What is the Catholic Church's view on Buddhism?

[MDK]

Hi MarianD: You are correct. They were both fully God and fully human. Same God of course, since there is only one God. I know that sounds strange to Christians. I did spend three years comparing each line of the 4 Gospels to the Gita, and found them all match - at least from the perspective of a Hindu they match. I am not sure what parts that Christians would think don’t match. You are one of the few Christians I have met who have even heard of the Gita so your thoughts on the differences would be interesting. The things He said as Jesus were a bit more cryptic in nature and not as direct, but I have attributed that to the fact that there had been so many copies of copies of copies and translations before any final form of the Gospels came about, coupled with the fact that Jesus was addressing a group of people who were living in the Kali Yuga and Krishna was addressing people who were living in a more enlightened age. Jesus was addressing a very egocentric tribal audience and He seems to have taken that into account. In spite of that, from an eastern perspective, the things Jesus said still seem totally natural, since Jesus was technically form the Orient. When his teachings got into Occidental hands the understanding of them seems to have taken on a rather interesting turn here and there. I think that is fascinating but a bit curious as well. Anyway, I would be interested in your thoughts on the differences, but I suppose that should probably be on another thread or you could send me a private message. I am very interested in what you had to say. Thanks very much for your thoughts.

Your friend
Sufjon

You seem like a nice guy, but you really need to get off this Hindu nonsense regarding Jesus. Some had thought the Gita was authored 2,000 years BC, but it seems that some of the more recent reviews of the Sanskrit literary style puts it at 1st Century AD, with some believing even later than that. So, sorry, it’s not real revelation,and Krishna is not God, but is a false god forbidden to worship at the risk of breaking the first commandment. Krishna is not Jesus. Jesus is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Krishna is not a manifestation of the one true God, nor is he a Divine Person of the Godhead. Krishna is a false god, a fairy tale elevated by men. There are three Divine Persons in the Godhead. We know who they are. Krishna is not one. The Bhagavad Gita or Gitopanishad was not written by God. Saying Krishna is God is idolatry, and blasphemy of the real God. Sadly, you’re still very confused about Christ and God.

 

[Sufjon]

You seem like a nice guy, but you really need to get off this Hindu nonsense regarding Jesus. Some had thought the Gita was authored 2,000 years BC, but it seems that some of the more recent reviews of the Sanskrit literary style puts it at 1st Century AD, with some believing even later than that. So, sorry, it’s not real revelation,and Krishna is not God, but is a false god forbidden to worship at the risk of breaking the first commandment. Krishna is not Jesus. Jesus is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Krishna is not a manifestation of the one true God, nor is he a Divine Person of the Godhead. Krishna is a false god, a fairy tale elevated by men. There are three Divine Persons in the Godhead. We know who they are. Krishna is not one. The Bhagavad Gita or Gitopanishad was not written by God. Saying Krishna is God is idolatry, and blasphemy of the real God. Sadly, you’re still very confused about Christ and God.

Dear MDK: The precise dating on the writing of the Gita cannot be precisely made. The very latest estimates would put it at about the same time as your Gospels, but no estimates are any later than that. Most accepted estimates are about 500 years before Christ. The lifDe of Krishna is pretty much accepted as being about 1,000 before Christ, if any of that matters. Anyway, this dialog has devolved into a typical western assault on anything you don’t understand. I have said before that I am happy that you have your faith, and I have been careful to speak kindly of it.

Now I am aware that you believe that you have the full authority of your church to make proclamations about God and to denounce anything other than what your church sees as the truth. Your denouncement of my faith (above) is pretty typical Christian fare. It is what you believe you have to do, and we have been watching you do that sort of thing for 2,000 years, and to that end you have a rich and colorful history. We are happy to leave you about your business of doing that. You have a faith to defend, and a jealous God to keep appeased. I understand that. Because you see Him the way you do, you have this fear of getting it wrong thing, which is why on this message board I see Christians arguing with other Christians, Christians arguing with Muslims, Christians denouncing this thing and that. You have this fear thing to deal with. Fear of God, fear of hell, fear of retribution. You also have this want thing. Want of heaven, want of safety, want of love, want of salvation. All of those things you fear and the things you want are inside your very own self and throughout the universe, yet still you fear some things and long for others. If you get it wrong you will go to hell. If you get it right you will go to heaven. You have this reward/punishment thing working on you. It is powerful. Beneath is this undulating fear, so you denounce. You were told to “be thou of one eye” and yet you can’t. Not being able to see what you were plainly told, you long and you fear. It is a powerful tool used on you from an early age that hits at the core of the human psyche. That’s your path. That is not my path.

Anyway, there is one God. You see Him in Jesus. I do too. I also see Him everywhere.

Your friend
Sufjon