Is it possible to practice both Buddhism and Christianity?

[smaneck]

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

.

Ah, you caught that. In some ways we believe that every Manifestation is the "Return" of the previous one, much as John the Baptist is the 'return' of Elijah. Baha'u'llah writes:

"It is clear and evident to thee that all the Prophets are the Temples of the Cause of God, Who have appeared clothed in divers attire. If thou wilt observe with discriminating eyes, thou wilt behold them all abiding in the same tabernacle, soaring in the same heaven, seated upon the same throne, uttering the same speech, and proclaiming the same Faith. Such is the unity of those Essences of being, those Luminaries of infinite and immeasurable splendour. Wherefore, should one of these Manifestations of Holiness proclaim saying: “I am the return of all the Prophets,” He verily speaketh the truth. In like manner, in every subsequent Revelation, the return of the former Revelation is a fact, the truth of which is firmly established. Inasmuch as the return of the Prophets of God, as attested by verses and traditions, hath been conclusively demonstrated, the return of their chosen ones also is therefore definitely proven. This return is too manifest in itself to require any evidence or proof.”

But in more specific ways we consider the Bab, the forerunner of Baha'u'llah, to be the return of Christ. As Shoghi Effendi writes:

" The passion of Jesus Christ, and indeed His whole public ministry, alone offer a parallel to the Mission and death of the Báb, a parallel which no student of comparative religion can fail to perceive or ignore. In the youthfulness and meekness of the Inaugurator of the Bábí Dispensation; in the extreme brevity and turbulence of His public ministry; in the dramatic swiftness with which that ministry moved towards its climax; in the apostolic order which He instituted, and the primacy which He conferred on one of its members; in the boldness of His challenge to the time-honored conventions, rites and laws which had been woven into the fabric of the religion He Himself had been born into; in the rôle which an officially recognized and firmly entrenched religious hierarchy played as chief instigator of the outrages which He was made to suffer; in the indignities heaped upon Him; in the suddenness of His arrest; in the interrogation to which He was subjected; in the derision poured, and the scourging inflicted, upon Him; in the public affront He sustained; and, finally, in His ignominious suspension before the gaze of a hostile multitude—in all these we cannot fail to discern a remarkable similarity to the distinguishing features of the career of Jesus Christ."

Speaking for myself it is because I saw Jesus in the Bab that I became a Baha'i.

 

[smaneck]

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?

LOL. I just put up a post indicating that the Bab was the second coming. But it doesn't really matter because every Manifestation is the return of every other. However, in this Day we have been blessed with two Manifestations just as the Muslims believed that both Jesus and the Mahdi would appear at the end of the age.

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?

We believe that the Baha'i Faith is the consummation of all religions although not in the sense that Muslims believe this about their own religion, that revelation stops with Islam. Nor do we think that other religions will cease to exist. But we do foresee the Baha'i Faith becoming the spiritual basis for the establishment of the Kingdom of God on Earth. That cannot however, be established by violent means for Baha'u'llah has explicitly prohibited jihad.

 

[light upon light]

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?

.

At the time of Jesus, the Jewish people were hoping for a messiah. However, they were told in the Tanakh that Elijah would return first.

The disciples said to Jesus, that they knew He was the messiah. But they asked Him where is Elijah?

Jesus explained to them that John the Baptist had come "in the spirit and power of Elijah", and that was the meaning of "return".

In the same way, Baha'u'llah is the return of the spirit and power of Christ, not the name and personality. He came to establish the unity of the human race and the establishment of a just and spiritual society. This was foretold in the holy books of the past as the time when the lion and the lamb shall lie together, and the Kingdom of God on Earth.

Regarding one "religion", yes, if by "religion" you mean that the peoples and religions of the world must put down their literal and metaphoric swords and cease to regard one another as anathema, must work together, learn to pray together, see one another as members of one family.

If you mean everyone that everyone has to convert to the Baha'i religion because our religion is better than theirs, we're right and everyone else is wrong - this is the opposite of the Baha'i spirit. The world has seen quite enough of that kind of religious exclusivity and pride. The Baha'i way is to see the light of truth in every lamp, to recognize it and value it. The Baha'i way is to see that all religions are lit with the light of the same God, that the same guidance from the Absolute that came to us through Christ appeared in the Buddha, Zoroaster, Muhammad, Deganawida, Krishna, and others.

Of course, individual Baha'is are like individuals in every other religion. There are stages of spiritual development and there are Baha'is at every one of those stages, just like with every other religion.

Baha'u'llah didn't come to establish a new and better religion. He came to call humanity to recognize its unity, and to work together to fulfill the promises of a world at peace, a world of economic justice, a world of spiritual orientation, a world of human development, a world where children are educated, a world where bigotry and hatred come to be seen as a disease of heart and soul.

But, just as Christ overcame the Roman Empire through reaching hearts, not through leading a military victory of the Jews over their oppressors, in the same way God doesn't use "magic" to bring about the kingdom of God on earth. We have to build it, ourselves, using God's teachings to guide us along the way. And anyone who is working to build this new world, they are on God's side, regardless of their beliefs or religion (or no religion!) And anyone who is fomenting discord and hatred, they are opposing God and delaying the world we all know is where we need to create in our hearts and communities and countries.

 

[Sophrosyne]

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.

.

If one has wrong beliefs about Christ then removing those beliefs or limitations would free us up. The problem is that Jesus himself and his chosen followers make very solid arguments about the validity of the Bible (scripture) and its limitations upon those who subscribe to it in belief. The farther you stray from what is revealed in the Bible about God the less of who God is you are believing in and at some point you end up with only your perceived or perhaps sinful desire of who God is instead of who God truly is.
God can himself limit himself, and does many times in the Bible.
I see no way in the Bible to incorporate (add) other religious beliefs alongside the Bible without tainting (or farther limiting) ones relationship with God. If your idea of God is only 80% right because you added stuff that is NOT God to him then at most you can only have an 80% relationship with him. The problem however is God doesn't like sharing he is jealous and if you try and share him with other gods you will find yourself abandoned to those gods instead of him.

 

[dlamberth]

If your idea of God is only 80% right because you added stuff that is NOT God to him then at most you can only have an 80% relationship with him.

I'd say don't add any ideas about God, to God. I think than one would be 100% correct because God can be God and not an idea.

God isn't limited other than in the ideas we have about Him. We can see the truth of that in His reach to others of other spiritual traditions.

.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I'd say don't add any ideas about God, to God. I think than one would be 100% correct because God can be God and not an idea.

God isn't limited other than in the ideas we have about Him. We can see the truth of that in His reach to others of other spiritual traditions.

.

If your ideas of God contradict who he is revealed to be in the Bible and also you act in disbelief of what is revealed there then. The Bible is rather elegant and complete enough that is doesn't need other information to "help" in telling us who God is. I agree God isn't limited in the ideas we have about him but he also isn't defined by the ideas we have about him either. Just because we or someone else has an idea about God doesn't make the idea right. God gave us plenty of ideas that ARE right such that entertaining ideas that are not revealed there or contradict the Bible is a venture wrought with peril.... do so at your own risk.

 

[dlamberth]

If your ideas of God contradict who he is revealed to be in the Bible and also you act in disbelief of what is revealed there then. The Bible is rather elegant and complete enough that is doesn't need other information to "help" in telling us who God is. I agree God isn't limited in the ideas we have about him but he also isn't defined by the ideas we have about him either. Just because we or someone else has an idea about God doesn't make the idea right. God gave us plenty of ideas that ARE right such that entertaining ideas that are not revealed there or contradict the Bible is a venture wrought with peril.... do so at your own risk.

I just know that I see the reach of God way beyond the beliefs that Christians have about Him. I see God so very alive and vibrant within the Hearts of so many others that have nothing to do with Christian beliefs. If one could reach beyond the Biblical limitations placed on God they would see the same as well. But, the limitations placed on God seem to prevail.

.

 

[stevenfrancis]

I am a convert from Buddhism to Christianity. In the early stages of my conversion, while I was still undergoing the Rcia (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults), I worked at ways to hold on to both, and even self-identified as a Buddhist Christian for a little while. In the end, I came to realize that while the application and practice of "compassion" is similar to the the practice of Agape love, they are still different. That alone didn't change everything for me however. It's the end game that had me drop my Buddhist vows, and let my Buddhism return to the ether. The difference seemed subtle at first, but it soon became clear to me that it was stark and not linkable in reality. A buddhist seeks to lose all ego and attachment. To rest in a state of no-attachment the deeper you think about it is to cease to exist. In Christianity we are seeking to exist more fully. To exist in the very presence of God in a state of sensation which is difficult to even imagine. Moreover, to exist in this state of Heaven complete with a resurrected body which has been perfected and glorified in a real new Heaven and New Earth, implying both space and time. Eternal everythingness as opposed to eternal nothingness. To get larger and larger instead of getting smaller and smaller. The humility is the same. As daily actors in the temporal world (or samsara), as Chrisians or Buddhists, we should humble ourselves to others and the world around us. But to Christians the self is still of very much importance. It is not that we lose self. It is that we love others as MUCH as we love ourselves. That all are just as important to us as ourselves at the highest level, and not at the lowest level. I and others are both important. Not I and others are equally unimportant. And yes, Christians know that this world passes away. That our current bodies are dust. But we are appointed to die only once, and then eternal LIFE. Full and vibrant life. The closest equivalence in Buddhism is probably the sect in which I took my vows, (Jodo Shinsu) which is "pure land" Buddhism, and involves even in a type of heaven. But alas, Christianity and Buddhism are not compatible in the end except that all religions should live here in peace with each other, and not speak ill of one another.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I just know that I see the reach of God way beyond the beliefs that Christians have about Him. I see God so very alive and vibrant within the Hearts of so many others that have nothing to do with Christian beliefs. If one could reach beyond the Biblical limitations placed on God they would see the same as well. But, the limitations placed on God seem to prevail.

.

I'm sorry but if you go too far beyond how God himself equates who he is in the Bible you will end up with an unlimited.... "NOT god".

 

[EnemyOfReason]

Never be quick to assign labels to what "YOU" believe. Apply Occam's Razor to theology as much as possible, keep it simple and keep it lightweight.
Remains a non-denominational Christian and find your inspiration where you find it, when needed. Do not worry about being a Protestant, Presbyterian or Anglican. These are trappings of the mind and are endangerments to the soul.

I am no Christian and overall I despise many things found in the Bible(specifically the New Testament) but I can only offer you the advice of a person not bound by religion.

Now theologically speaking, Buddhism and Christianity are not compatible. Buddhism denies dogma including it's own dogma which is why it is acceptable for a Buddhist(even the Dhali Lama) to deny elements of his own religion. Things such as Mount Meru are now rejected do tot he acquisition of knowledge about our world.
Christians hold that the Bible is the inspired word of god and absolute. Buddhist do not hold such a concept towards any book in general.

 

[Zoness]

Once a Catholic, always a Catholic.

It allows them such big numbers on all of those surveys and statistics about religion.

 

[steve_bakr]

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.

If you accept the foundational beliefs of Christianity, you can also be a Buddhist. I've met such people. There are also Zen Roshi's who are Catholics. There is also a book called, Zen Catholicism, and other such books. The area you speak of is called interspirituality, and not everyone is up to speed on it, so you will naturally get some detractors.

 

[smaneck]

It allows them such big numbers on all of those surveys and statistics about religion.

The statistics on all religions is vastly exaggerated. The Christian Encyclopedia puts the number of Baha'is in America at 700,000. Our own statistics put it at maybe 175,000 and that's counting anyone whoever declared and never formally withdrew.

But the reason the Catholic church won't take your names off the rolls doesn't have much to do with statistics. It has to do with their concept of baptism which makes you part of the church militant whatever you believe. Baptism is thought to be a vehicle of grace. You don't have to deserve it.

 

[smaneck]

If one has wrong beliefs about Christ then removing those beliefs or limitations would free us up. The problem is that Jesus himself and his chosen followers make very solid arguments about the validity of the Bible (scripture)

I note you place the word scripture beside Bible because while the NT says some things about scripture it says nothing about the Bible, for the simple reason it was not yet compiled. For them scripture meant the Tanakh. If Christian subsequently added scriptures, then logically why cannot more be added as well?

I see no way in the Bible to incorporate (add) other religious beliefs alongside the Bible without tainting (or farther limiting) ones relationship with God.

I see no way the two things are necessarily connected.

If your idea of God is only 80% right because you added stuff that is NOT God to him then at most you can only have an 80% relationship with him.

Excuse me, but do you think the scriptures, any scriptures can tell you even 10% about God? If so, your god is mighty small!

The problem however is God doesn't like sharing he is jealous

We aren't talking about adding additional gods.

and if you try and share him with other gods you will find yourself abandoned to those gods instead of him.

Okay, we will stick to monotheism. Of course Buddhism embraces no-theism.

 

[smaneck]

I just know that I see the reach of God way beyond the beliefs that Christians have about Him. .

God is beyond the beliefs any of us have about Him.

 

[smaneck]

Steven,

I would agree with you that the doctrines are not compatible as I stated towards the beginning of this thread, but I have to wonder if the distinction is not in the way we describe the reality rather than the reality itself. It seems to me that the goal of all mysticism is to obtain unity with the ultimate. The monotheistic traditions make a distinction between unity of being (which they deny) and unity of will (which they would accept.) Ultimately is this submission of our will not what detachment from self is all about? The ultimate goal of Islamic mysticism is to obtain fana or annihilation of the self. But the purpose of that annihilation is to baqa or abide in God.

warmest, Susan

I am a convert from Buddhism to Christianity. In the early stages of my conversion, while I was still undergoing the Rcia (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults), I worked at ways to hold on to both, and even self-identified as a Buddhist Christian for a little while. In the end, I came to realize that while the application and practice of "compassion" is similar to the the practice of Agape love, they are still different. That alone didn't change everything for me however. It's the end game that had me drop my Buddhist vows, and let my Buddhism return to the ether. The difference seemed subtle at first, but it soon became clear to me that it was stark and not linkable in reality. A buddhist seeks to lose all ego and attachment. To rest in a state of no-attachment the deeper you think about it is to cease to exist. In Christianity we are seeking to exist more fully. To exist in the very presence of God in a state of sensation which is difficult to even imagine. Moreover, to exist in this state of Heaven complete with a resurrected body which has been perfected and glorified in a real new Heaven and New Earth, implying both space and time. Eternal everythingness as opposed to eternal nothingness. To get larger and larger instead of getting smaller and smaller. The humility is the same. As daily actors in the temporal world (or samsara), as Chrisians or Buddhists, we should humble ourselves to others and the world around us. But to Christians the self is still of very much importance. It is not that we lose self. It is that we love others as MUCH as we love ourselves. That all are just as important to us as ourselves at the highest level, and not at the lowest level. I and others are both important. Not I and others are equally unimportant. And yes, Christians know that this world passes away. That our current bodies are dust. But we are appointed to die only once, and then eternal LIFE. Full and vibrant life. The closest equivalence in Buddhism is probably the sect in which I took my vows, (Jodo Shinsu) which is "pure land" Buddhism, and involves even in a type of heaven. But alas, Christianity and Buddhism are not compatible in the end except that all religions should live here in peace with each other, and not speak ill of one another.

 

[light upon light]

I just know that I see the reach of God way beyond the beliefs that Christians have about Him. I see God so very alive and vibrant within the Hearts of so many others that have nothing to do with Christian beliefs. If one could reach beyond the Biblical limitations placed on God they would see the same as well. But, the limitations placed on God seem to prevail.

.

God is certainly beyond any beliefs that any of us have of Him.

And the Holy Spririt certainly acts through people of any and every belief system. To believe otherwise, to call light darkness because it comes from a lamp we don't like, is what Christ referred to as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

 

[light upon light]

God is beyond the beliefs any of us have about Him.

I see we both wrote this in reply.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I note you place the word scripture beside Bible because while the NT says some things about scripture it says nothing about the Bible, for the simple reason it was not yet compiled. For them scripture meant the Tanakh. If Christian subsequently added scriptures, then logically why cannot more be added as well?



I see no way the two things are necessarily connected.



Excuse me, but do you think the scriptures, any scriptures can tell you even 10% about God? If so, your god is mighty small!



We aren't talking about adding additional gods.



Okay, we will stick to monotheism. Of course Buddhism embraces no-theism.

I'm not going to argue the Bible with an unbeliever, this is why unbelievers are not allowed to participate in theology forums because they reject the Bible as true in some form or fashion so discussing it with them is a wasted effort. If you don't believe the Bible trying to mix it with Buddhism is just plain stupid because you are trying to mix doubt with something else and you won't get the faith that is required in Christianity.

 

[smaneck]

I'm not going to argue the Bible with an unbeliever

Then why are you posting in the World Religion folder in the first place?

,

this is why unbelievers are not allowed to participate in theology forums because they reject the Bible as true in some form or fashion

But I don't. Or are you talking about biblical inerrancy? In that case most Christians wouldn't be allowed to participate in those forums either.