Buddhism is superior to Christianity. Here's why

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ismi, just a tad little advice, Heretic is way more nasty than he looks right now.

Hey Heretic, did you read that book about the Buddisht man who become a natonal celebrity who's currently teaching people the facts of what Buddhism is and he explained his life in depth. Sorry I can't remember the name.

Well, in my opinion, every religion have certain advantages over each other religions and also disadvantages under each religions.

Christianity for example acknowledges the existence of good and evil but denys us a 'true' weapon against evil save our faith.

Buddhism on the other hand do not see any evilness but rather degress of suffering that can be mended through 'Nirvana'.

OR I may just be sprouting utter crap here. I'll leave the decisions up to ya'll.
 
Buddha appeals to intellectuals, Judiasm/Christianity/Islam appeals to simpltons.
 
netrox said:
Buddha appeals to intellectuals, Judiasm/Christianity/Islam appeals to simpltons.

That's an overly broad and erroneous assertion. Care to justify it?
 
netrox said:
Buddha appeals to intellectuals, Judiasm/Christianity/Islam appeals to simpltons.


I agree with Teresh. It's a bit silly to force a broad statement about religions which you most likely haven't analyzed in depth or even experienced it.
I know lots of Christian intellectuals. And trust me they're not very friendly to people who force silly statements on religions.

As Teresh stated, care to explore that issue?
 
If you want to see some examples of dogma and intolerance in Buddhism (and this is not a knock at Buddhism, just a statement that it has flawed followers like any other belief system), check out the Wikipedia article on Rajneesh, whose Buddhist cult carried out the first bioterror attack on the US in the 20th century.

Um, Rajneesh is NOT a Buddist cult, it's a cult drawing on several religions, notably Hinduism.

I know no case of Buddhists killing in name of Buddha. Unlike Christians and Muslims, Buddhists don't terrorize or convert people.

That's why I have enormous respect for Buddhism.
 
Good link Liebling,

Found this piece in there...
To the seekers of truth the Buddha says:

Do not accept anything on (mere) hearsay -- (i.e., thinking that thus have we heard it for a long time).
Do not accept anything by mere tradition -- (i.e., thinking that it has thus been handed down through many generations).
Do not accept anything on account of mere rumors -- (i.e., by believing what others say without any investigation).
Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures.
Do not accept anything by mere suppositions.
Do not accept anything by mere inference.
Do not accept anything by merely considering the reasons.
Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions.
Do not accept anything merely because it seems acceptable -- (i.e., thinking that as the speaker seems to be a good person his words should be accepted).
Do not accept anything thinking that the ascetic is respected by us (therefore it is right to accept his word).

The above has everything to do with Buddism. Nothing with Christianity.
 
Im a little bit familiar with buddhism and I believe its the person choice to choose what religion he/she wants to believe in. No religion is better than the other one. Yes, there are extreme offshoots of every religion on earth becuz there are always a few fanatics who know everything and try get people to follow their way.
 
Um, Rajneesh is NOT a Buddist cult, it's a cult drawing on several religions, notably Hinduism.

I know no case of Buddhists killing in name of Buddha. Unlike Christians and Muslims, Buddhists don't terrorize or convert people.

That's why I have enormous respect for Buddhism.

It draws on several religions, yes, including Buddhism. Sorry, that should've been clearer. My point was that anyone can claim the mantle of a religion, can commit violent acts in the name of their beliefs. You can argue that Rajneesh's ideas aren't Buddhist, but the same could be said of, say, Eric Rudolph and Christianity (or, for that matter, Fred Phelps and Christianity).
 
My point was that anyone can claim the mantle of a religion, can commit violent acts in the name of their beliefs. You can argue that Rajneesh's ideas aren't Buddhist, but the same could be said of, say, Eric Rudolph and Christianity (or, for that matter, Fred Phelps and Christianity).

Indeed... See Wiki:No true Scotsman
 
From this website:

About Buddhism
The greatest achievement is selflessness.
The greatest worth is self-mastery.
The greatest quality is seeking to serve others.
The greatest precept is continual awareness.
The greatest medicine is the emptiness of everything.
The greatest action is not conforming with the worlds ways.
The greatest magic is transmuting the passions.
The greatest generosity is non-attachment.
The greatest goodness is a peaceful mind.
The greatest patience is humility.
The greatest effort is not concerned with results.
The greatest meditation is a mind that lets go.
The greatest wisdom is seeing through appearances.

Atisha (11th century Tibetan Buddhist master)
 
If you meant that neither the buddhist nor the christian can decide their religion is superior to the other, then i agree. However, i am not speaking as a buddhist, but as a thinker, a philosopher. One of the requirements in philosophy is to judge concepts objectively.

I don't think all religions are equal, which means there is an objective standard to judge their merits, based on their philosophical committments and the evidence of psychology and social history.
How is it objective to claim buddisim is superior? At the end of the day, this is just your opinion which you are indeed entitled to. It doesn't mean it's correct. This is a sticky subject and my personal opinion is that any human is capable of achieving inner peace. You don't have to be of any specific religon to accomplish this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top