Why Christian Religion Always Collides With Buddhism.

[canuckamuck]

Maybe it's practiced different, in other countries. When I go to church here, the pastor states different things, he can talk about ; the father, jezus, god, the holy one. Never been talked about afterlife, he states the soul goes to god for an eternal life.

Datsun I think you are getting hung up on the word afterlife. If something occurs to you after you die, that is an afterlife. So in your example, eternity with God would be an afterlife. Catholics certainly do believe in people going to heaven, purgatory, or heII after death.

This is not the same as reincarnation, which would be a recycled life.

Edited July 9, 2009 by canuckamuck

[bonobo]

One reason Thai Evangelist Christians "collide" with Buddhists is because they go around saying Buddhism is the work of Satan and/or the Buddha is a demon. This is what the brainwashed Christian Thai kids at Evangelist international schools tell Buddhist Thai kids at the same school. I happened to meet the principal of one of these schools recently. For a guy who thinks the Earth was created 6,000 years ago and all dinosaur bones are fakes, he seemed remarkably normal.

If you are a tiny minority and go around demonizing the majority, you are going to do a lot of colliding, for sure.

Demonizing others will go a long way to create conflict, that is for sure.

On the fake dinosaur bones, many evangelicals/fundamentalists now admit to the existence of dinosaurs, using Job 40's mention of "behemoth" as biblical proof.  Of course, they also tend to believe that man and dinosaur co-existed and that Noah brought them on the ark.

[camerata]

On the fake dinosaur bones, many evangelicals/fundamentalists now admit to the existence of dinosaurs, using Job 40's mention of "behemoth" as biblical proof.  Of course, they also tend to believe that man and dinosaur co-existed and that Noah brought them on the ark.

Right. Creationists come in a variety of different types. I read there is even a theme park somewhere in the States depicting humans frolicking with dinosaurs.

[Groongthep]

Actually it is your post that betrays a profound ignorance and naivety of Buddhist teaching. Buddhism as originally taught by Gautama is not a religion in the same dogmatic sense as the theistic religions. In fact, it has often been argued that it is not a religion at all but rather a logical philosophical explanation of reality or "truth".

I don't think you are on the right track at all. It depends entirely on how you define a religion. For example, I think a very good definition is, "A religion is an organized approach to human spirituality which usually encompasses a set of narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices, often with a supernatural or transcendent quality, that give meaning to the practitioner's experiences of life through reference to a higher power, God or gods, or ultimate truth."

As is the case with many "religions", Buddhism as practiced by the masses in Thailand with its amulets, spirit houses and ceremonies has little or nothing to do with what was taught by the founder of the theory. Buddhism teaches that there is no self, no everlasting soul and certainly no ever-present all-knowing "God". What it does teach is independent thinking, putting one's own beliefs to the test through critical self examination and that contentment and happiness are found through one's own efforts to extinguish unwholesome desires and greed.

Here you make what I feel is the fatal mistake that contradicts: You essentially say that "Buddhism is", but then say it is an independent thinking religion. Additionally, you cannot abbreviate the beliefs of Buddhism (or any other religion) down into three sentences. That's folly.

Your points are valid but I think you misunderstood my intention. I was not arguing that Buddhism was not a religion; I was simply saying that as a system of belief Buddhism is fundamentally different from the theistic religions for the reasons I stated. Your definition of a religion from wikipedia is as good as any I suppose but the contentions that Buddhism fits the definition of a philosophy better than that of a religion have been around for quite some time now. Much has been written on the subject since comparative religion has become a subject of study. It was not my intention to take one side over the other.

I fully agree with you that one "cannot abbreviate the beliefs of Buddhism (or any other religion) down into three sentences", but this is an internet forum and and a proper detailed explanation would take up much more space than I believe anyone who enjoys this medium of interaction would care to read. That's what books are for. My abbreviated comments were intended to simply highlight the main fundamental difference between Buddhism and Islam, Christianity, Judaism etc.

Further, I'm not sure what you meant in saying that I make "a fatal mistake that contradicts. You essentially say that "Buddhism is", but then say it is an independent thinking religion." Yes, Buddhism IS an independent thinking religion. The Buddha taught that one should not take any of his teaching on face value alone, but rather should investigate through meditation and self introspection for themselves if they have validity.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Groongthep

[phetaroi]

Actually it is your post that betrays a profound ignorance and naivety of Buddhist teaching. Buddhism as originally taught by Gautama is not a religion in the same dogmatic sense as the theistic religions. In fact, it has often been argued that it is not a religion at all but rather a logical philosophical explanation of reality or "truth".

I don't think you are on the right track at all. It depends entirely on how you define a religion. For example, I think a very good definition is, "A religion is an organized approach to human spirituality which usually encompasses a set of narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices, often with a supernatural or transcendent quality, that give meaning to the practitioner's experiences of life through reference to a higher power, God or gods, or ultimate truth."

As is the case with many "religions", Buddhism as practiced by the masses in Thailand with its amulets, spirit houses and ceremonies has little or nothing to do with what was taught by the founder of the theory. Buddhism teaches that there is no self, no everlasting soul and certainly no ever-present all-knowing "God". What it does teach is independent thinking, putting one's own beliefs to the test through critical self examination and that contentment and happiness are found through one's own efforts to extinguish unwholesome desires and greed.

Here you make what I feel is the fatal mistake that contradicts: You essentially say that "Buddhism is", but then say it is an independent thinking religion. Additionally, you cannot abbreviate the beliefs of Buddhism (or any other religion) down into three sentences. That's folly.

Your points are valid but I think you misunderstood my intention. I was not arguing that Buddhism was not a religion; I was simply saying that as a system of belief Buddhism is fundamentally different from the theistic religions for the reasons I stated. Your definition of a religion from wikipedia is as good as any I suppose but the contentions that Buddhism fits the definition of a philosophy better than that of a religion have been around for quite some time now. Much has been written on the subject since comparative religion has become a subject of study. It was not my intention to take one side over the other.

I fully agree with you that one "cannot abbreviate the beliefs of Buddhism (or any other religion) down into three sentences", but this is an internet forum and and a proper detailed explanation would take up much more space than I believe anyone who enjoys this medium of interaction would care to read. That's what books are for. My abbreviated comments were intended to simply highlight the main fundamental difference between Buddhism and Islam, Christianity, Judaism etc.

Further, I'm not sure what you meant in saying that I make "a fatal mistake that contradicts. You essentially say that "Buddhism is", but then say it is an independent thinking religion." Yes, Buddhism IS an independent thinking religion. The Buddha taught that one should not take any of his teaching on face value alone, but rather should investigate through meditation and self introspection for themselves if they have validity.

First, thanks for your even-handed response. I must admit I was in a bit of a snitty attitude yesterday when I was writing, so my response was at the very least curt.

My point with the Wikipedia definition was that they indicate that "religion" is generally, but not necessarily, based on the belief of a higher god. You're right, much has been written in the debate about whether it is a religion or a philosophy, and frankly, who gives a diddly. I think it is primarily a semantic argument.

What I mean by the flaw in your thinking (from my perspective, of course) is when you say, "Buddhism teaches that there is no self, no everlasting soul and certainly no ever-present all-knowing "God"," that is in opposition to the concept of the religion (or philosophy) of Buddhism being for independent thinking. For example, while I consider myself a Buddhist, I also believe in God. A Buddhist friend said to me one day, "If you're Buddhist, how can you believe there is a God?" I replied that my understanding was that Buddha said that even his words had to be put to the test. I believe in an ordered universe, and I do not believe all that is in the universe is a total accident or coincidence. I believe in evolution; studied it in college; can't see how by sheer coincidence you go from blue-green algae in the Pre-Cambrian era to my ability to see, hear, taste, and smell today. The analogy I gave was that out in a field you can throw piles of boards, bricks, wire, glass, shingles, pipes, nails, screws, and so forth. You still don't have a house until someone builds it. And, I thought that Buddhism didn't pass judgment on whether or not their was a god; rather that it was something that could not be determined.

[bonobo]

On the fake dinosaur bones, many evangelicals/fundamentalists now admit to the existence of dinosaurs, using Job 40's mention of "behemoth" as biblical proof.  Of course, they also tend to believe that man and dinosaur co-existed and that Noah brought them on the ark.

Right. Creationists come in a variety of different types. I read there is even a theme park somewhere in the States depicting humans frolicking with dinosaurs.

Yes, there is such a park, either in Kentucky or Ohio or thereabouts.

[fabianfred]

On the fake dinosaur bones, many evangelicals/fundamentalists now admit to the existence of dinosaurs, using Job 40's mention of "behemoth" as biblical proof. Of course, they also tend to believe that man and dinosaur co-existed and that Noah brought them on the ark.

Right. Creationists come in a variety of different types. I read there is even a theme park somewhere in the States depicting humans frolicking with dinosaurs.

You might be interested in studying the work of Edgar Cayce. In his many life readings he found that many people of this era were also alive during the Atlantis era. One thing he mentioned was a meeting held by peoples from many countries to discuss the problem of the large carniverous animals which were a threat and how they should deal with it....

[fabianfred]

Phetaroi.... I think you will find that Buddhism agrees with the theory of evolution....and doesn't need belief in a god to make it work.

An aeon (Mahakhappa) is in four parts.... the last when the universe is being destroyed....the first when the new universe is forming...the second when it is not yet ready to support life...and the third when life forms and beings take rebirth, according to their karma, in the new realms as they become ready...(animals,hells,heavens, human, etc.)

[Groongthep]

......while I consider myself a Buddhist, I also believe in God. A Buddhist friend said to me one day, "If you're Buddhist, how can you believe there is a God?" I replied that my understanding was that Buddha said that even his words had to be put to the test. I believe in an ordered universe, and I do not believe all that is in the universe is a total accident or coincidence. I believe in evolution; studied it in college; can't see how by sheer coincidence you go from blue-green algae in the Pre-Cambrian era to my ability to see, hear, taste, and smell today.

I believe that you and I think very much alike phetaroi. I try to refrain however, from labeling myself into any category like Buddhist or Christian, or Liberal or Conservative, or Black or White or whatever. Too often people read too much into these titles and make all kinds of wrong assumptions based on what those titles mean to them. I believe what I believe, but I will always try to be open to listening to the views and opinions of others which, if based on reliable references, solid proof or good judgment might have the effect of changing what I believe.

[manuchaomk]

Most people are slaves of their ego.... and consider their own beliefs to be the correct ones.

With something like religions, which are a matter of belief, there will always be friction.

There can only be one ultimate truth and each believes that their religion contains that truth.

I am Buddhist and am certain that Buddhism contains that truth, but cannot prove it to anybody except myself.

All religions are a matter of personal practise, and when one gains insights into the ultimate truth, whether though meditation or prayer, one cannot show these proofs to anyone else.

Each must work to their own salvation.

I totally agree with your brainfull message.

God bless you, with compassion.

[manuchaomk]

Well guyz,

what is the reason of my life?

do I feel lonely when I am phisically alone?

why do I born and die, what's the sense of this?

why this wonderful world is spread of life instead of Mars i.ex. ?

why am I conscious of my actions instead of some others animals?

I think those questions could help people to find the right way....doesn't matter through the Buddha or my holy Idol Jesus...

..God bless you ...or Buddha bless you...:-)

with compassion.

[manuchaomk]

Heaven is a men made name for " The Universe" .

The Universe is a man made name for the universe too.

hahah, was gonna say some similar thing.

What's The Universe? How big is it? What is it floating on? Are there more than just one cause some theoretical physicists believe there are more than one.

Yes, you guys are right here

Science, power of Thinking and your words too come from God.

The keyquestion that scientists never will know is how everythings born ?

That question is the key of your life. Doesn't matter if you believe in God through Buddha or my Idol Lord Jesus.

Sure you have to thanks God for the Gift that give to you (and me too hehe): the life

...Scientists are great people, but their theories are just the result of their ego (I mean the scientists that try to explain the Gift that our God give to us).

[chiangmaibruce]

Well, some insightful posts here. I'm in Chiang Mai where we certainly have our fair share of people with fish stickers on the backs of their cars. Not in a philosophical frame of mind this evening, but just a couple of observations:

A question: How do you feel when you are out socially and a Thai person comes up to you with a shy smile and announces "I'm a Christian". Like it's the password to a secret club. On the one hand I'm happy that they're happy. On the other hand I think "yeccchhhh", because it sort of implies that I would have thought them a lesser person if they were buddhist. And of course I wouldn't. I am comfortable with the core principles of both beliefs and look beyond that and within the individual. But how do you feel?

A story: I visited an Australian guy married to a Thai living up near Chiang Rai. Nice guy, lovely wife and wife's family all great people. The Aussie guy's mum was visiting at the time, a wealthy successful business woman who had had some kind of religious tipping point thing happen and went and did some sort of theological study before starting to bang the drum. Quite pretentious and also a bit of a fashion slave. <sorry to the son if you are reading this!> They drove me into town and around their farm. On driving in the front gate the mother said something negative about the spirit house there, and wanting to get rid of it, etc. I assumed at the time that she was annoyed by the colour of it or something like that. But oh no, a few moments later it sunk in that it was its religious connotations that got up her nose. So in a world of suicide bombings, starvation, environmental degradation, and all the rest, this silly women was getting angry about a little concrete spirit house stuck in a patch of grass in northern Thailand.

Groan, not a good ad for the big guy is it really?

Edited July 10, 2009 by chiangmaibruce

[phetaroi]

A question: How do you feel when you are out socially and a Thai person comes up to you with a shy smile and announces "I'm a Christian". Like it's the password to a secret club. On the one hand I'm happy that they're happy. On the other hand I think "yeccchhhh", because it sort of implies that I would have thought them a lesser person if they were buddhist. And of course I wouldn't. I am comfortable with the core principles of both beliefs and look beyond that and within the individual. But how do you feel?

To be honest, I would probably be a bit hypocritical. My personal belief is that God sent several messengers to teach people morality. Jesus, Buddha, perhaps Mohammad. Probably others. Won't get into my whole logic here. But, when people throw their religion at me, I feel rather nauseated. I would probably say something like, "Oh dam_n, those hellish Christians got to you?" There are few things I hate more than proselytizing. If someone asks me about my beliefs or Buddhism, fine. I'll be happy to chat. But if someone comes up to me on a mission, so long Charlie.

[Xangsamhua]

On the fake dinosaur bones, many evangelicals/fundamentalists now admit to the existence of dinosaurs, using Job 40's mention of "behemoth" as biblical proof. Of course, they also tend to believe that man and dinosaur co-existed and that Noah brought them on the ark.

Right. Creationists come in a variety of different types. I read there is even a theme park somewhere in the States depicting humans frolicking with dinosaurs.

You might be interested in studying the work of Edgar Cayce. In his many life readings he found that many people of this era were also alive during the Atlantis era. One thing he mentioned was a meeting held by peoples from many countries to discuss the problem of the large carniverous animals which were a threat and how they should deal with it....

Very interesting man, Edgar Cayce. I understand some of his prophecies have been validated and some not (as yet). However, there appears to be no evidence that he was self-serving in any way and he never set himself up as a guru or tried to develop a following. His long-distance healings interested me more than his prophecies when I read a bit about him in the 60s. Mae Tha (Chantha) in Roi Et province claims to be able to heal at a distance like Cayce. She, also, seems to be a most self-effacing person and in no way interested in establishing a cult around herself.

[Xangsamhua]

A question: How do you feel when you are out socially and a Thai person comes up to you with a shy smile and announces "I'm a Christian". Like it's the password to a secret club. On the one hand I'm happy that they're happy. On the other hand I think "yeccchhhh", because it sort of implies that I would have thought them a lesser person if they were buddhist. And of course I wouldn't. I am comfortable with the core principles of both beliefs and look beyond that and within the individual. But how do you feel?

To be honest, I would probably be a bit hypocritical. My personal belief is that God sent several messengers to teach people morality. Jesus, Buddha, perhaps Mohammad. Probably others. Won't get into my whole logic here. But, when people throw their religion at me, I feel rather nauseated. I would probably say something like, "Oh dam_n, those hellish Christians got to you?" There are few things I hate more than proselytizing. If someone asks me about my beliefs or Buddhism, fine. I'll be happy to chat. But if someone comes up to me on a mission, so long Charlie.

It might mean a lot more to a Thai person than it means to someone from a Western country where self-professed "Christians" tend be either a bit passe or people with some real gaps in their cognitive structure.

For a Thai to profess him/herself as a Christian may mean that he/she has had a conversion experience or been born into a Christian (probably Protestant) family; either way he/she is prepared to swim against the tide of Thai convention, i.e. that all Thais are Buddhists.

I would ask the person how they came to be a Christian and listen to their story. I have done so in the past and it's often quite interesting. If they then became too evangelizing I would just smile and listen until they've run out of steam. That's never happened to me in Thailand.

[Datsun240Z]

There is a big difference between Protestant and Catholic Christans

[phetaroi]

I would ask the person how they came to be a Christian and listen to their story. I have done so in the past and it's often quite interesting. If they then became too evangelizing I would just smile and listen until they've run out of steam.

I agree that it would be interesting, providing they do not evangelize. I remember well an encounter I had while doing a "city hike" in Washington, D.C. several years ago. I had stopped at a park to rest for a bit and refresh with a water fountain and a young man came up to me -- Filipino. He began with a little polite chit chat. Then, suddenly, "Do you know what this is?" "Yes, it's a Bible and you're going to attempt to convert me to some evangelical branch of Christianity. You can forget it, because I am a happy Buddhist." "Oh, I have a lot of respect for Buddhism." "Oh, really? Don't you think I'm going to go to hel_l?" "We don't have to talk about the unhappy part." "Oh, yes we do. Don't you think I'm going to hel_l?" "Let's talk about the love of Christ." "No, let's have you answer my question." "Okay, yes, you will go to hel_l." "You said you had a lot of respect for Buddhism. Thank you so much for respecting my religion so much you are going to condemn me to hel_l. Now let me ask you, all the millions of people in the world who lived before Christ could not accept Christ as their savior since he didn't exist yet. Did they all go to hel_l?" "Yes, of course." And during the time of Christ and later -- the millions who lived somewhere in the world where there was no knowledge of Christ; they all went to hel_l, also." "Naturally." "And today, every Buddhist, every Muslim, every Hindu, and others who don't believe what you believe. All going to hel_l?" "Yes." "Have you ever heard the phrase, 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'?" "Yes, of course." "Do you believe it?" "Yes." "Then I guess you are going to hel_l. Goodbye!"

[fabianfred]

My kids go to the largest non-govt school here in Fang...which is a christian school. One day whilst waiting for them I went to buy a snack from one of the carts which abound as school is turning out. The woman probably assumed I was christian ..being a farang. She was christian and asked me which church i went to on Sundays. i replied that i was a Buddhist. She was surprised and said she thought I would be christian. I said that my parents and siblings are Catholic..and I was brought up that way...but changed to buddhism myself. She then said that she could take me to church and introduce me to God. I said No thanks..i'm happy as I am...

She said .well you wont go to heaven..... I said i don't want to go to heaven..... she said..then you'll go to hel_l..... and i said i don't want to go to hel_l either....she looked confused and I said I want to go to Nirvana. She just didn't know how to answer that.....

[Xangsamhua]

If people in Thailand ask me what religion I am, I tell them I'm Catholic - which is what I am, regardless of what my philosophical or practice preferences may be at the moment. I have respect and gratitude for my heritage, even if I think it no longer has the answers. I also don't hide the fact that my current interests are in Buddhism.

I don't know that Thai people really accept the idea that you can choose your religion and that the choice you make identifies you. A Thai friend said once, in a conversation not particularly about religion, that if she weren't a Buddhist she'd be a Christian (because she admired Christian outreach in education, health and welfare). I don't think it occurred to her that she could make that choice.

I also recollect on another thread somewhere a Westerner in Chiang Rai being asked to indicate his religion for a local census form. He wanted to respond "Atheist", but the official had no idea what that was. He wanted to clarify, but his wife gave him "the look" and made him put down "Christian".

[bonobo]

I was raised a Christian (Lutheran), attended many Roman Catholic masses due to being with friends who worshipped, studied  Islam while in Iraq, and have been learning about Buddhism from my Thai friends (discussions, books, and going to temples.)  I want to learn and tend to encompass ideals which lead people to being "good," whatever that means.

Before I went to Iraq, my good friend geve me a very valuable amulet, a 1200-year-old Buddha, as well as a 400-year-old carved tiger tooth which Thai soldiers used to carry into battle.  I love antiquities, (I have a small but nice collection of various items from around the world), and as these are wearable, and as they were important to my friend, I tend to wear them.

When I get approached by  Thai hustler, be it a took-took guy, a tourist tout, or whatever, they always stop in amazement that I have the amulets, and their demeanor changes from con-type guy to friend.  They are amazed to see a farang with them.  But when they ask if I am BUddhist, they don't understand if I say no, but they seem to accept when I tell them I am learning about it.

[tranquillize]

If people in Thailand ask me what religion I am, I tell them I'm Catholic - which is what I am, regardless of what my philosophical or practice preferences may be at the moment. I have respect and gratitude for my heritage, even if I think it no longer has the answers. I also don't hide the fact that my current interests are in Buddhism.

I think you're being a bit dishonest when you tell people you're catholic. Religion is not the same as an ethnicity; for instance, i have German heritage even though i have never lived in Germany, i can still correctly refer to myself as German, or part German. Religion is a choice so if your family heritage, or even parts of your own life were spent catholic, that does not make you a Catholic. Sounds to me like you are simply a non-religiously affiliated person

[bonobo]

If people in Thailand ask me what religion I am, I tell them I'm Catholic - which is what I am, regardless of what my philosophical or practice preferences may be at the moment. I have respect and gratitude for my heritage, even if I think it no longer has the answers. I also don't hide the fact that my current interests are in Buddhism.

I think you're being a bit dishonest when you tell people you're catholic. Religion is not the same as an ethnicity; for instance, i have German heritage even though i have never lived in Germany, i can still correctly refer to myself as German, or part German. Religion is a choice so if your family heritage, or even parts of your own life were spent catholic, that does not make you a Catholic. Sounds to me like you are simply a non-religiously affiliated person

Just as a off-topic point, "catholic" means universal, and is used to pertain to denominations which are descended from the church of the apostles.  It is not only the Roman Catholic Church.  It includes all the Eastern Orthadox churches as well as most of the "high"churches, such as the Anglicans, Lutherans,and some Methodists.  Both the Nicene and Apostles' Creeds refer to the "holy catholic church."

[agent69]

what is the reason of my life?

do I feel lonely when I am phisically alone?

- That's for each of us to find out. Each will find different purpose. A life without meaning can be lonely and pointless.

- Yes. Also if some do aware of that eventhough they are surrounded by people. That more important question would be whether they know why.

why do I born and die, what's the sense of this?

why this wonderful world is spread of life instead of Mars i.ex. ?

- Well, it's part of nature. Can human lives be prolong? Scientists now would believe so. The sense of it? It's more like the first question, isn't it?

- Cause Mars is a little smaller than earth to hold its own atmosphere. And it doesn't have the magnetic field that would protect living things from radiation. Mars is not as alive as Earth in term of its core and volcanic activities.

why am I conscious of my actions instead of some others animals?

- Well, that is an assumption. Right or wrong assumption really matters if there is some constructive gain in finding out the truth. We would like to believe that we're better than other species and sometimes ... sadly ... races all due to assumptions. Fact is a lot of us instinctively react to situations. Still we are, a lot of times, aware of what actions we took and also, most time, are not aware of why. Does that make us same as animals?

[Xangsamhua]

If people in Thailand ask me what religion I am, I tell them I'm Catholic - which is what I am, regardless of what my philosophical or practice preferences may be at the moment. I have respect and gratitude for my heritage, even if I think it no longer has the answers. I also don't hide the fact that my current interests are in Buddhism.

I think you're being a bit dishonest when you tell people you're catholic. Religion is not the same as an ethnicity; for instance, i have German heritage even though i have never lived in Germany, i can still correctly refer to myself as German, or part German. Religion is a choice so if your family heritage, or even parts of your own life were spent catholic, that does not make you a Catholic. Sounds to me like you are simply a non-religiously affiliated person

You think I’m fudging? Maybe, maybe not. It feels more honest to say I’m Catholic (or, more accurately, Roman Catholic, as Bonobo points out) than non-affiliated or agnostic, or whatever. I also feel like a student of Buddhism, but could not say I’m a Buddhist. Being Roman Catholic is too much a part of me to deny. And, in any case, as in the past after periods of alienation, I may become more engaged in the Church once again.

But the thread is not about me. The question you have raised is to do with religious identity and how that is determined and by whom? Millions of people around the world identify as one religion or another regardless of whether their personal beliefs at the moment are in agreement with official doctrines. Perhaps in the West, we believe there should be a close identification between one’s personal beliefs and the religion that most closely corresponds to them. So if you want to know what religion you are at the moment you can take a test like Belief-o-Matic at http://www.beliefnet.com/Entertainment/Quizzes/BeliefOMatic.aspx and advise anyone interested of your self-selected affiliation at that point in time. You might be a Sikh today and a Hindu next month, after having just read a persuasive book about it. In five years’ time, having undergone a traumatic conversion experience, you might be an evangelical Christian, ready to pour fire and brimstone over those who become, say, Muslims in order to marry.

I’d make some space for intuition and subjectivity. So if someone feels like a Hindu, even if not recognized as such by Brahmins, let him/her identify as such. If one feels like a Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant Christian, let it be so. In any case, nothing’s permanent in time or space, so why insist on this or that label?

Peace

[phetaroi]

You think I'm fudging? Maybe, maybe not. It feels more honest to say I'm Catholic (or, more accurately, Roman Catholic, as Bonobo points out) than non-affiliated or agnostic, or whatever. I also feel like a student of Buddhism, but could not say I'm a Buddhist. Being Roman Catholic is too much a part of me to deny. And, in any case, as in the past after periods of alienation, I may become more engaged in the Church once again.

But the thread is not about me. The question you have raised is to do with religious identity and how that is determined and by whom? Millions of people around the world identify as one religion or another regardless of whether their personal beliefs at the moment are in agreement with official doctrines. Perhaps in the West, we believe there should be a close identification between one's personal beliefs and the religion that most closely corresponds to them. So if you want to know what religion you are at the moment you can take a test like Belief-o-Matic at http://www.beliefnet.com/Entertainment/Quizzes/BeliefOMatic.aspx and advise anyone interested of your self-selected affiliation at that point in time. You might be a Sikh today and a Hindu next month, after having just read a persuasive book about it. In five years' time, having undergone a traumatic conversion experience, you might be an evangelical Christian, ready to pour fire and brimstone over those who become, say, Muslims in order to marry.

I'd make some space for intuition and subjectivity. So if someone feels like a Hindu, even if not recognized as such by Brahmins, let him/her identify as such. If one feels like a Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant Christian, let it be so. In any case, nothing's permanent in time or space, so why insist on this or that label?

Several years ago when I wanted to "become" a Buddhist, I asked a monk up in Chiang Mai two questions -- how to learn about Buddhism in the United States when there are so few temples to visit and how to "become" a Buddhist. His answer: "Easy to learn about Buddhism. Buy a book. Difficult to learn about yourself. If you think like a Buddhist and act like a Buddhist, the you are a Buddhist."

I think it is reasonable for you to identify yourself as a Catholic, based on your explanation. The Pope might not agree...but then again, who cares.

[rockyysdt]

To be honest, I would probably be a bit hypocritical. My personal belief is that God sent several messengers to teach people morality. Jesus, Buddha, perhaps Mohammad. Probably others. Won't get into my whole logic here. But, when people throw their religion at me, I feel rather nauseated. I would probably say something like, "Oh dam_n, those hellish Christians got to you?" There are few things I hate more than proselytizing. If someone asks me about my beliefs or Buddhism, fine. I'll be happy to chat. But if someone comes up to me on a mission, so long Charlie.

Your belief just reminded me of my beliefs & the beliefs of those around me.

I used to do a lot of informal study of Christianity and sparred with converts about its validity.

I've been working on my practice of "self awareness" & realize my Christian preoccupation has been an attachment.

My "self awareness" kicked in at a wedding I attended on the weekend.

I observed my brother in law who was explaining that money to him means nothing after having recovered from chronic pain & the death of a friend.

My awareness told me that somehow his words didn't align with his behavior.

I observed his obese stature whilst he sat and over indulged in copious amounts of alcohol & rich foods.

He became preoccupied with his $5,000+ new plasma/bluray entertainment system, his $750 cell phone which is being replaced with the latest, his $2,000 camera & accessories, his latest car, his $600 titanium specs etc, etc, etc. His expressed new found view of life didn't seem to align with his lifestyle, & need for large amounts of money.

My observation didn't dwell on envy, hatred, nor superiority, but focused on an example of "lack self awareness".

I also thought that I could easily become like him should I lose my self awareness.

The discussion at the table moved on to many "I believe this", "I believe that". Others disagreed and expressed their beliefs. I slipped in a couple of "I believe" as well.

Observing myself witnessing this chit chat caused the penny dropped.

I've got a long wait to go (perhaps eons) but my thoughts were telling me that I was observing attachment to beliefs.

I try to observe beliefs for what they are and perhaps where they may have come from but in the end try to let the thoughts pass without letting them control my feelings & interactions with others.

When it comes to beliefs we're probably all way off the mark anyway.

Edited July 13, 2009 by rockyysdt

[jamesc2000]

I try to observe beliefs for what they are and perhaps where they may have come from but in the end try to let the thoughts pass without letting them control my feelings & interactions with others.

When it comes to beliefs we're probably all way off the mark anyway.

I completely agree with that!

Its not so much whether our beliefs are right or wrong, its our attachment to them that's the problem.

But most people cannot see their attachment to their beliefs and hence cannot free themselves from this

attachment. (and maybe don't want to cos they love their beliefs and are even happy to defend their beliefs

with their life or kill other people to preserve their beliefs)

People cannot solve problems they don't even know they have (or dun think they have), so I think you made a very good observation

which so many people are blinded to.

[mauGR1]

It's funny how people who call themseves "Christians" forget the original message(try love,it's free) and try to convert everyone,while i met a few people who call themselves "non-believers" but are full of love and compassion.I like the story of Jesus going to the temple and getting angry at the greedy priests who exploit the religion to get rich and powerful..IMO if he came back he would do the same.

[bonobo]

There is what I call "cultural religion" and "spiritual religion."

Someone who is culturally religious is a person who identifies himself or herself with a religion, but based on cultural background rather than true personal belief.  Most Japanese, for example, consider themselves Buddhists and marry in a Buddhist ceremony, yet somethng like 6% of the country classifies itself as truly religious.  Many Jews in the US strongly consider themselves Jewish, but they do not go to the temple.  Both groups feel an affinity to the past, appreciate the cultural impact of the two religions, yet are not to cemented to the spiritual aspects of what the two religions profess.

THen there are the "Easter Christians," or those who show up to church once a year on Easter.  Ask them their religion, and they will say "Baptist," "Lutheran," or whatever, but religion is not a major aspsect in their lives.

On the other hand, there are the spiritually religious people.  THese are people who embrace a religion on a deep and personal level, who try to live as per the teachings of the religion.  The religion can change should a person be converted, but the deep, personal belief is the key here.

With that, I do think it is reasonable to say "I am a Roman Catholic" or "I am Jewish" or whatever based on upbringing and cultural background even if that person no longer really worships.