First question: Why would you want to?
Is there a sense of something 'missing' from the Christian Tradition? As Earl said, and to me its a huge point, Christianity is the ONLY tradition that seems to look elsewhere for validation - I suggest the fault is not with Christianity but with the west, with its constant craving for novelty and innovation.
You would never find a Buddhist (or any other) asking if there is something to be had from Christianity.
Again, Earl highlights the difference between 'Christian belief' and 'Buddhist practice' - so are you talking about methods?
The obvious is meditation, but the Buddhists didn't invent meditation, it is practiced universally in its various forms.
And again, whereas 'meditation' and the fruit thereof might be the 'goal' of Buddhist practice, it is a stepping stone towards higher states in Christian prayer, ie contemplation.
+++
There is a basic and fundamental difference between Buddhism and Christianity, which colours everything, and this is the place of the person in the schemata, a point I have made many times across this board (and one which has never been seriously challenged).
In short, spokespersons of either camp who think they can mix the two simply do not comprehend the metaphysic of their own system, and sadly in the West (and the further west you go, the worse it gets) a large number of clergy are included in this, who demonstrate a staggering ignorance of the depths of Christian theology as they trample over the subtle beauty of their own tradition to plunder the treasures of another.
+++
I have picked up on Z's post, not against Z, but simply because this post highlights some of the issues:
"Nirvana can be seen as the place and god as the being [a christianised perspective], two views of the one existence, so reaching nirvana is not necessarily above god."
But Christianity would say there is only God - thus to talk about nirvana and not God implies a degree of unknowing in Buddhism which is known in Christianity.
"Gods creation [us] emanates from within him, so if Jesus is a perfect example of god as a human form, then he shows us the way back home."
God creates, he does not emanate, and this is a fundamental distinction that effects everything. Buddhism is a monism - God and the cosmos are one. The Abrahamic traditions are a dualism - there is God and there is the cosmos - and this dualism is resolved in the Trinity.
"I have heard a Christian argument, that meditation is not so harmless in some cases, as one visualises idols [deities] & these have an affect on your soul that is impure [some say even so with Jesus!], so why not meditate upon god only? - just something what i have come across!"
You should have the argument explained.
There is simple meditation, and there are psychodynamic methods which have profound psychic effects, and unmoderated are fundamentally dangerous. A non-negotiable rule of the latter is that they should NEVER been undertaken without proper supervision - the techniques are very real and not without danger.
In short - consider the Greek myth of Pandora's Box. Our asylums are full of those who, by (mostly) accident and (the occasional rarity of) design, lifted the lid and found themselves unable to replace it. There is no place more dangerous than the depths of one's own psyche, and no place in heaven or earth more dangerous to travel alone.
I am saying this to show that we can learn from each other!
What can we learn from each other that is not already taught at home?
I should hate Christians for their persecution of my kind
This is something of a sentimental and spurious intrusion into the discussion.
The strong persecute the weak everywhere, in every tradition, and utilise any means at hand to justify it.
A favourite saying from Medieval Japan (whose Buddhist monks were a law unto themselves):
"The weak are meat; the strong eat."
Thomas