4 ms·

I think the parent is talking about the people in the "ism" of Buddhism, not the Buddha himself. I think it's similar in Christianity. We have no idea what Chri

I think the parent is talking about the people in the "ism" of Buddhism, not the Buddha himself. I think it's similar in Christianity. We have no idea what Christ believed, but his followers sure have had some regressive attitudes towards women. Also, I'd agree with you that Buddhism itself is not sexist. But many of the practitioners are as sexist as everyone else. We shouldn't assume that just because someone practices a certain religion or spirituality that they are perfect.

otempomores 9y ago
The concept is pure the implementation is flawed fallacy.
icebraining 9y ago
I don't think that's right. Christians do know what Christ believe - it's right there in the Bible. I, as a non-Christian, might be skeptical of that, but believing it is part of the definition of Christian.
- paloaltokid 9y ago
  As a former Christian, I don't think we have any real idea what Christ (the historical figure) actually believed. For instance, I never recall learning that Christ wanted a church to be established with a Vatican, a pope, cardinals, etc. Nor did Christ say anything about going to church on Sunday. Most of the Bible is the Old Testament, which are primarily Jewish religious texts carried over from tradition, and the New Testament is a lot of writing about Christ from his disciples and later followers. But I found in my own study of the Bible that Christ was actually a fairly minor character, in terms of the volume of quotes actually directly attributed to him.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Christ (the historical figure) I'm not a current or ex-Christian, but except for Jehovah's Witnesses, do any current-day Christians believe that Christ is not (also) God himself? And isn't the New Testament the revealed Word of God? How could Christ-the-historical-figure have any opinions different from the ones revealed by God?
    - uhuh234 9y ago
      > do any current-day Christians believe that Christ is not (also) God himself? Yes lots, they are known as Trinitarians. Those that don't believe that Jesus is God incarnate are non-Trinitarians. Without being disrespectful to those that know far more than I, this was basically (simplistically, more or less) the reason for the Schism or the Orthodox Christian Church.
      - icebraining 9y ago
        Yes, I know (although I was actually asking about non-Trinitarians - sorry for the confusing formulation), but my question was if there were any "complete" non-Trinitarians left, except for Jehovah's Witnesses.
        kgwgk 9y ago
        Unitarians.
        neaden 9y ago
        Mormons are non trinitarian.
      - kgwgk 9y ago
        Actually I think they were all Trinitarian and agreed on the nature of Christ. The disagreement was over the origin of the Holy Spirit. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filioque https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filioque
    - paloaltokid 9y ago
      That's a great question and one that I'm not really qualified to answer. It's a huge theological topic, though. In my own life, I don't identify as a Christian anymore but I continue to draw inspiration from Christ's life and the few teachings I felt I could attribute directly to him. Even when I called myself a Christian, I never believed that the Bible was the literal word of God. It's just a book. When I studied for my confirmation my pastor took our group through a lot of interesting history around how the Bible was actually written and put together. There was tons of material that never made it in, so it's at best an approximation of beliefs that people who call themselves Christians have had over time. For what it's worth the history of Christianity is fascinating. There were many schisms and lots of infighting within the Church even prior to the Reformation. I suspect the same may be true within Judaism and Islam - there are "mainstream" sets of beliefs and then people on the fringe. Likely the fringe folks were more tapped in to the real mystical teachings but got shut out.
- psyc 9y ago
  Jesus said a finite number of things in the New Testament, so we have interpretations of some of his thoughts on some things. Every fundamentalist church I attended when I was young was far more enthusiastic about the teachings of Paul.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Right, but Paul's writings is Scripture, which is Word of God, and Christ is God. How could Christ believe anything else?
    - paloaltokid 9y ago
      I think you may be overthinking this a little, or applying philosophical reasoning where it doesn't quite make sense. If someone writes a book about me, that has nothing to do with me, even if the person who writes the book claims to know everything about me. Only I know what I believe and you should only assume I believe the things you hear me say, whether in word or in deed. EDIT: also, Paul never actually met Christ. He came along later after Christ had already been crucified. If you believe Paul's account, Christ revealed himself in a vision. But everyone agrees that Paul and Christ never actually met in person.
  - paloaltokid 9y ago
    Yep! I think modern fundamentalist Christians are actually more disciples of Paul than they are Christ.
- vkou 9y ago
  Most of the Bible has nothing to do with Christ - and the parts that do were written down by people with their own biases.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > I, as a non-Christian, might be skeptical of that, but believing it is part of the definition of Christian. The Bible—specifically the Gospels —contains some stories about what Jesus said and did, but much of the former is explicitly in parable. Ideas about what Jesus thought are largely inferences from that. And any belief about the Bible other than that, understood correctly, it contains no moral error, is neither part of the definition of Christianity, nor a universal doctrine within it (even among the official doctrines of the large subsets.)

otempomores 9y ago

The concept is pure the implementation is flawed fallacy.

icebraining 9y ago

I don't think that's right. Christians do know what Christ believe - it's right there in the Bible. I, as a non-Christian, might be skeptical of that, but believing it is part of the definition of Christian.

paloaltokid 9y ago
As a former Christian, I don't think we have any real idea what Christ (the historical figure) actually believed. For instance, I never recall learning that Christ wanted a church to be established with a Vatican, a pope, cardinals, etc. Nor did Christ say anything about going to church on Sunday. Most of the Bible is the Old Testament, which are primarily Jewish religious texts carried over from tradition, and the New Testament is a lot of writing about Christ from his disciples and later followers. But I found in my own study of the Bible that Christ was actually a fairly minor character, in terms of the volume of quotes actually directly attributed to him.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Christ (the historical figure) I'm not a current or ex-Christian, but except for Jehovah's Witnesses, do any current-day Christians believe that Christ is not (also) God himself? And isn't the New Testament the revealed Word of God? How could Christ-the-historical-figure have any opinions different from the ones revealed by God?
  - uhuh234 9y ago
    > do any current-day Christians believe that Christ is not (also) God himself? Yes lots, they are known as Trinitarians. Those that don't believe that Jesus is God incarnate are non-Trinitarians. Without being disrespectful to those that know far more than I, this was basically (simplistically, more or less) the reason for the Schism or the Orthodox Christian Church.
    - icebraining 9y ago
      Yes, I know (although I was actually asking about non-Trinitarians - sorry for the confusing formulation), but my question was if there were any "complete" non-Trinitarians left, except for Jehovah's Witnesses.
      - kgwgk 9y ago
        Unitarians.
      - neaden 9y ago
        Mormons are non trinitarian.
    - kgwgk 9y ago
      Actually I think they were all Trinitarian and agreed on the nature of Christ. The disagreement was over the origin of the Holy Spirit. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filioque https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filioque
  - paloaltokid 9y ago
    That's a great question and one that I'm not really qualified to answer. It's a huge theological topic, though. In my own life, I don't identify as a Christian anymore but I continue to draw inspiration from Christ's life and the few teachings I felt I could attribute directly to him. Even when I called myself a Christian, I never believed that the Bible was the literal word of God. It's just a book. When I studied for my confirmation my pastor took our group through a lot of interesting history around how the Bible was actually written and put together. There was tons of material that never made it in, so it's at best an approximation of beliefs that people who call themselves Christians have had over time. For what it's worth the history of Christianity is fascinating. There were many schisms and lots of infighting within the Church even prior to the Reformation. I suspect the same may be true within Judaism and Islam - there are "mainstream" sets of beliefs and then people on the fringe. Likely the fringe folks were more tapped in to the real mystical teachings but got shut out.
psyc 9y ago
Jesus said a finite number of things in the New Testament, so we have interpretations of some of his thoughts on some things. Every fundamentalist church I attended when I was young was far more enthusiastic about the teachings of Paul.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Right, but Paul's writings is Scripture, which is Word of God, and Christ is God. How could Christ believe anything else?
  - paloaltokid 9y ago
    I think you may be overthinking this a little, or applying philosophical reasoning where it doesn't quite make sense. If someone writes a book about me, that has nothing to do with me, even if the person who writes the book claims to know everything about me. Only I know what I believe and you should only assume I believe the things you hear me say, whether in word or in deed. EDIT: also, Paul never actually met Christ. He came along later after Christ had already been crucified. If you believe Paul's account, Christ revealed himself in a vision. But everyone agrees that Paul and Christ never actually met in person.
- paloaltokid 9y ago
  Yep! I think modern fundamentalist Christians are actually more disciples of Paul than they are Christ.
vkou 9y ago
Most of the Bible has nothing to do with Christ - and the parts that do were written down by people with their own biases.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> I, as a non-Christian, might be skeptical of that, but believing it is part of the definition of Christian. The Bible—specifically the Gospels —contains some stories about what Jesus said and did, but much of the former is explicitly in parable. Ideas about what Jesus thought are largely inferences from that. And any belief about the Bible other than that, understood correctly, it contains no moral error, is neither part of the definition of Christianity, nor a universal doctrine within it (even among the official doctrines of the large subsets.)