Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

! RELIGIOUS SMACKDOWN !



Which so called Prophet of Peace takes this ???

Who is the kindest hearted? Who is the most gentle? Who is the purest of the pure, the greatest of the great ?

Who is the sincerest of the sincere? Who is best represented by thier followers, and ultamtely, who is the deliverer of TRUTH ?

And again, who is used the LEAST as an excuse for discrimination, violence, and hate ?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
! RELIGIOUS SMACKDOWN !



Which so called Prophet of Peace takes this ???

Who is the kindest hearted? Who is the most gentle? Who is the purest of the pure, the greatest of the great ?

Who is the sincerest of the sincere? Who is best represented by thier followers, and ultamtely, who is the deliverer of TRUTH ?

And again, who is used the LEAST as an excuse for discrimination, violence, and hate ?

Buddha, his followers are more likely to sit and chant you to death.

Although I wouldn't say Buddhists are kind hearted or gentle by nature there must be a give and take on both ends.

I cast my chips with Muhammed.

Why...because I do.

Originally posted by Alliance
I cast my chips with Muhammed.

Why...because I do.


Muhammed is a terrorist....

Jesus is a hypocrit...

And Buddha is fat.....


I dislike fat hypocritical terrorists.....

Well then each of your preassigned characteristics is only 1/3 of each.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Muhammed is a terrorist....

Jesus is a hypocrit...

And Buddha is fat.....


I dislike fat hypocritical terrorists.....

Fat never killed anyone, except well the fat person.

Buddha isn't a hypocrite because he had a "soft" touch and preferred to speak in tones describing all and not some, as it were.

Shaky is probably gonna school me on this though.

Shakya need to go to school first.

Shaky surely is not fat......that's for sure.............I'd say Buddhists...

Bad bad Aliance..lol

Muhammed's followers will kill all the others, though Buddha's Martial Artists might be a problem, with Jesus' leet power(These are not my actual views (damn political correctness))

Originally posted by debbiejo


Shaky surely is not fat......that's for sure.............I'd say Buddhists...

Will you stop throwing around random accusations?

You were caught..!!!!

Considering that the "fat Buddha" is a different one from the one most commenly followed, I go With Guatama Buddha.

Guanyin buddhas mom....she was a tough lady.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Guanyin buddhas mom....she was a tough lady.


Debbie are your shoes untied, yeah I thought so time to go read some more.

Originally posted by Soleran
Debbie are your shoes untied, yeah I thought so time to go read some more. But that's what others told me..........why does he have other moms?

I've even seen pics and statues...

Originally posted by Soleran
Debbie are your shoes untied

Originally posted by debbiejo
But that's what others told me..........why does he have other moms?

I've even seen pics and statues...

I've always been a big fan of the Tao te Ching, maybe we can talk about this, can we, talk about it!

Buddha was sloth, but since he wasn't christian did he sin?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
! RELIGIOUS SMACKDOWN !



Which so called Prophet of Peace takes this ???

Who is the kindest hearted? Who is the most gentle? Who is the purest of the pure, the greatest of the great ?

Who is the sincerest of the sincere? Who is best represented by thier followers, and ultamtely, who is the deliverer of TRUTH ?

And again, who is used the LEAST as an excuse for discrimination, violence, and hate ?
Wasn't this settled on a South Park episode?

Originally posted by Soleran
Buddha was sloth, but since he wasn't christian did he sin? Lol, you need to read up on the Buddha. He was ascetic for a time, he reached the point where he was so emaciated and weak he almost drowned in a puddle. This led him to understand the need for moderation in life.

Originally posted by Regret
Lol, you need to read up on the Buddha. He was ascetic for a time, he reached the point where he was so emaciated and weak he almost drowned in a puddle. This led him to understand the need for moderation in life.


I was really joking about the sloth, my other posts would give you more insight to that.

Buddhists and folks who buy into the Tao are fairly similar, but thanks for your teachings none the less.

You do know a great deal of those stories are meant as lessons right?

Originally posted by Soleran
I've always been a big fan of the Tao te Ching, maybe we can talk about this, can we, talk about it!

Yes, why don't you start a thread........I really do not know anything of the Tao te Ching.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Muhammed is a terrorist....

Jesus is a hypocrit...

And Buddha is fat.....


I dislike fat hypocritical terrorists.....


hmmm.... not quite right, let's try again.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Muhammed has followers who are terrorists....

Jesus has followers who are hypocrites...

And Buddha went to extremes in bodyweight (both skinny and fat).....


I dislike fat hypocritical terrorists.....

So you really just hate the followers then, right?

It isn't Jesus' fault that his followers forgot the meaning of his teachings after a couple hundred years.

Personally, I'm torn on whether we can blame Mohamed for Islamic terrorism, but if the peaceful muslims are right then he's not to blame for that either. (if the terrorists are right about his teachings he is to blame)

And Buddha, Well, I guess it is his fault for starving and indulging himself, but he learned his lesson from it.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Yes, why don't you start a thread........I really do not know anything of the Tao te Ching.


Good book. Everyone should read it no matter what religion you follow. And confucious, Everyone should read him too.

Well, techically, everyone should read most everything...be we can't do that now can we?

Originally posted by Soleran
I was really joking about the sloth, my other posts would give you more insight to that.

Buddhists and folks who buy into the Tao are fairly similar, but thanks for your teachings none the less.

You do know a great deal of those stories are meant as lessons right?

Yes, but some are descriptions of the path followed by the Buddha in pursuit of enlightenment, and may be taken literally, but then I would leave that decision up to the Buddhists.

I do not know enough about the practices of Buddhists and Taoists to know if they are similar. From my readings of the two it seems that they are not that similar except when viewed from a Western perspective.

Originally posted by docb77
Good book. Everyone should read it no matter what religion you follow. And confucious, Everyone should read him too. Fine I'll go to the library after I'm done reading The "Occult Christ" and "Elemental Magick"

Originally posted by Regret
I do not know enough about the practices of Buddhists and Taoists to know if they are similar. From my readings of the two it seems that they are not that similar except when viewed from a Western perspective.


You said you don't study them much but you have an opinion like that, weird.

Originally posted by Soleran
You said you don't study them much but you have an opinion like that, weird. Reading and studying their texts is not the same as knowing how the followers/adherents of a religion behave/worship, let alone their interpretation of the writings.

All religion is really just philosophy though, one in the same.

Defining something like that from its followers seriously detracts from the intent of its "writings" though, wouldn't you agree?

Originally posted by Soleran
All religion is really just philosophy though, one in the same.

Defining something like that from its followers seriously detracts from the intent of its "writings" though, wouldn't you agree? Yes, it can, but it is also important to see how the followers interpret the text. Especially with texts from a foreign culture, some words and phrases may be taken differently based on the culture wherein the text originated.

Originally posted by Regret
Yes, it can, but it is also important to see how the followers interpret the text. Especially with texts from a foreign culture, some words and phrases may be taken differently based on the culture wherein the text originated.

I prefered to look at the teachers just as much as the students. Sure the text can be intrepreted individually but typically a teacher guides that viewpoint.

Originally posted by Soleran
I prefered to look at the teachers just as much as the students. Sure the text can be intrepreted individually but typically a teacher guides that viewpoint. Little of Lao Tsu is really known though, in fact he is the least documented central religious figure that I am aware of.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Fine I'll go to the library after I'm done reading The "Occult Christ" and "Elemental Magick"

Well, those are probably interesting , but The Tao Te Ching would probably do more to make you a better person.

Originally posted by Regret
Little of Lao Tsu is really known though, in fact he is the least documented central religious figure that I am aware of.


I wasn't referring to the Tao in as much of the other faiths that are more popular and everyone creams their pants to "teach."

Originally posted by docb77
Well, those are probably interesting , but The Tao Te Ching would probably do more to make you a better person. I've made the comment before that if a person were to follow the Tao, they would be a better Christian than many Christians...

Originally posted by Regret
I've made the comment before that if a person were to follow the Tao, they would be a better Christian than many Christians...


Probably because water is easier to swallow then Christian pills

Originally posted by Soleran
I wasn't referring to the Tao in as much of the other faiths that are more popular and everyone creams their pants to "teach." So you referred to the Taoist monks and not Lao Tsu? And then compare them to priests, imams, etc?

Originally posted by Soleran
Probably because water is easier to swallow then Christian pills No, because Jesus taught similar principles that it seems Christians have difficulty grasping.

Originally posted by Regret
So you referred to the Taoist monks and not Lao Tsu? And then compare them to priests, imams, etc?


I didn't bring up either you did.

I simply said the Tao is a good path to follow you seem to bring up Lao and others they really don't add value to the conversation here though.


Here though, yes very good you know the author to the Tao te Ching, Lao Tsu.

Originally posted by Soleran
I didn't bring up either you did.

I simply said the Tao is a good path to follow you seem to bring up Lao and others they really don't add value to the conversation here though.


Here though, yes very good you know the author to the Tao te Ching, Lao Tsu.

It was a simple question based on this comment:

Originally posted by Soleran
I prefered to look at the teachers just as much as the students. Sure the text can be intrepreted individually but typically a teacher guides that viewpoint.

to which I replied:

Originally posted by Regret
Little of Lao Tsu is really known though, in fact he is the least documented central religious figure that I am aware of.

Then you:

Originally posted by Soleran
I wasn't referring to the Tao in as much of the other faiths that are more popular and everyone creams their pants to "teach."

Which followed a series of posts following your comment:

Originally posted by Soleran
Buddhists and folks who buy into the Tao are fairly similar

Sorry, I was responding to your comments, discussing your statements, I find it somewhat insulting that you suggest I was not. Perhaps you were referring to something else, you should clarify your statements rather than becoming defensive. Obviously you were not clear, or we would understand each other here.

My question is, which teachers are you referring to here - "I prefered to look at the teachers just as much as the students"

Originally posted by Regret


Obviously you were not clear, or we would understand each other here.




Would we?


Teachers regardless of faith, or regardless what they are teaching.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
! RELIGIOUS SMACKDOWN !



Which so called Prophet of Peace takes this ???

Who is the kindest hearted? Who is the most gentle? Who is the purest of the pure, the greatest of the great ?

Who is the sincerest of the sincere? Who is best represented by thier followers, and ultamtely, who is the deliverer of TRUTH ?

And again, who is used the LEAST as an excuse for discrimination, violence, and hate ?

Well you can forget about that Mohammed character....

It's definately between Jesus and Buddha. And I'm honestly stupmed as they both loved living things and were completely selfless.

Originally posted by Soleran
Would we?


Teachers regardless of faith, or regardless what they are teaching.

So "teachers" in your statement is in reference to priests, imams, monks, etc., anyone who teaches? Or is it in reference to the original and perhaps the only "true" teachers such as: Jesus, Lao Tzu, Siddhartha Gautama, etc.?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Muhammed is a terrorist....

Jesus is a hypocrit...

And Buddha is fat.....


I dislike fat hypocritical terrorists.....

I think you hate religon for the sake of it.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
! RELIGIOUS SMACKDOWN !



Which so called Prophet of Peace takes this ???

Who is the kindest hearted? Who is the most gentle? Who is the purest of the pure, the greatest of the great ?

Who is the sincerest of the sincere? Who is best represented by thier followers, and ultamtely, who is the deliverer of TRUTH ?

And again, who is used the LEAST as an excuse for discrimination, violence, and hate ?

I asked Storm, and she told me I shouldn't make a thread like this because it might spark some arguments and serious fights

Originally posted by docb77
hmmm.... not quite right, let's try again.



So you really just hate the followers then, right?

It isn't Jesus' fault that his followers forgot the meaning of his teachings after a couple hundred years.

Personally, I'm torn on whether we can blame Mohamed for Islamic terrorism, but if the peaceful muslims are right then he's not to blame for that either. (if the terrorists are right about his teachings he is to blame)

And Buddha, Well, I guess it is his fault for starving and indulging himself, but he learned his lesson from it.


Bro I was just joking around...I do not judge the figures by thier followers, it is unfair....

Jesus seemed like a nice guy, so did Buddha, I am unsure about Muhammed however....i am given different information on who he really was.

Originally posted by Council#13
I asked Storm, and she told me I shouldn't make a thread like this because it might spark some arguments and serious fights

Every thread on this forum has sparked arguments and fights.....

So far everyone who has posted here has done it in some diplomatic way, and i hope it stays that way. If it gets really wild, then Storm may close it if she wishes, she's the moderator.

So far, except for this....

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Muhammed is a terrorist....

Jesus is a hypocrit...

And Buddha is fat.....


I dislike fat hypocritical terrorists.....

Originally posted by Alliance
So far, except for this....


If someone cannot see the lack of seriousness behind that statement, then they are blind and should not debate here.

People can take things offensively. I have an exceedingly recent memory of someone else with the same problem.

Originally posted by Alliance
People can take things offensively. I have an exceedingly recent memory of someone else with the same problem.

I wondor who that could be...

*Dum dum DAAHHHH*

Originally posted by Alliance
*Dum dum DAAHHHH*


WHO YOU CALLLING DUMB ??!?!?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Every thread on this forum has sparked arguments and fights.....

So far everyone who has posted here has done it in some diplomatic way, and i hope it stays that way. If it gets really wild, then Storm may close it if she wishes, she's the moderator.

Yeah, but I think she meant it would be like "What the hell do you mean? Buddha was a fat ass! Shut up!" or something

Originally posted by Council#13
Yeah, but I think she meant it would be like "What the hell do you mean? Buddha was a fat ass! Shut up!" or something

That would be the fault of the poster, not the thread...

Anyone can make a stupid statement like that in ANY thread...

I mean JUST LOOK at the ABORTION thread....its filled with back and forth insults...and im sure the thread was never intended for that.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
That would be the fault of the poster, not the thread...

Anyone can make a stupid statement like that in ANY thread...

I mean JUST LOOK at the ABORTION thread....its filled with back and forth insults...and im sure the thread was never intended for that.

Really? Well, I think Abortion should be up to the parents. They should also give a resonable excuse for having the baby. Like, "I was raped" is a good one.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
! RELIGIOUS SMACKDOWN !



Which so called Prophet of Peace takes this ???

Who is the kindest hearted? Who is the most gentle? Who is the purest of the pure, the greatest of the great ?

Who is the sincerest of the sincere? Who is best represented by thier followers, and ultamtely, who is the deliverer of TRUTH ?

And again, who is used the LEAST as an excuse for discrimination, violence, and hate ?

Buddha was not a prophet, nor was he a God, nor he claimed to be either of those.

He was a teacher.

Although certain Hindu's believe that he was the 9th incarnation of God, and Jesus 10th.

Basically, Krishna was the 8th incarnation of God, Buddha was the 9th, and Jesus 10th, according to certain Hindu belief.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Muhammed is a terrorist....

Jesus is a hypocrit...

And Buddha is fat.....


I dislike fat hypocritical terrorists.....


Oh Jesus B. Krishna! (I just wanted to say that for ages!!)

Buddha was not fat. no2

You are refering to Chinese statue of Buddha representing happiness. 'Laughing buddha'' :
Bodhisattva Maitreya (Chinese: Mileh-fo, Japanese: Miroku Butsu or Bosatsu)

That image is based upon Chang Dingzi (907-1060) a Buddhist monk who was a native of Chekiang Province NOT real Buddha.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Buddha was not a prophet, nor was he a God, nor he claimed to be either of those.

He was a teacher.

Although certain Hindu's believe that he was the 9th incarnation of God, and Jesus 10th.

Basically, Krishna was the 8th incarnation of God, Buddha was the 9th, and Jesus 10th, according to certain Hindu belief.


Sounds very interesting, but my "prophet of peace" opening was just an opening...nothing with literal intention.

For me, this is between Buddha and Jesus...both seemed sincere and as good as can be. Neither fought, niether waged war, neither executed....




Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Oh Jesus B. Krishna! (I just wanted to say that for ages!!)

Buddha was not fat. no2

You are refering to Chinese statue of Buddha representing happiness. 'Laughing buddha'' :
Bodhisattva Maitreya (Chinese: Mileh-fo, Japanese: Miroku Butsu or Bosatsu)

That image is based upon Chang Dingzi (907-1060) a Buddhist monk who was a native of Chekiang Province NOT real Buddha.


I know....that whole quote was a joke, im surprised at how many people are taking it seriously...

Yeah, didn't have the time to read all thread, so I replied on what I knew.

I strongly believe that Jesus knew what Buddha preached. He must have. Either that or they are a incarnation of the 'great spirit' pray

*mysterious music*

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I strongly believe that Jesus knew what Buddha preached. He must have.

Why is this again, sorry if I forgot?

Because similarities are just too great to be coincidental, in what they bought thought.

Just a personal belief.

Ok. I think many great people express similar ideas, but I don't necessariyl believe it to be a causal relationship.

I also don't trust the Bible to be historically accurate. The historical record surrounding Muhammad, Siddartha, and others makes them more realistic beings.

Originally posted by Alliance
Ok. I think many great people express similar ideas, but I don't necessariyl believe it to be a causal relationship.

I also don't trust the Bible to be historically accurate. The historical record surrounding Muhammad, Siddartha, and others makes them more realistic beings.

There were rumors that in his personal journeys through the desert, Jesus Christ actually learned a whole LOT from the far East...

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Because similarities are just too great to be coincidental, in what they bought thought.

Just a personal belief.

I think that intrinsic truths exist in behavioral propriety. Given this, the similarities may be due to basic truths of proper behavior, not necessarily to knowledge of other teachings.

Originally posted by Alliance
Ok. I think many great people express similar ideas, but I don't necessariyl believe it to be a causal relationship.

I also don't trust the Bible to be historically accurate. The historical record surrounding Muhammad, Siddartha, and others makes them more realistic beings.




Study the stories surrounding these individuals, many events are similar in level of improbability.

Originally posted by Regret



Study the stories surrounding these individuals, many events are similar in level of improbability.

You cannot ignore the fact however that Jesus went on a personal journey, and that he had contact with people from the far East...

The people in the Far East who had influence from Buddhism possessed the "love thy neighbor" philosophy way before Jesus preached it...

I am by no means discreditting Jesus, only trying to remind you that he is a HUMAN BEING and is subject to being influenced as well....

Originally posted by Regret



Study the stories surrounding these individuals, many events are similar in level of improbability.

But there is more concrete evidence of their actual existance. They were histoorical figures, whether you buy into their divine nature or not.

Originally posted by Alliance
But there is more concrete evidence of their actual existance. They were histoorical figures, whether you buy into their divine nature or not. Historically existing figures yes, but as to them being "more realistic beings" than Jesus, this is not true. They are all just as realistic as the next.

No I disagree. At least we can tell that Siddarth and Muhammad were based on one historical figure.

Originally posted by Alliance
No I disagree. At least we can tell that Siddarth and Muhammad were based on one historical figure. I doubt that in less than a century people would have forgotten a figure as monumental as Jesus as described in the New Testament. Given this, early Jewish converts to Christianity that lived in the area that Jesus taught would be evidence of his existence, unless you are claiming that there were no Christians until at the earliest somewhere close to one hundred years later. It would be illogical to believe that those in the area would be Christian if some person named Jesus did not exist, regardless of the accuracy of Biblical claims.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Muhammed is a terrorist....

Jesus is a hypocrit...

And Buddha is fat.....


I dislike fat hypocritical terrorists.....

Muhammed preached peace

Jesus didn't do anything he said not to do

Buddha probably wasn't fat

I hate them too

Originally posted by Council#13
Muhammed preached peace

no2

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
no2

Are you sure? Islam is about peace. Unless we're talking about the wrong Muhammed here!

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Because similarities are just too great to be coincidental, in what they bought thought.

Just a personal belief.

Apparently the Bible predicts Mohammed......the last time I read about it seemed convincing but I have learnt alot since then. Besides there so much other stuff about Islam that even if the Bible did predict Mohammed it would not matter.

Originally posted by Council#13
Are you sure? Islam is about peace. Unless we're talking about the wrong Muhammed here!

According to the Islamic scholar Alliance it does.

Not just according to Alliance

Originally posted by Council#13
Not just according to Alliance

Well people who tend not to know much about it.

Originally posted by Council#13
Are you sure? Islam is about peace. Unless we're talking about the wrong Muhammed here!

Oh, let me guess.

You have never read the Qur'an, but you ''hear about it'', you don't know what a ''Hadith'' and ''Sunnah'' are, you don't know basic pre-islamic history of Arabia, which brought about Muhammad, you don't know any of the history involving Muhammad nor what he did, nor what he preached.

I bet you don't know amongst killing between 600 to 900 Jews personaly, he married a 9 year old girl when he was 54.

But the TV told you Islam is a religion of peace, so it must be true.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Oh, let me guess.

You have never read the Qur'an, but you ''hear about it'', you don't know what a ''Hadith'' and ''Sunnah'' are, you don't know basic pre-islamic history of Arabia, which brought about Muhammad, you don't know any of the history involving Muhammad nor what he did, nor what he preached.

I bet you don't know amongst killing between 600 to 900 Jews personaly, he married a 9 year old girl when he was 54.

But the TV told you Islam is a religion of peace, so it must be true.

No, actually. None of that's true, oddly enough (about where I heard these things) When did he kill 600-900 Jews?

Originally posted by Council#13
No, actually. None of that's true, oddly enough (about where I heard these things) When did he kill 600-900 Jews?

North Arabia was predominately Jewish at the time. Medina, who is now Islamic second holiest city was actually Jewish.

He killed all men of the tribe of Banu Qurayza. You can google it, it will give you more info.

Its not western propaganda, I promise you. Its Arabian history.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
North Arabia was predominately Jewish at the time. Medina, who is now Islamic second holiest city was actually Jewish.

He killed all men of the tribe of Banu Qurayza. You can google it, it will give you more info.

Its not western propaganda, I promise you. Its Arabian history.

shock What a dick. You say he did this personally?

Originally posted by Council#13
shock What a dick. You say he did this personally?

Dug out trenches in the market, and beheaded them as they were being deported. The bodies stayed in the trenches i think...can't recall.

Some people say that there were 600 - 700 Jews, but others put up the figure as high as 800 or 900.

You can never know for sure...

Anyway, Muhammad was a great warlord, but not a good prophet.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Dug out trenches in the market, and beheaded them as they were being deported. The bodies stayed in the trenches i think...can't recall.

Some people say that there were 600 - 700 Jews, but others put up the figure as high as 800 or 900.

You can never know for sure...

Anyway, Muhammad was a great warlord, but not a good prophet.

Oooh. I thought you meant he took a scimitar and looped off each head Cause that would've taken days. Hitler was worse, but of course we all know that

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Buddha wins then....

Christianity has failed to promote equal rights, or if it has done so, has only had minimum effects...

I am sure Jesus meant well, because his teachings were great, but apparenly his voice was not powerful enough to be immune to corruption...


Buddha's life , philosophy/teachings and practice are indeed great. The wisdom of Buddhism is like a sea in which all rivers and streams flows to it the deepest ocean...

Originally posted by mahasattva
Buddha's life , philosophy/teachings and practice are indeed great. The wisdom of Buddhism is like a sea in which all rivers and streams flows to it the deepest ocean...

Did he say that, or did you? Just curious

Originally posted by Council#13
Did he say that, or did you? Just curious

Yes, Buddhism contains the vast arrays of sutras(buddha's teachings) which offers 84,000 Dharma(truth) gates by which anyone can reach the summit of wisdom. Buddhism has something for every religious disposition.

I see

Originally posted by Council#13
I see

So, do u understand what i say then??

Originally posted by mahasattva
So, do u understand what i say then??

He just wanted to know if you wear quoting Buddha.

Originally posted by mahasattva
Yes, Buddhism contains the vast arrays of sutras(buddha's teachings) which offers 84,000 Dharma(truth) gates by which anyone can reach the summit of wisdom. Buddhism has something for every religious disposition.

Honestly, any philosophy can cantribute to any other.