Did the Buddha talk about God?

[rossum]

rossum

** to avoid injury to living beings.
to avoid taking what is not given.
to avoid sensual misconduct.
to avoid false and malicious speech.
to avoid intoxicants.**

Eminently reasonable and Christian!

Erm… We got there first, but we don’t mind you borrowing them. Just like the early Hindus didn’t mind us borrowing the rules from them in the first place. Whoops…

rossum

 

[InJesusItrust]

Christianity developed independently from Buddhism. The Old Testament shows us that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah. In addition, there is something called the natural law.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

rossum

Erm… We got there first, but we don’t mind you borrowing them. Just like the early Hindus didn’t mind us borrowing the rules from them in the first place. Whoops…

Oops! Read some history. Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism, the promised Messiah. Moses lived long before the Buddha, and Jesus draws much of his teaching (including the commandments) from the Old Testament, certainly not from the Buddha.

Moreover, you should know it’s the view of Catholics that the Son of God was present at the Creation. So he certainly predates the Buddha.

 

[rossum]

Oops! Read some history. Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism, the promised Messiah. Moses lived long before the Buddha, and Jesus draws much of his teaching (including the commandments) from the Old Testament, certainly not from the Buddha.

And Hinduism is older than Judaism. The rules are not exactly difficult to devise. The important thing is to realise that they apply universally and not just to the tribe/city/kingdom that we happen to belong to. One can look at the Bible and see this developing over time.

Moreover, you should know it’s the view of Catholics that the Son of God was present at the Creation. So he certainly predates the Buddha.

And my scriptures tell me that there are previous Buddhas that predate any god.

rossum

 

[Charlemagne_II]

rossum

And Hinduism is older than Judaism.

If seniority matters so much to you, you must admit Judaism is older than Buddhism. But since the Son of god was present at Creation, he is older than Hinduism as well.

And my scriptures tell me that there are previous Buddhas that predate any god.

And you know this how?

 

[rossum]

And you know this how?

What part of “my scriptures tell me” do you have a problem with?

Your scriptures say things that are not possible under Buddhism. My scriptures say things that are not possible under Christianity.

We disagree because we follow different religions.

rossum

 

[billcu1]

bill

**When you have a foot problem you go to the podiatrist, not the plummer. When your child is ill you see a pediatrician, not an architect. Why would one want to go to the magisterium about buddhism. The church will tell you all about it surely and not know a thing. We must be wise. Wise as serpents. **

The wisdom is to go to the teaching authority of the Church. The magisterium has that teaching authority. I don’t. The magisterium does not exist in a vacuum. It is composed of bishops priests and theologians (clerical and lay). When the magisterium rules on anything it rules after due consideration. It is wise, wise as serpents (though I have never understood why serpents are wise.

It’s an old belief from olden times. The Genesis said originally that the serpent lost his legs. The serpent in the garden was wisdom. Wisdom tempted man. It has later been changed to the devil.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

rossum

What part of “my scriptures tell me” do you have a problem with?

The part where you say you have the truth in your scriptures, but do not tell us on what authority you have the truth.

We have the truth and proclaim our authority from God. You say your gods may be “safely ignored.” So where is your authrity if it is not divine?

 

[billcu1]

Amitabah may have overstepped. . .

How can one who is as all knowing as God and equal with him make a mistake. All the buddhas know we’re having this discussion. I don’t question all knowingness. It’s like questioning God.

 

[billcu1]

If you hold the Catholic Faith then you must believe, as Catholics do, that if a person knows the Catholic Faith is the truth and then refuses to be joined to it, he cannot be saved. Willful rejection of the known truth is a Sin against the Holy Ghost.

It is not a teaching of the Church that “all will not come to Christ and they’re not doomed if they don’t” It is rather the teaching of the Church that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no one comes to the Father but by Him.

Now, there is some theological speculation about implicit vs explicit faith. Implicit Faith is viewed as an attitude of mind wherein one seeks the truth diligently, and strives with all one’s strength to live up to what one believes God wants one to do. Such a one can be saved, but with difficulty, and that one is in ignorance of the true dual Nature of Christ. Such ignorance, if it be invincible, can be excused, but it is not an ideal situation, as such a one will necessary lack very many helps that can only be received in explicit faith. For such as these, it ought always to be our aim, to bring them into explicit faith, so that they may be more easily saved and may merit a better crown.

I wouldn’t be so concerned about “selling points.” The sole “selling point” of anything can only be its truth; and in a secondary way to truth, its facility of application. One both these counts, the Rosary is a very important key. The Rosary is first of all a devotion specifically approved by God and recommended by Him through all His prophets and Saints. Secondly, the Rosary makes Catholicism far easier to practice faithfully. It destroys heresy and converts from sin. It is impossible to go too far in recommending the Rosary.

Now I am going to ask you for clarification, what do you mean by your phrase, above, “Jesus said to the Lord. . .”? JESUS IS LORD! That is the Faith of the Church. No one can be Catholic who does not believe that.

Yes Jesus is our lord but when I said the Lord I meant the heavenly father. To learn one must set aside his belief to avoid confusion and look with an open mind. I didn’t say abandon beliefs.

 

[billcu1]

“He who seeks will find and become troubled, then astonished and reign over all.-- Jesus”

Doesn’t sound canonical, sounds Gnostic.

Why, in your opinion, were the Gnostic writings excluded from the Canon of Scripture?

Why did Jesus say “What is it to you that I would have him live until I return?” concerning John the disciple. Jesus had sheep in other folds. I don’t believe the Catholic church was meant for the gnostic scriptures. Then there’s politics and so one involved there. But I think if Jesus was talking to Catholics he would say concerning Gnosis “What is it to you” to some. Study to show yourself approved.

 

[rossum]

The part where you say you have the truth in your scriptures, but do not tell us on what authority you have the truth.

Buddhist scriptures rest on the authority of the Buddha and his enlightenment.

We have the truth and proclaim our authority from God.

We have the truth and proclaim our authority from the Buddha.

You say your gods may be “safely ignored.” So where is your authrity if it is not divine?

You are again making Abrahamic-style assumptions. The Buddha is superior in knowledge to any of the gods. He is enlightened while they are not. He teaches them and not the other way round. My authority is higher than the gods.

rossum

 

[billcu1]

I wish to present you with two passages from Holy Scripture.

1. “The Fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom.”
2. “Perfect Love drives out all fear.”

These two passages are not contradictory! It is, perhaps, that they make a useful koan for Christian meditation.

Right! Perfect Love drives out all fear. One should not fear to step out. It’s the holy spirit calling. Love will lead and guide you into the truth. The babes need the magisterium. Save the meat for those spiritually mature.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

rossum
**
You are again making Abrahamic-style assumptions. The Buddha is superior in knowledge to any of the gods. He is enlightened while they are not. He teaches them and not the other way round. My authority is higher than the gods.**

You are making Buddhist style assumptions. How do you know Buddha is superior in knowledge to any of the gods? On the word of Buddha? Where does he says this?

We know Christ is believable because he claims to come from God. Since the Buddha does not claim to come from God, how believable is he? Is he not just human and subject to error as are all mere humans?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

bill

**The babes need the magisterium. Save the meat for those spiritually mature. **

We all need the magisterium. What do you mean by opposing meat to the magisterium?

What source of authority is higher than the magisterium? One’s own private judgment?

That is the essence of Protestantism.

 

[billcu1]

bill

**The babes need the magisterium. Save the meat for those spiritually mature. **

We all need the magisterium. What do you mean by opposing meat to the magisterium?

What source of authority is higher than the magisterium? One’s own private judgment?

That is the essence of Protestantism.

No! the Holy Spirit leads and guides into all the truth. I wonder why you ask about buddhism and I know you have a specific question as the OP, but are constantly trying to compare? If you have all you need why seek? To learn one must step humbly from the podium and sit in the audience. I’m not talking about protestantism at all. This was about buddhism or more specifically your original question I think is non seq. IMO. Have you ever looked at Theological Germanica? When that which is not perfect has been made perfect why would you need the magisterium. The buddhas are all knowing They are “equal with God”. As we would one day be. But that’s what’s ordained for man beyond heaven. Heaven is where we continue to perfect ourselves.

 

[rossum]

You are making Buddhist style assumptions. How do you know Buddha is superior in knowledge to any of the gods? On the word of Buddha? Where does he says this?

In the Tripitaka.

We know Christ is believable because he claims to come from God.

We know the Buddha is believable because he claims to be enlightened. We further know because the methods he taught still work to produce enlightenment now. The Buddha was so sure of what he taught that he told us to test it and to check it for ourselves. Not blind faith but testing and knowledge:

[The Buddha said:] "Now, look you Kalamas, do not be led by reports, or tradition, or hearsay. Be not led by the authority of religious texts, nor by mere logic or inference, nor by considering appearances, nor by the delight in speculative opinions, nor by seeming possibilities, nor by the idea ‘this is our teacher’.

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: ‘These things are bad; these things are blameable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,’ abandon them. …

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: ‘These things are good; these things are not blameable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,’ enter on and abide in them."

Anguttara Nikaya 3.65, Kalama sutta

The Buddha invites us to check for ourselves that his methods work. Many Buddhists have checked for themselves over the years and have confirmed that his methods do indeed work. Enlightenment can be observed in this world, before death, so confirmation is possible.

Since the Buddha does not claim to come from God, how believable is he? Is he not just human and subject to error as are all mere humans?

The Buddha claims to be higher than the gods. He is believable because he is enlightened and so he taught the path to enlightenment. This is confirmed because the path he taught still works.

rossum

 

[Charlemagne_II]

bill

No! the Holy Spirit leads and guides into all the truth.

Yes! The Holy Spirit guides the magisterium. Do you disagree?

** I wonder why you ask about buddhism and I know you have a specific question as the OP, but are constantly trying to compare?**

I ask about Buddhism to understand. Comparing Christ to Buddha helps me to understand the difference. Is that a problem for you?

If you have all you need why seek?

There is no end of knowledge and wisdom.

**To learn one must step humbly from the podium and sit in the audience. **

Exactly. That is why you should step humbly from your podium and listen to the magisterium. No?

 

[billcu1]

In the Tripitaka.

We know the Buddha is believable because he claims to be enlightened. We further know because the methods he taught still work to produce enlightenment now. The Buddha was so sure of what he taught that he told us to test it and to check it for ourselves. Not blind faith but testing and knowledge:

[The Buddha said:] "Now, look you Kalamas, do not be led by reports, or tradition, or hearsay. Be not led by the authority of religious texts, nor by mere logic or inference, nor by considering appearances, nor by the delight in speculative opinions, nor by seeming possibilities, nor by the idea ‘this is our teacher’.

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: ‘These things are bad; these things are blameable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,’ abandon them. …

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: ‘These things are good; these things are not blameable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,’ enter on and abide in them."

Anguttara Nikaya 3.65, Kalama sutta

The Buddha invites us to check for ourselves that his methods work. Many Buddhists have checked for themselves over the years and have confirmed that his methods do indeed work. Enlightenment can be observed in this world, before death, so confirmation is possible.

The Buddha claims to be higher than the gods. He is believable because he is enlightened and so he taught the path to enlightenment. This is confirmed because the path he taught still works.

rossum

The buddha came from God. In short. They are now like God. Shakyamuni started his walk in hell as a bull helping another bull pull a cart the demon driving the cart became so infuriated when he showed a small act of kindness. The other bull stumbled and the buddha(the other bull) volunteered to pull the other’s weight. The demon struck him with his trident and killed him.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

The Buddha invites us to check for ourselves that his methods work. Many Buddhists have checked for themselves over the years and have confirmed that his methods do indeed work. Enlightenment can be observed in this world, before death, so confirmation is possible.

So what your saying is that we ourselves are the final authority? Just as I thought. Atheism.