Then it wouldn’t be Heaven.
It does, and this is a whole thread unto itself. There are obviously different interpretations within Christianity about what Heaven is, and there’s all kinds of debate about what it takes to get there. Personally I’m not sure that Christian theology necessarily precludes a selfish motive for Heaven, but there is also a lot of talk about humility, which can’t be faked. Jesus complained a lot about the ostentation of “hypocrites” who boasted about their own piety. He encouraged doing good deeds in secret. I think he was trying to encourage a state of mind which understood the joy of compassion for its own sake, without the expectation of a reward.
To get back to the OP:
This is one of ther reasons I agree with the OP. With so many groups saying theirs is the ONLY true way to something better happening after you die, the odds of having been born into, or selecting later, the one that is right, are slim. Odds are better that they are all wrong.
So might as well live the best you can with the one life you KNOW you have. I don’t think this means live only for the present moment (might live to be 110, after all!) or only for the future (might get hit by a truck today). Also it means that any hope we have for things getting better is for the human beings that we know are here and now to do the best they can with what they’ve got to help each other. Of course if someone can’t do that without believing that he HAS to because some invisible being says so, well, fine. Unfortunately, too many people throughout history have believed that the invisible being tells them to make somebody else miserable or dead.
I’m far from an expert in Buddhism. But I do own a tape of a talk that the Dalai Lama gave in NYC a while back, and it seemed to me that he was very accepting of various beliefs in a god. For example, in discussing meditation, he spoke of fixing your mind on something, and gave the example of Jesus for a Christian, Mohammed for a Muslim, the Torah or the goodness of Moses for a Jew, and so on.
Lotsa good minds weighing in here, with good voice. My main lesson in Buddhist teaching has been to listen, and then practice meditation technique. It’s a hard lesson to learn for western yammering minds. and I’m having to calm my own, here.
For the OP: What the Buddha saw as truth and enlightenment made all petty human judgement rather laughable in perspective. You could say the same of Christ and Mohammed. Petty human arguements are quite small in the scale of things. From what I’ve seen on my time on earth, the truth found is found intraculturally. The most valuable thing I’ve found is that the wisest knowledge happens with an open heart. I’m a hardass skeptic, but have still found that to be truth. Buddhism mediates that precipice for me, will leave it to you to find your own path.
Don’t really know if this helps at all…
Dictionary definition of Buddha
** 1)Founder of Buddhism; worshipped as a god
(c 563-483 BC)**
According to JOHN:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but
have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
What happens, Moslems, Buddhists, Jews etc… etc…??
You guys are dodging the issue! Again!
I could care less about who you believe is running things up there in your dreamy little after life. Buddha or Mickey Mouse doesn’t matter to me! I’m Atheist!! That means I don’t believe in any of this bullshit!
I’m just pointing out how unintelligent it is to base your life on a single [unproven] book (religion) when the entire isle is full of similarly ridiculous fairy tales. Come on! If I had to pick one, I’d at least pick a cool one like “Lord Of The Rings” or something!
Of course, a dictionary is so much more accurate than people who have studied Buddhism as an academic discipline. Makes it so much easier, too, not having to worry about all of the different branches of Buddhism that have developed in the last 2500 years. Boy I’m sure glad you helped clear <i>that</i> up!
:rolleyes:
JOhn.
Who are you talking to? Who’s posted here who thinks that.? We’re just having an objective discussion here about contrasting belief systems. Your dictionary “definition” is way off base, btw. Buddha is not worshipped as god in any of the major sects of Buddhism. Sometimes Buddhas are prayed to (and there’s more than just one, a 'Buddha" is any enlightened individual) for guidance, but they’re more akin to saints than to gods. Siddhartha is definitely not worshipped as a creator god who controls everything and judges everybody. There are some sects who have deified the Buddha, but that deification is incidental. Buddhism is not a religion of worship.
Also, I think you meant “aisle,” not “isle.”
Bully for you that you’re an atheist. We’re all really impressed. We have so few atheists on these boards. :rolleyes:
I’m agnostic, myself. Thankfully, Zen doesn’t require any supernatural beliefs.
How can you hand Diogenes his ass over zen? What is he, thinking too much? (he he Zen humor)
I’ve practiced Zen meditation, a la Suzuki, and I’m a Christian. So what?
Oh, and we don’t choose our faith, we find it in the majority of cases. We research it, and attempt to seek the truth. As for atheists then, have you ever heard of St. Anthony?
Something’s lost and can’t be found
Please, St. Anthony, look around!
That’s Catholic humor. I myself am an evangelical Christian, so we think that’s the work of the Devil. (That’s my humor)
It’s still better than Lord Of The Rings. See, Frodo wasn’t a real person. Siddhartha Gautama and Jesus were.
So, your argument, distilled down is: some religions are mutually incompatible with each other.
WOW!! Like that thought has NEVER occured to anyone here!
Also, while all religions contain elements of mythology, they also contain practical guidelines for living and interacting with other people in a moral way. The same can be said for Atheism, too.
So, what’s your point? Is this really a great debate or are you ragging on Theists for doing something you think is stupid?
But (an agnostic) I would rather say belief is given: by society, by family and so on, in the majority of cases… 
Sweetie, I’m an atheist also, but at least I’ve bothered to learn something about other people’s belief systems. Nothing human is alien to me, and if one wishes to build bridges of understanding between people, one ought to learn about their ethical and cultural assumptions, which naturally entails learning about their religion.
Being an uninformed atheist is just as useless as being an uninformed fundamentalist. In addition, you have much to learn in the art of debate, young Padawan. Using incomplete dictionary definitions to score points is not the way of the Jedi.
Thank you for witnessing.
A trés cool book, written by a devout Roman Catholic, non?
From what I read, I understand that Siddhartha was pretty agnostic when it came to supernatural matters. His attitude appeared to be something along the lines of ‘there may be gods, and there may be heavens. If so, ending up as a god, or ending up in heaven, can actually be a drawback to your spiritual development - because these are highly desireable states, and (presumably) last a long time, you will be bound even more to the wheel of existence, and take longer to work for enlightenment’. [Not a quote by any means]
In other words, dieties and the supernatural may very well exist; they may very well not exist. It doesn’t matter, they are just more distractions anyway. Siddhartha wasn’t interested in distractions, only how to overcome them.
Apparently, when questioned about his theology, Siddhartha one replied by analogizing himself to a doctor on a battlefield: “if you were hit with an arrow, would you ask your doctor where the arrow came from, who made it, and other such trivialities? No, all you would care about is whether the wound could be healed, to make the pain stop”. In the same way, Siddartha was unconcerned about theology - the goal is healing and salvation.
O.K.! I have to learn that Dopers can’t read between the lines!
And love to Hi-Jack! Let’s try it this way!
Would a Buddist monk get into heaven?
According to (your boy) JOHN:
15That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Where do good Budda boys and girls go? Hell!
Oh, now you’re being patently offensive.
:mad:
If you don’t like your thread being hijacked, that’s find and feel free to say so. But that crack crosses so many lines. It had better be a lame attempt at a joke.
JOhn.
PS I want to thank everyone here who has posted constructive and, um, enlightening things about Buddhism and how it compares to western religions. I myself am putting foot on the path of Buddhism (doing a lot of reading and attending a non-denominational sitting group at the local UU church), and have learned quite a lot in this thread. You folk rock!
Why did you even bother to pose the question if you have already assumed the answer? The Christian answer ranges from “Buddhists go to Hell, you betcha” to “God has said that Jesus is the way, but we don’t know all the avenues people may take to Him.”
What exactly are you trying to prove here? That Christians are all unthinking bigots? Some are, and many are not. If you would bother to look up posts by Polycarp, Duck Duck Goose**, and Tiskadekamus**, just to name a few, you would find posts written by intelligent, compassionate Christians who do not believe God condemns anyone to Hell merely for being born in a non-Christian society. Anyone who knows my posting hisotry knows That I have a deep antipathy for Christian homophobia, but even I am not fool enough to believe that all Christians subscribe to any one doctrine.
In any event, I would strongly urge to a) do some reading on the diversity of ideas held by various Christian denominations, b) use less offensive language, and c) take a class on elementary logic.
InLikeFlynn,
It is easy to blast followers of any religion for the bigotry of their co-believers - assuming of course that you take that bigotry as representative.
Look around, however, and you will soon find many thoughtful people sincerely interested in religion, who are the exact opposite of bigots - people who find it interesting to grapple with the issues that have troubled and enlightened humanity ever since there has been such a thing as humanity (and which in many ways are responsible for humanity being what it is, for good or ill).
No-one can force you to believe - or not believe - in any particular religion or philosophy of life. By the same token, you cannot ridicule others into accepting your own. To simply point out that different religions and philosophies are incompatible according to some interpretations proves nothing at all.