Christianity vs Buddhism

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

Christianity or Buddhism, which is "better" for the individual and/or for mankind. Based on teachings, and the actual end results each ideology has manifested. Keeping in mind what Jesus once said: "By their fruits ye shall know them."

My thoughts:

I think Christianity breeds irresponsible people, at least emotionally and intellectually irresponsible. Because when a Christian has done something wrong such as burn heathens, burn Salem Witches, murder rival cults, abuse children, and so on, they can always pray and ask for forgiveness.

But in Buddhism, there is no escaping your own stupid actions due to karma, aka the law of cause and effect. This breeds a people who are at least emotionally and intellectually responsible.

I also believe that Christianity makes people careless in the long term. Meaning that because Christianity teaches that Jesus will return "one day soon," why would "we" put in any effort to keeping nature clean from pollution, over exploitation, and so on when Jesus will just fix everything soon?

I also think Christianity breeds hateful people, and a people who believe that have the only "Truth," and therefore everyone else are not as good as them... not "saved."

As far as end results, during the past 2000 years Christianity as a world phenomenon has given rise to sectarian wars, slaughtered millions, burn books, stifled free thinking, etc.

I'd say that Buddhism is the better of the two.

 

[nash8]

Christianity or Buddhism, which is "better" for the individual and/or for mankind. Based on teachings, and the actual end results each ideology has manifested. Keeping in mind what Jesus once said: "By their fruits ye shall know them."

My thoughts:

I think Christianity breeds irresponsible people, at least emotionally and intellectually irresponsible. Because when a Christian has done something wrong such as burn heathens, burn Salem Witches, murder rival cults, abuse children, and so on, they can always pray and ask for forgiveness.

But in Buddhism, there is no escaping your own stupid actions due to karma, aka the law of cause and effect. This breeds a people who are at least emotionally and intellectually responsible.

I also believe that Christianity makes people careless in the long term. Meaning that because Christianity teaches that Jesus will return "one day soon," why would "we" put in any effort to keeping nature clean from pollution, over exploitation, and so on when Jesus will just fix everything soon?

I also think Christianity breeds hateful people, and a people who believe that have the only "Truth," and therefore everyone else are not as good as them... not "saved."

As far as end results, during the past 2000 years Christianity as a world phenomenon has given rise to sectarian wars, slaughtered millions, burn books, stifled free thinking, etc.

I'd say that Buddhism is the better of the two.

Is a Christian a follower of Joshua, or of the Bible?

And the largest slaughtering of innocent people was actually commited by an athiest.

And if you believe that all Christians, even ones within the heirarchy believe that they have the only truth, you should send a PM to Vouthon, he may be able to enlighten you.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Not really. Buddhism is devoid of Buddh-"ism". It's nice in saying yet directly, only reflections which ripple and wane. Christianity just ripples more at times and subsides like many things.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The OP sums it up nicely. The Christians can assuage their conscience by claiming that the guilty weren't "true Christians" and nothing changes. They will continue on believing and preaching that everyone else is going to burn in hell or be wiped out after they die except for them, use the law as a weapon and continue killing people for being different from them. It's the same bs all throughout the last 1700 years.

 

[psychoslice]

I didn't even needed to think about that question, of course Buddhism.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

And the largest slaughtering of innocent people was actually commited by an athiest.

False.

 

[payak]

My Abbott claims the best is the one that benefits the individual most.

You choose the one you believe in,not the coolest one because of a phase,if you believe in it and its working for you keep it up.

 

[nash8]

False.

Who has killed more people than Joseph Stalin?

My Abbott claims the best is the one that benefits the individual most.

You choose the one you believe in,not the coolest one because of a phase,if you believe in it and its working for you keep it up.

Indeed, I agree with this. Everyones different, one religion might make one person want to kill another, while that same religion might make another person wan't to help people, it's all subjective.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Who has killed more people than Joseph Stalin?

Hitler started WW2 and the war resulted in the death of over 60 million people not counting is Holocaust.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram :namaste

My Abbott claims the best is the one that benefits the individual most.

You choose the one you believe in,not the coolest one because of a phase,if you believe in it and its working for you keep it up.

I like your abbot :namaste

''if you believe in it and its working for you keep it up.''

this is perfect , ....

It dosent matter wether you have chosen christianity or buddhism , if it makes you a better person then you have understood , if it makes you criticise the practice of others then you have missunderstood
:namaste

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I think the most obvious thing that can be agreed on when it comes to people who have been responsible for the most mass murders is that it is usually in agreement that they were all mentally unstable.

So maybe that has more to do with their acts than their whole "atheism or religious" views.

What's interesting though is that both Hitler and Mussolani had "anticlerical fathers"

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

On the one hand, I agree with the OP. From a general and overall viewpoint, Buddhism tends to lean toward humanism, while Christianity tends to pretty much ignore humans.

BUT...one cannot ignore the fact that some people have killed in the name of Buddha, while there are those who have performed the most virtuous deeds in the name of Jesus. So, my studies have led me to Buddhism, but, to each their own. For some people, Buddhism wouldn't do squat, while a religion such as Christianity or Islam would make them to be saintly. What I think is most important, is for each individual to be honest enough with themselves to objectively evaluate their beliefs, and realize that, while they may have spent much time in a religion, or been born into a certain religion, or follow a religion because it's culturally acceptable, it may not be the best religion for them, and that there may be something else out there, that, while they may currently consider wrong, may find that it's what works best for them.

 

[ChristineES]

Various religions need to stop this contest mentality. For one thing, a lot of Buddhists beliefs are similar to Christian beliefs (as illustrated by Thich Nhat Hanh in the book Living Buddha/Living Christ). I don't think this "my religion is better than your religion" is very helpful. I wouldn't dream of blaming the Holocaust on any religion or Joseph Stalin's reign on lack of religion- they were both the result of dictatorship and a thirst for power and a need to put the blame of their problems on someone else- using a scapegoat.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Hitler started WW2 and the war resulted in the death of over 60 million people not counting is Holocaust.

Where do you get 60 million, I have heard it was 11-16 million total.

Stalin, on the other hand, scored a 60 million.

Although Mao (a socialist and I believe a Buddhist) could have been a near 70 million.

 

[Quintessence]

Christianity or Buddhism, which is "better" for the individual and/or for mankind. Based on teachings, and the actual end results each ideology has manifested.

I think it is a monumentally impossible task to assess this in an objective fashion. Therefore, I generally find it a waste of time to ask the question. Answers tell you more about the person opining than about either of the two religions themselves.

 

[muziko]

I think Christianity breeds irresponsible people, at least emotionally and intellectually irresponsible. Because when a Christian has done something wrong such as burn heathens, burn Salem Witches, murder rival cults, abuse children, and so on, they can always pray and ask for forgiveness.

Welcome to world religions.

Christianity makes people careless in the long term. Meaning that because Christianity teaches that Jesus will return "one day soon," why would "we" put in any effort to keeping nature clean from pollution, over exploitation, and so on when Jesus will just fix everything soon?

Is it loving to your fellow man or to God to destroy nature? :no:

Christianity breeds hateful people

 

[nash8]

Hitler started WW2 and the war resulted in the death of over 60 million people not counting is Holocaust.

It could be argued that Hitler was an athiest himself, and even so, you can't directly attribute the deaths to him, the Holocaust most definitely, but the sum of the casualties of WWII, not quite.

I think the most obvious thing that can be agreed on when it comes to people who have been responsible for the most mass murders is that it is usually in agreement that they were all mentally unstable.

Indeed, I agree, hold the person personally responsible for their actions, instead of the philosophy they promote. Words can be construed any way you wan't them too, it's much harder to misconstrue actions.

So maybe that has more to do with their acts than their whole "atheism or religious" views.

Indeed.

What's interesting though is that both Hitler and Mussolani had "anticlerical fathers"

What's even more interesting, is that Hitler's father was anticlerical, but his mother was supposedly a devout Catholic. I dunno about you, but living in that household might have been enough to drive anyone mad.

Where do you get 60 million, I have heard it was 11-16 million total.

Stalin, on the other hand, scored a 60 million.

Although Mao (a socialist and I believe a Buddhist) could have been a near 70 million.

Lowest WWII estimate is 40 million.

Stalin, accumulated an approximated 60 million in just mass murders. If you include the famine that he purposely caused, as well as some other of his moves, he's well over 75 million.

Mao still has the most according to the lowest and highest estimates though. Very interesting indeed.

This information even lends itself more to the idea that no one religion can insight any more violent actions than any other.

RELIGIONS DON'T COMMIT VIOLENCE, PEOPLE DO. Blaming the religion only takes responsibility away from the people that commit the actions.

List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[payak]

Hitler was a Darwinist

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Lowest WWII estimate is 40 million.

Stalin, accumulated an approximated 60 million in just mass murders. If you include the famine that he purposely caused, as well as some other of his moves, he's well over 75 million.

Mao still has the most according to the lowest and highest estimates though. Very interesting indeed.

This information even lends itself more to the idea that no one religion can insight any more violent actions than any other.

RELIGIONS DON'T COMMIT VIOLENCE, PEOPLE DO. Blaming the religion only takes responsibility away from the people that commit the actions.

List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ah, WW2 in general.

Anyways, I was just stating this because the man you replied to said an atheist had the largest killcount in history under the hands of just one man.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I don't think it's really possible to pinpoint Hitler's religious beliefs. He accepted things from Christianity, the occult, and eastern religions, although he warped all of them. Personally, I think he just used things that he felt would give legitimacy and power to his own selfish ends.