And what would you say about this
Mathew chapter reads..
34"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw—
36a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'[a]
37"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
This is not question of intelligence, rather that specific teaching is according to your wishes and you ignore rest of the teaching.
Escape from truth
2007-02-13 00:06:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Jesus did not really say the kingdom of God is within you. That is according to a very old and inaccurate translation. Jesus' words were addressed to the Pharisees and hardly was the kingdom in them!
Luke 17:21 is more accurately understood as 'the kingdom of God is in your midst.' The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible comments this way as well. This was so because Jesus, the representative of his Father and the only potentate (1 Timothy 6:16) was among them.
Moreover, that the kingdom is not some "inner state of mind" or "personal salvation" can be seen from a consideration of Daniel 2:44. There, God's kingdom is described as doing things that could hardly occur if that kingdom were some state of mind. God's kingdom is an actual government with Christ himself as King and many others who will rule with him in his kingdom. Daniel 2:44 makes it clear that God's kingdom - an actual government - will crush and destroy all other kingdoms - other actual human governments - and stand forever as the only means of government in this universe.
Hannah J Paul
2007-02-12 23:53:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by Hannah J Paul 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
An interesting supposition and from a Buddhists perspective a very intuitive and thougtful comparison. I like your sincere attempt at finding similarity rather than difference, it is similarity which can initiate warm friendship and a sense of community amongst different folk.
Although Buddha's message doesn't mention "salvation", the Dharma can be interpretted as a kind of salvation, that releasing our true inner nature's from suffering and therefore the attainment of true happiness which is known as Nirvana is an ongoing and personal struggle all within the consciousness makes it an internal struggle..."salvation" then is within us...an insightful observation...only using different terms...well done.
I agree with you..very intelligent indeed..
Peace from a Buddhist.
2007-02-13 00:36:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Gaz 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
they'd disagree on the inspiration of the international and on the nature of lack of existence. although i don't love assuming issues about those who lived 2 thousand years in the past. Amatus, Buddha become no longer searching for a god. He become considered The Enlightened One. guy above me, artwork on your definition of "info".
2016-11-27 19:54:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Buddhism does not have any gods...so when you follow that path, you are not going to be with God of the Bible.
So if you want to be with the God of the Bible in eternity, it is more intelligent to follow the teachings of Jesus.
This all depends on what are your motives and what are you trying to accomplish. Superficial level Buddha and Jesus has similarities in their teachings. : )
2007-02-13 01:25:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by SeeTheLight 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Jesus, the Father's Son, and Buddha, the once living human.
as long as they teach ppl to do right things thats good enough as leaders.
only in that context.
2007-02-12 23:59:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by pbtham 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Being that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, His teachings are far more superior and it's His teachings that I follow. Heaven can only be found through Jesus Christ.
2007-02-12 23:59:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by tracy211968 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes and are very complimentary to each others teachings. Their teachings go hand in hand. Like all wise, intelligent, loving beings that seek to do good and enlighten others. There is no conflict between two goods, even though they may be centuries and miles apart.
2007-02-12 23:43:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Answergirl 5
·
5⤊
0⤋
The difference is, after Buddha died, no one came along 50 years later and said "I used to know Buddha, and he told me he was the only way someone could get to know God."
That did, on the other hand, happen after Jesus died.
2007-02-12 23:49:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by DiggyK 2
·
3⤊
1⤋
Buddha was a mere man. Jesus is alive and is the savior of all. That is wisdom not intelligence.
2007-02-12 23:42:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tribble Macher 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
thankyou for grouping them together, i think they would have felt fondly of one-another myself, and yes i think they were not only intelligent, but enlightened people... i think people get so wrapped up in the packaging of their religions that they forget the wrappings (the bible, koran and other religious texts) were created by mere mortals....they may have also been omnipotent/enlightened (prophets and what have you), but these literary pieces have been passed through so many hands and translated and re-interpreted so many times.... all i'm saying is i agree with you.....
2007-02-12 23:50:43
·
answer #11
·
answered by jessiblu_83 3
·
3⤊
0⤋