Thread dedicated to laurence82
-
haih..not yet banned ah? yellow must be really auspicious
-
Hmm.... I followed your links but it points to a thread from this same Buddhist forum. I thought it is the posts you made in the Christian forum that causes a big hoo hah?Originally posted by laurence82:You just echoed my exact thoughts
Go read here on my second post, i think its second post, in the forum
It was the remarks on the differences in values.
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=173291&page=1
My question for, well, everyone here is this. While there are things that might be offensive to the Christians, what might be the things that will be disparaging to Buddhism?
And this question can apply from any faith to any faith. Meaning, what are the things Buddhists practise that might be disparaging to Muslims, or from Hindus to Sikhs etc etc
These are the issues we all have to look at. My issue is, what really can contribute to world peace to members of all faith?
Anyway, can you point me to the issues raised by your detractors? I would like to see what is it you said that set them off, and also why what you said set them off...
As for things that offend Christians, well it depends on what type of Christians. Some Christians display an admirable level of stoicism and morality that far exceeded mine. They emphasize the 'love' message from Jesus Christ and at the same time de-emphasizes the other more problematic aspects of the religion. This types of Christians are by nature pretty hard to offend. On the other hand, some fundamental Christians would be offended by the very existence of us non-believers.
As for world peace… Well world peace is a complex issue and is affected by an intermix of geo-political, historical, economic, religious and cultural factors. As far as religion goes, if we all just work towards a common set of ‘values’ advocated by all mainstream religions that are rooted in an universally acceptable “golden rule”, and play down the sovereignty part of religion (which is also advocated by most mainstream religions), that would go a long way to at least ensure religious harmony, and to remove a major variable in the complex equation making up ‘world peace’.
I wrote about this in another thread hereÂ…
http://buddhism.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=173291&page=1 -
Originally posted by Beyond Religion:
The link I posted in Buddhist forum, has dealt with the issues in two prongs, to say what i felt about the discussion so far in that topic, and to clarify what was going on
Hmm.... I followed your links but it points to a thread from this same Buddhist forum. I thought it is the posts you made in the Christian forum that causes a big hoo hah?
Anyway, can you point me to the issues raised by your detractors? I would like to see what is it you said that set them off, and also [b]why what you said set them off...
As for things that offend Christians, well it depends on what type of Christians. Some Christians display an admirable level of stoicism and morality that far exceeded mine. They emphasize the 'love' message from Jesus Christ and at the same time de-emphasizes the other more problematic aspects of the religion. This types of Christians are by nature pretty hard to offend. On the other hand, some fundamental Christians would be offended by the very existence of us non-believers.
As for world peace… Well world peace is a complex issue and is affected by an intermix of geo-political, historical, economic, religious and cultural factors. As far as religion goes, if we all just work towards a common set of ‘values’ advocated by all mainstream religions that are rooted in an universally acceptable “golden rule”, and play down the sovereignty part of religion (which is also advocated by most mainstream religions), that would go a long way to at least ensure religious harmony, and to remove a major variable in the complex equation making up ‘world peace’.
I wrote about this in another thread hereÂ…
http://buddhism.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=173291&page=1
[/b]
what may be said may be offensive, but i want go more in depth from your above post, what people said may be offensive to their faith, is it really true? its the issue we may be in conundrum
One very very good example, in the issue over the caricatures of Mohammed, somebody posted an article, and for now i assume its true, that there were no actually anything in the Quran against depicting the Prophet in images. Similar article have been written by a Muslim writer in ST not long ago.
What is offensive, may be caused by even poor understanding of their faith. -
We must replace FI with CenturionMBT before Laurence can get banned.Originally posted by alexkusu:haih..not yet banned ah? yellow must be really auspicious
-
I have gone through all your posts in the above thread, and I really don't see anything that might be offensive to Christians, but as I said, we operate on different values.Originally posted by laurence82:The link I posted in Buddhist forum, has dealt with the issues in two prongs, to say what i felt about the discussion so far in that topic, and to clarify what was going on
what may be said may be offensive, but i want go more in depth from your above post, what people said may be offensive to their faith, is it really true? its the issue we may be in conundrum
One very very good example, in the issue over the caricatures of Mohammed, somebody posted an article, and for now i assume its true, that there were no actually anything in the Quran against depicting the Prophet in images. Similar article have been written by a Muslim writer in ST not long ago.
What is offensive, may be caused by even poor understanding of their faith.
Perhaps I can shed some light by relating a couple of my own experience in offending Christians...
1. I once said that I can never ever sacrifice my own children if God commanded me to (a la Abraham and Jephthah), thereupon a Christian chided me and said that I can never become a Christain if I have this kind of mentality. He didn't flame me to be honest, but I did detect some anger in his tone.
2. I once incurred the wrath of several Christians when I related all the instances in life where I was aggressively preached by Christians. They accused me of generalizing all Christians as being fundamentalists. I was somewhat suprised as that was never my intention. In reprtospect, I should have used words with a greater degree of caution and precision, but honestly, I felt that what I wrote was not disparaging to Christians in that context. Nevertheless, I apologized, and made a couple of clarifications on my view, but to no avail. I was already crucified in those Christians' eyes.
But... back to your case, can you point me to the Christians' response and outrage at your comments? It will always be an educational experience to see where the Christians are coming from, if nothing else we can learn to better know their softspots and be more cautious in future. -
Actually, its more of my outrage at some of their comments, with regards to issues pertaining to non believers or victims of Katrina or the blatant identification of antichrist. i mean, why would i want to go in the Christian doctrines right?Originally posted by Beyond Religion:I have gone through all your posts in the above thread, and I really don't see anything that might be offensive to Christians, but as I said, we operate on different values.
Perhaps I can shed some light by relating a couple of my own experience in offending Christians...
1. I once said that I can never ever sacrifice my own children if God commanded me to (a la Abraham and Jephthah), thereupon a Christian chided me and said that I can never become a Christain if I have this kind of mentality. He didn't flame me to be honest, but I did detect some anger in his tone.
2. I once incurred the wrath of several Christians when I related all the instances in life where I was aggressively preached by Christians. They accused me of generalizing all Christians as being fundamentalists. I was somewhat suprised as that was never my intention. In reprtospect, I should have used words with a greater degree of caution and precision, but honestly, I felt that what I wrote was not disparaging to Christians in that context. Nevertheless, I apologized, and made a couple of clarifications on my view, but to no avail. I was already crucified in those Christians' eyes.
But... back to your case, can you point me to the Christians' response and outrage at your comments? It will always be an educational experience to see where the Christians are coming from, if nothing else we can learn to better know their softspots and be more cautious in future.
By the way, I am not sure if you do read Chit Chat forum. Your point two seems unique to you, coz more often than not, its the other way round, people enraged by preaching Christians. Even some of the Christian forumers felt annoyed at preachy people too. -
oh the Cathars belong to medival times. Look up the Spanish Inquisition, only its not actually in Spain. Its when southern France was independent and France consisted of only the Northen parts. The French marched south and massacred everyone by the tens of thousands. When asked how they would tell who were God's people and who were heretics, the Bishop/Abbot in charge of the entire crusade replied: "KILL them all. We'll let God decide who belongs to him"Originally posted by Beyond Religion:Yeah, there is a saying something like "There is nothing more dangerous than someone who is absolutely convinced that he knows the truth"... A sceintist also said "With or without religion you will have good men doing good things and evil men doing evil things. For good men to do evil things, that takes religion." [nb: Not exact quote, but something like that...
)
However to be fair, there are some pretty decent Christians out there. It is only unfortunate that the more evangelical ones are much more vocal than the 'decent' ones.
Murdering their fellow Christians? That is news to me. To the best of my knowledge, that kind of thing only happened during medieval times but not in recent times. My personal opinion is that Christians can somewhat be a grave discomfort in the posterior, but I don't think they are the murderous type (in recent times that is). BTW, who is Cathars?
And for more recent examples, look to North Ireland in th 70s and 80s, where Protestants and Catholics regularly slew each other and innocents in the name of God. -
You are probably wondering what is the aggression caused by Christians in India. You may wonder how can a minority religion that is only 3% of the population cause aggression in a nation of over 1,000,000,000 people. In the press, the aggresion and "persecution" of Christians is often publicized. However it is never publicized how Christian Fundamentalists often incite this cycle of violence and aggression.
The root cause of Christian aggression in India is caused by the fact that Christianity believes that Jesus Christ is the only son of god. He is supposed to have been sent to earth to wash away the sins of the people, and so redeem them. Of course, this happens only to those who accept him as the only son of god. All the others do not get the benefit who do not have this shared belief will be burnt in hell for all eternity.
Christianity says that it has a unique path to salvation, and all the other paths are false. While there is supposed to be some modification in these views, the acceptance is that all the other paths may at most be second best. Therefore, it is better if people accept Christianity and not take a chance.
Christians believe that they have been commanded by Christ to go and “save” (convert) the people of this world. This is also supposed to give them special merit when it comes to the day of final judgment.
While there are many Christians who today do not believe in this exclusivity, there are a still large number of misguided Christians who still believe that in the exclusivity of Christianity and the concept of saving souls.
It is this misguided belief that causes breeds a hatred and intolerance for other religions. and from this hatred, these Christian Fundamentalists begin their aggression to convert. And often they will go to any means to convert even if it means violence.
This website seeks to educate the world about the atrocities that conversions bring and to bring this aggressive nature of Christianity to an end.
http://www.christianaggression.org/ -
Oh it's becoming like a race must only believe in 1 religion
Example: Indians from India MUST believed hinduism or is a traitor to it's roots
-
Millions of African-Americans are Christians today because their ancestors were converted against their will to the religion of the slave-master.
Hundred of thousands of American-Indians are Christians today because the Christian missionaries converted their ancestors against their will.
In Europe, it was the same thing. When Rome controlled most of the world, the Roman Emperor, Constantine, in 325 CE forced Christianity onto his subjects.
The people of Lithuania did not become Christians because they read the Gospels and decided to accept their teachings. On the contrary, the people of Lithuania were forced into Christianity against their will, as a result of relentless military force.
From The Crusades, by Bernard Hamilton 1:
“In 1309 the Teutonic Order moved its headquarters to Marienburg in Prussia. It had a papal license to wage perpetual war against the pagans and used this to launch annual crusades against Lithuania. These expeditions were very popular the nobility of northern Europe: campaigns were held twice a year, in the summer and in the winter when the order laid on special Christmas festivities for visiting crusaders.”
“The excuse for men who enjoyed fighting and to lay waste large parts of Lithuania in the name of Christ was removed in 1386 when the King of Lithuania, Ladislas Jagiello, married Queen Jadwiga of Poland and received Catholic baptism. The two kingdoms were united under Christian rulers and the Teutonic Knights no longer had any justification for crusading against pagans there.”
Lithuania was not the first country that fell victim to a campaign of lethal military force, for the purpose of forced conversion to Christianity. Three entire European nationalities became victims of genocide because they refused to become Christians:
“...the Vandals, Ostogoths, and Heruli. The last three were destroyed by the Pope of Rome because they refused to become ‘Christian.’ The armies of Emperor Justinian, in cooperation with the Pope, thrust the Ostrogoths out of the city of Rome. They have become extinct.”2
Jews had to endure the sword too. Millions of Jews from the fourth century CE until the 20th Century were forced to “kiss the sword” of Christ, or be put to death by that sword. So very many Jews have died at the hands of Christians in the name of Jesus. However, many Jews managed to survive. They survived by lying they converted, but secretly remained Jews. The Christian Church finally realized what was happening and in 1492, the Spanish Inquisition tried to purge the country of these “Secret” Jews, called Marranos.
Christianity cannot take any pride for their large numbers of subjects. Almost all Christian ancestors, Catholics and Protestants really had no choice in the matter. They were forced to accept Jesus as their Lord. Christianity was a forced religion. Today it is being forced in another manner, through an army of missionaries beating on your door.
Jews today know that their forefathers heard God speak to them at Mount Sinai, commanding them to follow His Laws. Christians today cannot make this claim. Perhaps this is the major reason for the anti-Semitism in Christianity, the hatred and jealousy of Jews throughout history.
http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=ARTICLES&id=1137165211 -
exactly. Christians and Christianity caused more people to die than any other religion. And im not talking about those who gave their lifes up for Christianity. I'm talking about those who were killed because they didn't agree with Christianity. Sometimes, worse. They were Christian in principle but were killed anyway because they were not following Rome's idea of what Christianity should be. Or else, corrupt popes and bishops used the catholic religion as an excuse to wage war and gain land, gold and power for their own greedy gains. Need I name the French crusade against the Pays d'Oc Cathar "heretics"? What about hmmm.... Pope Leo X? Let me whisper loudly: "Medici family of Florence!" Opps! another embaressing name? How about... Salem....?
I don't think I need to say more. -
The New York Times edition of November 14, 2005 highlighted the global nature of the "Missionary Business" or in other words, evangelical missionaries who run businesses to fund conversion activities around the world.Originally posted by HENG@:exactly. Christians and Christianity caused more people to die than any other religion. And im not talking about those who gave their lifes up for Christianity. I'm talking about those who were killed because they didn't agree with Christianity. Sometimes, worse. They were Christian in principle but were killed anyway because they were not following Rome's idea of what Christianity should be. Or else, corrupt popes and bishops used the catholic religion as an excuse to wage war and gain land, gold and power for their own greedy gains. Need I name the French crusade against the Pays d'Oc Cathar "heretics"? What about hmmm.... Pope Leo X? Let me whisper loudly: "Medici family of Florence!" Opps! another embaressing name? How about... Salem....?
I don't think I need to say more.
Andy Newman, in this NYT article called "Their Mission: Spreading the Word Through Business", has painted a glowing picture of these "preying vultures". Yet we quote "faithfully" from the article:
'Tom Sudyk is not most people's idea of a missionary. On paper, he looks like a modern global capitalist, which he is. Mr. Sudyk, an entrepreneur from Michigan, runs, among other things, an outsourcing company in Chennai, India, providing medical transcribers and software engineers to American businesses. In six years, the Indian company -- a subsidiary of EC Group International, a larger outsourcing company that Mr. Sudyk founded in Grand Rapids -- has grown to 75 employees and is moving into a building triple its present size.
But the Gospel, Mr. Sudyk says, illuminates every aspect of his business, from its ethics to its help to local ministries to the technical support it lends a Christian-run vocational school for polio victims in Chennai. Each afternoon at the Chennai office, there is a 10-minute prayer, and while the prayer is interdenominational, employees who ask to learn more about Jesus Christ -- as many have -- are gladly accommodated.'
While portraying their tactics in a positive light, the NYT article continues:
'Christian-run companies are multiplying in just about every corner of the globe, reshaping overseas mission work. These businesses form a movement known variously as business as mission, kingdom business and great commission companies, after the biblical charge to "make disciples of all the nations."
In Romania, for example, a Californian who runs a Tex-Mex restaurant and catering hall said that he expected to clear $250,000 in profit this year, most of which will be donated to local ministries. And in a Muslim country with a history of hostility to Christianity, a medical-supply
importer from the Midwest leverages the trust she earns through her business dealings to quietly spread the word.
Full Article here: http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=ARTICLES&id=1133940251
-
-
Originally posted by chunyong:
-
Its not what u believe, its what u do. Actions speaks louder than words and definitely much much much louder den wat u believe in.
Do good deeds and u will get good fruits. Good input = Good output, rubbish input gives u rubbish output...this is a constant, eternally also like dat one. -
u r refering toOriginally posted by chunyong:Its not what u believe, its what u do. Actions speaks louder than words and definitely much much much louder den wat u believe in.
Do good deeds and u will get good fruits. Good input = Good output, rubbish input gives u rubbish output...this is a constant, eternally also like dat one. -
any religion, the basis is to coach u to do good deeds, as long as u do good deeds, doesn't really matter which religion u have...religion is just a 'brand'Originally posted by neutral_onliner:u r refering to -
-
Good PointOriginally posted by chunyong:any religion, the basis is to coach u to do good deeds, as long as u do good deeds, doesn't really matter which religion u have...religion is just a 'brand'
-
All religions ask people to do good and avoid evil. But apart from that, in Buddhism, we also teach people to cleanse their minds. This is very important in Buddhism and is perculiar to Buddhism. It is only through this can we achieve liberation.Originally posted by chunyong:any religion, the basis is to coach u to do good deeds, as long as u do good deeds, doesn't really matter which religion u have...religion is just a 'brand' -
The Buddha was apparently the only religious teacher who gave highest credit to human intelligence. He advised us not to become slaves to external agencies but to develop our hidden mental power with self-confidence. He also pointed out that man is responsible for everything in this world. Pain and pleasure are both created by man himself, and man has the ability to get rid of his sufferings.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:All religions ask people to do good and avoid evil. But apart from that, in Buddhism, we also teach people to cleanse their minds. This is very important in Buddhism and is perculiar to Buddhism. It is only through this can we achieve liberation.
Man can learn to maintain peace and happiness by applying wisdom diligently without depending on external powers. It is manÂ’s untrained mind that is responsible for all the troubles, calamities, disturbances, unfavorable circumstances and frictions. At the same time, manÂ’s mind can transform the unfortunate situation of the world and render it a peaceful, prosperous and happy place for all to live - if only he uses his mind properly. Man-made problems must be solved by man himself.
-
Yup indeed. So Buddhism isn't really a 'Religion' after all.Originally posted by neutral_onliner:The Buddha was apparently the only religious teacher who gave highest credit to human intelligence. He advised us not to become slaves to external agencies but to develop our hidden mental power with self-confidence. He also pointed out that man is responsible for everything in this world. Pain and pleasure are both created by man himself, and man has the ability to get rid of his sufferings.
Man can learn to maintain peace and happiness by applying wisdom diligently without depending on external powers. It is manÂ’s untrained mind that is responsible for all the troubles, calamities, disturbances, unfavorable circumstances and frictions. At the same time, manÂ’s mind can transform the unfortunate situation of the world and render it a peaceful, prosperous and happy place for all to live - if only he uses his mind properly. Man-made problems must be solved by man himself. 
-
Buddhism is more than a religion, more than a way of life, more than a system of ethics and morals, and more than a system of spiritual development, but a system that can make sense of and unite the varying beliefs of this world.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Yup indeed. So Buddhism isn't really a 'Religion' after all.
I rest my case...Have a nice day...Good Bye -
Yup... have a nice dayOriginally posted by neutral_onliner:Buddhism is more than a religion, more than a way of life, more than a system of ethics and morals, and more than a system of spiritual development, but a system that can make sense of and unite the varying beliefs of this world.
I rest my case...Have a nice day...Good Bye -
agreed! hear hear!Originally posted by neutral_onliner:Buddhism is more than a religion, more than a way of life, more than a system of ethics and morals, and more than a system of spiritual development, but a system that can make sense of and unite the varying beliefs of this world.
I rest my case...Have a nice day...Good Bye