I want a rich sugar momma I can dig some gold out of... any ideas? [/derail]

This Sons of Buddhism prospect will never get his top rocker.

(March 1, 2012 at 5:26 am)tackattack Wrote: I want a rich sugar momma I can dig some gold out of... any ideas? [/derail]

Trust the Mighty Tack to catch a "gold train" when he sees one!!

Try the Cougars honey...


Worked for Zen

(February 29, 2012 at 8:57 pm)Bgood Wrote:

Quote:apophenia wrote

to pretend that the dark and the light can be separated by any religion known to man is, I think a forlorn hope, yet I understand why Buddhists are vulnerable to that delusion — that's precisely what their dogmatic religious beliefs tell them, that the Buddha can teach them a trick of the mind that will separate the two halves cleanly

Buddhism doesn't teach that....

(February 19, 2012 at 11:23 pm)Bgood Wrote: ...The Bible has been directly used as justification of totalitaian dictatorships all throughout history. Think about it..a Monotheistic God who rules the universe through force and fear. Just like Kim Jong-Il and plenty of others try to do.

Democracy was born in Ancient Greece, and they were a polytheistic culture. All the Abrahamic religions are inherently wrong, corrupt and evil. Easten religions are FAR more superior in intellect, virtue and practice. Case closed Carnavon. Christianity is dead. Become a buddhist if you want to experience true awakening and spirituality lol. But whatever you do, put down the fucking cross and walk upright!

Flowers

Who shall overcome this earth, and the world of Yama (the lord of the departed), and the world of the gods?
Who shall find out the plainly shown path of virtue, as a clever man finds out the (right) flower?

The disciple will overcome the earth, and the world of Yama, and the world of the gods.
The disciple will find out the plainly shown path of virtue, as a clever man finds out the (right) flower.

He who knows that this body is like froth, and has learnt that it is as unsubstantial as a mirage,
will break the flower-pointed arrow of Mara, and never see the king of death.

Death carries off a man who is gathering flowers and whose mind is distracted, as a flood
carries off a sleeping village.

Death subdues a man who is gathering flowers, and whose mind is distracted, before he
is satiated in his pleasures.

As the bee collects nectar and departs without injuring the flower, or its colour or scent,
so let a sage dwell in his village.

Not the perversities of others, not their sins of commission or omission, but his own misdeeds
and negligences should a sage take notice of.

Like a beautiful flower, full of colour, but without scent, are the fine but fruitless words of him
who does not act accordingly.

But, like a beautiful flower, full of colour and full of scent, are the fine and fruitful words of him
who acts accordingly.

As many kinds of wreaths can be made from a heap of flowers, so many good things may
be achieved by a mortal when once he is born.

The scent of flowers does not travel against the wind, nor (that of) sandal-wood, or of Tagara and Mallika flowers;
but the odour of good people travels even against the wind; a good man pervades every place.

Sandal-wood or Tagara, a lotus-flower, or a Vassiki, among these sorts of perfumes, the perfume of virtue is unsurpassed.

Mean is the scent that comes from Tagara and sandal-wood;--the perfume of those who possess virtue
rises up to the gods as the highest.

Of the people who possess these virtues, who live without thoughtlessness, and who are emancipated through true knowledge,
Mara, the tempter, never finds the way.

As on a heap of rubbish cast upon the highway the lily will grow full of sweet perfume and delight, thus the disciple of the truly enlightened Buddha
shines forth by his knowledge among those who are like rubbish, among the people that walk in darkness.

- The Dhammapada

(February 29, 2012 at 7:47 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: I simply point out these contradictions. And since they clearly exist, then if I wanted to be as ignorant as you and "pretend" that I can uses these fables to make claims about what God would supposedly do, then I can point to any statements in these absurd contradicting fables and proclaim, "For the Bible Tells us so!"

Sorry for the delay, I am just quite busy at present.
I accept that some verses seem to contradict and foolish to ignore that, but it is just as foolish to stop at that and not consider all the facts that has relevance and in most instances will make the meaning clear.

If you use a document and wish to interpret it properly, you have to know the context and background before you make an informed decision on the meaning in terms that specific document. Thus, “The Bible tells me so” is exactly the position as you wish to suggest contradictions within the document. So one can only argue from the Bible and using it in its proper context
The issue that you raise that Jesus would suggest a different standard than God the Father, is however not such a case, as it is clear from Scripture that the standard for “being saved” is belief in Jesus Christ.
Jesus has never indicated that ignorance is an “excuse” and thus have to interpret the saying in terms of what is clear :
1) All sins, apart from the “unpardonable sin” can be forgiven, ( Mat 12:31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.) This is evident throughout the Bible. Israel at times turned to other gods, but when there is repentance and turning back to God, they have been forgiven.
2) Isa 55:7 Let the wicked forsake his way and the man of vanity his thoughts, and let him return to Jehovah, and He will have mercy on him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon
3) Isa 44:22 I have blotted out your transgressions like a thick cloud; and your sins like a cloud. Return to Me, for I have redeemed you.
4) Isa 44:23 Sing, O heavens, for Jehovah has done it. Shout, O lower parts of the earth; burst forth into praise, O mountains. O forest and every tree in it, sing praise, because Jehovah has redeemed Jacob, and He glorifies Himself in Israel.

This tie in with the fact that our good works does not “get us into heaven” or bad works “prevents us ever from going to heaven”. If that was the case, none of us would get to heaven for we are sinners. Jesus paid the price for our sins (redeemed). That is what was achieved at the cross.

Quote:You can root though these texts finding verses that support your demands that Jesus and this God are hateful entities who are chomping at the bit to condemn people to eternal damnation of every little thing.

I can root through the very same texts finding verses that support precisely the opposite conclusions.

So it basically boils down to the individual. You can make it into a hateful religion by choosing which verses you support and how you personally interpret them. Or you can make it into a loving religion by focusing on choosing other verses that support a more loving picture of a God.

That choice is entirely up to you. The actual cannon of fables is riddled with enough contradictions to support whichever view you prefer to support. A hateful God, or a loving God.

If I were going to support these fables I'd support the loving interpretations.

So it is up to us to choose which to prefer and which to “ignore”? That is very popular as some find the judgement of God "unsavory". We all like to hear that God is loving and kind and as previously indicated ,that is the message that attracts people. We choose to reject the judgement of God as we choose to live according to our rules and God should be happy. This is not even how we play rugby. Imagine that. Especially my team would love it as they have lost a game last Saturday - one they really had sown up, were it not for the penalties.
Do I judge you because you would rather have a god that fits in with your expectations and judgement of what is right and wrong? Not at all. Who would not support you on your choice?
But that is not what we learn from the Bible. God has made rules by which we should live and by which we will be judged.

Quote:I said, If Jesus proclaims in these tales that his very own disciples do not understand him, then why should anyone believe that the authors of the New Testament would have understood him any better?

This goes to the heart of the matter of whether or not these hearsay rumors have any credibility at all.

It has absolutely nothing at all to do with what you may personally understand or not understand.

The point is actually that what has been recorded is independent of the authors’ understanding thereof as the authors do not claim anything other than recording it truthfully.

Quote:The idea that he is a totally made-up fictional character makes no sense to me because I can't personally imagine why anyone would write such a fucked up story from pure scratch. Someone suggested in another thread that these were desperate times and these people just made up a 'deliverer' from Roman occupation. But that makes not sense to me. Why would they make up a totally fabricated story of a 'deliverer' who ends up being beaten and nailed to a pole by Roman Soldiers.

So to me it makes more sense that these are superstitious rumors based on some real event.

Your comment on this “fictional character” is somewhat removed from reality as any proper and unbiased assessment of literature will show. You are welcome to do your own proper research..See for instance http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrRQqYGf4O0 , or read some of the information here http://www.thedevineevidence.com/jesus_history.html, .

Quote:You are focusing on stuff that came long after the events of Jesus. Christianity didn't even exist at the time of Jesus.

Christianity is based on both OT and NT. That they were not saved by works is evident from the Old Testament
Isa 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
Isa 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
The following may be worthwhile to read; http://www.theologicalstudies.org.uk/pdf...inberg.pdf
Here is an extract”
It thus becomes apparent that a comprehensive understanding of God’s gracious purpose-which has been one and the same from Genesis 3:15, right on through to the closing chapters of Revelation-lies contingent upon the Christian’s recognition of one cross, one testament, one faith, and one Church throughout all history.

Quote:Yes, Buddhism is poles apart from the teachings of the Torah. And that's what existed at that time.

And YES, the teachings attributed to Jesus were indeed poles apart from the teachings of the Torah.

In fact, that's a large part of why I'm convinced that Jesus could not possibly have been the demigod son of the God of Abraham.

You did not quite address the problem of works v grace. But I am sure you agree that as stated, Christianity is directly opposed to Buddhism on the issue. Buddhism, like Islam are works-based faiths
It will be worth your while to consider the law (Torah) – which you claim contradicts the Torah. The purpose of the law is explained especially in Galatians - i.e
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
It is also clear from the OT that there was to be a change as a new covenant is foreseen:

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, says Jehovah, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,
Jer 31:32 not according to the covenant that I cut with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt (which covenant of Mine they broke, although I was a husband to them, says Jehovah).
So although there was a change in the covenant, (that was already forseen in the Old Testament), the means of being saved has always been the same.
That was actually one of the areas that Paul warned young Timothy about – the Judaizers wanting to bring people back under “curse of the law”. The reason being that nobody can live perfect lives (the law sets the standard) and must thus look at their salvation through Jesus Christ only.

Quote:Whether he was a Mahayana Buddhist or not is another story. But he clearly wasn't the son of the God of Abraham from the Torah, because he renounced the commandments given by that God.

On what grounds do you claim this?

Quote:What are you talking about? Mahayana Buddhism absolutely supported the concept of a Bodhisattva. All you're doing here is displaying a gross ignorance of what Mahayana Buddhism stood for.

Yes, you are quite correct. I am really ignorant about the various “Buddhisms”. But not to worry, I do not wish to indulge in “Buddhism bashing” as it is really not the issue. I respect your views and will be content to try and answer any thoughtful question that you pose in respect of Christianity.

Quote:John
[47] And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
[48] He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
.......
If you reject his teachings and fail to do as he teaches you'll create bad karma and suffer the consequences.

This is in perfect harmony with the way I would expect a Mahayana Buddhist to teach.

It seems that you are somewhat mistaken as to what Jesus is saying, also seen in proper context.
The following is a proper understanding:
1) Jesus did not come to judge. (Absolutely as this was not his purpose-
(Luk 5:32 I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. ) Jesus left heaven and became a mortal man for the purpose of paying for the sins of those that trust in Him). Also see his interaction with the “outcasts” of society, including the woman caught in adultery etc)
2) He never condoned any of their sins (see i.e “go and sin no more”)
3) Jesus indicated to people the need to repent of their sins and come to Him for relief
a. (Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.)
4) All people are invited to come to Jesus
a. Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
b. Mat 11:29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
c. Joh 7:37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
d. Isa 55:1 Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
5) There will be a day of judgement where people will be judged by what Jesus said

It is really important to note that which you seem to misinterpret: "In other words, if you do the things he teaches you will create good karma and you will find rest and peace."
Jesus does not teach that good works and living a holy life will give you peace – but come to Jesus and He will give you (his) peace. Good works often have the effect of making us proud– that which God hates and also at times become an end in themselves.

Context is whatever one wishes for it to be. You know, when you make context arguments, have you ever considered that you'll then have to make all those different contexts non-contradictory as well? Just makes it worse. How hard is it to say "the bible is just a story". There can still be a god, there can still be a christian god, god can still be whatever you wish, but the bible is just a story. What's the "true interpretation" of the story? There is none, and it would cheapen the story if it were so. Why is it that the gods I don't believe in are always bigger than the gods other people do? Heaven forbid there be some other use, some other meaning, some less than absurd translation of a text supposedly inspired by the lord of the fucking universe. But whatever, box your own god in all you like. Make him seem more like yourself, easier to understand, shackle him to your interpretation. What's the worst that could happen?

(points to the massive heap of dead religions that insisted on doing exactly this)

You wanted out but you cant have it. It's in your face but you can't grab it. WHAT IS IT?

Buddism is cyclical, yet reality is linear. How does the Buddist reconcile this?

As are judaic religions, prophetic cycle. Google is your friend.

Hang on a sec, lemme check the Akashic record.