Why do Christians fail so miserably at promoting the faith?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I do not try to pass off other people's writings as my own. I just don't want my comments moderated because of the 3 paragraph rule (you're technically only allowed to quote 3 paragraphs from an external source; moderators don't always apply this rule strictly, thankfully, but I've had comments moderated, where all the important paragraphs were deleted and only the 3 first paragraphs were left; losing the main point of the article; this happened especially on the origins&creationism forum when discussing details about the fossil record, where all the crucial information was lost from my commentary).

But you know this, cause I've explained it to you before. You're making a mountain out of a mole hill in order to paint something negative on me (possibly because you don't like the content of my commentary, you don't want to hear it, or possibly others to take it seriously). Just let it go. I'm not going to change the habit when I think there's a risk that a portion will be deleted by a moderator. When I think there's little risk of that, I always show it's from an external source and link the source (it seems that on the Religion&Theology forum it's more OK to use considerably more than 3 paragraphs). Sometimes when the article consists of more than 1 page, I will link the next page, so that those who will click and look a bit beyond the page that shows up, they can see where the stuff in my comment came from. This is what I did on page 3 in this thread when I used the following link:

The bishop did not provide an answer to his question. But there is an answer. You will find it in the following article:

Who Are Preaching the Good News?

That first line was the last line on the preceding page for that link. The whole 2 comments leading up to that link are from the preceding page, but if I put all that in an external box, not only is it less likely to be read attentively, the risk the whole comment will be moderated goes up substantially. But I don't want to deprive people of the bigger more detailed picture and only stick to 3 paragraphs, because the opposite of this happens a lot in this world:

The “understanding heart is one that searches for knowledge”; it is not satisfied with a mere superficial view but seeks to get the full picture. (Pr 15:14)

Source: Understanding (Insight on the Scriptures)

Most people in this world have been conditioned to be content with a superficial view, not getting to the bottem of a matter (this widespread conditioning is a standard propaganda technique, it involves the notion of 'keeping people in the dark', and giving people the impression that it's fine to be there, and that they're not in the dark, see Isaiah 5:20,21). Cause the Devil is in the details, as they say. Or should I say the truth is in the details, and the Devil does not want you to know these details to acquire an understanding heart. Enter anti-spam regulations such as the 3 paragraph rule to snuff those details out, while the moderator doesn't realize he's using censorship rather than clearing spam. On the Origins&Creationism forum it became clear that all the important most inconvenient facts (for evolutionary myths) were deleted by the moderator on several occasions. A bit too much of a coincidence (as if the people there weren't allowed to know these facts and details).

The same thing happened on another subforum where I shared some crucial warnings about nationalism and patriotism. Whole comments were lost that could have woken up some people to these dangers. The promotion of nationalism and patriotism is one of Satan's main tools in his brainwashing kit, especially religious people are susceptible to these threats to their minds, heart and thinking. As demonstrated by the Buddhist nationalists in Myanmar for example, riling up other Buddhists to commit atrocities towards the Rohingya people (muslims).

Besides, it's such a waste of time when you've spent half an hour collecting all the crucial details about a subject from different articles sometimes, and then have a moderator coming along and removing all the most important bits in less than a minute, leaving only the introduction to the subject (or sometimes nothing at all), keeping people in the dark about these (cause they won't click the link to the article or articles if available, the conditioning described at 2 Timothy 4:3,4 kicks in again, they don't want to hear it, so they're definitely not gonna look for it; they would much rather waste their time and minds on the millions of useless or misleading comments on ATS that tickle their ears because it conforms with what they want to believe or think about, just what they wanted to hear, as per their conditioning and indoctrination by the ruler of this world and god of this system of things, whose views, teachings and way of thinking or doing things is most popular in this world and on ATS).

“For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.” (2 Timothy 4:3,4)

“So we should no longer be children, tossed about as by waves and carried here and there by every wind of teaching by means of the trickery of men, by means of cunning in deceptive schemes.” (Ephesians 4:14)

“Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;” “We have much to say about him, and it is difficult to explain, because you have become dull in your hearing. For although by now* [Lit., “in view of the time.”] you should be teachers, you again need someone to teach you from the beginning the elementary things of the sacred pronouncements of God, and you have gone back to needing milk, not solid food. For everyone who continues to feed on milk is unacquainted with the word of righteousness, for he is a young child. But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their powers of discernment* [Or “their perceptive powers.”] trained to distinguish both right and wrong.” (Col 2:8; Hebrews 5:11-14)

“However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron.”(1 Timothy 4:1,2).

Knowledge (Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 2)

...
Knowledge (gno'sis) is put in a very favorable light in the Christian Greek Scriptures. However, not all that men may call “knowledge” is to be sought, because philosophies and views exist that are “falsely called ‘knowledge.’” (1Ti 6:20) ...
... Thus Paul wrote about some who were learning (taking in knowledge) “yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge [...] of truth.” (2Ti 3:6, 7)

“... having an appearance of godliness but proving false to its power and from these turn away. From among these arise men who slyly work their way into households and captivate weak women loaded down with sins, led by various desires, always learning and yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge of truth.” (2Ti 3:5-7)

“Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called ‘knowledge.’ By making a show of such knowledge, some have deviated from the faith.

May the undeserved kindness be with you.” (1Ti 6:20,21)

...How does God view the “wisdom” offered by human philosophy?

1 Cor. 1:19-25: “It is written: ‘I will make the wisdom of the wise men perish, and the intelligence of the intellectual men I will shove aside.’ Where is the wise man? Where the scribe? Where the debater of this system of things? Did not God make the wisdom of the world foolish? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through its wisdom did not get to know God, God saw good through the foolishness [as it appears to the world] of what is preached to save those believing. . . . Because a foolish thing of God [as the world views it] is wiser than men, and a weak thing of God [as the world may see it] is stronger than men.” (Such a viewpoint on God’s part is certainly not arbitrary or unreasonable. He has provided in the Bible, the most widely circulated book in the world, a clear statement of his purpose. He has sent his witnesses to discuss it with all who will listen. How foolish for any creature to think that he has wisdom greater than that of God!)

Source: Philosophy (Reasoning From the Scriptures)

“Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,
Those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,
Those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Woe to those wise in their own eyes
And discreet in their own sight!” (Isaiah 5:20,21)

The last time I was in a Christian mega church they had a coffee and donut shop in it. Big screens and a pretty good band.
For me when they no longer ask you to open your Bible but look at the big screen with it Verses of the Lord, I felt like walking out, which I did. Its about pay to be entertained for an hour or two. Just not my cup of tea.
Now I go to a small church and its different, how different, 100%. Not the type of church of my childhood, but its got a few foreigners attending and part of the Sunday school can be in English. But I got to say, I am not hard core like them folks so I watch what my tongue speaks.

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Why do Christians fail so miserably at promoting the faith?

Because faith is not something you need to promote, sell, impose, or force onto anyone. You either believe, or you don't. You can teach someone how to reason, but you cannot teach someone how to believe. You don't teach someone how to dream. You either dream, or you don't. To have faith is like to fall in love: it cannot be taught, imposed, or forced.

That's why.

I should write that down. Those are words that should go in a history book.

a reply to: whereislogic

Here is my issue since A lot of stuff in what is called "The Holy Bible" was stolen from the Pali Canon and or other Buddhist writings? Why call it Christianity or anything else? Public opinion in not really knowing would assume that Muslims have been around with their religion in the B.C.E. but nope 1200 to 1300's C.E. also around the same time most of what people call "The Holy Bible" was "written" the dark ages the Bubonic plague era... Although, the Muslim people much like ox herders have been around a long time herding camels goats etc making cloth and rugs out of them all along religious pilgrimage sites often referred to as the silk road. Their "prophet" took the Plato challenge and holed up in a cave for thirty days and lo and behold he saw the "light" and founded Islam.

Some would point out his personal life flaws like marrying a rich woman using local law to steal her money and then marrying a young lady; but that has nothing really to do with the religion other than their law still seeing women as personal property no better than a slave or at worse a common animal... using the "Old Testament" as part of their cannon for the "chattle" business and als backup since it really couldn't stand on its own. Southeast Asia has a bit of that influence and people try to say Buddha was anti-females; that wasn't the case he knew they had their own path to teach why would he want to get in the way of that teaching? Being male it wasn't in his range to teach for them. He also worked in removing caste or slavery out of india even down to that of animals being slaughtered as sacrifices or burnt offerings... something both Christians and Muslims both share or having in common slaughtering or killing in the name of their god(s) as a sacrifice.

Anagamin means final birth in the "human" realm this is what "The Buddha" announced on his birth here on the human plane of existence... all of the planes and classes of beings open and are everywhere and sometimes all on top of each other when one reaches what is known as "equanimity" it is very easy to become full of amity when such a thing happens however; it is best used as a practice... if you have fourteen to sixteen different types of beings if not more all trying to be on top of you ask you questions steal rob kill and even try to eat you alive at every moment of every day? What are known as the ten perfections? EASY to practice in such a state occurring.

Fast for seven days; it's one of his vows or promises that you and or anybody will arrive at the truth... and of course whatever arises? Don't grasp... karma/kamma will likely make you grasp though, and such a thing cannot be helped.

Here's the thing there are infinite amounts of causes all over the place; even Catholics have two saints for "lost causes" a matron saint and a patron saint. Saying "god" is the "one" cause... Buddhists see that as delusional as there is no one cause; reversing what is called "the wheel" the carkavartins you have a wheel I had a wheel everyone has a wheel... I say had but thats just my personal business. The precepts reverse that wheel of kamma or undo previous bad causes it isn't that haha I'm making good burning away the bad no no no all that bad is still there however the precepts are the unconceived the unturned wheel it spins and tuns backwards... undoing death, undoing old age, undoing sickness, undoing birth etc etc until you so utterly conquer your wheel that it is destroyed... oh you'll get another one sailing in like a cakra of destruction but they want you to use that one for teaching. Pratyekabuddhas don't, they know how to remain free from wheels and do.

It's honestly pointless to teach all anyone needs to learn is already out there... applying it and sticking to it is all it takes nothing else... running around blah blah blah thats not practice thats a chicken with its head cut off not knowing its a chicken and not knowing it has lost its head. But that's my opinion and observation. Hearing doesn't really occur properly even when it is the same language, so teaching? Not something I want to be cursed with. Clarifying butter for lamps already lit? Perhaps is all I really do otherwise I'm poison through and through I'd say pretty much every religious person that is actually done with the religious life is just as poisonous as a viper... however still walking around being religious once done? I honestly call that evil... you're done get out of the way you're muddying the waters.

originally posted by: Crowfoot
a reply to: whereislogic

Here is my issue since A lot of stuff in what is called "The Holy Bible" was stolen from the Pali Canon and or other Buddhist writings?

Perhaps that is merely what you want to believe, it tickles your ears when someone makes a case for that?

Why call it Christianity or anything else?

Make sure you don't get Christianity confused with Christendom. Many of the teachings of Christendom (the religions that claim to be Christian but do not hold to the teachings of the Bible, for example concerning military service, which is incompatible with Christianity but Christendom doesn't teach this, Churches have even been used as recruitment platforms for the armed services), are derived from Pagan religious teachings and philosophies, they trace back to ancient Babylon (even evolutionary philosophies trace back there). From there they spread in all directions, including the East (Medo-Persia and India).

Because of this, it could be that you are under the impression that something found in Buddhist writings, is also part of Christianity or the Bible's teachings, when in fact it is only part of Christendom's teachings, because both Buddhism and Christendom borrowed and adopted teachings from the Babylonian religious philosophers (sometimes modifying it slightly).

The Bible points out this connection to Babylon when it is describing Babylon the Great in the book of Revelation.


I don't remember Jehovah ever being mentioned in Buddhist writings. Or Hindu writings for that matter. Nor have I ever seen an Eastern religion, Christendom, Judaism or Islam, take a united stand (as a religion) against military service. (individual Seventh Day Adventists may from time to time refuse military service, as long as they are not threatened by prison time, at which point I have heard about Seventh Day Adventists in South Korea caving in on their Christian principles of not doing military service; across Western countries, there are SDA's in various militaries, including the US military; the movie Hacksaw Ridge is about a SDA doing military service, grappling with his Christian values. I found it interesting, but also telling when considering the clear description of Christians from the Bible and historical writings below).

“For though we walk in the flesh, we do not wage warfare* [“We do not wage warfare.” Lit., “we are not doing military service.” ...; Lat., non . . . mi·li·ta'mus.] according to what we are in the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful by God for overturning strongly entrenched things. For we are overturning reasonings and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God;” (2 Cor 10:3-5)

“A careful review of all the information available goes to show that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius [121-180 C.E.], no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service.” (The Rise of Christianity, by E. W. Barnes, 1947, p. 333) “It will be seen presently that the evidence for the existence of a single Christian soldier between 60 and about 165 A.D. is exceedingly slight; . . . up to the reign of Marcus Aurelius at least, no Christian would become a soldier after his baptism.” (The Early Church and the World, by C. J. Cadoux, 1955, pp. 275, 276) “In the second century, Christianity . . . had affirmed the incompatibility of military service with Christianity.” (A Short History of Rome, by G. Ferrero and C. Barbagallo, 1919, p. 382) “The behavior of the Christians was very different from that of the Romans. . . . Since Christ had preached peace, they refused to become soldiers.” (Our World Through the Ages, by N. Platt and M. J. Drummond, 1961, p. 125) “The first Christians thought it was wrong to fight, and would not serve in the army even when the Empire needed soldiers.” (The New World’s Foundations in the Old, by R. and W. M. West, 1929, p. 131) “The Christians . . . shrank from public office and military service.” (Editorial introduction to “Persecution of the Christians in Gaul, A.D. 177,” in The Great Events by Famous Historians, edited by R. Johnson, 1905, Vol. III, p. 246) “While they [the Christians] inculcated the maxims of passive obedience, they refused to take any active part in the civil administration or the military defence of the empire. . . . It was impossible that the Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes.”—The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, by Edward Gibbon, Vol. I, p. 416.

See also this comment I made on page 3, as it relates to this topic and gives a clue regarding the question in the thread title. That is, if you interpret "Christians" in that question as referring to the adherents of Christendom (as that seemed to have been the intent of the OP), rather than real Christians following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ, and the early Christians who did not do military service (unlike the adherents of Christendom who profess to be Christians).

a reply to: whereislogic
There's a good documentary called 'Jesus was a Buddhist Monk' on youtube.

Buddha and Christ mean the same...the light. There is only the light..... it's what is ever present 🎁

The light showing up, the manifestation......maya, the movie of life.....the life, the way....is never not here.

There is nothing outside of the light....so there is no separation....so all is one in Christ regardless of belief.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: whereislogic
There's a good documentary called 'Jesus was a Buddhist Monk' on youtube.

Buddha and Christ mean the same...the light. There is only the light..... it's what is ever present 🎁

Ever considered the possibility that that claim is made to make Buddhism more appealing to a Western market? I.e. a marketing ploy?

Did you know that marketing and propaganda are very similar? The same techniques are used to sell something, only the product being sold is different. Ancient Babylon used to be a religious propaganda center from which many religious philosophies spread in all directions. There is also political and/or ideological propaganda, this is what most comes to mind when people think about the term propaganda. The promotion of nationalism and patriotism are examples of ideological propaganda (and they usually have a political overtone to them). And they tend to go hand in hand with religion.

What Obstructs Universal Brotherhood? (Awake!—1981)

IN 1469 C.E. a man named Niccolò Machiavelli was born in Florence, Italy. He wrote a book on politics entitled “The Prince,” using as a model Cesare Borgia, son of Pope Alexander VI. Borgia, according to one historian, was “an artist in ‘power politics,’ using without scruple and remorse such measure of force or fraud as may enable him to extend and secure his conquests.”

The Encyclopædia Britannica says that Machiavelli “founded the science of politics for the modern world.” “Machiavellianism” is now a word meaning the political principle “that any means however lawless or unscrupulous” may be used by a ruler to maintain his power.

Such politics has plagued this 20th century. Wars, coups, corruption, horrible violence and terrorism are all manifestations of it. Politics divides the East from the West. It divides nations, cities (such as Berlin) and even families. Politics is one of the most divisive influences of mankind.

Closely related to such politics and often exploited by political leaders is the spirit of . . .

Nationalism

On this subject an amusing story is told about an army chaplain in Scotland who, at a new military camp, asked for volunteers to convert an old barn into a chapel. In the absence of the chaplain the volunteers painted in large letters above the altar: “Scotland forever and ever.” The surprised chaplain asked them to make the sign a bit more religious. They did. The inscription then read: “Scotland forever and ever. AMEN.”

Scotsmen are known for being very proud of their country. But they are not alone in this. For example, English children, especially in the days when the British Empire was dominant in the world, were fed nationalistic fervor from earliest childhood. They were taught to believe that ‘Britannia Rules the Waves,’ and that the English are a superior nation, blessed by God.

In every nation similar feelings are promoted by politicians who know that a strong nationalistic spirit serves their purposes well. But their purpose may not be in the best interest of people. In an article entitled “Nationalism Is Alien to True Patriotism,” columnist Sydney J. Harris observed: “Nationalism means ‘going along’ with a Hitler or a Stalin or any other tyrant who waves the flag, mouths obscene devotion to the Fatherland, and meanwhile tramples the rights of people.”

Too, as the story of the chapel in Scotland shows, nationalism and religion often go together. Wrote Dr. Robert L. Kahn, a rabbi: “Religion and Nationalism always tend to go hand in hand. In times of war, particularly, . . . ‘For God and Country’ becomes a sort of battle cry. This has always been so. [In World War II] one of the popular songs was the war-whoop of a chaplain, ‘Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition.”’

...

Might that have something to do with 'why adherents of Christendom fail so miserably at promoting their beliefs and opinions'? (I changed the question in the OP a bit to change the focus a bit, cause they're not promoting Christianity, i.e. 'the Christian faith') I recommend considering this question in light of my comment(ary) on page 3, that I linked at the end of my previous comment. And the case made there.

a reply to: whereislogic

Ever considered the possibility that that claim is made to make Buddhism more appealing to a Western market? I.e. a marketing ploy?

No because Jesus was crucified for speaking a new religion ....they said it was blasphemy.

a reply to: whereislogic

No one told me that I was reading the book of "Matthew" and remembered reading the same thing in the Dhammapada went and looked sure enough. I don't sit around and listen to people flap their gums about religion I never have sure I've been to churches etc sat in them with other people for over 14 years but not something I would personally choose to do myself.

But more on the topic; Buddhism gods realizing impermanence and not wanting their kingdoms to fall their glory to fade? Is like the same moment when some movie star says "Don't you know who I am?" Panic sets in how can I keep everything from falling apart? Merit or no merit without practice all sorts of that come to an end... Bodhidharma made that point to an earthly king seeing the kingdom as a heavenly paradise and wanted council on how to keep it or make it last forever... it doesn't matter how high the heaven no matter how much worship how many sons how many daughters etc etc it will fall dependent origination that kingdom did not depend on him... however grasping at it clearly showed he was dependent on it... at that moment he should have apprehended that he wa already in the demons grip mistaking it as a kingdom and him being the ruler... but he didn't.

Seeing those things like verses as true? To myself is irritating as it is just that sort of house or kingdom... others find that validating instead of the fart in the wind that cuts the obvious rot out of it just right.

If you see a cross on the road ride it

originally posted by: Crowfoot
a reply to: whereislogic

No one told me that I was reading the book of "Matthew" and remembered reading the same thing in the Dhammapada went and looked sure enough.

Could you be a bit more specific? Cause the book of Matthew is mostly about Jesus. I don't think Jesus is mentioned in the Dhammapada.

Did you notice that your claim shares some similarities with the claims made in the documentary referred to by Itisnowagain? Which basically argues that Jesus got his teachings from Buddhism (supposedly being a Buddhist monk after all) rather than from his God and Father, Jehovah, as the Bible claims (John 7:16; 8:28; 12:49). Sort of like your claim: "A lot of stuff in what is called "The Holy Bible" was stolen from the Pali Canon and or other Buddhist writings".

I remember an article about another group of people who were very keen on reminding people that their teachings came first (over what was more popular at the time in that area), and even claiming that prominent philosophers and promoters of the teachings that were more popular in that area at the time, were actually disciples of their teachings (the first group I mentioned, the same situation as in that documentary but then in reverse; so sort of like instead of claiming that Jesus was a Buddhist monk, claiming that Buddha was a Christian).

The Apologists—Christian Defenders or Would-Be Philosophers?

...

“Christianity” Becomes a Philosophy

The philosopher Celsus mockingly described Christians as “labourers, shoemakers, farmers, the most uninformed and clownish of men.” This mockery was too much for the apologists to bear. They determined to win over public opinion by resorting to a new tactic. Once rejected, worldly wisdom was now used in the service of the “Christian” cause. Clement of Alexandria, for example, saw philosophy as “true theology.” Justin, though claiming to reject pagan philosophy, was the first to use philosophical language and concepts to express “Christian” ideas, considering this type of philosophy “to be safe and profitable.”

From this point on, the strategy was, not to oppose philosophy, but to make supposed Christian thought a philosophy higher than that of the pagans. “On some points we teach the same things as the poets and philosophers whom you honour, and on other points are fuller and more divine in our teaching,” wrote Justin. Adorned with its new philosophical finery, “Christian” thought now claimed the dignity of old age. The apologists pointed out that Christian books were far older than those of the Greeks and that the prophets of the Bible lived earlier than Greek philosophers. Certain apologists even concluded that the philosophers copied from the prophets. Plato was made out to be a disciple of Moses!

Christianity Distorted

This new strategy led to a mixture of Christianity and pagan philosophy. Comparisons were made between Greek gods and Bible characters. Jesus was compared to Perseus; and Mary’s conception to that of Perseus’ mother, Danaë, who was said to be also a virgin.

Certain teachings were greatly modified. For example, in the Bible, Jesus is called “the Logos,” meaning God’s “Word,” or Spokesman. (John 1:1-3, 14-18; Revelation 19:11-13) Very early on, this teaching was distorted by Justin, who like a philosopher played on the two possible meanings of the Greek word logos: “word” and “reason.” Christians, he said, received the word in the person of Christ himself. However, logos in the sense of reason is found in every man, including pagans. Thus, he concluded, those who live in harmony with reason are Christians, even those who claimed or were thought to be atheists, like Socrates and others.

Moreover, by forcing the tie between Jesus and the logos of Greek philosophy, which was closely linked with the person of God, the apologists, including Tertullian, embarked on a course that eventually led Christianity to the Trinity dogma.* [For further information on Tertullian’s beliefs, see The Paradox of Tertullian.]

The word “soul” appears over 850 times in the Bible, including more than 100 times in its Greek form. It basically refers to mortal, living creatures, either human or animal. (1 Corinthians 15:45; James 5:20; Revelation 16:3) The apologists, however, twisted this Bible teaching by linking it with Plato’s philosophy that the soul is separate from the body, invisible and immortal. Minucius Felix even asserted that belief in the resurrection had its early beginnings in Pythagoras’ teaching of the transmigration of the soul. How far Greek influence had led them from the teachings of the Bible!

...

Seems to be a re-occurring tactic to market or sell your favorite religious teachings or philosophies over the ones you claim are less original, less old, i.e. yours came first and then the others copied or 'stole' ("others", as in, those starting the religious market you want to tap in to, whose adherents you want to make your philosophies, teachings and religious views appeal to by claiming you've got the original teachings and views of what their teachings and views are based on, your version is more authentic so to speak).

Coming back to the claim: "A lot of stuff in what is called "The Holy Bible" was stolen from the Pali Canon and or other Buddhist writings".

To put that into some historical perspective:

Buddhism is based upon the person and teachings of Siddhartha Gautama, who became known as “Buddha” (meaning “Enlightened One”). Siddhartha was born into a royal family in India in the sixth century B.C.E. "Buddhist writings" came later. Wikipedia's page for the Dhammapada talks about "the very source of the Dhammapada in the third century B.C.E."

Most of the Hebrew Scriptures were already completed in the seventh century B.C.E. (the latest books were completed in the fifth century B.C.E.) They contain many prophecies about Jesus, the book of Matthew talks about how Jesus fulfilled them, among other things.

The Hebrew Scriptures make up more than half of the Bible. And what is in the Christian Greek Scriptures is based on it and a continuation of it.

The Bible's main theme is Jehovah God, whose name is used almost 7000 times, the most frequently mentioned name in the Bible. I don't know what the 2nd most frequently mentioned name in the Bible is, but it's probably Jesus, Jehovah's firstborn son. He was the first creation by Jehovah, created as a divine spirit being, an angel, a god/mighty one (those are synonyms where you see a /). And the rest is history as they say (would be a bit too much to get into now).

Both of these individuals are not discussed in ancient Buddhist writings as far as I know (at the very least not by name, which is kinda important for knowing who is being discussed and identification).

a reply to: whereislogic
It's not about what was first.... it's not about copying.....

A more likely explanation, Borg said, is that the similarity in their sayings mirrors the similarities in their experiences. The Buddha, after a six-year religious quest, had an enlightenment experience under the Bo tree; Jesus' quest led him to the wilderness and his spiritual mentor, John the Baptist. Both began renewal movements within their respective, inherited religious traditions - Hinduism and Judaism. And both were given an exalted, even divine status by the communities which grew up around them.

"The similarities of their wisdom teaching may flow out of the similarity of their religious experience," Borg said.

New book looks at parallel sayings of Jesus, Buddha | Oregon State University
today.oregonstate.edu...

There is a lot online about the similarities between Buddha and Jesus.

But if you have stuck with one religion and not been into comparative religion then you will just promote your one religion and not notice how they all point to the same....

Some of their sayings are remarkably similar. Among them:

Buddha: "The avaricious do not go to heaven, the foolish to not extol charity. The wise one, however, rejoicing in charity, becomes thereby happy in the beyond." (Dhammapada 13.11)
Jesus: "If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven." (Matthew 19.21)


Buddha: "Consider others as yourself." (Dhammapada 10.1)
Jesus: "Do to others as you would have them do to you." (Luke 6.31)


Buddha: "Let us live most happily, possessing nothing; let us feed on joy, like radiant gods." (Dhammapada 15.4)
Jesus: "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God." (Luke 6.20)


Buddha: "If anyone should give you a blow with his hand, with a stick, or with a knife, you should abandon any desires and utter no evil words." (Majjhima Nikaya 21.6)
Jesus: "If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also." (Luke 6.29)


Buddha: "During the six years that the Bodhisattva practiced austerities, the demon followed behind him step by step, seeking an opportunity to harm him. But he found no opportunity whatsoever and went away discouraged and discontent." (Lalitavistara Sutra 18)
Jesus: "When the devil had finished every test, he departed from him until an opportune time." (Luke 4.13)

Did you ever see the Eddie Murphy film called "The Golden Child"?

a reply to: whereislogic

A bhikkhu is a bhikkhu is a bhikkhu

otherwise known as a student is a student s a student

when beyond learning high school one leaves high school when one is beyond college they leave college

what they do with that "knowledge" is their responsibility

p.s. cherry picking scripture to fit what you want it to say instead of it standing on it's own to where and whom it belongs is a silly thing to do. It's clearly stated to whom those "books" belong and whose "account" they are giving as a "book". Nothing more nothing less.

miserable spreading the faith? even though Christianity is the largest religion in the world? not sure where your logic comes from...

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: whereislogic
...
Did you ever see the Eddie Murphy film called "The Golden Child"?

Yes.

I've studied the basics, patterns and fruits of many religions. They do have a lot in common. I already mentioned a couple:

- promotion of patriotism and nationalism (and playing on those sentiments)
- involvement with politics and war
- some or many of their adherents do military service, military service is depicted by many of their religious leaders as a good thing, a noble thing to do in service of your country, sometimes they actively take part in recruitment for the armed services* (making arguments like that it transforms "young souls into patriotic citizens and providing them scopes for self-development")
- their conduct often does not match their teachings ("for they say but they do not practice what they say." Mt 23:3)

*: here's a recruitment video made in cooperation with Jain University (Jainism is a branch of Buddhism, I saw an American news report that claimed it was the most peaceful religion in the world, yeah sure):

Not much different than this stuff (except here it's a bit more exaggerated to make a point, and less subtle and cunning as the video above so you don't miss that point; it's what the makers of the video above don't want you to see, realize, or even consider about the propagandistic nature of their video):


What is also noteworthy, is that the religion that is most popular in a country, often supports the actions of the government of that country (including military actions and decisions; and you often hear the same arguments and talking points from both sources).

Religion and the War in Ukraine—What Does the Bible Say? (KEEP ON THE WATCH!)

Consider the following regarding prominent religious leaders and the war in Ukraine:

“The head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, has not said a word against Russian aggression. . . . His Church’s systematic propaganda campaign about Ukraine has been utilised in Putin’s justification for war.”—EUobserver, March 7, 2022.

“Patriarch Kirill . . . has sent his strongest signal yet justifying his country’s invasion of Ukraine—describing the conflict as part of a struggle against sin.”—AP News, March 8, 2022.

“Ukrainian Orthodox Church leader, Metropolitan Epiphanius I of Kyiv, on Monday blessed his people to ‘fight against the Russian invaders’ . . . [He] also stated that killing Russian soldiers isn’t a sin.”—Jerusalem Post, March 16, 2022.

“We [the Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Organizations (UCCRO)] support the Armed Forces of Ukraine and all our defenders, we bless them in their defense of Ukraine from the aggressor, and offer our prayers for them.”—UCCRO * Statement, February 24, 2022. [The UCCRO, or Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Organizations, includes 15 churches representing Orthodox, Greek and Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Evangelical denominations as well as Jews and Muslims.]

What do you think? Should religions that claim to follow Jesus Christ encourage their members to go to war? What does the Bible say?

The history of religion in war

History shows that religion has often condoned, justified, or even promoted war while pretending to work for peace. ...

a reply to: whereislogic
Buddha and Christ are not religions.....both words mean 'the one reality'....the enlightened one (Buddha) and the light (Christ).

Nothing but the Reality is; there is no separate being, no arriving and no being far away. This is seen in true vision; when I experienced it, I saw nothing but Him.
When my Beloved appears, with what eye do I see Him? With His eye not with mine; for no one sees Him except Himself.
Ibn 'Arabi.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I was responding to your remark about "comparative religion". After answering the question about that movie.

I have studied and compared religions quite a lot in my life. When doing this I've seen some significant comparisons, or common threads or patterns in teaching and conduct (the fruits of those religions being similar, or basically the same when it comes to specific subjects such as the examples I pointed out).

They say 'all roads lead to Rome', but all religiously philosophical roads lead to ancient Babylon (if you trace back the origin of these religious philosophies/ideas/beliefs). Remember, I'm using the same type of hyperbole as in the phrase 'all roads lead to Rome', obviously not literally all roads lead to Rome, but at the time of the Roman Empire, most did, in a way. Something similar can be said of religious ideas, teachings and practices connecting back, sometimes via another religious road (and/or a slight modification of the original idea or practice, or one idea or teaching being built upon another, such as reincarnation being built upon the idea that the soul or some spirit part of man survives the death of the physical body, a.k.a. the myth of the immortal soul*), to ancient Babylon. As I discussed on page 5.

*: “Death was a passage to another kind of life.”—The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, p. 556. Also quoted on page 5. That idea lies at the basis of many religious philosophies and teachings concerning an immortal soul, or reincarnation, and even the idea that one can communicate with the spirits of the dead, i.e. the idea of ghosts, which is heavily promoted in the entertainment media. Ghosts don't exist, demons do, which are spirit beings that are currently confined to the earth together with Satan, another spirit being. They like to impersonate dead humans. Cause they can know stuff about the deceased that seems genuine to those who knew the deceased person. Sorry, getting a little side-tracked here with my examples. OK, one last thing, the teaching of hellfire is also built upon the teaching of the immortal soul. And that can lead to this behaviour, conduct (these fruits):

HELLFIRE USED TO JUSTIFY VIOLENCE IN THE MIDDLE AGES: Mary I, queen of England (1553-1558), known as “Bloody Mary” for burning nearly 300 Protestants at the stake, reportedly said: “As the souls of heretics are hereafter to be eternally burning in hell, there can be nothing more proper than for me to imitate the Divine vengeance by burning them on earth.”

Source: What Did Jesus Teach About Hell?

What is the origin of the teaching of hellfire?

In ancient Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs the “nether world . . . is pictured as a place full of horrors, and is presided over by gods and demons of great strength and fierceness.” (The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, Boston, 1898, Morris Jastrow, Jr., p. 581) ... Buddhism, which dates back to the 6th century B.C.E., in time came to feature both hot and cold hells. (The Encyclopedia Americana, 1977, Vol. 14, p. 68) ...

Source: Hell (Reasoning From the Scriptures)

The End of False Religion Is Near!

▪ What is false religion?

▪ How will it end?

▪ How will you be affected?

What Is False Religion?

Are you distressed about crimes committed in the name of religion? Do the warfare, terrorism, and corruption perpetrated by those who claim to serve God offend your sense of justice? Why does religion seem to be at the root of so many problems?

The fault lies, not with all religion, but with false religion. A widely respected religious figure, Jesus Christ, indicated that false religion produces bad works, just as a “rotten tree produces worthless fruit.” (Matthew 7:15-17) What fruit does false religion yield?

False Religion . . .

◼ MEDDLES IN WAR AND POLITICS: “Across Asia and beyond,” says the journal Asiaweek, “power-hungry leaders are cynically manipulating people’s religious sentiments for their own needs.” As a result, the journal warns: “The world threatens to sink into madness.” A prominent religious leader in the United States declared: “You’ve got to kill the terrorists before the killing stops.” His solution? “Blow them all away in the name of the Lord.” By contrast, the Bible says: “If anyone makes the statement: ‘I love God,’ and yet is hating his brother, he is a liar.” (1 John 4:20) Jesus even said: “Continue to love your enemies.” (Matthew 5:44) How many religions can you think of whose members engage in war?

◼ SPREADS FALSE DOCTRINE: Most religions teach that the soul or spirit is some invisible part of a human that survives the death of the physical body. By means of this teaching, many of these religions exploit their members, charging money to pray for departed souls. However, the Bible teaches a different doctrine. “The soul that is sinning​—it itself will die.” (Ezekiel 18:4) “The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5) Jesus taught that the dead will be resurrected​—an unnecessary action if humans had an immortal soul. (John 11:11-25) Does your religion teach that the soul does not die?

...

Christians in the current era have no legitimate leaders and no culture.

They sound more like followers of Karl Marx than God.

They pray and ask God for free stuff, and more free stuff.

Are christians fulfilling their role and duties as christians to deserve blessings?

They don't care about that. They just want their free stuff. Which some might consider shameful. And others might say merely makes them a product of their environment. Which is created and fostered by billionaires and ruling elites.

Their environment which is created by the billionaires and ruling elites, which christians are supposed to reject and not conform to their ways.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

"Promoting faith"?

You make it sound like some sleazy product. Spirituality is not capitalism, you know, it needs no promotion.

You don't have to promote a tree to make its leaves fall; when it's time, they fall naturally. A fresh leaf takes considerable effort to pull off compared to a leaf that's ready to leave the tree. It's the same thing with people; when they are ripe and ready, they will find, embrace and understand spiritualism and spiritual life.

Religions aren't really needed, they're like the lines you need to learn how to write, but once you have learned, you can write better and more freely without the lines. Of course this planet's religions are tainted, corrupted, poisoned and maybe even toxic. They are filled with useless rituals, and priests that don't have a clue of what they're preaching; just repeating the words they don't even understand anymore. Telling about 'losing a life to win a life' without understanding what it means is akin to blasphemy in my opinion.

Churches are dead places for zombies, they have nothing to do with the Living Spirit of the Creator-Universe.

Let them fail at promoting their dead practice sand useless rituals that do not bring them closer to the Divine.

originally posted by: namehere
miserable spreading the faith? even though Christianity is the largest religion in the world? not sure where your logic comes from...

Isn't ISLAM larger? Believers in Christianity and Islam have both done a GOOD JOB in recruiting followers/members.