Evidence for God from Science

On that note, what if Christ is the only way to enlightenment, and it is your tyrannical belief that there are other ways to do so? In enforcing such a belief and preventing people from spreading the faith, you'd be unwittingly condemning thousands who might have welcomed Christ if given the chance.

kmr wrote:On that note, what if Christ is the only way to enlightenment, and it is your tyrannical belief that there are other ways to do so? In enforcing such a belief and preventing people from spreading the faith, you'd be unwittingly condemning thousands who might have welcomed Christ if given the chance.

Thank you KMR, you said it brother, now you know how I feel.

Feel? That's just a form of desire. And any good Buddhist wants to be freed from desire.

jlay wrote:Feel? That's just a form of desire. And any good Buddhist wants to be freed from desire.

Jlay, you are like a little kid that is screaming non-sense just to be heard. why don't you go and play with your choo-choos, and leave the adults to have a conversation.

Okay, but seriously, if you need clarification, please rephrase your comment. But if you are just wanting to attack, then please refer to above sentence.

Thanks,

Ivellious wrote:While I don't necessarily agree with the specifics of Buddhawarrior, I kind of get his idea (I think). I think the real issue here is, can you be moral and spiritual and find God and go to heaven without accepting Jesus as God? I think the ultimate question here is whether the Jews and the Muslims and the Hindus and the Taoists and the ancestor-worshipers in Japan etc.etc. can possibly go to heaven. I think that is where lots of non-Christians take offense to other people who claim that they are inevitably screwed unless they drop their beliefs and dedicate their lives to Jesus.

Personally, I think God would accept anyone into heaven so long as they lived a good life, but I understand that my perspective isn't really accepted here haha...

Quoting on a quite previous reply but you're bringing this to a works theology, Ivellious. Christianity is actually the only religion in which you do not have to do any physical work to get to heaven, God promises that whoever so believes that Jesus died on the cross for everyoes sins will get to heaven, there is no extra work that is required of you to do to get to God. I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father except through Me. Jesus clearly states that no one no matter who you are, cannot get into heaven unless you believe that Jesus died for your sins on the cross. I don't know.... to me that's very simple to get because I believe that Jesus is God and I automatically agree with what Scripture says, but I guess you don't grasp the idea of a Rissen Christ as well as I do. I'm not assuming you don't believe that He died on the cross. As for Buddha, I suggest you spend more time reading the Bible and soaking in what God has to offer (a lot) through the Holy Scriptures.

Buddha, that is not an attack. it is pointing out the obvious contradictions in your own world view. does buddhism seek to eliminate desire or not?


Funny that you completely ignored my prior post. Irrational?

jlay wrote:Buddha, that is not an attack. it is pointing out the obvious contradictions in your own world view. does buddhism seek to eliminate desire or not?


Funny that you completely ignored my prior post. Irrational?

Jlay, buddhism does NOT seek to eliminate desire.

and for that matter, I am not Buddhist, just like Siddhartha was not buddhist, just like Jesus was not Christian.

And if you would like answers to your post, please rephrase your attacks to be questions, I can not guess at what you are asking thru the barrage of insults.

Thanks,

Bovey wrote:As for Buddha, I suggest you spend more time reading the Bible and soaking in what God has to offer (a lot) through the Holy Scriptures.

buddhawarrior wrote:

kmr wrote:On that note, what if Christ is the only way to enlightenment, and it is your tyrannical belief that there are other ways to do so? In enforcing such a belief and preventing people from spreading the faith, you'd be unwittingly condemning thousands who might have welcomed Christ if given the chance.

Thank you KMR, you said it brother, now you know how I feel.

Thanks for your suggestions Bovey, but we already went over this...

buddhawarrior wrote:
Jlay, buddhism does NOT seek to eliminate desire.

and for that matter, I am not Buddhist, just like Siddhartha was not buddhist, just like Jesus was not Christian...,

Then what are you and what do you believe?

Please read the Board Guidelines
-
-
-

BW, Its ok. We have nothing to fear from this man's view. If he chooses to not disclose that information, it shows more information about the weakness of his doctrine. I would not be alarmed at all of his presence here. Intact, its a good opportunity for others to apply their apologetics and learn how to talk to one of this kind of person.

Buddahwarrior,

Jlay hasn't said anything offensive. Infact, he has said practically everything I have said to you, just in his own words.

You are very confused, sir. You came here asking questions. You got answers as well as questions in these regards. You're now backing up into this "I don't want to have an argument. People are getting offensive and/or defensive" standpoint. Here, you don't understand what an "argument" is in this context. We're not here having a contest. We're having an important discussion, don't you think? We're in disagreement here, are you no longer interested in hearing why that is? If so, you're free to leave if you please because this place isn't a soapbox for propagating your view. However, if you are still interested then stick around and ask questions. I am very confident that if you stick around and hear us, you'll learn how inadequate your view is to Christian apologists. Christianity is growing rampantly in China and Hindu beliefs are getting exposed and we have answers, evidence, and logic from our scholars and independent scholars that are creating massive changes that will soon and surely make your beliefs an extinct, pointless viewpoint.

However, I want to make something clear to you, Buddahwarrior. So that you understand us. We're not offended by you, but you need to understand that your viewpoint and ideas are in our view the direct lies from Satan himself. We have no hostility to YOU, we're hostile and eqquiped to combat your belief. Some Christians are not fully eqquiped. Others are fully armored and ready for war. The reality is, we are at war here. NOT with YOU. We're at war with your ideas straight from Satan himself (the father of lies).

So, now that we got that out of the way. I have a couple of comments and questions.

You put some importance on this thing called Love. Its rather interesting because you seem to hold it as a virtue, correct? Since there are virtues, there are vices as well, right? The Tao directs reflects that.

You stated earlier that God is beyond language, logic, and formless. Practically impersonal. So, how do you come to conclude virtues/vices? Ethics like Love and Hate REQUIRE propositions. If God is unknowable, you would have no knowledge of these ethics, and God cannot inform your conscience or inform your actions. Its impossible for a virtue like Love to enter the realm of thought, and so how does that come into your view that you can propagate love actually exists?

On that note, if you don't acknowledge truths existence as something that can be known? Can you identify falsehood? You said that truth and contradictions are the same side of the coin. You've made an error, again. What's on the other side of the coin, then?

Isnt it becoming more and more obvious to you? What you propagate is impossible. It robs identity from God and effectively you rob yourself and claim nothing has an identity. Yet here you are telling us about the is of predication? Telling us effectively there is no duality. No perception, no perceived. No objects. No contingency.

Its all completely contrary to experience that you cite proves your view.

Jlay, buddhism does NOT seek to eliminate desire.

?? It states that the source of suffering is desire, and to eliminate suffering desire must be eliminated. Does it not say this?

Also, you say logic will not lead to enlightenment. First, define enlightenment.
2nd, I would be curiuos why all the Buddhist sources attempt to employ logic to defend their beliefs.

domokunrox wrote:BW, Its ok. We have nothing to fear from this man's view. If he chooses to not disclose that information, it shows more information about the weakness of his doctrine. I would not be alarmed at all of his presence here. Intact, its a good opportunity for others to apply their apologetics and learn how to talk to one of this kind of person...

If he does not disclose anything, then there is no way for an open honest discussion. If no open honest discussion, then Buddhawarrior’s statements are all in error pertaining to desiring a state of openness. This can be interpreted as blatant hypocrisy.

Any person who is not forthright, is not an honest person and enlightened with dishonesty. So it is important for Mr. Buddhewarrior to disclose his views – if he is, as he claimed, not a Buddhist then his name he goes by is dishonest exemplifying a clear lack of enlightened honesty necessary to substantiate any claims concerning the importance of being enlightened he made.

It is hard for me not to interpret your remarks as anything but hostile. However, I am not the one with anything to lose, you however are the ones whose faith seems to be on the line. You call me dishonest, you call me hypocrite, you call me confused, and ignoramus. That's fine. But it just makes it more difficult for me to open to you. So, if this is how you like to play, let's play.

domokunrox wrote:You put some importance on this thing called Love. Its rather interesting because you seem to hold it as a virtue, correct? Since there are virtues, there are vices as well, right? The Tao directs reflects that.

Domo, you quoted Luke 7:45-50 in one of the very first posts to me. in it contains this, "her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little"

You, yourself believe Love is important, then why not exercise some of your amazing brain power and answer the question you pose to me yourself, without contradiction? Must I do everything for you?

The Tao points a finger straight at your hypocrisy, that's why it shows examples of duality and opposites. The first chapter of the Tao is a disclaimer to the whole thing. Have you not read it? Or maybe you just do not understand it. If you are going to quote the Tao, at least give it the respect it deserves and do not ask stupid questions that was already answered by the first chapter. The Tao can not be known. If you think you know it, you do not.

domokunrox wrote:You stated earlier that God is beyond language, logic, and formless. Practically impersonal. So, how do you come to conclude virtues/vices? Ethics like Love and Hate REQUIRE propositions. If God is unknowable, you would have no knowledge of these ethics, and God cannot inform your conscience or inform your actions. Its impossible for a virtue like Love to enter the realm of thought, and so how does that come into your view that you can propagate love actually exists?

Since you quoted the Tao, let's continue with that. The Tao (way of nature) is my God, the only constant is change, and the only predictable outcome is unpredictablity. That is the way of nature. God is nature, God creates nature constantly, continually, perpetually. If you think that God gives a damn about you, just wait till your loved one dies of horrible suffering, just wait till your daughter is raped and murdered, just wait till you are dying of cancer. You think you will go to Heaven by condemning others? you are Wrong, dead, wrong. The contradiction I see here is that you think you are smarter than God, smarter than nature.

An idiot can be with God, and probably even more so than your intellect. A Child, a baby has more of a chance of being with God than you. God is in you, God is with you, you do not need to know him with your mind, or intellectually, You are IT, you are GOD, God created you. The only Sin is your false idols of intellect. You think you can come up with symbols like 2+2 and call that God? you are Wrong again. God is in ME, God IS me. I AM God. I AM Love, Love is my nature, God is my nature. You spin words and confuse yourself and others. Stop that. You don't need to do that. If you want to know God, just be quiet and watch him work thru you.

domokunrox wrote:if you don't acknowledge truths existence as something that can be known? Can you identify falsehood? You said that truth and contradictions are the same side of the coin. You've made an error, again. What's on the other side of the coin, then?

Do you even read my words before you misquote them? I said that Truth and Contradiction are the TWO sides of the same coin. Again, let's refer to the Tao. Again, I point to the illusion of duality. You create absolutes in a relative world. Real truth, the Tao, the ways of nature, the nature of God does not need to be known by the mind. Just BE and the experience of God comes to you. The only falsehood that I need to identify is your pseudo-intellectualism.

domokunrox wrote:Isnt it becoming more and more obvious to you? What you propagate is impossible. It robs identity from God and effectively you rob yourself and claim nothing has an identity. Yet here you are telling us about the is of predication? Telling us effectively there is no duality. No perception, no perceived. No objects. No contingency.

Actually, it is becoming more and more obvious to me that you are merely an infant on the road to real understanding. You need to hold onto your teddy because you are scared that if you let go you would be lost. And you bend my words with your already confused mind, lost in your own created maze. You do not seek to understand, but to accuse. I say to you this. Redirect this mis-spent energy to finding the truth in my words. Apply your great brain power to actually figuring it out. Don't let your fears hold you back. Cast away your lovey-teddy and jump into the arms of the Tao. Don't be afraid of letting go your believes. They won't serve you at the Gate of the Lord. Just because you win arguments does not mean you are let in. Just because you proved you have read more books, memorized more verses, does not mean you KNOW wisdom.

If you are really interested in having a conversation outside of the rules of this forum, then send me a private message. Because I do not wish to embarrass you in front of your congregation of misguided intellectuals.

jlay wrote:

Jlay, buddhism does NOT seek to eliminate desire.

?? It states that the source of suffering is desire, and to eliminate suffering desire must be eliminated. Does it not say this?

Also, you say logic will not lead to enlightenment. First, define enlightenment.
2nd, I would be curiuos why all the Buddhist sources attempt to employ logic to defend their beliefs.

Sorry Jlay, I've run out of patience today, and might just give it to you straight.

I tell my 2 year old daughter certain things because it's easy for her to understand. You obviously are on the same level as my two year old. Yes, for you, my child, you must eliminate desire to eliminate suffering.

However, if you were older and wiser, and have tried to practice the elimination of desire, and have failed at it, I would tell you something else.

Now you have failed at attempting to eliminate your desire, you are ready for step two. ELIMINATE YOUR DESIRE FOR ELIMINATING DESIRE.

I don't think I should tell you more, because you are obviously a noob. so try that exercise and if you have more questions, i would be happy to do my best in answering.

B. W. wrote:

domokunrox wrote:BW, Its ok. We have nothing to fear from this man's view. If he chooses to not disclose that information, it shows more information about the weakness of his doctrine. I would not be alarmed at all of his presence here. Intact, its a good opportunity for others to apply their apologetics and learn how to talk to one of this kind of person...

If he does not disclose anything, then there is no way for an open honest discussion. If no open honest discussion, then Buddhawarrior’s statements are all in error pertaining to desiring a state of openness. This can be interpreted as blatant hypocrisy.

Any person who is not forthright, is not an honest person and enlightened with dishonesty. So it is important for Mr. Buddhewarrior to disclose his views – if he is, as he claimed, not a Buddhist then his name he goes by is dishonest exemplifying a clear lack of enlightened honesty necessary to substantiate any claims concerning the importance of being enlightened he made.

ARgh, must I sink to such lows as to explain to you your own idiocy?

Buddhawarrior, Not BUDDHIST Warrior. Silly boy.

Buddha is just a label for someone who is enlightened.

Buddhist is someone who follows a set of practices to attain enlightenment.

I do not follow a set of practices, but seek only enlightenment thru whatever means. The success of the end goal is all that matters. The labels others put on me, or I put on myself does not matter, and mean nothing.

Jesus was not Christian. and Gautama was not a Buddhist.

If you only want to be a follower, that is your choice. But I've set my aim a bit higher. I'm willing to destroy my own ego like a warrior slays his enemies to attain the only thing worth living for. Call it whatever you want, Christ Consciousness, Buddha nature, Ultimate Yoga, Union with the Divine, Enlightenment, Awakening, the name does not matter, only the perpetual experience of it matters.

If you must call me names just to boost your own sense of self worth, that's too bad. It is your eternal salvation at stake, not mine. But please see how you sound, like a frightened little baby. You are so afraid of losing your religion that you are wiling to throw out the baby with the bath water. Don't you see, in this argument, no one wins unless we all win. It does not matter who is right, it matters that you see the truth. That you have been scared, you have been afraid, and you are willing to crucify the first real voice you've heard just to protect your ego.

I make the same offer to you as I do to anyone on this site. You can send me a private message if you wish to continue this conversation. But within the scope of this site, you are not allowed to change your mind.

I'm sorry if your passive aggressive slander had prompted me to take the gloves off. But I hope you see my point. but of course, I already know you won't. Your fear and anger is too great. It swallows you up and disallows you to see the truth when it's staring at you in the face. You wish only to destroy it, so you can go back to your sinful ways. But that won't help you. Not if you are truly seeking salvation. Go ahead, keep looking for contradictions, you will find many. You will win many arguments, and you will have your friend Domo to pat your on the back. But guess what, you've missed the point. the Two of you are shaking hands in hell. Congratulations.