Any Christian Martial Arts Schools?

[JDK]

I probably will go to hell, BUT isn't religion a belief? It is what you believe and others believe the other way. I can't understand why people - like your dad - forces his believes on others.

I am a Christian and had Buddhist masters. I always watched their ceremonies with the utmost interest. Doesn't mean I changed to a different belief, because that is also just a belief so why change.

Anyway. I think any Christian can go to any Buddhist school or even a temple. Doesn't mean you are going to hell or anything like that. I think it is a great learning experience to watch others. I have spent over 20 years reading Buddhist writings and watching Buddhist ceremonies only because of my interest and research in the origins of martial arts but I never considered myself a Buddhist. I know a lot about it but I still remained who I always was. And I think if someone is afraid of facing the other religion, than he/she by no means can consider himself a true believer.

-X-

I appreciate your thoughts, and I agree...it shouldnt be about fear.
Not knowing you at all...I take you at your word that you are a follower of Christ..a CHRISTian, if you will.

Being a christian, I am assuming you have spent as much or more time studying the Word of God s you have Buddhist teachings...PLEASE do not take that comment as "judging you"...as I said...we do not know each other, and the term "I am a christian" is tossed around so flippantly these days...many claim to be Christians...and yet do not practice even the most basic tenets of the Christian Faith.

I will assume I am writing to a born-again child of God.
The Bible says Eph 5:11
And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Now I have learned that when God says "no fellowship" he means none.
And He takes it a step further, by stating that we are to defend the Faith by reproving ( correcting, rebuking, pointing out the wrong) of unfruitfull works of darkness.

We cannot have our Cake and eat it too.......

IF you believe The Bible...souls are at stake....and Buddhism is following a pagan idol religion....therebye disobeying God if we belong to The Lord as christians.

God states time and time in His Word that He refuses to share His Glory with any other false god...and that his children are to remain apart, seperate, and abstain from the very hint of idolatry and works of honor, homage, worship, respect, to any other God but the One True God of the Bible

I can only answer with God's Word brother...and feel free to respond if you do not accept pr have questions about the following COMMANDS ( not Suggestions

1Th 5:22
Abstain from all appearance of evil.

1Jo 5:21
Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.


II Corthians 6:14
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

2Co 6:16
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said *, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

2Co 6:17
Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

1Co 8:10
For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;

Ex 20:3
Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

[Ben Gash]

Came across this gem, when I went to another forum.
Another perfect example of how delusional people who take the bible literally are.

http://www.dbhome.dk/carlo/cat.htm

That was quite the most mad thing I have seen in a long time.
*edit* Ahh, it's from a Jehovah's witness site

[Corwyn]

SO JDK,

gen 3:16
women suck

incest IS OK, and sometimes even lying is OK, contrary to the 10 commandments
Gen.17:15-16, 12:13-20 and then 20:2 and again 26:7

Rape is not only OK, but pleasing to your god - 16:1-4 or is it just the monage a trios that god digs?

Slavery is A OK
Gen 29:24, 29

Murder (because of rage and jealousy) is also A OK as long as you burn the correct set on entrails 4:8 and hey not only murder but torture too 16:6

Are you OK with ALL of these too?

[MasterKiller]

Ex 20:3
Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

[/B]

But it is OK to worship other Gods as long as God is your primary God. The Old Testament is very clear on this. As long as you do not put Chicklor the Mighty Chicken-Headed Beast above God, you can worship him all you want (provided you do not make an idol).

Jews were not originally monothestic and worshipped many dieties (household gods, village gods, etc...)

[cjurakpt]

The Bible says

ah, the catch all justification...what makes the bible intrinsically more correct than any other spiritual text? answer: nothing (same for all the rest of them)

we are to defend the Faith by reproving ( correcting, rebuking, pointing out the wrong) of unfruitfull works of darkness.

basically defined as anything contrary to what the bible says...so much for tolerance...

and Buddhism is following a pagan idol religion....

no it's not; if you think it is, you show a total misunderstanding of the fundamental point of Buddhism (e.g. - that it's not a religion per se, that it has no formal opinion on deity-worship, that it works regardless of theistic belief or not etc.); the only real "problem" with Buddhism is that it's another belief system - again, Christianity per se is predicated on the notion that every other system is basically wrong (deny it, go ahead); Buddhism, on the other hand, doesn't reall care what you believe in, but that liberation / freedom from suffering is not conditional on deity belief / worship

God states time and time in His Word that He refuses to share His Glory with any other false god

again, by definition, false god = any god not the "God" making this statement...


as for the literal interpretation of scripture, here's some more bibical silliness from Leviticus:

Childbirth12:2 - 5: When a woman conceives and gives birth to a boy, she shall be ritually unclean for seven days...Then, for 33 additional days, she shall have a waiting period during which her blood is ritually clean. Until this purification period is complete, she shall not touch anything holy and shall not enter the sanctuary. 12:5 If she gives birth to a girl, she shall have for two weeks the same ritually unclean status as during her menstrual period. Then, for 66 days after that, she shall have a waiting period during which her blood is ritually clean."
(so, giving birth to a girl makes you twice as unclean as birthing a boy...)

Sartorial19:19 Do not wear a garment that contains a forbidden mixture of fabrics.(wool & linen as per Deuteronomy 22:11)

Tonsorial19:27 Do not cut off the hair on the sides of your head. Do not shave off the edges of your beard.

fine if you want to follow it (the last two), but how exactly does not following them (and they are not suggestions, remember that) make you a candidate for eternal d@mnation?

btw, JKD, do you follow those two last precepts? I guess you can give my regards to Beelzebub if you don't...and you can't plead ignorance now, since it's been pointed out to you...

[MasterKiller]

Chicklor the Mighty Chicken-Headed Beast approves of cjurakpt.

[chasincharpchui]

what do you christians have to say bout this?

fiction once again?

[Ben Gash]

The relationship between Judaic law and the Christian way of life is extremely complicated and often poorly understood. Study of the old Testament for Christians is A) a history lesson, B) a series of illustrative tales giving insights and ideas and showing life as it is( 3000 year old scripture is often more gritty and real than many contemporary works), C)It gives a comprehensive treatise on the concepts of sin and redemption, D) it contains all the prophecy that points to the coming of Jesus and E), through point C explains the mechanism of Christian's redemption through Christ's sacrifice.
The old testament is also generally poorly (and selectively) studied by Christians, as much of it is long, cumbersome and contextually dificult to understand.
People fail to grasp fundamentals of the old testament, which leads them down all manner of blind alleys. For example much of the Torah deals with secular, non spiritual issues. There are whole chapters devoted to the diagnosis, containment and treatment of leprosy!!! Context is often ignored as well. The much abused Leviticus is talking to Levites, the Israeli priest caste, and are guidance for them on hygeine, dispute handling (an eye for an eye is not a general moral point, it's about making fair and just proclaimations) and ceremonial duties, as well as spiritual issues. Many aspects of law relating to things that seem incredibly silly now are in fact relating to very specific pagan practises.
There is even a fundamental linguistic confusion, as the Hebrew word that we translate as "The Law" is more accurately "The Teacher", which would probably spare much of the pointless debate that goes on.
The thing most often forgotten though is that the old testament contains God's covenant with THE JEWS. The new testament very specifically states on multiple occasions that there is a new and different covenant for Christians, based on grace, forgiveness,faith, relationship and choice.

[Corwyn]

The relationship between Judaic law and the Christian way of life is extremely complicated and often poorly understood. Study of the old Testament for Christians is A) a history lesson, B) a series of illustrative tales giving insights and ideas and showing life as it is( 3000 year old scripture is often more gritty and real than many contemporary works), C)It gives a comprehensive treatise on the concepts of sin and redemption, D) it contains all the prophecy that points to the coming of Jesus and E), through point C explains the mechanism of Christian's redemption through Christ's sacrifice.
The old testament is also generally poorly (and selectively) studied by Christians, as much of it is long, cumbersome and contextually dificult to understand.
People fail to grasp fundamentals of the old testament, which leads them down all manner of blind alleys. For example much of the Torah deals with secular, non spiritual issues. There are whole chapters devoted to the diagnosis, containment and treatment of leprosy!!! Context is often ignored as well. The much abused Leviticus is talking to Levites, the Israeli priest caste, and are guidance for them on hygeine, dispute handling (an eye for an eye is not a general moral point, it's about making fair and just proclaimations) and ceremonial duties, as well as spiritual issues. Many aspects of law relating to things that seem incredibly silly now are in fact relating to very specific pagan practises.
There is even a fundamental linguistic confusion, as the Hebrew word that we translate as "The Law" is more accurately "The Teacher", which would probably spare much of the pointless debate that goes on.
The thing most often forgotten though is that the old testament contains God's covenant with THE JEWS. The new testament very specifically states on multiple occasions that there is a new and different covenant for Christians, based on grace, forgiveness,faith, relationship and choice.

Ben,

You are absolutely correct. However these reasons and logic only make sense if one understands the historical context and accepts the fact that these writings were created by MAN and ONLY man and are NOT to be blindly accepted as the infallible word(s) of some skyman. Once you start down that road you enter the world of neurosis or psychosis

[SevenStar]

I'm sure you guys caught the archeological find in jerusalem on the news. They found a tomb under a hotel. Inside, there are three caskets, one says mary magdalene, one says jesus and one says judah, son of jesus. What do you think about this? What if it is found to actually be jesus christ and mary magdalene?

[cjurakpt]

Many aspects of law relating to things that seem incredibly silly now are in fact relating to very specific pagan practises.

precisely - what made sense back then (e.g. - eat pork = die from trichinosis = God doesn't want you to eat pork), can be totally irrelevant now; which means one engages in a relitavistic reading of "sacred" texts; which makes sense; but then it opens you up to the possibility that someone can come along and punch holes in your theology a mile wide, and that is very inconvenient from the perspective of holding ultimate moral authority, not to mention dealing with pesky questions from congregants who really want you to have all the answers anyway (my opinion, sorry)

wha we then see is how "religion" is littl emore than an archaic convention that, back when people had a much pporer understanding of how the natural world operated (that is, cause and effect), they attribbuted many phennomena to "the divine"; as the utilitarian aspect of religion dwindled, it was replaced by a much more existential one, that is as an answer to questions such as the meaning of life, what is truth, and, most importantly, what happens after "I" die, will "I" still exist, and if so, will "I" be happy? not that these things weren't around a while ago either, but the utilitarian and the "spiritual" stuff was clearly delineated; now, unfortunately, since all of it has been relegated to the latter, you have people trying to justify why the Creator of the Universe (or Chicklor - I kinda have taken a shine to him myself) would utter these bon mots if they weren't meant to have meaning FOREVER! I mean, if they are not relevant now, then it implies somewhat short sighted thinking on "His" part and here we have yet another paradox (right up there with "if he created everything according to his wishes, then he allowed for free will, which allows for people to turn against / not believ in him, so that must also be part of his will, so why would he in fact condem to eternal suffering those carrying out his free will? and again, if he gave us free choice so that we could choose not to see him as god, then if we choose not to, he must be ok with that, etc. etc. etc.")

religion is silly; especially the hats...

[B-Rad]

I'm sure you guys caught the archeological find in jerusalem on the news. They found a tomb under a hotel. Inside, there are three caskets, one says mary magdalene, one says jesus and one says judah, son of jesus. What do you think about this? What if it is found to actually be jesus christ and mary magdalene?

I've been reading about it. At first I was fairly excited (seemed like an interesting find), but then I found out that they've known about this thing since the 1980's.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science....ap/index.html

[chasincharpchui]

I'm sure you guys caught the archeological find in jerusalem on the news. They found a tomb under a hotel. Inside, there are three caskets, one says mary magdalene, one says jesus and one says judah, son of jesus. What do you think about this? What if it is found to actually be jesus christ and mary magdalene?

its actually more than 3 caskets

theres one for joseph
jesus
maria(his mother)
mariamne(mary magdalene)
judah son of jesus
and 2 of his brothers

cant remember
http://youtube.com/results?search_qu...&search=Search

[Ben Gash]

In 1996, when the British Broadcasting Corp. aired a short documentary on the same subject, archaeologists challenged the claims. Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television.

10 characters

[Corwyn]

I wouldn't put much stock in those tombs.
First, they were found in 80, so outside of the "media" hype I seriously doubt that anything of great scholarly value will be revealed now...
It's going to be another Horaldo opens Al Capones tomb kind of thing.

Second, the names, Jesus, Joseph and Mary are like Michael and John and well Mary, today. If you found a wallet that said "this wallet belongs to John with no photo ID" who would you give it to?

Third, the location doesn't make real sense.
this is a middle class grave in Jerusalem for a poor guy from Galalleh - unless of course he got rich selling trinkets and splinters off the cross of the son of god .

4th, short of a full scroll that said this is Jesus, the guy who preached that he was the son of god who had 12 desciples and married Marry signed in blood, there is simply no way to conclude that THIS is the guy. We have no pictures, - unless like JDK you think he was a white blond haired blue eyed guy (sorry couldn't resist) and outside of some VERY VERY tenuous writing by Josephus every other reference to the actual existence of a biblical JC has been completely debunked as forgeries by xian apologists. There is simply NO credible evidence that a guy anything like what is described in the buybull actually lived during the time described.