a bit further it appears this is far from unusual for Buddhists and possibly even the norm! Buddhists do not worship anyone it appears.

As I said before I don't know a great deal about Buddhism but this has sparked my interest. I am a Christian but find it quite difficult to fit into any pigeonhole that people may put me in upon knowing that. Buddhism, from what I do know, appeals to me and I may fit in better there in my search for a spiritual community. So my question is, if Buddhism is considered(as it is by some practicers according to the internet) more of a way of life rather than a religion, is it compatible with Christianity.

I am sure there's a whole range of different views on this and I welcome them all in a quest to further understand where I'm at spiritually right now.

 

[dlamberth]

God is limited because there is good and evil and God isn't evil thus by NOT being evil he is limited. God also limits himself by his plans for mankind and also limits himself due to agreements he makes with men. In all instances God limits himself BY CHOICE. It it these limits that DEFINE him from being just some other generic idea of God into one that is more knowable. People want a personal God, and God limited himself in that he became a man and walked the earth as a man teaching and preaching about what his plans were for us and what he wanted us to be like and do while we live.
Finally God limits himself because he wants us to CHOOSE to love him therefore he limits his interference with mankind to allow the maximum amount of free will there is so we can choose to believe in and love him. It is because he limits himself that you are even allowed to believe in him being the way he is NOT and choose to want your idea of God instead of God himself.

What if one took ALL of those limitations. every single one of them away from Christ and totally freed Him up from our beliefs and dogma that we have about Him? I think that sort of trajectory answers the point made earlier about the idea that it's not really Christ that's being rejected.

Does experiencing a life in a Christ who freed from limitations OR form make one any less of a Christian? I've seen how a Christ with out limitations is freed to be experienced even in the Buddhist content. And I think that's the rub. There is a sense of ownership in the Christian community...Christ is mine, no one else can have Him kind of limitation. But in practice, when I look around the world, that's just not true. God simply can not be bounded or limited in any way, shape or form.

.