Abrahamic religions are the religions of violence (Buddhist, hell, church)

[FunkyMonk]

Originally Posted by elwill

i think that you used the worng words
you said the these religions are religion of sword , you didn't say that followeres of religion used violence

now you say that your personal opinion is that Jesus Christ brought a message of love and peace to the world , which contradict your statment " religion of violence"

There is no contradiction.

I think that Jesus Christ himself was a true mystic who bought a message of love and peace. So I think that Christianity can be a righteous path if it is practiced in a proper way.

I think Jesus was far, far ahead of any of his disciples, and many of them were bewildered and confused by Jesus' abilities.

After his death, when his legacy became deeply entrenched in the Christian religion, that is when Christianity became a religion of violence and intolerance.

I think Jesus brought a beautiful message, and this message was not understood by some of the fools around him, and was taken out of context and misunderstood. And much of this misunderstanding exists to this day.

And now, "Christianity" seems to me, to be very different than what Christ was actually teaching 2000 years ago.

When I spoke of Christianity, I was talking about where the religion went after Christ's death. When I said that Abrahamic religions are religions of violence. I'm talking about the state of these religions today and throughout their history. Not in their original inceptions.

[elwill]

Originally Posted by FunkyMonk

There is no contradiction.

I think that Jesus Christ himself was a true mystic who bought a message of love and peace. So I think that Christianity can be a righteous path if it is practiced in a proper way.

I think Jesus was far, far ahead of any of his disciples, and many of them were bewildered and confused by Jesus' abilities.

After his death, when his legacy became deeply entrenched in the Christian religion, that is when Christianity became a religion of violence and intolerance.

I think Jesus brought a beautiful message, and this message was not understood by some of the fools around him, and was taken out of context and misunderstood. And much of this misunderstanding exists to this day.

And now, "Christianity" seems to me, to be very different than what Christ was actually teaching 2000 years ago.

When I spoke of Christianity, I was talking about where the religion went after Christ's death. When I said that Abrahamic religions are religions of violence. I'm talking about the state of these religions today and throughout their history. Not in their original inceptions.

i have the same beliefs as you about the original teaching
i just tried to show you how the misunderstanding can arise

[bluepacific]

Originally Posted by FunkyMonk

Christianity, Islam and Judaism.

The religions of the sword, gun and bullet.

The religions of murder, death and violent takeover.

The Sunday Leader Online

TamilNet: 05.09.99 Monks and soldiers trod war road together


LANKALIBRARY FORUM • View topic - Buddhist soldiers?


Buddhist Monks Lead Thai Soldiers


"Review of Buddhists, War and Nationalism" A sacrificing of Chinese Buddhists Ethics for Nationalism against Japanese Buddhist Aggressions.
http://www.buddhistethics.org15/jessup-review.pdf

The religious state of Buddhism today

[Reverend1111]

Originally Posted by FunkyMonk

There is no contradiction.

I think that Jesus Christ himself was a true mystic who bought a message of love and peace. So I think that Christianity can be a righteous path if it is practiced in a proper way.

I think Jesus was far, far ahead of any of his disciples, and many of them were bewildered and confused by Jesus' abilities.

After his death, when his legacy became deeply entrenched in the Christian religion, that is when Christianity became a religion of violence and intolerance.

I think Jesus brought a beautiful message, and this message was not understood by some of the fools around him, and was taken out of context and misunderstood. And much of this misunderstanding exists to this day.

And now, "Christianity" seems to me, to be very different than what Christ was actually teaching 2000 years ago.

When I spoke of Christianity, I was talking about where the religion went after Christ's death. When I said that Abrahamic religions are religions of violence. I'm talking about the state of these religions today and throughout their history. Not in their original inceptions.

I believe the same way you do and I feel that most christians will not step outside of their boxes because of fear. They don't want to be told they have been led by false teachers. I'm not saying the bible is totally wrong at all, only some of it. There are some great teachings in there. The NT has been misinterpreted because the apostles were not very well educated at the time. They didn't understand The Masters teachings until pentacost and then they didn't understand them fully. They didn't even write their stories until long after The Masters death.
The OT was written at a time when people were not very spiritual and more animalistic. I mean they were even cannibals. They liked blood and gore and blamed God for everything. God never led anyone to murder or sacrifice. That was only invented by humans of the day. When Moses came along, He was inspired to deliver the 10 commandments so that people would stop doing that. But, out of habit and fear, they reverted to their old ways. The NT tried to fix all of that but again, fear kept people believing in a wrathful God and not a loving God.
It sad to think what our world could have been like right now if people back then would have just believed in an all loving God. We may have had heaven on earth by now.

[DaniMae1]

Originally Posted by victorianpunk

Not necessarily...find me one example of the Gnostics, the Cathars, the Manicheanist or the Mandaens massacring anyone or forcing anyone to convert.

You cannot, because no such examples exist (I looked and looked and looked and couldn't find any)

Funky is clearly speaking of traditional Christianity...Gnostics are not traditional. Much better and well rounded in my opinion!

[Antlered Chamataka]

Originally Posted by bluepacific

The Sunday Leader Online

TamilNet: 05.09.99 Monks and soldiers trod war road together


LANKALIBRARY FORUM • View topic - Buddhist soldiers?


Buddhist Monks Lead Thai Soldiers


"Review of Buddhists, War and Nationalism" A sacrificing of Chinese Buddhists Ethics for Nationalism against Japanese Buddhist Aggressions.
http://www.buddhistethics.org15/jessup-review.pdf

The religious state of Buddhism today

Interesting post.

I have long believed tha Buddhist Terrorism is the sole way of destroying communist China.

But that people don't have the strength to do it.

We used to incite such feelings amongst the expat Tibetan population back in colleges in India.

They're just too happy with the freedom and life they enjoy in their new country.

[calmdude]

Originally Posted by Colossus_Antonis

Interesting post.

I have long believed tha Buddhist Terrorism is the sole way of destroying communist China.

But that people don't have the strength to do it.

We used to incite such feelings amongst the expat Tibetan population back in colleges in India.

They're just too happy with the freedom and life they enjoy in their new country.

From what I understand, the Indian government does not want them to go too far and start active actions against China - protests are as far as they are allowed to go.

Also, I would not categorize their actions as "buddhist terrorism" - far from it -it is the Chinese that have systematically terrorised them but we do not do much as the Chinese now partially own us.

[bluepacific]

Originally Posted by Colossus_Antonis

Interesting post.

I have long believed tha Buddhist Terrorism is the sole way of destroying communist China.

But that people don't have the strength to do it.

We used to incite such feelings amongst the expat Tibetan population back in colleges in India.

They're just too happy with the freedom and life they enjoy in their new country.

You know something, that was only the tip of the iceberg what I dug up. Most of it I could'nt even dare to post here as it was too graphic many of the things they are involved with in differing areas of the world. One website dealing with their violent activities in Thailand & Myanmar (Burma) were so graphic, that under the story just before all the photos, they had a WARNING - GRAPHIC PHOTOS associated with a good sized paragraph about what you are going to see with regards to those photos. They were pics of what both Buddhists and Muslims are doing to each other in Thailand. Both sides are guilty and disgusting. There was no way I could have posted that website here. It was hideous. I still am a bit creeped out for seeing it.

My point is, some of these threads start out by someone representing a side claiming the Moral high road and the reality is anything but. Every group here, and I don't care who, has "Soiled Unterhosen" laying around somewhere. Still, I wished I had'nt seen that extrodinarily informative site. Hopefully these things one day get put away permanently.

[calmdude]

bluepacific - do you know the reason for the muslim-buddhist wars in SE Asia (I don't)?. Was it realted to conversions or politics? I am asking a sincere question since I do not know the credibility of the source you cited.
I never (was/ will be/ am) Buddhist but I have not heard of their group fighting to convert others - they may be involved in self defense though.

[bluepacific]

Originally Posted by calmdude

bluepacific - do you know the reason for the muslim-buddhist wars in SE Asia (I don't)?. Was it realted to conversions or politics? I am asking a sincere question since I do not know the credibility of the source you cited.

This website seems to be pretty informative. also if you look at a map of Thailand it touches down to the predominently Maylay Muslim Malaysia.

Here's a very good informative artice from the Cambridge Journals website: If the link does'nt come in, then smply Google "Thai Buddhism, Thai Buddhists and the southern conflict" National University of Singapore, February 2009.

http://journals.cambridge.org/downlo...4f2789ffa4ab4d

Here's a short few sentences from the first paragraph of the research study:

"Thailand's 'southern border provinces' of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat - along with four districts nieghbouring Songkhla - are the site of firey political violence characterized by daily killings. The area was historically a Malay Sultanate, and was only loosely under Thai suzerainty until the early twentieth century. During the twentieth century there was periodic resistance to Bangkok's attempts to suppress local identity and to incorporate this largely Maylay speaking, Muslim-Majority area into a predominently Buddhist natio-state."