yeah, it was...if you look at his original teachings they're extremely close to buddhism. they're were buddhist monastaries in alexandria (egypt, believe it or not). its kinda hard to explain, but his teachings were most likely gnostic (he incorporated his jewish beliefs w/buddhism)) instead of the form of christianity we practice today. some people believe that during the time Jesus is missing in the bible (there is a large amount of time where we cannot account for his location), he might have traveled down to alexandria and studied buddhism.

 

and besides, who gives a f*ck if conservatism goes against christian values. almost everything goes against christian values.

 

99civic_love That is likely correct. Budhism is a 3000+ year old religion, as opposed to the 2000 year old religion of Christianity. Many historical scholars, not religous scholars, believe that Jesus spent about 15 years of study in a Budhist temple. This would account for the time of his life that is not otherwise documented.

Furthermore, Jesus provided us with the Budhist philosiphy of non-attachment, unconditional love and respect for all things, and the concept that everything and everyone is God. This is, in part, the path to enlightenment. Not through simple understanding, but by living it every moment of every day.

Jesus was indeed (in behavior) a great Budhist. This is, in part, what inspired my origional post. Conservative policy and behavior (I guess I should refine that to say extreme right wing conservative) opposes Christian values. However, it opposes Budhist values to even a greater extent.

 

OK fastball, first, I get here once a week, if that. Next, I am not rewriting the old testament. Actually, the old testament has NOTHING to do with the life of Jesus. He was not yet born.

Christianity encompases all religions that follow the teachings of Jesus. Catholicism is only one. As a part of the bigger whole, I am not wrong for using it as an example. Attempting to point out differences between Christianity and Catholicism is is ignorant of world religous structure. It can not be done since one contains the other, they are not mutually exclusive. Further, my post was responding to someone quotting the Pope, which implies Catholic, rather than the larger concept of Christian.

Are you going to tell me that hundreds of thousands of people were not killed in the crusades? When they refused to convert, they were murdered as herotics. This is historical fact. And, not much different than killing Arabs who fail to convert to western values, or killing Americans because we fail to convert to Islamic values. It is all wrong.

"What I have read in school books"- Ha. What school books may you be talking about. Graduate school I hope. I will let you know that I am probably the most educated poster on this site. The letters after my name are B.S. B.A., M.S. M.A. and next year pHD. This does not include certifications. I have over 200 undergraduate college credits, and over 100 graduate school credits. I have at least 1 year of college study in every physical and social science, including religion and spirituality, political science and economics.

As for my twisting peoples quotes. I may have done so mistakenly, but don't even imply that I did so on purpose. However, I believe that his post was edited after my response.

Regarding interpretation. That is exactly what is wrong. Everyone interprets to prove their point and advance their agenda. Truth will never be found in biased interpretation. That is why I do not follow religous interpretation, but only historical fact. Fanatics, those without critical analysis, tend to pick and choose their points of contention. What I am talking about is much more conceptual, macro and universal in value. Not pick and choose of specific micro points. True understanding of how things relate to one another comes from looking through the telescope, not the microscope. The big picture. The life of Jesus is much interpreted. So much so that there are now over 100 secs of Christianity. My original post contains no interpretation. Only the historical facts of the overt behavior of Jesus.

"Those who call themselves Christian" that is exactly my point. There is disjunction between those who call themselves Christian, and those who attempt to behave like Christ. The behavior is what tells the truth, not the stated belief system.

 

I said a few lines will do. When you post this crap no one wants to read the whole book of Joab. Just get to the point, that is if you have one. You make it too easy to antagonize you.

 

toot your own horn much? nobody likes a braggart and that is a pretty broad assumption considering the volume of members we have on this board.

you say all these words, yet time and time again i have seen in posts your use of the "microscope" in attempt to justify what can only be labled as propaganda used to bash the right wing.

seems a little hypocritical to me.

 

if you went to school for so long, then why are you spelling Buddhism wrong?

sorry, i have to be a smartass.



and darling, you probably aren't the most educated person on this site


PS- please shorten your posts. maybe your trying to look intelligent by posting as many unnecessary "big words" as possible, but here, we like to keep it short and sweet. just get to the point next time, ok?

 

Great. You have proven you can remember what you read, pass difficult exams, and follow what you've read like a lemming. Which in your case sound dangerous. You seem to have a skewed sense of reality blinded by all of your education. Common sense goes much farther than degrees in poli-sci and spirituality. If you were an elementary school teacher or high school calculus teacher I think you could have a better sense of the world. Or an engineering degree. Form your own opinions based on what is hapening rather than what people have written over the last 1000 years. You are not the only person I've come in contact with with such issues.

 

:werd: this guy is pissing me off

 

Edited:

OK...whatever blows your dress up. Since this is an internet forum, I had chosen to sit back and not challenge your spelling or grammar. But, since you decided to puff out your chest and let us know how "educated" you are, I had to bite. If you had to pay for your education, I would ask for a refund. Your spelling and grammar are pretty bad. There are mistakes in most of your posts I have seen.

Most of your recent posts are nothing more than cut and pasted rhetoric, and they lack any original thought. Where, in your educational experience, was it taught to simply parrot what you felt you agreed with? Education may mean something to some people (and it seems to mean much to you), but the real world appears to be something that you have yet to grasp. I'll take my college degree and real life experiences over your classroom experience any day.

I would bet, based upon my contacts with "professional" students such as you, that you are at least socially immature, in years, by the number of years that you have spent going to school. Never mind responding - you proved yourself with the post that I quoted above. I hope you didn't hurt yourself when you started pounding your chest so hard.

Oops...I forgot. I'll apologize now for perpetuating this off-topic banter.