Buddhism and Christianity
-
went there, you not open the thread yet lehOriginally posted by Icemoon:ok!
Everyone pls continue discussion in Forbidden City. Click my siggy.
-
shaolin warrior monks saved Tang Tai Tsung from the Sui Dynasty soldiers =)Originally posted by laurence82:Another ignorant doit
By right, Chinese practise kung fu mainly for health reasons and defence. But of course, there will be people who use it to fight.
By the way, Shaolin is the temple that practise kung fu in any form, not Shuang Lin or anything. -
no idea... think our chit chat had went off tangient liao...Originally posted by An Eternal Now:What is mythought-logical?
-
He should be still a prince then?Originally posted by laoda99:shaolin warrior monks saved Tang Tai Tsung from the Sui Dynasty soldiers =) -
goodOriginally posted by laoda99:shaolin warrior monks saved Tang Tai Tsung from the Sui Dynasty soldiers =)
they saved a good emperor
you sure its Tang Taizong and not Tang Taizu? -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
so can we say violence prevail in all religions?
All those are not [b]religious wars but violence caused by some Buddhists.[/b]
-
got diffOriginally posted by laoda99:so can we say violence prevail in all religions?
religions advocating violence as a mean is different from members using or even advocating violence as a mean
if Christianity, like the T Rex says is peaceful, then its apt to say Christianity advocates peace, but prolly other people got other opinions -
Originally posted by Icemoon:I can't .. 'cos I learn gongfu for health reason!
-
ya .. should be Taizong, I have the commemorative stamps for that. But I not sure when it happened, you see. The chinese name for the incident is "shi ba he shang qin wang" (18 monks rescuing the king) .. correct me if wrong.Originally posted by laurence82:good
they saved a good emperor
you sure its Tang Taizong and not Tang Taizu? -
He learn the Confusing Ya3 Ba1 8 Stroke Ba4 Zhang3Originally posted by laurence82:good
what gongfu u learning now? -
Cannot.Originally posted by laoda99:so can we say violence prevail in all religions?
Religious wars and wars caused by ppl who claim to be following that religion is a different thing.
Buddhism did not have wars coming under the name of Buddhism. We do not fight for Buddhism or force others to convert, etc.
Things done out of political and personal motives cannot come under Buddhism. -
u mean Shi Ba He Shang Jiu Qin Wang?Originally posted by Icemoon:ya .. should be Taizong, I have the commemorative stamps for that. But I not sure when it happened, you see. The chinese name for the incident is "shi ba he shang qin wang" (18 monks rescuing the king) .. correct me if wrong.
shiok, then should be Taizong liao -
where does Kenshin comes in?
-
Originally posted by laoda99:He learn the Confusing Ya3 Ba1 8 Stroke Ba4 Zhang3
-
Then can i say crusades cannot come under Christianity becoz they are done out of political and personal motives?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Cannot.
Religious wars and wars caused by ppl who claim to be following that religion is a different thing. Buddhism did not have wars coming under the name of Buddhism. We do not fight for Buddhism or force others to convert, etc.
Things done out of political and personal motives cannot come under Buddhism. -
He learned until he is so confused that he become Ba4 Zhang3Originally posted by laurence82: -
that is the Catholic's argument, not yours.Originally posted by laoda99:Then can i say crusades cannot come under Christianity becoz they are done out of political and personal motives? -
you mean the rice dumpling?? lolOriginally posted by laoda99:He learned until he is so confused that he become Ba4 Zhang3 -
religion is mostly peaceful (though there exist some that are violence), but men tends to misuse religion as an excuse to create violence ... when actually what they want is not about religion, its really about power and influence.Originally posted by laoda99:so can we say violence prevail in all religions? -
Dont start, coz it also giving credit to terroristsOriginally posted by laoda99:Then can i say crusades cannot come under Christianity becoz they are done out of political and personal motives? -
Also cannotOriginally posted by laoda99:Then can i say crusades cannot come under Christianity becoz they are done out of political and personal motives?
From what you posted earlier:
...This changed rapidly in the time of Constantine - the Council of Arles in 314 said that to forbid "the state the right to go to war was to condemn it to extinction", and shortly after that Christian philosophers began to formulate the doctrine of the Just War. (Read more about the history of this doctrine)
For many centuries Christians believed that it was right and proper to use violence (and thus war) to spread the faith and deal with its opponents. They did not regard violence as an inherently bad thing: whether it was bad or not depended on what it was being used for.
This thinking is covered under holy wars - the main examples of which, for Christians, are the Crusades.
From Constantine onwards Christian writers and preachers have used warlike and soldierly metaphors in their writing about the faith.
The idea that violence is not inherently bad can also be seen in some versions of the Just War doctrine - violence (war) can be a vital tool in restoring justice and peace.... -
not sure if there were any cases of church ministers donning battle gear and going for a pillage.Originally posted by laoda99:Then can i say crusades cannot come under Christianity becoz they are done out of political and personal motives? -
Buddhist councils will never go as far as approving violence.
-
hmmm.....but i really cannot see any difference from the wars caused by Buddhism and Christianity.....
Well
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Also cannot
From what you posted earlier:
...This changed rapidly in the time of Constantine - the Council of Arles in 314 said that to forbid "the state the right to go to war was to condemn it to extinction", and shortly after that Christian philosophers began to formulate the doctrine of the Just War. (Read more about the history of this doctrine)
[b]For many centuries Christians believed that it was right and proper to use violence (and thus war) to spread the faith and deal with its opponents. They did not regard violence as an inherently bad thing: whether it was bad or not depended on what it was being used for.
This thinking is covered under holy wars - the main examples of which, for Christians, are the Crusades.
From Constantine onwards Christian writers and preachers have used warlike and soldierly metaphors in their writing about the faith.
The idea that violence is not inherently bad can also be seen in some versions of the Just War doctrine - violence (war) can be a vital tool in restoring justice and peace....[/b] -
Wasnt Jesus the one who said, live by the sword, die by the sword?
Or i watch too much National Geographic?