Truth Magazine

By Robert F. Turner

The Minneapolis Star once published a survey made among people of all religious faiths, asking, “Which do you think is more important for the church to do – to convert people to a spiritual belief so that they can earn a happy life after death, or, to teach people how to live better every day with all other people?” Only 17 percent of those interviewed believed that conversion to a spiritual belief was more important. We would frame the question differently, and we believe Jesus knew the Christian life is best for both here and hereafter, but there is no doubt where he placed the emphasis. The response of so-called “religious” people is a clear indication of the extent to which the “social gospel” has compromised genuine Christianity.

Jesus taught, “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth . . . but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven . . . . No man can serve two masters . . . . Therefore . . . be not anxious for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on . . . . Seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matt. 6:19f). Or consider this: “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. . . . For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Matt. 16:24,26) Jesus’ first concern was for the soul and eternity.

Many things have conspired to change this emphasis, but we will note two things in particular: the “social gospel” and the “whole man concept.” Roman Catholicism had a strangle hold on Western Europe prior to the Reformation. The “Church” crowned or deposed kings, and directed both social and religious life. When rebellion came it was not only religious, but political and social. As an example, the French Revolution overthrew “church” control and rejected moral restraint. But the people soon learned that “freedom” is not free. Without restraint anarchy reigned and life became intolerable. So-called godless France was forced to revise its stand toward religion; but her modernistic theologians changed its emphasis to meet “this world” needs. Compassion, work ethics, social concern, etc. (all inherent in Christianity, but not its goal) were given top billing, and the “social gospel” flourished.

Some time later in Germany (not necessarily related to the social gospel) some learned men developed the “whole man” concept of education. It became apparent to them that schooling must be more than the pouring of information into the students. The physical, social and spiritual side of man must be developed as well as his intellectual side; and this called for “whole man” education. I believe their concept was valid, and has done much to improve educational systems when kept in proper balance. But the “whole man” concept did not stop at the public schools. Through religious Teacher Training books and courses, often written or taught by people with secular education backgrounds, that “whole man” concept was brought into “our” Bible classes. It was a “natural” to blend this with what we had accepted of the “social gospel,” and conclude that “the church” was obligated to the “whole man.”

If you ask for Scripture you will probably get Luke 2:52, “And Jesus increased in wisdom (intellectually) and stature (physically), and in favor with God (spiritually) and man (socially).” There you have it, with the usual comments in parentheses. Is there any doubt that Jesus grew in all these ways? Is there any doubt that all individuals should grow in these ways? No doubt in my mind! But what has this to do with the work of the organized church? It is pure and unwarranted assumption to use this passage to justify church support of secular schools, gymnasiums, and social clubs. It becomes an attack upon the distinctive role of the church.

Christianity does affect all human relations. In the domestic realm it makes for better husband or wife, and children. In the business world it makes for diligence and honesty (Col. 3:17f). It teaches respect for civil government (Rom. 13), and develops a proper understanding of neighborliness (Lk. 10:29f). But this is a far cry from putting the church into secular business, politics, or “Family Life Centers.” 1 Corinthians 11:22 (“Have ye not houses to eat and to drink in?”) shows we “despise” the church of God when we mix its worship role with domestic functions. The problem was not where they were (the church could meet for worship in a private dwelling); but why or for what they were assembled. The organized church is saints teamed in works peculiarly Christian.

The church, both distributively and collectively, has a teaching role (1 Tim. 3:15; 2 Cor. 11:7-8). It is the “pillar and ground” of divine truth, declaring by word and example the goods news of salvation in Christ. The association of saints promotes worship and edification (1 Cor. 11:18f; Heb. 10:24-25), and opportunity to pool resources for evangelism and benevolence (Phil. 4:15; 1 Cor. 16:1-2). The emphasis is spiritual, as is seen in the whole of Scriptures concerning the church at work. It is “a spiritual institution, to administer to spiritual needs.”

Scriptural contributions are (or should be) made with authorized purposes in mind; and we break trust with contributors and our Lord when we use these funds for something else. In civil government the fire department has specific reasons for being, and tax funds are assigned with those needs in mind, I fear some brethren might argue that since each citizen has other needs (the “whole man,”remember!) the fire department funds should be spent on all those needs. Of course we could end up with failure to prevent or cure fires – and it seems in many church circles the “fires” of eternal torment are nothing like as important as the fire under the coffee pot.

Brethren, Christianity makes for a better world today but its effect on this life is a by-product of its greater reason for being. Christianity aims and prepares us for life in heaven; and we must not allow the social gospel and the ‘whole man” concept to turn us from that eternal destiny.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 11, pp. 327-328
June 7, 1990

By Lanny Smith

Sectarianism is a big problem in our religious world. It is a manifestation of the fleshly, sensual side of man, and “they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (Gal. 5:19-21). The Lord’s body is not to be sectarian, for it includes all who have been saved (Acts 2:36-47). Nevertheless, there can be those in that body who are sectarian (Acts 15:5f). Such being the case, it is needful for us to understand this issue.

A sect “properly denotes a predilection either for a particular truth, or a perversion of one, generally with the expectation of personal advantage; hence, a division and the formation of a party or sect in contrast to the uniting power of ‘the truth’ held, in toto ” (Vines). In other words, a particular doctrine(s) is elevated and emphasized as the sole basis for acceptability, with little regard for the rest of the truth, or for those who feel differently.

We read of sects in the Scriptures. There was the “sect of the Sadducees” (Acts 5:17), the “sect of the Pharisees” (Acts 15:5), and others. Each of these groups was distinct, and each claimed to follow the same God, and the same Scriptures. In modern times, a parallel is found in denominationalism, which is a synonym for sectarianism. Webster says that denominationalism is “the emphasizing of denominational differences to the point of being narrowly exclusive: sectarianism.” Consider, for instance, these denominations: Seventh Day Adventist, Baptist, Latter Day Saints, and Pentecostal. Each of these groups show “a predilection either for a particular truth, or a perversion of one.” Such groups are therefore condemned in Scripture (Gal. 5:19-21; 1 Cor. 1:10-13).

Unfortunately, some Christians seem to believe that only the denominations are sectarian, or for some reason, it’s acceptable when “we” are sectarian. That such is true is evident to anyone who knows the situation with God’s people. We have a wide variety of sects ranging from “ultra-liberal” to “ultra-conservative.” We can literally “join the sect of our choice”! While many preach unity based upon God’s word, they practice denominationalism.

There is, for example, a sect which shows “a predilection” for “gospel,” rather than “doctrine.” This has the effect of including several sects, but excluding those who insist upon “the uniting power of ‘the truth’ held, in toto.” Or, if such is not your taste, there are sects in which a whole host of “pet doctrines” are emphasized: no classes, no women teachers, no located preachers, and so forth. I do not say this to ridicule anyone’s convictions, but to stress the sin of forming sects built around these doctrines.

If I may, I would like to get even closer to home: some among us would seem to define a “sound” church as one with no organ, no orphan’s home, and no kitchen. This can become our own sectarian “list of essentials.” The members may be materialistic, worldly, and indifferent, but at least they belong to the “right” church! Brethren, this is no less sectarian than the denominations! I am not saying that the above issues are unimportant, but let us never judge another’s faithfulness only by issues that we deem important (cf. 2 Cor. 10:12). How can some of us smugly criticize our “liberal” brethren, while having a “beam in (our) own eye” (Matt. 7:1-5)? Again, this is not said to excuse our brethren’s sinful practices, but rather to get us to look in the mirror first.

What are the solutions to sectarianism? I suggest four:

1. Realize that no one is immune to sectarianism, and that each of us must endeavor to avoid it (1 Cor. 1:10; 1 Pet. 4:11; Eph. 4:1-6).

2. Realize that no one truth is more important than another: we must seek to know and to do all truth to the best of our abilities (Matt. 23:23-24; Jn. 7:17; 8:31-32; 12:48).

3. Realize that each of us is fallible, and may well be deficient somewhere (Psa. 19:12; 1 Cor. 4:4). This does not excuse sin, but it can humble us before we look down our nose at another (Lk. 18:9-14; Gal. 6:1).

4. Realize that “the Lord knoweth them that are his.” We need not concern ourselves with determining each individual’s final destiny. Our job is to “depart from iniquity” and “contend for the faith” (2 Tim. 2:19; Jude 3).

Friends, God’s church is not a sect. It contains all of his people, dedicated to seeking “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” Are you a loyal subject in the kingdom of Christ? If not, why not become one (Acts 2:36-47)?

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 11, p. 326
June 7, 1990

By Daniel H. King

Our world is becoming more of a unified community. Several things have contributed to making this so. One is the speed at which we can now travel from one place to another on our globe. Air travel is primarily responsible for this revolution in rapid transport. Both speed and cost have changed drastically. Another important advancement has been in the area of satellite communication. With the touch of a few numbers on the key pad of a modern telephone we can now communicate with people almost anywhere in the world. News events happen live on our TV screen as they take place half a world away from us.

One of the obvious results of these technological innovations is that, so to speak, the “world has become a smaller place.” At one time it was easy for us to ignore what was happening in some remote land that did not speak our language, wear clothing similar to ours or have customs like us. We could even pass over the section of the newspaper that covered the rise and fall of their despots and dictators and heralded the stance they took toward the “superpowers,” “East and West,” etc. Those of us who cared deeply about the spread of the gospel might read with more than a little interest about how missionaries were treated and what the native religion was like. But it all seemed so far away! No longer. Now one can get on a jumbo jet and fly anywhere on earth in a single day. And with every passing decade that time factor becomes a smaller consideration. Communication with these remote locations is well nigh instantaneous. Indeed, our world is becoming a “smaller place.”

By watching world events in recent years, and especially those turbulent occurrences relating to Iran and the Middle East, Christians are finding it necessary to become better informed as to the nature of world religions. Whereas in the past we could be satisfied to understand the basic views of Methodism, Catholicism, Presbyterianism, Lutheranism, and the other so called “affiliations of historic Christianity,” suddenly we had thrust upon us a new vocabulary and a whole new set of religious ideologues representing arcane movements. Where do they come from? What do they stand for? What do they believe? Why do they seem to resent us (Americans) so much? These are questions that immediately entertain us when we hear the newscasts and read the papers.

But for God’s people there are some issues which loom large in our minds. The most obvious one relates to the salvation of the souls of men. The Bible says that the gospel of Christ is the only hope for the rescue and redemption of the human race from sin and its punishment (Rom. 1:16). Without faith in Christ and obedience to him, there is no salvation (Jn. 3:16, 8:32, etc.). There is no more plain teaching of the Word of God than this. It will not help wistfully to promote some system of escape for them apart from Christ. Some of our brethren, of course, in their misguided sympathy have made the effort. But this will neither justify the ungodly nor will it relieve those of us commissioned with the gospel from our responsibility. When we view on our TV screens these masses of humanity idolizing in ignorance some religious figure of dubious reputation, we cannot help but be moved. Hopefully we will be moved to action. Sending men to preach the Word, supporting them at a level where they can be effective and will not grow discouraged and quit, developing native preachers, provisions of Bibles and supplies, teaching materials in translation, etc., are all things we can and should be doing.

Another matter of some concern should be that of educating our people as to the basic background and viewpoint of most of these major world religions. In coming years we will not only be confronting the reality of this sort of religious diversity in the national media, but these people will be living in our neighborhoods. Many already are. We can confidently expect that with our birthrate in this country declining and our tax base dwindling because of this (leading to fewer workers supporting more people on social programs), we will be seeing many more immigrants from other countries permitted entrance into the U.S. A considerable number of foreign temples and shrines already dot the landscape in many major U.S. cities. Good materials and solid teaching have always presented the first and best hope against the inroads of any error (1 Tim. 5:16). This is no exception. To that end, we at Guardian of Truth have prepared the present “special issue.” We hope that it will serve a useful purpose in those places where it goes.

Finally, the Lord’s people ought to be encouraged by every opportunity to compare Christianity to the world religions. Like a diamond among the commonest stones, its radiance and purity have everything to gain and nothing to lose by the comparison. Inevitably we will be regarded as intolerant or even arrogant by some for taking this viewpoint. A large number of our intellectual leaders suggest that we submit our faith to some sort of “syncretism” – i.e., attempt to unite or reconcile diverse religious tenets or practices, so as to coexist peacefully and without competition, Syncretic movements are starting to burgeon in this philosophical climate: the Theosophical movement in this country, the aim of which is “to rescue from degradation the archaic truths which are the basis of all religions; and to uncover the fundamental unity from which they all spring”; from the Hindu background, there is the Ramakrishna Mission; from Muslim origins comes Baha’ism (its temple near Chicago has nine doors through which men may enter representing the “nine religions of the world”); in Japan there is the symbol of Ittoen, the Garden of Light, a swastika with a cross at the center and a sun in the background, and whose prayer is, “Teach us to worship the essence of all religions, and help us to learn the one ultimate truth” (See J.N.D. Anderson, Christianity and Comparative Religion, p. 14).

The more we honestly examine the biblical revelation and the faith of the early church, the more obvious the reason becomes for Christianity’s ultimate displacement of all the philosophical, immoral and amoral religious constituencies existing at the time of its appearance. The proclamation of the church was and is utterly unique. There are some features which have their counterparts in other religious systems, but nothing compares with the gospel related by Paul in I Corinthians 15:3f: “That Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the Scriptures; and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve; then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep; then he appeared to James; then to all the apostles; and last of all . . . he appeared to me.”

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 10, pp. 289, 319
May 17, 1990

By Chris Reeves

One may wonder why it is so important to devote such time and space to a study of the world’s religions. And when reading about the religions of the East, the Christian probably thinks that he will never come in contact with a practicing Buddhist. So, why should he find out anything about his beliefs? The fact is, it is very possible for us to come in contact with a Buddhist, and we have a responsibility to talk with him about his beliefs as well as our own. If we think that Buddhism (or one of the other world religions) is practiced only in some far-away country, we are mistaken. For example, do you realize that one of American’s religious denominations is called the Buddhist Churches of America? It was incorporated in 1942, its headquarters are in San Francisco, California, and there are about 250,000 members today. The challenge to learn more about our “religious” friends and neighbors is, therefore, before us. This article is intended to briefly summarize the origin, teachings, and development of modernday Buddhism. A brief contrast of Buddhism with the Bible will also be given in hopes that the reader will understand the fundamental differences between the two, and the superiority of the latter.

Buddha – The Enlightened One

Buddhism begins with a man who woke up. In his later years, people came to Buddha and inquired, “Are you a god?” He answered, “No.” “An Angel?” “No.” “A saint?” “No.” “Then who are you?” Buddha answered, “I am awake.” His answer became his title. In Sanskrit the root budh denotes “to wake up” and “to know,” thus, Buddha means “the Enlightened One” or “the Awakened One.” Buddha’s experience of “enlightenment” became the essence of his religion.

The events leading up to Buddha’s enlightenment are as follows. Buddha was born around 560 B.C. into a very wealthy family who lived in northern India. His full name was Siddhartha Gautarna of the Sakyas. He was the son of a rajah (ruler) and grew up in a life of luxury. His father protected him from all outside influences. This lifestyle gave him no satisfaction, so he decided to leave and become homeless. For the first time Siddhartha faced life’s realities. He saw the suffering of the world in three forms: a decrepit old man, and invalid racked with disease lying on the road, and a corpse. Finally, he saw a monk with a shaven head, a robe and a begging bowl. These sights taught Siddhartha that life is full of suffering and death. What he longed for now was true knowledge. So, at age twenty-nine he left his wife, son, family and home, in search for truth.

For the next six years he studied at the feet of two great Hindu masters, and even tried severe acts of asceticism at one point to find the meaning of life. However, he did not find what he was looking for in these things. It was not until he practiced a form of raja yoga (meditation) while sitting under a fig tree that he found his enlightenment and became the Buddha. He sat for a total of forty-nine days under this tree (call a Bo-tree, or “tree of enlightenment”), but it was in the first three days of his meditation that he received the knowledge that he would later teach. For the next forty-five years, Buddha would travel through India teaching his message of enlightenment and gathering his followers. He died at the age of eighty (c. 480 B.C.).

Buddha – The Reformer

Before examining the teachings of Buddha, it is important for one to realize that Buddhism was originally a religion of reaction against the perversions of Hinduism an Indian protestantism. Buddha came out of the world of Hinduism and, when he grew older, revolted against the existing Brahamanical (priest) system predominated by empty rituals, ceremonies and sacrifices. He also protested the caste supremacy of the priests and certain religious doctrines like the belief in a individual soul (atman). Buddha did not want to re-establish Hinduism in any way, he wanted to start a new religion, and that he did.

Determined to change the religion of his day, Buddha preached a religion devoid of authority (i.e., each person is to do his own religious seeking), ritual, speculation (i.e., soul, or life after cleath), tradition and the supernatural (i.e., miracles and God). In formulating his religion, however, Buddha was largely influenced by the Upanishadic sages, and the prevailing ideas of karma, reincarnation, yoga and the monastic life. In short, he accepted the best of the existing religion and rejected what he did not consider useful.

Buddha – The Teacher

When Buddha finally arose from sitting under the Bo tree, he travelled toward India’s holy city of Bernares. Before arriving in Deer Park at Sarnath, he preached his first sermon to five companions. His subject was the Four Noble Truths, which contained Buddha’s most fundamental beliefs. All that Buddha later taught would unfold from these Four Noble Truths.

The First Noble Truth is the knowledge of suffering (dukkha). This states that all human existence from the day of one’s birth to his death is miserable and painful. The Second Noble Truth concerns the origin of suffering. Suffering has its source in desire (tanha), specifically the desire to pull apart from the rest of humanity and be an individual self. Buddha did not believe that a person had a soul (atman), nor was he an individual, but rather he was one with the rest of the world. Buddha taught that when a person desires to be an individual, suffering begins. The Third Noble Truth concerns the destruction of suffering. This is the central aim of Buddhism. It is achieved when one is freed from the endless cycle of rebirths (samsara) and when one enters the blessed state of nirvana (either before or after death). The Fourth Noble Truth points the way to the removal of suffering. This is achieved by walking the Eightfold Path to nirvana.

The Eightfold Path is as follows: (1) Right knowledge; (2) Right attitude; (3) Right speech; (4) Right action; (5) Right living; (6) Right effort; (7) Right mindfulness; and (8) Right composure. The Eightfold Path focuses on the Buddhist’s knowledge of the Four Noble Truths, his ethical conduct and mental discipline. The Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path were the heart of Buddha’s teaching.

The goal of one’s understanding the Four Noble Truths and walking the Eightfold Path is nirvana. Etymologically this word means “to blow out,” or “to extinguish,” and all the religious effort in Buddhism points to this end. One could sum up a Buddhist’s philosophy in one word “escape.” It is a desire for release from the karma – the law of cause and effect, and rebirth; a Buddhist searches for nirvana. The cycle of rebirths can be broken only by ceasing all desire. When this is done, one will enter nirvana. But what is nirvana? It may be described as something between annihilation and continued existence. Negatively, nirvana is the state where all desire is extinguished. Affirmatively, it is a continued existence which cannot be described. Buddha said nirvana was like the wind; it is there but you cannot show it. When asked to define nirvana, Buddha always said that he had never tried to solve this question. His mission was to show man the way of escape, not describe what he would find once he had been liberated.

Buddha lived and taught for almost fifty years after his enlightenment, but he did not write a single word of his teachings. His original teachings were handed down from one generation to the next by word of mouth. This continual oral tradition was not put into writing until about three centuries after his death. By this time, the religion had split into a number of schools. Each school set down the teachings of Buddha as they understood them. The oldest Buddhist writings, the Pali canon, are called the Tripitaka or “three baskets.” These “scriptures” contain stories about the life of Buddha, rules for the monastic order and Buddhist theology. They are used by the Theravada Buddhists. The Mahayana Buddhists, however, recognize many more texts as authoritative.

Buddhist Sects

Soon after Buddha’s death, his followers split into many factions, and within two hundred years, two major traditions emerged. They were the strict, conservative Theravadins and the more liberal Mahayanas. The basic difference between the two was how they saw the life of Buddha and the way of salvation. The former viewed Buddha as a saint and only a monk could achieve salvation, while the latter viewed Buddha as a savior and everyone could be saved, Theravada Buddhism is the main tradition in Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia. Mahayana Buddhism is popular in Mongolia, Tibet, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Nepal. After Buddhism splits into Theravada and Mahayana, Theravada holds together while Mahayana continues to divide. Mahayana divides into five sects with Zen being the most popular. Zen Buddhism came from China and developed in Japan in the twelfth century. In Zen, one reaches enlightenment (satori) through meditation (zazen) and answering riddles (koan) under the hand of a Zen master (roshi). The state of satori cannot be described; it comes abruptly, momentarily, and often more than once. Zen is now very popular in the West.

Western thinkers have been interested in Buddhism for about two-hundred years. In 1875, Buddhism was promoted in America with the founding of the Theosophical Society in New York. Buddhism also traveled to the United States via Asian immigration at the end of the nineteenth century. Today, most Buddhists are united in the Buddhist Churches of America. Their membership of 250,000 is made up of both Americans and Asians. Buddhism has about 300 million followers world-wide and continues to grow. No matter where they are or of what sect they are a part, all Buddhists have faith in the Three Jewels: Buddha, his teaching (dharma) and the religious community that he founded (sangha).

Buddha or the Bible?

There are a number of differences between the teachings of Buddha and the Bible. According to the Bible, God is a Spirit Being who is Creator and Sustainer of the universe (Gen. 1:1-3; Jn. 4:24; Acts 17:23-31). Yet, he is separate from it. Buddhism, however, denies the existence of a personal God. It says the world evolved and it operates only by natural power and law, not divine command. Thus, man is the center of all “religious” activity – there is no faith in, or worship of, God. In Zen Buddhism, God is man and man is God; all is God and God is all (pantheism). There is a certain “force” (tao) that penetrates all things, and that force is God. This kind of pantheism fr,ind in Zen was popularized in the Star Wars films.

According to the Bible, “truth” is objective (i.e., it originates outside of man). It comes from God, does not change and is contained in Scripture (Psa. 117:2; Jn. 17:17). In these last days, God has revealed his truth through the words of Jesus Christ (Heb. 1:2). Jesus is the source of all spiritual truth today (Jn. 1: 17; 14:6), and only through his word can man be set free from sin (Jn. 8:31,32). In Buddhism, “truth” (englightemnent) comes subjectively through meditation. There are different forms of meditation in Buddhism and the experience of “enlightenment” differs from sect to sect.

We are told in the Bible that all responsible humans are sinners (Rom. 3:23). Sin may be a direct transgression of God’s law (1 Jn. 3:4), or a neglect of it (Jas. 4:17), but all sin is against God (Psa. 51:4; Acts 5:4), and will bring separation from God (Isa. 59:2) as well as spiritual death (Rom. 6:23). God, by his grace, sent Jesus into the world to save mankind from sin and death (Jn. 3:16). Those persons who obey his word will be saved (Heb. 5:9). Thus, we are saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8). The Buddhist, however, is not trying to be saved from sin and its consequences, but rather from the law of karma and reincarnation. His “salvation” comes when all desire is quenched and he stops being reborn. This, too, is achieved only by one’s own effort; no outside help is necessary (a “works only” salvation).

Man is pictured in the Bible as the crown of God’s creation, being made in the image of God and having a soul (Gen. 1:26,27; 2:7). With his body, man is to serve God (Rom. 12:1; 1 Cor. 6:19,20). But in Buddhism, man is viewed as a worthless creature and life is hardly worth living. He does not have a soul and his entire existence is evil and full of suffering. The Bible, however, does not teach a pessimistic view of life. Each person is valuable (Matt. 16:26) and has a purpose in life – to serve his Creator (Eccl. 12:13). Though he may have to endure suffering in this life, he will be rewarded for his endurance (Matt. 5:11, 12; Jas. 1:24,12). And, his entire existence is not all evil. He may choose to do evil or good (Gal. 5:16-25).

The Bible tells us that those who die in harmony with God’s word will enter into heaven and there live eternally with God (Jn. 14:3); Rev. 21:3). Heaven is a place of great reward (Matt. 5:12), where there is no suffering or wickedness (Rev. 21:4,8). All the saints in heaven will exist in a new , glorified body (Phil. 3:21; 1 Cor. 15:35-49), and they will serve God forever (Rev. 22:3,5). The Buddhist, however, longs for nirvana. Nirvana is a place where desire has ceased. It is not a place of annihilation, but at the same time it cannot be described or realized by any of the senses, only by the mind.

Many other differences could be given, but these will suffice to show that Buddhism is in conflict with the Bible. We must, therefore, rationally weigh the evidence that supports the teaching of Buddhism and the Bible to see which is the truth. When this is done, one will find that the former is based upon the imagination of one man, while the latter is God’s inspired word.

Buddha or Jesus?

As the writer of the book of Hebrews showed the superiority of Christ over Judaism, it is necessary today to show the superiorty of Christ over Buddhism. This can easily be done by looking at the authority of Buddha and the authority of Jesus. What authority did Buddha have to teach his doctrine? None. Having no God, no inspired word, and no miracles to confirm the teaching, Buddhism depends wholly upon the doctrines and commandments of one man. Buddha has no real authority for saying the Eightfold Path is the way to salvation. Christ, on the other hand, said, “I am the way” (Jn. 14:6) to salvation, and he proved it by working miracles and ultimately rising from the dead. His resurrection declared him to be the Son of God (Rom. 1:4). and he was given all authority over everything in heaven and on earth (Eph. 1:20-22). Since he has all authority, we must listen to him rather than man.

There is no hope for the Buddhist except he believe in Jesus Christ. There is no such thing as reincarnation (cf. Heb. 9:27) and nirvana. We must show the Buddhist that “in none other is there salvation, for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). “There is one God, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:5). Christ is all-sufficient and the hope of heaven is our only hope.

Bibliography

The History, Teaching, and Development of Buddhism: Banerjee, P. Early Indian Religions, New York: Halsted Press, 1973.

“Buddhism.” Compton’s Encyclopedia. Chicago: Compton’s Learning Co., 1989.

Burtt, E.A. The Teachings of the Compassionate Buddha. New York: The New American Library Inc., 1955.

Mead, Frank S. The Handbook of Denominations. Nashville: Abingdon, 1985.

Metz, Wulf. “The Enlightened One: “Buddhism.” Eerdman’s Handbook To The World Religions. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1982.

Reynolds, Frank E. “Buddhism.” The World Book Encyclopedia. Chicago: World Book Inc., 1989.

Smith, Huston. The Religions of Man. New York: The New American Library of World Literature Inc., 1958.

A Contrasting of Buddhism with the Bible: Curry, Melvin. “All-Sufficient Christianity vs. Heathen Religion. ” Florida College Lectures. Temple Terrace, FL: Florida College Bookstore, 1971.

Dumoulin, Heinrich S. J. Christianity Meets Buddhism. LaSalle, IL: Open Court Publishing Co., 1974.

Geisler, Norman L. Worlds Apart.- A Handbook on World Views. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House Co., 1989.

Jackson, Wayne. “Christianity and World Religions.” Reason & Revelation (Tract).

McDowell, Josh. Understanding Non-Christian Religions. San Bernadino, CA: Campus Crusade For Christ Inc., 1982.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 10, pp. 297-300
May 17, 1990