RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Church



Message

facedown -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/24/2008 7:02:20 AM)

satrian

actually, i understand that old avestan is closley similar to the middle chronological layers of the indian vedas than anything else. however, there is no way to historically date the text(s) based on what's written.

i didn't say that the avesta was written in the 13th century CE, i said this is the date of the oldest fragment. let's think about this for a moment: the oldest surviving fragment of this book is only around 700 years old. legend insists that it was written by zoraster (if he ever, like lau tsu, actually every existed) himself. but there is no scholastic or historical reason to suggest it actually is so.

so, you have at least a 1700 year gap between the oldest fragment and when it is supposedly written. if one used the same critique of ancient hebrew writings or more modern christian writings (those found in the old and new testaments of the christian bible, for example) then one would be required to dismiss it all as pure legend, and not worthy of much of anything.

we can imagine that zoraster wrote something as early as the 11th century BCE; however, it doesn't do much good for an intellectual conversation. especially, when tradition holds that moses himself penned the torah around the 13th century BCE, and this doesn't do much good for critiques (myself often included on occasion).

::
i suppose the point asked to clarify is this:
there is little historical evidence for zorastrian history (not iranian history, zorastrian history). we have a few writings, but nothing that is very old at all (fragments of them). historians try to work with whats available to back date as much as they can and recreate some version of history. now, interestingly, other eastern cultures, such as iranian, are spoken of and about as though it is all factually based. but with other near eastern cultures, say those of a group of hebrews, or later followers of jesus, it is often spoken of as though it's all either a) fabrication, b) self-sustainment, c) inaccurate, or d) written at a much later date.

::
i'm not sure it could be said that zoraster began the traditions mentioned by herodotus with a full degree of intellectual certainty. lets suppose in 6,000 years from now a fellow comes across a couple of fragments, one from the constitution of the united states, and the other seems to be much later, around 2,000 years old (so one from around 1700 CE and the other 3700 CE). both speak of some similar ideas, so the fellow decides that the culture who wrote these writings in 3700 CE is the same group from back in 1700 CE.
_
now, the vendidad says that the dead are unclean, and only special corpse bearers who live apart from the rest of soceity are allowed to touch them, and even they need to purify themselves aftewards. the body is then cleansed, and then wrapped in a garment. then, the corpse is placed into the tower of silence, a rather large stone tomb. prayers would then follow for some time. there would also be some sort of fire during this time.
_
dakhma (the common word for these 'towers'); however, denotes any place for the dead, not necessarily that as depicted in the engraving for a tower of silence in mumbai. secondly the earliest reference to iranian ritual expose is from herodotus's histories. the historiographer talks of rites done in secret, and that the bodies were dragged around by a dog. further the 'magi' (a term that eventually came to signify a zorastrian priest) embalmed the corpse and laid it in a trench.
_
further, the earliest discovery of such tombs is around the 5th to 4th centuries BCE that indicatating that the bones were isolated, but there is no evidence that this happened through a ritual exposure. and the use of towers isn't attested until the 16th century CE.
_
so, you have an old greek document that speaks of things that are similar, but not exactly what the culture practiced.

quote:

My mentioning of the Zoroastrians originally was to show that using the survival of the Jews throughout the ages as an argument for god was irrational.
this is good enough of an observation; however, as noted, zorastrian history is full of holes, legends, and doubt in and of itself, and cannot be used as a backdrop for any critique.

finally, i don't want to get into your conversation with other folks here; however, if you're interested in the formation of the follwers of jesus, and you want it from an agnostic (on the atheist side) source, i'd recommend bart ehrman. if you want a scholastic approach from a christian, the only one i'd recommend is tom wright.

peace to you, and like you, i enjoy the conversation. too bad we're so very badly off topic! lol



notmycity -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/24/2008 4:20:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xc279

Hi, I was a Christian for basically all my life. I went to a Christian school until junior high at which point I moved and started going to public school. I read the Da Vinci Code which (I know it is fiction) was enough for me to start doubting. I did research on my own to try and figure out the truth. I discovered that there are no historical records of anything that Jesus did outside of the Bible. The Bible also had no proof to support it.
On a spiritual level I also had my doubts. I never asked to be created. How can a loving God send people to Hell just for not loving him? I know that the reason for this was because all have sinned and fallen short the glory of God. But if he created sin (since he created everything), he created hell, he made the laws and decided that if anyone disobeyed them and chose not to love him that they would spend eternity in hell, then why should I love him?
Can anyone shed some light on this?


Have you read your entire Bible?


2 Tim 3:16-17
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


Consider these words from Christ:


John 3:18-21
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Which group do you belong to?



xc279 -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/24/2008 11:37:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: notmycity

quote:

ORIGINAL: xc279

Hi, I was a Christian for basically all my life. I went to a Christian school until junior high at which point I moved and started going to public school. I read the Da Vinci Code which (I know it is fiction) was enough for me to start doubting. I did research on my own to try and figure out the truth. I discovered that there are no historical records of anything that Jesus did outside of the Bible. The Bible also had no proof to support it.
On a spiritual level I also had my doubts. I never asked to be created. How can a loving God send people to Hell just for not loving him? I know that the reason for this was because all have sinned and fallen short the glory of God. But if he created sin (since he created everything), he created hell, he made the laws and decided that if anyone disobeyed them and chose not to love him that they would spend eternity in hell, then why should I love him?
Can anyone shed some light on this?


Have you read your entire Bible?


2 Tim 3:16-17
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


Consider these words from Christ:


John 3:18-21
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Which group do you belong to?


If I am doubting the existence of God and the validity of the Bible then ,no offense, how would passages from the Bible convince me that it is factual?



facedown -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/25/2008 7:07:28 AM)

xc29
i know the conversation got a little side-tracked, but here was a post directed in response to the op from the previous page:

"...greetings. it seems, from my reading, that possibly your main concern with christianity/the bible/jesus/christians/etc is along the lines of not being able to trust that which was written, and maybe even more to the point, not trusting that which is written, about that which is written. and that you're seeking something beyond yourself, you're looking for a path that seems authentic.

i ask this with all sincerity, when was the last time you read the gospels? is it possible, that much of what's written about the gospels, and the bible as a whole, is junk? when i read the gospels, i see a way of service, humility, a path that embraces life even in suffering, and a path of hope. i don't read about a "to-do" list that is rather extensive (if it exists at all, it is simply: love) as folks within christendom often create. i don't see the modernistic faith of logic, scientific reason, or self-sustainment often purported.

what does buddism mean to you? is it a guide to live rightly and do justly? is it a 'religion' to you? does it do or say anything to you about that which is unseen? does it represent historic facts? i ask this, again in all sincerity, as buddhism means so much to so many..."

quote:

If I am doubting the existence of God and the validity of the Bible then ,no offense, how would passages from the Bible convince me that it is factual?

thought i might also respond to this, since even though the other's questions was drastically different, it also eluded reading the scriptures.
so, it seems the core of your question is in seeking the "existence of god" looking for "factual" evidence, is that accurate?

let me approach this in a couple ways:
~ first, in thinking of my ealier post to, as quoted above, i'd remind you, and i need to remind myself, that all that is written about something, isn't a pure reflection of the scriptures. all that we think about the scriptures too, does not necessarily reverberate with them either. you also see this in buddhism, where mahayanna and therevada have serious differences about the teachings of buddha.
it seems rational; however, that if we allow some variance and elongation from one school, that maybe we should allow it from another?
my conviction is the teachings of the christ are authentic. and i have my days, weeks, and sometimes months, where i struggle on a variety of core-issues. my conviction is that there is something greater than myself, i am not the center; and i'm called to participate in that which is greater, and yet - this is not without struggle, hypocrisy, and the like.
~second, if you're seeking "factual evidence", then what are you looking for from buddhism? mahayana doctrine is centered around the liberation of suffering and the existence of buddha's and bodhisattva's that embody the transcendent buddha-nature....the eternal buddha essence is present, but hidden and unrecognized in all things.
. are you doubting this, are you seeking factual evidence of this?

interestingly, when dr suzuki translated the scriptures into chinese some time ago, he had to find a word for "logos". it's often translated into english as "word"; however it's a very complicated word, a difficult word, and the only viable option in chinese that conveyed the same connotation from the original, was dao. dao of course is another complicated word, and we can simplify it as simple "the way". thus the opening of john 1 would read as follows "...the beginning was the way..."

christianity isn't a western culture. it it isn't a western religion. at it's root it is near-eastern. this is why it's often difficult to read and understand the scriptures from a western point of view. even further, there are entire schools from the west that seem so far away from the message of jesus, it's saddening.
~
~
if you're seeking some insights on the teachings of jesus, i'd recommend further readings from a trappist monk, thomas merton.
if you're looking for insights into the historicty of the movement of those who followed in the path of jesus, i'd recommend bart erhman and tom wright (to give you a good balance).



P31W -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/25/2008 8:57:18 AM)

xc279

How about the OT and the laws contained in them. Have you done the research on them?

They are fascinating!!!!

Medical research compared what Moses would have studied while in Egypt (considered the BEST medical advise of it's day) with what Moses was told to record in the law. They are worlds apart in thier medical advise. Moses was dead on each and every time.

Do you know how ocean currents were discovered? A man was reading in the bible about them and said "it must be true". He is the father of oceanography.

What about looking at the OT and see how countries who pretty much follow the guidelines contained in them for strong property rights prosper whereas countries who don't follow them are pretty much third world countries?

There are just TONS of fascinating things to discover about God's word.

I am not at home but when I return I will give you the names of some books you will want to investigate. They will amaze and astound you.

You won't have questions about the scriptures of the existance of God once you see how dead on God's word is.



Ezra -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/26/2008 5:59:01 PM)

quote:

If I am doubting the existence of God and the validity of the Bible then ,no offense, how would passages from the Bible convince me that it is factual?


You are not suggesting that you approach every non-fiction book as a fraud, are you? If you pick up any text book, do you automatically presume it is a fraud, and then try to prove otherwise? If you pick up the statutes or laws of any nation and read them, do you firstly assume they are bogus, and then go from there? I don't think so. Therefore this is a specious argument at best.

Indeed, if there is any book in the world that can be fully trusted for any kind of accuracy, it is the Bible. Numerous individuals have tried to prove it otherwise, and failed. Therefore your fundamental premise that the Bible is fraudulent, inaccurate, misleading, non-factual etc. is just a cover up. You will have to dig deeper for your reasons to reject the Bible.

The Bible will reveal to you that you are a sinner and lost and that you need the Savior. That Christ died on the Cross for your sins, and rose again for your justification. That you must believe this Gospel and repent, and receive Christ as Lord and Savior, or face eternal separation from God in the Lake of Fire.

No sinner likes to hear this. But the truth is not always palatable. That's why Pilate dodged the issue by asking "What is Truth"? You dodge it by asking "Where is Truth"? Same difference.

Buddha needed salvation as much as Mohammed or Moses. Moses believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousness. Buddha and Mohammed did not, and created their own religions.



Doc65 -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/26/2008 6:21:07 PM)

Aside from Josephus, there are other writings...

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm

And, if you don't think there is a hell in Buddhism, you are wrong....I suggest you do a little deeper look, perhaps the Tibetan Book of the Dead, for starters...



davelinde -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/28/2008 5:14:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xc279
...I have decided to convert to Buddhism.
I am not going to post anymore at the risk of possibly causing someone else to lose faith. To me it's more important that you believe in something than it is what you believe. I wish everyone the best.


Looks like the OP left already.

I find this statement amazing though - "it's more important that you believe in something than it is what you believe". I don't get it but I've heard variants of it before. It goes hand in hand with the idea that a sincere belief is inherently good, even if the basis is false. Sincerity trumps truth?

The logic here (before we got sidetracked on the tenets of Buddhism or defending the Gospel starting with an atheistic pre-supposition...) is that if the truth as I've understood it and judge it does not meet my standards (eg "God is not good") I may choose to believe an alternate idea because I like the way it sounds.

How would one defend the idea that the tenets of Buddhism are on a more solid basis than the tenets of Christianity? Clearly I disagree with the conclusion... but I cannot even follow the logic?

It really seems like the truth to be accepted is what seemed "nice" and for today Buddhism seemed nicer?



xc279 -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/28/2008 7:28:03 PM)

What I meant by that is that if you have something to believe in that helps you through the hard times that is better than being completely lost and having nothing. As far as truth goes, with all the evidence disproving Christianity that isn't really much of an arguement. There is nothing in Buddhism to be proven or disproven. It is more of a philosophy than a religion. It does not deny scientific facts that have enormous evidence in favor of beliefs that can be disproven by science and make no logical sense.

EDIT: Let's take God for example. Besides what I said earlier regarding hell, there are other discrepencies. Christians say that the Big Bang did not happen because every effect has a cause and the Big bang would violate this. Yet when questioned about the origins of God the response is "God is eternal". Doesn't that violate the concept of every effect has a cause? And if God is eternal then by Christians own arguement he did not have a creator despite his being more complex than humans. If the universe is so complex that it needed a creator, and God is more complex still, then doesn't God need a creator?



facedown -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/28/2008 9:11:49 PM)

xc279
any thoughts regarding post #54?

regarding post 59
it should be noted that "some christians" suggest that the big bang couldn't have occured, but it isn't really a matter of cause and effect to my understanding, it's more of a push towards a 'young earth'. most folks who demand a 'big bang' have difficulties in the "why" or "how", and if you talk with many, it begins to sound like something, somehow sparked it. in addition, when you delve into quantum physics, things take on strange characteristics and it seems as though there is some "personality" in that which is.

and as i understand it, it was Georges Lemaître, a catholic priest who really got this theory of a big bang going.....

further, in various forms of buddhism there is an understanding of transcendence, even if it is sumyata, or nothingness. this isn't to be understood as "atheism", let alone "agnostic", but more akin to "negative theology", which by the way, is very prominent in older tribes of christianity.

pax



meerkat -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/28/2008 10:46:56 PM)

Hi xc,

I was brought up in a christian home, and had doubts about hell and the love and justice of God when I was around 14 or 15. I have recently come back to Christ (I am still a bit suspicious about religion - with so many different denominations etc its a bit offputting) it seems that I have always felt and known that there is more to life than the physical realm and I did explore some new age spirituality- spiritualism. I was searching for truth and still am.

From what I now understand from the scriptures is that we are created earthly, the sons (daughters) of Adam and being earthly there is no way that we can not sin. Also the wages of sin is death (not eternal punishment) Romans 8:20-21 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected [the same] in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation. For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:. 1 Peter 3:18

I believe that ultimately that all will be reconciled back to God in Christ however there will be judgement (Lake of fire) for decisions, deeds done in the flesh - and the only way to be born of the Spirit is to believe (trust, submit, obey) in Christ (in this life or the next)

With regard to the age of the earth debate this is an interesting website http://www.yashanet.com/library/missing_link.htm



Sammy_S -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/29/2008 1:14:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xc279

Hi, I was a Christian for basically all my life. I went to a Christian school until junior high at which point I moved and started going to public school. I read the Da Vinci Code which (I know it is fiction) was enough for me to start doubting. I did research on my own to try and figure out the truth. I discovered that there are no historical records of anything that Jesus did outside of the Bible. The Bible also had no proof to support it.
On a spiritual level I also had my doubts. I never asked to be created. How can a loving God send people to Hell just for not loving him? I know that the reason for this was because all have sinned and fallen short the glory of God. But if he created sin (since he created everything), he created hell, he made the laws and decided that if anyone disobeyed them and chose not to love him that they would spend eternity in hell, then why should I love him?
Can anyone shed some light on this?



No you werent.



facedown -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (4/29/2008 6:18:16 AM)

sammy
while things such as association doesn't necessarily mean anything, because we are not talking about that which is exclusive, i find your response inappropriate....at best.
doubt, in and of itself, doesn't tell anyone if someone is "out" anymore than association tells anyone someone is "in".



HisFish -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/2/2008 12:12:50 AM)

quote:

As far as truth goes, with all the evidence disproving Christianity that isn't really much of an arguement



quote:

And Buddhism isn't about eternity. It isn't about getting "warm-fuzzies". It is about truth. It just doesn't tie it into a hope of the afterlife or belief in a book which has evidence disproving it.


Im sorry, but these are statements of disbelief, not doubt. You need to cry out to the Lord for salvation. No amount of intellectual discussion, historical proof, or clever arguement can save a man. The work of the Holy spirit changing the heart is the only way.


quote:

sammy
while things such as association doesn't necessarily mean anything, because we are not talking about that which is exclusive, i find your response inappropriate....at best


Inappropiate?. Sammy is quite right. No true, born again, sovereignly kept christian will ever abandon Christ. The word says that "They went out from us that that it might be made manifest that they never were of us".

quote:

doubt, in and of itself, doesn't tell anyone if someone is "out" anymore than association tells anyone someone is "in



That is true. but in my 25 years in the evangelical church i dont know how many times ive seen pastors and counselors tell people, most of them in youth groups, not to let their nagging doubts, or more often than not, out and out disbelief, stop them from doubting their salvation. After all, they would be told," you prayed a prayer, came forward during altar call, and got baptized didnt you?, dont worry, your saved". Lets not tell people they are saved when everything they tell us says they are not.



PolarBear -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/2/2008 6:09:26 AM)

XC, I hope you're still reading!

These things DO have answers! I hope you're willing to explore them. They are far to deep to summarize in a single response to you though, or even in a thread.

There is a book by Gary Habermas called The Historical Jesus that delves into historical writings about Jesus in great detail. He digs through what ancient writings say about Jesus, and they do match up with what the Bible says. He studies the skeptics' view of the historical evidence, and notes that they virtually all accept some facts, including Jesus' crucifixion, and the fact that the early disciples and Paul really believed they had seen the risen Christ. Paul was of course a persecuter, so the fact that he believed is amazing. Then there were the disciples, who willingly died for proclaiming that Christ was God and had risen. Of course people die often die for lies, but these disciples KNEW Jesus and SAW Him. They knew for sure if He did miracles and rose from the dead. And they died for proclaiming that message.

You might also check into a couple books by Kenneth Samples. Without a Doubt: Answering the 20 Toughest Faith Questions (which I have not read) gives answers to 20 questions people like you ask. A World of Difference (which I am reading right now) compares and contrasts the Christian worldview and truthclaims with other worldview competitors, and gives reasons that logic supports the Christian view.

quote:

ORIGINAL: xc279

EDIT: Let's take God for example. Besides what I said earlier regarding hell, there are other discrepencies. Christians say that the Big Bang did not happen because every effect has a cause and the Big bang would violate this. Yet when questioned about the origins of God the response is "God is eternal". Doesn't that violate the concept of every effect has a cause? And if God is eternal then by Christians own arguement he did not have a creator despite his being more complex than humans. If the universe is so complex that it needed a creator, and God is more complex still, then doesn't God need a creator?


LOL. "Christians" do not say the Big Bang did not happen, a certain group of young earth "literalists" do. In reality, I think the Big Bang is absolutely one of the most profound arguments FOR Christianity.

You can look at it from two sides. First, the Bible talks much about the Big Bang. In several places it specifies that everything created came from nothing. That's exactly what the BB says. About 10 times in the Prophets, God is said to have "stretched out the heavens". The Hebrew word there literally means the stretching out of everything. The BB theory indeed says the same thing, that even space itself has been undergoing expansion. Isaiah 42:5, "The Lord, who created the heavens and stretched them out," combines those two facets in a single phrase! Romans 8 and debatably other passages imply the second law of thermodynamics, another feature of a BB universe.

Then look what the BB itself implies. We know that all matter, energy, space, and even time itself came into existence at that point. That tells us a LOT about God! Whoever or whatever is responsible for causing this universe to come into existence MUST have unimaginable creative powers. After all, He created not only all matter, but space and time dimensions! He must transcend time itself! Of all the world religions, ONLY the Bible talks about such a God!

God does not need a creator because He exists outside of time. There was no time before His existence. He just "is". I know that's hard to wrap your mind around, but it's what the Bible teaches, and in light of modern cosmology, it actually makes quite a bit of sense.

Of course, this boils down to whether or not you WANT God. Apparently you've already decided to reject Him; if so, that is unfortunate. If you want Him and look for Him, you will find abundant reasons for doing so!



JordanW -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/3/2008 1:36:08 AM)

Jesus is The Way, The Truth and The Life. You have to have faith in order to believe. I don't believe your sole excuse for doubting Christianity, I just feel that you have a lack of faith.



bufo -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/3/2008 8:09:50 PM)

This has the potential to be quite an interesting thread, though it was hijacked for awhile. XC279. I think i have heard that the Dalai lama has suggested that most americans should look to Christianity for a spiritual practice. I suspect that the problem you may be having is that you are hearing too much from Christians of a particular stripe. I am a non-Christian and even I occasionally bump into a Christian who practices his faith in a way that almost suggests a follower of the Buddha Way. Most religions have aspects of both belief on the one hand and practice on the other. Of course these are actually integrated in the lived religious experience. I think that Christianity, as practiced by many modern americans, particularly the more fundemental version is heavily weighted to belief over spiritual practice. As such I feel it tends to make an "idol" of conceptual thoughts and beliefs which hinders an opening of the individual's heart. I think you are correct that some forms of Buddhism take an approach that emphasizes practice over belief, acknowledging that the wholeness of spiritual experience goes beyond, "thoughts" and professed belief in doctrines. That said, the same practices of opening the individual to intimacy with "God", the universe, peace, "emptiness" and/or freedom are also available with the Christian tradition. You will just have to work your way to God around the Christians who will tend to get in your way. In fact, their getting in your "Way" will be a great opportunity to practice your "way" and to realize it and intimacy with God and all being. Thanks.



hawknelsonismyfriend -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/4/2008 7:37:11 PM)

Dude, seriously, how can you turn down the free gift of eternal life? Stop doubting. Go talk to a pastor.



xc279 -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/5/2008 3:33:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hawknelsonismyfriend

Dude, seriously, how can you turn down the free gift of eternal life? Stop doubting. Go talk to a pastor.


I don't believe in it anymore. Simple as that. It is not a matter of willingly "turning down eternal life" so much as it is me coming to my senses and growing up. Looking back Christianity is very much like a cult. And the whole Satan being responsible for evil seems like a way for someone to turn the blame on someone else instead of taking responsibility for their own actions. Same with the second coming, if people believe that someone is going to come and rescue everyone from their problems then why would they worry about trying to make earth a better place?
Also how could you, in good conscious, spend eternity with someone that would willingly send most of humanity to hell? I know that the arguement is that God sent his son to diefor you and if you believe in him you will go to heaven. Well, who created hell? God. Who was Jesus's sacrificed to? His father. What kind of pervert would sacrifice his own son to himself?



earthless -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/5/2008 3:58:52 PM)

xc,

God doesn't send anyone to Hell. Hell is the natural consequence of one's rejection of God.

To force someone into heaven who hates the presence of God would be like compelling someone who cannot rise above rap music to listen endlessly to the works of Bach and Handel. It would be horrible! Hell is both a punishment and the outcome of a mind-set against God.



xc279 -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/5/2008 4:17:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

xc,

God doesn't send anyone to Hell. Hell is the natural consequence of one's rejection of God.

To force someone into heaven who hates the presence of God would be like compelling someone who cannot rise above rap music to listen endlessly to the works of Bach and Handel. It would be horrible! Hell is both a punishment and the outcome of a mind-set against God.


So you are fine with spending eternity with a guy who created hell? What, are you going to roast marshmellows off of them? And isn't the purpose of punishment to teach? What good is it if it is eternal? Sounds more like sadistic torure.



earthless -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/5/2008 4:31:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xc279

quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

xc,

God doesn't send anyone to Hell. Hell is the natural consequence of one's rejection of God.

To force someone into heaven who hates the presence of God would be like compelling someone who cannot rise above rap music to listen endlessly to the works of Bach and Handel. It would be horrible! Hell is both a punishment and the outcome of a mind-set against God.


So you are fine with spending eternity with a guy who created hell? What, are you going to roast marshmellows off of them? And isn't the purpose of punishment to teach? What good is it if it is eternal? Sounds more like sadistic torure.


I am fine knowing God is just and we have free-will to decide what we want.

As for your 'purpose of punishment' question, you're missing the point. If God forced someone to do something they do not want, that is unjust, unfair, wrong.

Based off of your statements, I take it you're also against anyone ever receiving a life sentence in prison. Is that correct?



xc279 -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/5/2008 4:36:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

quote:

ORIGINAL: xc279

quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

xc,

God doesn't send anyone to Hell. Hell is the natural consequence of one's rejection of God.

To force someone into heaven who hates the presence of God would be like compelling someone who cannot rise above rap music to listen endlessly to the works of Bach and Handel. It would be horrible! Hell is both a punishment and the outcome of a mind-set against God.


So you are fine with spending eternity with a guy who created hell? What, are you going to roast marshmellows off of them? And isn't the purpose of punishment to teach? What good is it if it is eternal? Sounds more like sadistic torure.


I am fine knowing God is just and we have free-will to decide what we want.

As for your 'purpose of punishment' question, you're missing the point. If God forced someone to do something they do not want, that is unjust, unfair, wrong.

Based off of your statements, I take it you're also against anyone ever receiving a life sentence in prison. Is that correct?


No. People have changed their ways in prison. I support what they do in Italy, criminals are put in a cell that is to small to stand in and has no light. A few years of that will reform all but the most hardened criminals. For them I think they should be put into a normal cell to serve the remainder of their sentance after serving time in one of the aforementioned smaller cells. I am against the death penalty because it does not offer a chance to become a better person.



earthless -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/5/2008 4:50:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xc279


No. People have changed their ways in prison. I support what they do in Italy, criminals are put in a cell that is to small to stand in and has no light. A few years of that will reform all but the most hardened criminals. For them I think they should be put into a normal cell to serve the remainder of their sentance after serving time in one of the aforementioned smaller cells. I am against the death penalty because it does not offer a chance to become a better person.


You just contradicted yourself. Either you're against life sentences or you're not. Which one is it going to be?



xc279 -> RE: Thinking of converting to Buddhism (5/5/2008 4:58:03 PM)

No I did not contradict myself. I believe that instead of normal jails we should have italian styled prisons but with fewer years in prison. Once released they would undergo evaluation and, if they are no longer a threat, be released back into society on probation. I realize that this would not work for everyone so some should be given a life sentence. The point is not all crimes are equal and not all criminals are the same.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI