Is Jesus a Buddhist?

Originally posted by Regret
...The question, given this idea that I hold that God inspired much of Buddhism, is whether or not Buddhists are Christian. Or rather, since the Mormon belief system differs so greatly from much of mainstream Christianity, and the fact that I think many Christians would disagree with the idea that the Buddha was divinely inspired, are Buddhists a form of Mormon.

I think because the name Buddhist came before Mormon, the question should be, are Mormons a form Buddhism? 😉

Two of the definitions of Christian

3 Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4 Showing a loving concern for others; humane.

Except that those definitions aren't used in the way you want to use them. This is what happens when people use dictionaries without some sort of context (which I assume is how you came by those).

Correct:
"Hey, Jones, I know you're falling on hard times, so I brought some food to help you out."
"Well thank you Jack, that's very Christian of you."

Those are definitions 3 and 4 instead of 1 and 2 for a good reason.

Realistically, Jesus embodied almost none of the philosophical elements of Buddhism. Moral aspects, maybe.

Originally posted by Gregory
Except that those definitions aren't used in the way you want to use them. This is what happens when people use dictionaries without some sort of context (which I assume is how you came by those).

Correct:
"Hey, Jones, I know you're falling on hard times, so I brought some food to help you out."
"Well thank you Jack, that's very Christian of you."

Those are definitions 3 and 4 instead of 1 and 2 for a good reason.

Realistically, Jesus embodied almost none of the philosophical elements of Buddhism. Moral aspects, maybe.

What do you think the "philosophical elements of Buddhism" are?

Yes, I would pose the same question to Gregory as Shaky, so I can develop further on the subject.

Originally posted by Gregory
Except that those definitions aren't used in the way you want to use them. This is what happens when people use dictionaries without some sort of context (which I assume is how you came by those).

They are used in the way I use them by me. I believe that definitions 3 and 4 are more accurate than the statement of belief in Christ. I have met many "Christians" that I don't believe fit the definition. I have also met many non-Christians that I view as Christian more so than many Christians

Originally posted by Gregory
Realistically, Jesus embodied almost none of the philosophical elements of Buddhism. Moral aspects, maybe.

You really need to study Buddhism, Christ's teachings support, or perhaps a better term would be are in line with, much of Buddhist teachings.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I think because the name Buddhist came before Mormon, the question should be, are Mormons a form Buddhism? 😉

Or perhaps the names are irrelevant, and manner of behavior and conduct are the more important portion of the question, at least if there is an eternal truth.

Originally posted by Regret
Or perhaps the names are irrelevant, and manner of behavior and conduct are the more important portion of the question, at least if there is an eternal truth.

I was just being persnickety. 😄

Originally posted by Regret
You really need to study Buddhism, Christ's teachings support, or perhaps a better term would be are in line with, much of Buddhist teachings.

I have studied Buddhism, briefly. And I disagree with you. It's as simple as that.

In some ways, they're even polar opposites. The goal of Buddhism is to lose your individual self in nervana; Christians want to extend their individual selves for eternity in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Originally posted by Gregory
I have studied Buddhism, briefly. And I disagree with you. It's as simple as that.

In some ways, they're even polar opposites. The goal of Buddhism is to lose your individual self in nervana; Christians want to extend their individual selves for eternity in the Kingdom of Heaven.

I thing you are getting Mahayan and Theravada confused with each other.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I was just being persnickety. 😄

I know 😉

Originally posted by Gregory
I have studied Buddhism, briefly. And I disagree with you. It's as simple as that.

In some ways, they're even polar opposites. The goal of Buddhism is to lose your individual self in nervana; Christians want to extend their individual selves for eternity in the Kingdom of Heaven.

If Nirvana is a state of ultimate love, then Christians believe that they should lose their individual self in the love of others, same concept. Heaven should not be the goal of Christian religion, love of others is the goal, heaven just happens to be the place we go if we achieve that.

Originally posted by Regret
If Nirvana is a state of ultimate love, then Christians believe that they should lose their individual self in the love of others, same concept. Heaven should not be the goal of Christian religion, love of others is the goal, heaven just happens to be the place we go if we achieve that.

Actually I disagree with that, i believe that heaven should ultimately be the goal. All of our moral decisions should be based on trying to go to heaven. Obviously there is more to life than just only trying to get into heaven, but it shoudl ultimately be our goal over everythign else because if you live your life to go to heaven then love and everything else will come naturally.

Originally posted by gordomuchacho
Actually I disagree with that, i believe that heaven should ultimately be the goal. All of our moral decisions should be based on trying to go to heaven. Obviously there is more to life than just only trying to get into heaven, but it shoudl ultimately be our goal over everythign else because if you live your life to go to heaven then love and everything else will come naturally.

Wrong. John was praised by Christ for his desire to aid others in getting to heaven at the expense of his more delayed entrance. Also, the commandments were love God, and second love others. Desire for self to enter heaven is supported by the first, but does nothing for the second. Loving others and God will end in one getting to heaven, there is no way around that, in fact my belief is that an individual cannot get into heaven without these two.

1 Jn. 4: 7, 11-12
7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
• • •
11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.
12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

A person cannot have the Holy Spirit if we do not love one another.

1 Jn. 3:11, 16-24
11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
17 But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?
18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.
20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.
22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

Once again trying to get to heaven is not mentioned. Loving God and others is the only means by which one can get into heaven.

Rom. 13: 8
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

The law is only fulfilled in us if we love others.

Gal. 5: 13
13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

More mention of loving others.

1 Thes. 3:12-13
12 And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you:
13 To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.

We are told that for us to love one another is Christ's intent to the end that we may be held blameless before god.

1 Peter 1:22-23
22 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

The only method to become born again is through unfeigned love of others.

2 Jn. 1:5
5 And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another.

It is the commandment from the beginning. And which commandment was in the beginning? The Word of God, which Christians believe to be Christ, thus Christ is defined as love, one for another.

If you live your life to love, then heaven and everything else will come naturally. If you love truly, you are on the path to heaven. If you try to get to heaven, you are being selfish which selfishness is contrary to the word of God.

Originally posted by Regret
Two of the definitions of Christian

3 Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4 Showing a loving concern for others; humane.

I would say that a Buddhist that lives his religion well, fits the Christian term.

I believe that from a Buddhist perspective Jesus could be considered to be a believer in many of the philosophical concepts found in Buddhism. I also believe that Buddhism was divinely inspired, so Christ, given my belief in his divine nature, would be the pinnacle of Buddhism for me.

The question, given this idea that I hold that God inspired much of Buddhism, is whether or not Buddhists are Christian. Or rather, since the Mormon belief system differs so greatly from much of mainstream Christianity, and the fact that I think many Christians would disagree with the idea that the Buddha was divinely inspired, are Buddhists a form of Mormon.

The word Buddhism or Buddhist is nowhere in the Bible. Jesus never once mentioned anything about any other religion. Jesus said that He spoke the words of God (His Father) and not even once did He talk about nirvana etc. Besides Jesus pre-existed all Buddahs any way so if Buddhism was the way to attain salvation from sin so that we could go to where God is, then Jesus would have told us. Jesus and a Buddah are day and night different. Jesus is God; Jesus is Creator; Jesus is God in human flesh; Jesus came to save humanity from their sins; Jesus was crucified (He did not practice Buddhist customs); Jesus body was placed in a sepulcher (tomb); Jesus was resurrected by God (Buddhist don't believe in God, right?); Jesus is the only (and I loath and am reluctant to use this term) "religious" figure to ever rise from the dead. I hate to associate Jesus with religion because He and religion are two separate things. Nevertheless, all of the other religious ring-leaders bones are still buried.

John 1:1-3, 10, 14
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

These verses are referring to Jesus the Christ. I just wanted to substantiate the fact that Jesus has always existed. Thus Jesus pre-existed all Buddahs including the religion of Buddism. In fact Jesus pre-xisted all religions for that matter. He was there in the Beginning (i.e., before time, the universe, the earth, etc.)

I just want Jesus to be "buddhist" so he can be a pagan god.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
This was an interesting page I found one night. So I thought I would share it with you.

Is Jesus a Buddhist?

No. Buddha himself said that his disciples and anyone else following his teaching should not have to call themselves by any label or name - he said that there are many Buddha's out there who are not Buddhists.

Jesus died a Jew, just like Buddha died a Hindu.

We should not have to identify ourselves with any label, then we are not following the principles of Buddhism anyway.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The word Buddhism or Buddhist is nowhere in the Bible. Jesus never once mentioned anything about any other religion. Jesus said that He spoke the words of God (His Father) and not even once did He talk about nirvana etc. Besides Jesus pre-existed all Buddahs any way so if Buddhism was the way to attain salvation from sin so that we could go to where God is, then Jesus would have told us. Jesus and a Buddah are day and night different. Jesus is God; Jesus is Creator; Jesus is God in human flesh; Jesus came to save humanity from their sins; Jesus was crucified (He did not practice Buddhist customs); Jesus body was placed in a sepulcher (tomb); Jesus was resurrected by God (Buddhist don't believe in God, right?); Jesus is the only (and I loath and am reluctant to use this term) "religious" figure to ever rise from the dead. I hate to associate Jesus with religion because He and religion are two separate things. Nevertheless, all of the other religious ring-leaders bones are still buried.

Don't get hung up on words. The names of things do not matter. If you study what Jesus said and what Buddha said, there are a lot of similarities in concepts.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Don't get hung up on words. The names of things do not matter. If you study what Jesus said and what Buddha said, there are a lot of similarities in concepts.

I think it's safer then to say that Buddha was Buddha and Jesus was Jesus. A=A and B=B.

It doesn't really matter to me though. I think whatever you want to call someone, be that Buddhist or Christian, what matters is that everone had something usefull to say.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The word Buddhism or Buddhist is nowhere in the Bible. Jesus never once mentioned anything about any other religion. Jesus said that He spoke the words of God (His Father) and not even once did He talk about nirvana etc. Besides Jesus pre-existed all Buddahs any way so if Buddhism was the way to attain salvation from sin so that we could go to where God is, then Jesus would have told us. Jesus and a Buddah are day and night different. Jesus is God; Jesus is Creator; Jesus is God in human flesh; Jesus came to save humanity from their sins; Jesus was crucified (He did not practice Buddhist customs); Jesus body was placed in a sepulcher (tomb); Jesus was resurrected by God (Buddhist don't believe in God, right?); Jesus is the only (and I loath and am reluctant to use this term) "religious" figure to ever rise from the dead. I hate to associate Jesus with religion because He and religion are two separate things. Nevertheless, all of the other religious ring-leaders bones are still buried.

Very few of the words in an English Bible are words that were in the original text. They are translations of the original words into words that those speaking English could understand, they are not the words that were originally written.

The term Buddha defined is:

One who has achieved a state of perfect spiritual enlightenment.

I would say that Jesus fits this definition of a Buddha. Thus Christ is a Buddha, by definition.

The use of the term Buddha was not used in the translating of the Bible, but it is a term that could have been used accurately had the translators felt the desire to use the term.

You need to understand that the language that you read in the Bible is not God's language, it is a construct of man to aid in communication. If the Bible is translated into Arabic the term God is translated to Allâh, fact. The term Allâh is the Arabic translation for the English word God. Your chick tracts attack this out of hand, and by doing so show their lack of intelligent research and study.

Allâh is the Arabic language word referring to "God", "the Lord" and, literally according to the Qur'an, to the "God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" in the Abrahamic religions. It does not mean "a god", but rather "the Only God", the Supreme Creator of the universe, and it is the main term for the deity in Islam. Do you disagree with the fact that the term God means the same as the term Allâh? If you do then you are denying that the term God means the same as the term Allâh. I believe that the term Allâh is a more accurate term by definition than the term God, as it has a more narrow and more Biblically accurate definition.

The term Buddha is a similar term, the meaning is what is important when a term is used, but the term is not, it is only a man made construct to allow you to understand what is being said.