Creator God and the existence of alternative religions
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
God is Spirit and thus He has no physical form. However, God is able to take on any form He chooses to appear to man. He can manifest His presence in a burning bush to Moses or in human form to Abraham or Adam. Please see also
http://creation.com/does-god-have-body-parts
Ok thanks. I will view the link you gave before I make anymore comment. -
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
If so, then basically you are saying that all things and beings are eternal since all they do is go through countless rebirths. Yet such a notion is highly problematic!
Your idea of devas is hardly scientific. We are talking about the spirit realm, are we not? Aliens? You really want to invoke ETs? You talk about fallen devas, which means they were unfallen to begin with. Yet they were also eternal because of infinite worlds?
You mentioned re time the age of humans as 84,000 years. Please explain what you mean by that. Humans living up to 84,000 years? As to lifespan of humans, the question is, how is the origin of life accounted for? Surely before you talk about death and decay you must explain life and living. The Bible provides the information for this both.
eternalism is rejected by Buddhism, as there's no permanent self. everytime the "self" is a new. always be reminded of the teaching of dependant arising and middle way. there's no extreme view in Buddhism.
scientific don't talk about spirit realm btw. anyway i was using the "alien" word to cite an example, when i said "imagine...".
yes, it's not unaccounted. as mentioned the lifespan will expand and increase according to their moral deeds. our account mentioned the next coming Buddha on earth where the lifespan of human will be at 80,000 years. their morality are top form. in Xtian, i know of the kingdom of god. at this time, earth is also like heaven.
/\
-
Originally posted by zulkifli mahmood:
sinweiy wrote on 21 Mar `13, 6:03PM
“i think ours is more rational in scientific way in term of “alien” beings, u can imagine the coming of some “alien” transparent beings, eaten some food and slowly living here become non transparent and cannot fly anymore. ours are more gradual through times. they both have quite the same “image of man”. these fallen devas can live for hundred of thousands of yrs in the beginning and reincarnate into human. the life span of human decreases and increases through times too depending on their deeds.”Hello Sinweiy, hope you don’t mind me asking you this question ok. The text above, is that your own speculation or the Buddha teaching? About their ‘alien’ transparent or physical appearance we don’t know.
actually i was citing an example. "alien", if have meat or form body, they are consider as human realm. devas from the heavenly realm have spontaneous body.
Four Modes Of Birth
Buddhism states that there are four modes of birth - namely :
egg-born beings (andaja)
womb-born beings (jalabuja)
moisture-born beings (samsedaja)
beings having spontaneous births (opapatika)
This broad classification embraces the 4 modes of birth of all living beings.
Birds and oviparous snakes belong to the first division.
The womb-born creatures comprise all human beings,
some devas inhabiting the earth,
and some animals that take conception in a mother’s womb.
Embryos, using moisture as nidus for their growth,
like certain lowly forms of animal life, belong to the third class.
Beings having a spontaneous birth are generally invisible to the physical eye.
Conditioned by their past Kamma, they appear spontaneously,
without passing through an embryonic stage.
Petas and Devas normally, and Brahmas belong to this class.
http://www.basicbuddhism.org/index.cfm?GPID=52
/\
-
Originally posted by sinweiy:
eternalism is rejected by Buddhism, as there's no permanent self. everytime the "self" is a new. always be reminded of the teaching of dependant arising and middle way. there's no extreme view in Buddhism.
scientific don't talk about spirit realm btw. anyway i was using the "alien" word to cite an example, when i said "imagine...".
yes, it's not unaccounted. as mentioned the lifespan will expand and increase according to their moral deeds. our account mentioned the next coming Buddha on earth where the lifespan of human will be at 80,000 years. their morality are top form. in Xtian, i know of the kingdom of god. at this time, earth is also like heaven.
/\
Question is, when Buddha rejected eternalism did he reject the truth or the error? If there is an eternal God, then Buddha's rejection would be a big mistake. So long as there is God who is the only necessary, self-existing, eternal, independent being, it would be wrong to reject eternalism. Even if everything else in this universe, or the universe itself for that matter, is not permanent, that is no basis for saying that the same applies to God.
So the issue is not about whether the view is extreme or middle or moderate, but whether that view is true. By 80K years you were referring to the time when the next Buddha supposedly appears and not the life of a human being?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Question is, when Buddha rejected eternalism did he reject the truth or the error? If there is an eternal God, then Buddha's rejection would be a big mistake. So long as there is God who is the only necessary, self-existing, eternal, independent being, it would be wrong to reject eternalism. Even if everything else in this universe, or the universe itself for that matter, is not permanent, that is no basis for saying that the same applies to God.
So the issue is not about whether the view is extreme or middle or moderate, but whether that view is true. By 80K years you were referring to the time when the next Buddha supposedly appears and not the life of a human being?
u use IF, the Truth as our stance is, as i already mentioned, answered by Dalai Lama on the notion of "clear light", is not the notion that u are refering of a unique autonomous entity. hence there's no error in our stance. http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes22.html
urs is the same as the Vedantic system, where the ultimate reality is known as Brahman, and nothing else exists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman . eternal.
middle way can be a saying where both are possible/eternal, and/or both can be impossible/not eternal. depending on one's perspective. like the six blind men touching different parts of the elephant, one may say the elephant look like the trunk, the other the ear, etc, but all are touching the same animal, ie Elephant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant
middle way mean "clear light", is Neither eternal nor not eternal.
Beliefs that are contrary to the law of kamma
There are three philosophies which are considered by Buddhism to be wrong view and which must be carefully distinguished from the teaching of kamma:
1. Pubbekatahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and suffering arise from previous kamma (Past-action determinism).
2. Issaranimmanahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and suffering are caused by the directives of a Supreme Being (Theistic determinism).
3. Ahetu-apaccayavada: The belief that all happiness and suffering are random, having no cause (Indeterminism or Accidentalism).
http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma6.htm
since we reject all the above views, it doesn't mean that all of them are impossible. we are more into #1, yet some gods can also cause suffering and karma can some time be random by too many factors. why do some people are born ok and some are born disabled, is not Accidentalism nor Theistic determinism.
it IS the lifespan of human then, like about 56billion years from now as recorded. Maitreya Bodhisattva is now at Contentment heaven/The Delightful heaven(Tusita), when his heavenly life (4000 celestial yrs) end there, he will take birth as a prince on earth, where he became the next Buddha. 50 human years equal one celestial day.
http://www.basicbuddhism.org/index.cfm?GPID=52
/\
-
Originally posted by sinweiy:
u use IF, the Truth as our stance is, as i already mentioned, answered by Dalai Lama on the notion of "clear light", is not the notion that u are refering of a unique autonomous entity. hence there's no error in our stance. http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes22.html
urs is the same as the Vedantic system, where the ultimate reality is known as Brahman, and nothing else exists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman . eternal.
middle way can be a saying where both are possible/eternal, and/or both can be impossible/not eternal. depending on one's perspective. like the six blind men touching different parts of the elephant, one may say the elephant look like the trunk, the other the ear, etc, but all are touching the same animal, ie Elephant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant
middle way mean "clear light", is Neither eternal nor not eternal.
since we reject all the above views, it doesn't mean that all of them are impossible. we are more into #1, yet some gods can also cause suffering and karma can some time be random by too many factors. why do some people are born ok and some are born disabled, is not Accidentalism nor Theistic determinism.
it IS the lifespan of human then, like about 56billion years from now as recorded. Maitreya Bodhisattva is now at Contentment heaven/The Delightful heaven(Tusita), when his heavenly life (4000 celestial yrs) end there, he will take birth as a prince on earth, where he became the next Buddha. 50 human years equal one celestial day.
http://www.basicbuddhism.org/index.cfm?GPID=52
/\
Incorrect. The Biblical concept of God is NOT the Hindu concept of Brahman. I may be wrong but the Hindu concept of Brahman seems to be the God of the Bible stripped of His Personhood. Thus it becomes just an impersonal force of sorts. That makes a whole world of difference!
Re the blind men and elephant, we must not forget that there is at least one person who knows how the elephant looked like, the narrator! So there is still an objective reality of the elephant.
It seems also to me that Buddhism often violates the laws of logic, namely the law of the excluded middle. Not this, not that is often promoted by buddhists, but in so doing clear communication becomes impossible. Or perhaps that's the intent? When one is noncommittal and ambiguous in his replies then he knows that others will find it difficult to find fault with him. Best of all he can lay claim to possess some unique gnostic ability to know these things which will cause his hearers no small amount of frustration that they somehow keep missing the "insights" and "truths".
Lastly, are you saying that humas are going to be around for another 56 billion years? How long do you believe humans have been existing for that matter?
-
if the content/meaning is the same, even if the name is different, to me its the same. maybe u are saying the meaning is different ? or what people think it mean is differnent etc..
re different perspectives different meaning is not ambiguous or doubtful or uncertain of truth, but Clarity and Understanding of truth.
you wouldn't make sense if u are thinking of one small world that start at certain time and will end at certain time, and that's it. But that's not it. by then, as recorded, all the lands will be united as one big land form, just like in the dinosaur period. human being will be huge. i know quite unbelieveable. so i will leave it as either belief it or not. i believe the Buddha and many masters with insights also do.
re karma clarified why some people are born ok and some are born disabled, or unfair etc. as u are your own architect of ur own destiny.
/\
-
Originally posted by sinweiy:
if the content/meaning is the same, even if the name is different, to me its the same. maybe u are saying the meaning is different ? or what people think it mean is differnent etc..
re different perspectives different meaning is not ambiguous or doubtful or uncertain of truth, but Clarity and Understanding of truth.
you wouldn't make sense if u are thinking of one small world that start at certain time and will end at certain time, and that's it. But that's not it. by then, as recorded, all the lands will be united as one big land form, just like in the dinosaur period. human being will be huge. i know quite unbelieveable. so i will leave it as either belief it or not. i believe the Buddha and many masters with insights also do.
re karma clarified why some people are born ok and some are born disabled, or unfair etc. as u are your own architect of ur own destiny.
/\
The God of the Bible is a PERSON whereas Brahman is an impersonal thing. So how can it be the same? It is as different as a robot is from a human, regardless of how humanlike the robot is.
What clarity is there in the reply "eternal and not eternal"?
I am thinking of the universe as a whole, not just earth. The idea of one huge land mass is not disputed by me, though I disagree on the time span. Huge humans? Again the Bible speaks of certain people who are huge, Goliath was one of them. But then again how huge are you talking about?
How can you say you are your own destiny's architect when you cannot even determine the time and place of your birth and death? There are so many things beyond your control. Karma that explains everything explains nothing. The Bible, on the other hand, says that we live in a fallen and cursed world. This is no longer the perfect world God created. That is why most people are born OK and some are not. It is not because of some bad karma you accumulated from countless past lives and thus your own fault that you are born deformed or mutated etc.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
The God of the Bible is a PERSON whereas Brahman is an impersonal thing. So how can it be the same? It is as different as a robot is from a human, regardless of how humanlike the robot is.
What clarity is there in the reply "eternal and not eternal"?
I am thinking of the universe as a whole, not just earth. The idea of one huge land mass is not disputed by me, though I disagree on the time span. Huge humans? Again the Bible speaks of certain people who are huge, Goliath was one of them. But then again how huge are you talking about?
How can you say you are your own destiny's architect when you cannot even determine the time and place of your birth and death? There are so many things beyond your control. Karma that explains everything explains nothing. The Bible, on the other hand, says that we live in a fallen and cursed world. This is no longer the perfect world God created. That is why most people are born OK and some are not. It is not because of some bad karma you accumulated from countless past lives and thus your own fault that you are born deformed or mutated etc.
erm, Brahman to hindu is also a PERSON or rather God what. Brahman, The Highest God Of Hinduism http://www.hinduwebsite.com/brahmanmain.asp
if i recalled correctly, it's 160 feet(the translation might need more clarification due to different feet size). how big is dinasaur and how big is today's animal and human? in the past, the air are not polluted, oxygen are very rich, hence their size, if u didn't read from science. in that future, everything will be purified again and weather will be perfect for vegetation/crops. imagine a human standing next to an elephant or horse. then the future human next to dinosaur size. the size is just relative. haha, with certain size, even the pyrimid can be explained. just a thought. the Buddha is indeed all knowing.
things cannot be control does not make one not their own architect of destiny. things cannot be control IS the prove of not-self.
If the body were self it would not inflict suffering on us, and it should be possible to subject it to our will. While others may not be amenable to one's control, it should at least be possible to manage our own body as we desire. But the fact of the matter is that the body is not self. That is why it inflicts suffering on us and refuses to be controlled. http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/mahasi-anat/anat01.htm
karma is needed for a society with other beings to work. if without this law, one can do what ever they like; one can determine the time and place of your birth and death etc. karma architect and also take control. it's as true as gravity prove falling object.
fallen and cursed world (which i think u all newly come up) to me is too story like (or something out of no where/condition, since u do not believe in a previous cause), compare to the idea of karmic Law that explain the unfairness and indifference of lifes. fallen although is a good excuse, and it may excuse the cursed world AFTER it's occurrence, But not BEFORE it's occurrence. indifference, i am also refering to those born either a male or female, short or tall, asian or european, personality, habits etc.
However, we do have our own similar saying if not reminded of a "fallen" world AKA, five turbid world, evil world of the five turbidities, five periods of turbidity, impurity or chaos of decay. http://online.sfsu.edu/rone/Buddhism/BuddhistDict/BDF.html indeed we are living in this decayed world. though later when the next coming, it'll be a better world. even though it's a decayed world, Buddha Shakyamuni vowed in the past to be born here to help others despite the suffering of the world. the next Buddha Maitreya however vowed to be born in a better world. that's when we use the word world/universe, it's an on going cycle rather than a one time basis.
/\
-
Have to encourage God followers to be cremated with some of this stone to show the world that they truly practice vipassana :p
èˆ�利[梵sarÄ«ra;Buddhist relics] å�ˆä½œâ€œèˆ�利å�â€�。æ„�为尸体或身骨,佛教称释迦牟尼é�—体ç�«ç„šå�Žç»“æˆ�çš„ç� 状物。å�Žæ�¥ä¹ŸæŒ‡é«˜åƒ§ç�«åŒ–剩下的骨烬。
http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/247552.html -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
erm, Brahman to hindu is also a PERSON or rather God what. Brahman, The Highest God Of Hinduism http://www.hinduwebsite.com/brahmanmain.asp
if i recalled correctly, it's 160 feet(the translation might need more clarification due to different feet size). how big is dinasaur and how big is today's animal and human? in the past, the air are not polluted, oxygen are very rich, hence their size, if u didn't read from science. in that future, everything will be purified again and weather will be perfect for vegetation/crops. imagine a human standing next to an elephant or horse. then the future human next to dinosaur size. the size is just relative. haha, with certain size, even the pyrimid can be explained. just a thought. the Buddha is indeed all knowing.
things cannot be control does not make one not their own architect of destiny. things cannot be control IS the prove of not-self.
If the body were self it would not inflict suffering on us, and it should be possible to subject it to our will. While others may not be amenable to one's control, it should at least be possible to manage our own body as we desire. But the fact of the matter is that the body is not self. That is why it inflicts suffering on us and refuses to be controlled. http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/mahasi-anat/anat01.htm
karma is needed for a society with other beings to work. if without this law, one can do what ever they like; one can determine the time and place of your birth and death etc. karma architect and also take control. it's as true as gravity prove falling object.
fallen and cursed world (which i think u all newly come up) to me is too story like (or something out of no where/condition, since u do not believe in a previous cause), compare to the idea of karmic Law that explain the unfairness and indifference of lifes. fallen although is a good excuse, and it may excuse the cursed world AFTER it's occurrence, But not BEFORE it's occurrence. indifference, i am also refering to those born either a male or female, short or tall, asian or european, personality, habits etc.
However, we do have our own similar saying if not reminded of a "fallen" world AKA, five turbid world, evil world of the five turbidities, five periods of turbidity, impurity or chaos of decay. http://online.sfsu.edu/rone/Buddhism/BuddhistDict/BDF.html indeed we are living in this decayed world. though later when the next coming, it'll be a better world. even though it's a decayed world, Buddha Shakyamuni vowed in the past to be born here to help others despite the suffering of the world. the next Buddha Maitreya however vowed to be born in a better world. that's when we use the word world/universe, it's an on going cycle rather than a one time basis.
/\
See http://www.religionfacts.com/hinduism/beliefs/brahman.htm
To the extent that Brahman is seen as God or share qualities and attributes with the God of the Bible, I would explain it thus by saying that this is consistent with what the Bible says. People everywhere have a notion of a supreme Being, but the truth of which has been distorted over time in many cultures. Just like what happened in China (see http://creation.com/the-original-unknown-god-of-china ). I believe the Bible preserves the true record.
Re size of humans and dinosaurs in the past. We have fossils of huge dinosaurs but not huge humans! I would agree that in the past it seems that the environment was quite different, the pre-Flood world of Noah. This might explain some form of gigantism but there are limits to that. The pyramids and other wonders of ancient times are explained also by the Bible. The Bible teaches that man was created intelligent to start with and lived hundreds of years. Imagine the kind of wisdom and knowledge one can accumulate over that span of time! The pyramids are explained best by human technology now lost to us, or yet to be discovered. I believe it requires no alien encounters.
Things that we cannot control is proof that we are NOT masters of our own destiny. It does not prove not-self. The principle of reaping what you sow is not denied by the Christian. In fact, this is an order established and upheld by God. God establishes the natural laws and the moral laws. You cannot do what you like as you deem fit because God has set these laws in motion.
The notion of a fallen world is not newly come up idea. It is as old as the Bible itself! The Bible teaches that when Adam fell creation fell with him as well. Thorns and thistles and pain in childbirth are just some of the repurcussions of the fall. The Fall is trhe context that explains all the death and suffering we see. Buddhism simply acknowledges the observation we see but does not provide a satisfactory explanation for why it is so. The answer is well hidden in the countless past eons. Appeal to natural law of karma does not explain why we can call it unfairness. Nature does what it does, so to be consistent you have no basis to call it fair or unfair. This is the naturalistic fallacy.
Again the Buddhist's notion of a decayed world bears similarity to the Bible's fallen and cursed world, as do the hope of a coming Matreiya to bring restoration. Why the similarities? I believe this goes back to the events in the Tower of Babel. There the shared memory is communicated in the same universal language. Once divided, that shared memory becomes distorted over time though some vestige and remembrance of it still remains.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Re size of humans and dinosaurs in the past. We have fossils of huge dinosaurs but not huge humans! I would agree that in the past it seems that the environment was quite different, the pre-Flood world of Noah. This might explain some form of gigantism but there are limits to that. The pyramids and other wonders of ancient times are explained also by the Bible. The Bible teaches that man was created intelligent to start with and lived hundreds of years. Imagine the kind of wisdom and knowledge one can accumulate over that span of time! The pyramids are explained best by human technology now lost to us, or yet to be discovered. I believe it requires no alien encounters.
Things that we cannot control is proof that we are NOT masters of our own destiny. It does not prove not-self. The principle of reaping what you sow is not denied by the Christian. In fact, this is an order established and upheld by God. God establishes the natural laws and the moral laws. You cannot do what you like as you deem fit because God has set these laws in motion.
The notion of a fallen world is not newly come up idea. It is as old as the Bible itself! The Bible teaches that when Adam fell creation fell with him as well. Thorns and thistles and pain in childbirth are just some of the repurcussions of the fall. The Fall is trhe context that explains all the death and suffering we see. Buddhism simply acknowledges the observation we see but does not provide a satisfactory explanation for why it is so. The answer is well hidden in the countless past eons. Appeal to natural law of karma does not explain why we can call it unfairness. Nature does what it does, so to be consistent you have no basis to call it fair or unfair. This is the naturalistic fallacy.
Again the Buddhist's notion of a decayed world bears similarity to the Bible's fallen and cursed world, as do the hope of a coming Matreiya to bring restoration. Why the similarities? I believe this goes back to the events in the Tower of Babel. There the shared memory is communicated in the same universal language. Once divided, that shared memory becomes distorted over time though some vestige and remembrance of it still remains.
In Buddhism, i agreed that they are more clever and moral in the past, or even have some spiritual powers. it proved our slowly degrading generations. i ever saw a giant human leg fossil discovery, but anyway, i think they are sort of of spontaneous body as i mentioned to zulkifli mahmood, fossil is not for spontaneous body化生. u said no fossil, i can also say no remain of high tech equipment? i think for u even if the prove is there, u will still reject it or come out with another excuse. do cite the bible text of the fallen? but do not cite commentries by the followers later on. beside, why can't the personal being remove the fallen or make it not happen, if he's all power?But if u are ur Self, u should be able to control yourself. u only say no as a form of believe but not as a form of inner investigation.
by unfairness, i also mean one cannot be equal to 'God', but in buddhism, we can or are equal to Buddha.
in the teaching of karma, to blame it on naturism or randomism is also an error. i think u lack a thorough understanding of karma to deny it as a satisfactory explanation. naturalistic fallacy IS a part of karma. karma is very complex.
Beliefs that are contrary to the law of kamma
There are three philosophies which are considered by Buddhism to be wrong view and which must be carefully distinguished from the teaching of kamma:
1. Pubbekatahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and suffering arise from previous kamma (Past-action determinism).
2. Issaranimmanahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and suffering are caused by the directives of a Supreme Being (Theistic determinism).
3. Ahetu-apaccayavada: The belief that all happiness and suffering are random, having no cause (Indeterminism or Accidentalism/randomism).
http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma6.htm
Kamma as a law of nature
Buddhism teaches that all things, both material and immaterial, are entirely subject to the direction of causes and are interdependent. This natural course of things is called in common terms "the law of nature," and in the Pali language niyama, literally meaning "certainty" or "fixed way," referring to the fact that specific determinants inevitably lead to corresponding results.
The laws of nature, although uniformly based on the principle of causal dependence, can nevertheless be sorted into different modes of relationship. The Buddhist commentaries describe five categories of natural law, or niyama. They are:
1. Utuniyama: the natural law pertaining to physical objects and changes in the natural environment, such as the weather; the way flowers bloom in the day and fold up at night; the way soil, water and nutrients help a tree to grow; and the way things disintegrate and decompose. This perspective emphasizes the changes brought about by heat or temperature.
2. Bijaniyama: the natural law pertaining to heredity, which is best described in the adage, "as the seed, so the fruit."
3. Cittaniyama: the natural law pertaining to the workings of the mind, the process of cognition of sense objects and the mental reactions to them.
4. Kammaniyama: the natural law pertaining to human behavior, the process of the generation of action and its results. In essence, this is summarized in the words, "good deeds bring good results, bad deeds bring bad results."
5. Dhammaniyama: the natural law governing the relationship and interdependence of all things: the way all things arise, exist and then cease. All conditions are subject to change, are in a state of affliction and are not self: this is the Norm. http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma1.htm#law
erm, Buddhism is already well acknowledged in history that its about 500 yrs eariler than Xtianism. beside the former is based on wisdom, detailed text, test it with ur self to believe it's true while the latter is base on story that one Must blindly believe it's true. the Tower of Babel is to me a way ur all want to win the who-is-the-first race. sorry, i see, the other way round of distortion by the followers.
lastly, i feel it's best we communicate by starting " In Buddhism..." or "In Xtianism....". the argument that I am the real, while u are the distorted, is pointless, as all are debatable topics. its better, as those with inner eyes will judge for themselves who is real or distorted.
/\
-
No offence to anyone. Just find this interesting from 1 of my facebook friend. Anyway, it's a good question.
-
Originally posted by Dawnfirstlight:
No offence to anyone. Just find this interesting from 1 of my facebook friend. Anyway, it's a good question.
oh, i also have this question. so the answer is no. i thought yes. ok. :)/\
-
Originally posted by Dawnfirstlight:
No offence to anyone. Just find this interesting from 1 of my facebook friend. Anyway, it's a good question.
-
Originally posted by Dawnfirstlight:
No offence to anyone. Just find this interesting from 1 of my facebook friend. Anyway, it's a good question.
:) nicely done -
God created everything in this universe but not religions of the world. Religions are founded by men. God created human race. Originally Adam and Eve are obedient to God and they have sanctifying grace in them. God gave them the Garden of Eden to look after and commanded them not to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. Satan came and deceived them and the disobeyed God and later was banished. They lost their sanctifying grace. You might wonder why God did not stop the Satan from tempting them. Yes, it is about free choice. God gave us free choice to choose whether to obey God or disobey God. If God were to stop Satan in the first place it means God did not allow them to make a choice. God is love but He never force someone to love Him and obey Him. What is forced upon is not of love. He allows us to make a choice: Him or the World. To obey Him we must condone all worldly things and seeks after Him or otherwise. God is both justice and love. Justice requires punishment, no matter what. Meanwhile in the Garden of Eden, God punished Adam and Eve and drove them out of the Garden of Eden. However God still loves them so God since then has prepared His only Son, Jesus Christ, the second person in the Trinity to come into the world and die for our sins. Jesus Christ is God but He chose to appear in a lowly manner. He died for our sins, His blood washes all our sins away and purges our soul. This is the real meaning of Good Friday. We commemorate the passion of Christ for us. His forgiveness and mercy allow us to stand before God and commune directly with Him.
-
God again, oh no.
it is easter today, tomorrow is April Fool.
-
Originally posted by singalover:
God created everything in this universe but not religions of the world. Religions are founded by men. God created human race. Originally Adam and Eve are obedient to God and they have sanctifying grace in them. God gave them the Garden of Eden to look after and commanded them not to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. Satan came and deceived them and the disobeyed God and later was banished. They lost their sanctifying grace. You might wonder why God did not stop the Satan from tempting them. Yes, it is about free choice. God gave us free choice to choose whether to obey God or disobey God. If God were to stop Satan in the first place it means God did not allow them to make a choice. God is love but He never force someone to love Him and obey Him. What is forced upon is not of love. He allows us to make a choice: Him or the World. To obey Him we must condone all worldly things and seeks after Him or otherwise. God is both justice and love. Justice requires punishment, no matter what. Meanwhile in the Garden of Eden, God punished Adam and Eve and drove them out of the Garden of Eden. However God still loves them so God since then has prepared His only Son, Jesus Christ, the second person in the Trinity to come into the world and die for our sins. Jesus Christ is God but He chose to appear in a lowly manner. He died for our sins, His blood washes all our sins away and purges our soul. This is the real meaning of Good Friday. We commemorate the passion of Christ for us. His forgiveness and mercy allow us to stand before God and commune directly with Him.
I always wanted to ask this question. Why Jesus couldn't just descend straight from heaven but must "reborn" as human to come to this world? Did Jesus' birth in this world prove reincarnation? I wonder should we consider Jesus birth in this world as heavenly being reborn as human????? Was Jesus a heavenly being before he came to this world?????
Our parents know that by giving too much free will, the child will run wild, that's why being a good parent is very important. Don't spoil the kids! To love your children is not to let them do what they want, this will do more harm than good. I believe God knows better than us.
-
Hi All, Hope you all won't mind sharing a little info from the Buddha's texts.
Buddha did speak of the beginning of the universe but not a lot..read on and you'll know why he didn't..
Yes I am a Mahayana Buddhist.
First a little excerp from the Wiki:
As no major principles of Buddhism contradict it, many Buddhists tacitly accept the theory of evolution.[1] Questions about the eternity or infinity of the universe at large are counted among the 14 unanswerable questions which the Buddha maintained were counterproductive areas of speculation.[2] As such, many Buddhists do not think about these kinds of questions as meaningful for the Buddhist goal of relieving oneself and others from suffering.[3] One does not need to know the origin of life, nor agree with the Buddha's position on scientific topics, in order to achieve enlightenment.
Anagarika Dharmapala once stated that "the theory of evolution was one of the ancient teachings of the Buddha."[4]
In the Majjhima Nikaya, a potential follower asks the Buddha for an answer to the problem of cosmogony:
"Suppose someone was hit by a poisoned arrow and his friends and relatives found a doctor able to remove the arrow. If this man were to say, 'I will not have this arrow taken out until I know whether the person who had shot it was a priest, a prince or a merchant, his name and his family. I will not have it taken out until I know what kind of bow was used and whether the arrowhead was an ordinary one or an iron one.' That person would die before all these things are ever known to him."[2]The Buddha argued that there is no apparent rational necessity for the existence of a creator god because everything ultimately is created by mind.[2] Belief in a creator is not necessarily addressed by a religion based on phenomenology, and Buddhism is generally accepting of modern scientific theories about the formation of the universe. This can be argued either from the standpoint that it simply does not matter, or from an interpretation of the Agañña Sutta favoring the notion that it describes the basic concept of evolution.[5]
Agaña Suta
In the Agaña Suta, found in the Pali Canon, the Buddha does appear to give a highly detailed answer to this issue. The Buddha, speaking to the monk Vasettha, a former Brahmin, states the following:
‘There comes a time, Vasetha, when, sooner or later after a long period this world contracts. At a time of contraction, beings are mostly born in the Abhasara Brahma world. And there they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self luminous, moving through the air, glorious—and they stay like that for a very long time. But sooner or later, after a very long period, this world begins to expand again. At a time of expansion, the beings from the Abhasara Brahma world, having passed away from there, are mostly reborn in this world. Here they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving through the air, glorious— and they stay like that for a very long time. At that period, Vasetha, there was just one mass of water, and all was darkness, blinding darkness. Neither moon nor sun appeared, no constellations or stars appeared, night and day were not yet distinguished, nor months and fortnights, nor years and seasons; there was no male and female, beings being reckoned just as beings. And sooner or later, after a very long period of time, savory earth spread itself over the waters where those beings were. It looked just like the skin that forms itself over hot milk as it cools. It was endowed with color, smell, and taste. It was the color of fine ghee or butter and it was very sweet, like pure wild honey.[6]Because the Buddha seems to present a model of cosmology wherein the universe expands and contracts over extremely long periods of time, this description has been found by some to be consistent with the expanding universe model and Big Bang.[7] The Buddha seems to be saying here that the universe expands outward, reaches a stabilising point, and then reverts its motion back toward a central point resulting in its destruction, this process again to be repeated infinitely. Throughout this expanding and contracting process, the objects found within the universe undergo periods of development and change over a long stretch of time, according to the environment in which they find themselves. Following this passage above, the Buddha goes on to say that the "beings" he described in this paragraph become attached to an earthlike planet, get reborn there, and remain there for the duration of the life. As a consequence of this, physical characteristics change and evolutionary changes takes place. This is often interpreted as a very rough theory of evolution. Furthermore, the Aggañña Sutta presents water as pre-existent to earthlike planets, with the planet forming with water and the life moving from the water onto the earth. The Buddha does not talk about a specific earth, but about earthlike planets in general.
The Agaña Sutta does raise an issue about the importance of the question; if the Buddha regards the answer as meaningless, why would he give a teaching on it? And if he does not regard the answer as meaningless, why did he not provide it to another person who asked? One of the answers could be that he gave the teaching to people who had a very fixed idea of the existence of the universe or tried to explain the creation seen on a relative level. The Buddha likened his teaching to a doctor's medicine to cure a patient's suffering. The medicine must be of the right content and right amount to the right patient at the right time. As such, there is no absolute truth as there is no single, absolute cure-all medicine fitting all patients.
Here's the link to the Agganna Sutta on the Buddhist Library if you wish to read the whole text.
-
Originally posted by Dawnfirstlight:
No offence to anyone. Just find this interesting from 1 of my facebook friend. Anyway, it's a good question.
Problem with the above scenario is that the priest is wrong. But I suppose the above is just a caricature to take a jab at Christianity or Roman Catholicism.
Anyway, a Christian who knows the Bible well enough will know that the Bible is not silent on this. In the book of Romans the Apostle Paul said that people DO KNOW about God and sin. He said that the evidence for God is seen in the creation and thus people are without excuse. It is not that people do not know, but that people suppress the knowledge of God. As to sin, if you ask everyone, they can tell you that they are not morally perfect. We all know in our hearts that we have done wrong. We have lied, we have stolen, we have coveted etc etc. God has given us His law aka the conscience which functions as a moral compass albeit marred by sin such that people can have their conscience hardened or seared by repeated wrongdoing. Even if we do not know or heard of the 10 commandments, our conscience can still judge us.
-
Originally posted by sinweiy:
In Buddhism, i agreed that they are more clever and moral in the past, or even have some spiritual powers. it proved our slowly degrading generations. i ever saw a giant human leg fossil discovery, but anyway, i think they are sort of of spontaneous body as i mentioned to zulkifli mahmood, fossil is not for spontaneous body化生. u said no fossil, i can also say no remain of high tech equipment? i think for u even if the prove is there, u will still reject it or come out with another excuse. do cite the bible text of the fallen? but do not cite commentries by the followers later on. beside, why can't the personal being remove the fallen or make it not happen, if he's all power?But if u are ur Self, u should be able to control yourself. u only say no as a form of believe but not as a form of inner investigation.
by unfairness, i also mean one cannot be equal to 'God', but in buddhism, we can or are equal to Buddha.
in the teaching of karma, to blame it on naturism or randomism is also an error. i think u lack a thorough understanding of karma to deny it as a satisfactory explanation. naturalistic fallacy IS a part of karma. karma is very complex.
erm, Buddhism is already well acknowledged in history that its about 500 yrs eariler than Xtianism. beside the former is based on wisdom, detailed text, test it with ur self to believe it's true while the latter is base on story that one Must blindly believe it's true. the Tower of Babel is to me a way ur all want to win the who-is-the-first race. sorry, i see, the other way round of distortion by the followers.
lastly, i feel it's best we communicate by starting " In Buddhism..." or "In Xtianism....". the argument that I am the real, while u are the distorted, is pointless, as all are debatable topics. its better, as those with inner eyes will judge for themselves who is real or distorted.
/\
I do not reject facts and proofs if you can show them. The question lies not with the facts and proofs, but with the INTERPRETATION of them. Contrary to what people like to say, facts DO NOT speak for themselves. If they do then we do not need lawyers! Evidence and facts must be interpreted within a framework or belief system. They must be put together to form a coherent and plausible story.
The issue is not what God can do. God can do anything. He can even zap the fruit out of Eve's hand before she ate it or blow the serpent up the moment it went up the tree. But such a God would be capricious, wouldn't it? The world that God created was perfect, but the endowment of free will would entail also that consequences (whether good or bad) must follow and be borne. With free will comes moral responsibility.
Naturalistic fallacy is part of Buddhism teaching of karma? How can an impersonal law of nature make moral judgements about good and bad? The law of gravity does no such thing. But once a moral law giver is factored in, it makes sense that there is such a thing as moral judgements.
There is nothing unfair about one not being equal to God. The Creator by definition is always greater than the creation. By definition there can only be ONE necessary being. If we are all equal to God then it means there are numerous beings called God. This is not monotheism. And logic will tell you that God cannot create His own equal. As to many being Buddhas, that is just like saying everyone has the chance to enter heaven so I have no issue with that at all.
Buddhism may be earlier than Christianity, but the history of the Bible well precedes Buddhism! On what basis do you conclude that Christians blindly believe the Bible while you do not blindly believe what the Buddha texts teach, bearing in mind that your Buddhist scriptures were written down 500 years after Buddha died? The events of the Tower of Babel is supported even in the field of linguistics. People cannot explain where the varieties of human languages come from. But most agree that the cradle of civilisation lies in the Middle East. And linguists have traced all languages to a few families of languages that seemingly just appeared and did not evolve from a proto-language.
People who have read a lot of myths and legends can read the Bible and note that it does not fit the label at all. CS Lewis was one such person.
-
As with the old testament or the genesis part..I did some research and went all the way back to Enuma Elish and the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Noah is know as Utanapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Some extra info here on the origins of the Holy Bible. One of the reason why I went all the way back to the origins.
I read these out of curiosity and interest. For my own debate and curiosity.
-
Originally posted by Dawnfirstlight:
I always wanted to ask this question. Why Jesus couldn't just descend straight from heaven but must "reborn" as human to come to this world? Did Jesus' birth in this world prove reincarnation? I wonder should we consider Jesus birth in this world as heavenly being reborn as human????? Was Jesus a heavenly being before he came to this world?????
Our parents know that by giving too much free will, the child will run wild, that's why being a good parent is very important. Don't spoil the kids! To love your children is not to let them do what they want, this will do more harm than good. I believe God knows better than us.
The idea of reborn and reincarnation is foreign to the Bible. It is wrong to speak of God's incarnation as reborn. That Jesus was born of a virgin attested to both His humanity and His divinity. Jesus is GOD in the flesh, so yes He was a heavenly being before He came into the world.
Freedom is not to be confused with free will. Parents cannot give too much free will. What parents give nowadays is too much freedom! Why would a kid run wild? That's because we are sinful people. We inherited the sin nature of our ancestor Adam. Good parents teach their kids to avoid certain things. God told Adam and Even to avoid eating from the forbidden tree and warn them of deadly consequences of disobedience.
-
Originally posted by omph:
As with the old testament or the genesis part..I did some research and went all the way back to Enuma Elish and the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Noah is know as Utanapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Some extra info here on the origins of the Holy Bible. One of the reason why I went all the way back to the origins.
I read these out of curiosity and interest. For my own debate and curiosity.
Since Genesis is OLDER than the Epic of Gilgamesh, the latter would be a distortion of the former. See http://creation.com/noahs-flood-and-the-gilgamesh-epic
Besides Wiki I suggest you also see http://www.truthnet.org/Bible-Origins/
You may also be interested in this http://creation.com/fall-and-other-religions