Forums > Social Chat > Peace. Only through God?
Login/Join to ParticipateGOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
On another thread I put forward the view that inner peace could be attained through non religious means.
Raymund Phule disagreed, as do many religious people who may believe, for example, that true peace can only be found through Jesus Christ.
So I thought I'd start a new thread, here's the relevant part of my quote, followed by Rays reply :-
[ 23. October 2003, 11:57: Message edited by: onewheeldave ]
On another thread I put forward the view that inner peace could be attained through non religious means.
Raymund Phule disagreed, as do many religious people who may believe, for example, that true peace can only be found through Jesus Christ.
So I thought I'd start a new thread, here's the relevant part of my quote, followed by Rays reply :-
quote:and
Originally posted by onewheeldave:
Life without a God is not meaningless, meaning and purpose can be found, for example, within oneself, and through acts of true compassion.
The miracle of us existing as conscious beings is in no way diminished if it is the case that we were not created by a God.
quote:
Originally posted by Raymund Phule:
This I personally disagree with.
However Yes you can find peace within yourself, but it wont be complete. What if there was more, what if you could be more peaceful? What if the only way to do that is via the Grace of God? Would you want it?
[ 23. October 2003, 11:57: Message edited by: onewheeldave ]
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
playing the days away
7,263 posts
Location: The Middle lands, United Kingdom
playing the days away
7,263 posts
Location: The Middle lands, United Kingdom
Posted:
Mr Hands...once again SALU!!
It seems Raymondo is the eternal answer....he is the book of life....actually I think I'll forget anything I've read from now on, turn to the bible and live my life the many and various different ways it tells me to....the good christian way. I am converted...but to which Christianity?
Maybe Raym0nd can help me here? Should I be
Baptist
Roman Catholic
Catholic - Church of England
Prodestant
Seventh Day Evangelistic
Presbeterian
Methodist
Church of Latter Day Saints
Davidians
etc
etc
etc
Or how about Judaism seeing as it gave Birth to Christianity in the first place?!
Between you and me Mr Hands.....(whisper) lets just hope he's wrong
Mr Hands...once again SALU!!
It seems Raymondo is the eternal answer....he is the book of life....actually I think I'll forget anything I've read from now on, turn to the bible and live my life the many and various different ways it tells me to....the good christian way. I am converted...but to which Christianity?
Maybe Raym0nd can help me here? Should I be
Baptist
Roman Catholic
Catholic - Church of England
Prodestant
Seventh Day Evangelistic
Presbeterian
Methodist
Church of Latter Day Saints
Davidians
etc
etc
etc
Or how about Judaism seeing as it gave Birth to Christianity in the first place?!
Between you and me Mr Hands.....(whisper) lets just hope he's wrong
Let's relight this forum 
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
Ohh going in with the insults now
What a wonderful use of sarcasim! I applaude you all
Ohh going in with the insults now
What a wonderful use of sarcasim! I applaude you all
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
BRONZE Member
holy man
110 posts
Location: Upstate, NY, USA
holy man
110 posts
Location: Upstate, NY, USA
Posted:
custom bug, hmmmmm....what about good old fashioned paganism? I vote for that one. . Ray, I can see where you are coming from, but OMG, you are to hard. There are rules and regs, but you have to remember just as strong and passionate as you are about what you believe so is the other person. Attacking and cutting down isn't gonna win the masses. I have a uncle like you and you both make God so unatainable(sp?). The very people you all try to "help" and "convert", you cut down and destroy with you lack of love. I try to attain the status you have created, I'd just kill myself and take my chances with eternity. Yes there are rules and regs if that what you want to call them, but I just hope you never get judged as harsh as you have judged others.
blow south winds, open up the door, revelation let me see. . . .
custom bug, hmmmmm....what about good old fashioned paganism? I vote for that one. . Ray, I can see where you are coming from, but OMG, you are to hard. There are rules and regs, but you have to remember just as strong and passionate as you are about what you believe so is the other person. Attacking and cutting down isn't gonna win the masses. I have a uncle like you and you both make God so unatainable(sp?). The very people you all try to "help" and "convert", you cut down and destroy with you lack of love. I try to attain the status you have created, I'd just kill myself and take my chances with eternity. Yes there are rules and regs if that what you want to call them, but I just hope you never get judged as harsh as you have judged others.
blow south winds, open up the door, revelation let me see. . . .
Gather your harps from the willow trees, dust off the ancient strings. Call the bards and prophets, let them sing healing and freedom. Let light and love flow from the strings, colors of revelation.
GOLD Member
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
Posted:
Sea Lawers? Perhaps our "uncanny ability to rationalize everything" is because EVERYTHING is rationalizable with the right arguments. It's the basis of our law system and why lawers make the big bucks bro. It applies to religion too, and as Mr Hands said, the sheer WEALTH of philosophies and religions, even denominations within your OWN religion, points to the lack of objectifiable "truth" in any doctrine. I can very easily rationally progress you through any number of "proofs" of the existence of God, or any number that prove he doesn't exist not because I lack knowledge, but because of the wealth of it that I can pull from the many different sources I have read. I have been searching for two years for what I believe, and in that time I have studied many things, many which argue against the others. With each one I look at the arguments and say to myself, "I wish I could go back and argue against that" because in many cases (Read St. Augustine or Aquinas) the "proof" ends with something along the lines of "But we all know you exist because you have to so that is the end of it" which is completely unsatisfactory to me and many others. At the same time, I find very FEW people who can argue these points with me now. Most of the people I talk to come to a point where they either (a) can't think of anything to further their argumetn and I start providing them with material, of (b) stomp off angrilly or insult me because I refuse to just take it on faith, or (c) Come back to the "Everyone knows God exists...". Either way I get nowhere, and this is why I am taking a Philosophy of Religion course next semester, in hopes of finding people who will argue as vehemently as I want to.
Buddhism is not free of political control eitherm HOWEVER you have to look at where it has suceeded where all other religious political states have failed. Tibet is a smallish mountain country bordering China (If you ask China, IN China) which was once ruled by various warlords not unlike feudal Europe. Buddhism made its way here, and over the period of about 100 years turned the entire country into a monastic country. MONASTIC, not evangelistic... they mostly kept to themselves and helped those who came to them for "wisdom". Soon the people raised one person (The Dali Lama) into power as leader of the nation, and it became a monastic COUNTRY, which unilaterally disarmed under the "rule" of Tibetin Buddhism (Difference between it and Buddhism: Anyone can reach Buddahood in this lifetime / many Buddhas existent in the past reincarnated as their leaders). Until China invaded them and killed a 1/6th of their population in the 1940s they lived four centuries in "peace" (Not to say they didn't have their problems, but in comparison to all other nations on earth at this time: peace). Today about 1/5th of their population has fled the country to escape religous persecution. China is still baffled as to why their "supperior" system hasn't been excepted by the inhabitants and they continue to occupy them. And ironically, it has stemmed the spread of Tibettin Buddhism because the displaced people started new monestaries on other countries that have begun to teach others interested in its ways.
Here then is an example of a religiously run country which found peace itself, and ( ) it's not Christian or Judaic or Islam! Its also not Hindu, Taoist or confucian! Or Atheistic! If you want to go by tangeable results, Tibettin Buddhism is the most applicable to the religious system it seems!
A Sea Lawer is simply you putting your stamp of approval on my arguments or not. To others, my arguments may seem quite applicable, and I even argue FOR your side sometimes Ray (My infamous devils advocate positions, hehe ). If I am right and you are wrong, it doesn't matter because upon death your individual self won't exist anymore, at least not in its current judging aspect (How can one thing judge itself without comparison to any other?). If you are right, and I am wrong, I will be severely disapointed because I will have gone from one existence where everyone judges everyone else, to an existence where I get judged constantly by one unquestionable person/thing, and THAT Ray would be Hell for me. Call me satan, but "Non servium".
Sea Lawers? Perhaps our "uncanny ability to rationalize everything" is because EVERYTHING is rationalizable with the right arguments. It's the basis of our law system and why lawers make the big bucks bro. It applies to religion too, and as Mr Hands said, the sheer WEALTH of philosophies and religions, even denominations within your OWN religion, points to the lack of objectifiable "truth" in any doctrine. I can very easily rationally progress you through any number of "proofs" of the existence of God, or any number that prove he doesn't exist not because I lack knowledge, but because of the wealth of it that I can pull from the many different sources I have read. I have been searching for two years for what I believe, and in that time I have studied many things, many which argue against the others. With each one I look at the arguments and say to myself, "I wish I could go back and argue against that" because in many cases (Read St. Augustine or Aquinas) the "proof" ends with something along the lines of "But we all know you exist because you have to so that is the end of it" which is completely unsatisfactory to me and many others. At the same time, I find very FEW people who can argue these points with me now. Most of the people I talk to come to a point where they either (a) can't think of anything to further their argumetn and I start providing them with material, of (b) stomp off angrilly or insult me because I refuse to just take it on faith, or (c) Come back to the "Everyone knows God exists...". Either way I get nowhere, and this is why I am taking a Philosophy of Religion course next semester, in hopes of finding people who will argue as vehemently as I want to.
Buddhism is not free of political control eitherm HOWEVER you have to look at where it has suceeded where all other religious political states have failed. Tibet is a smallish mountain country bordering China (If you ask China, IN China) which was once ruled by various warlords not unlike feudal Europe. Buddhism made its way here, and over the period of about 100 years turned the entire country into a monastic country. MONASTIC, not evangelistic... they mostly kept to themselves and helped those who came to them for "wisdom". Soon the people raised one person (The Dali Lama) into power as leader of the nation, and it became a monastic COUNTRY, which unilaterally disarmed under the "rule" of Tibetin Buddhism (Difference between it and Buddhism: Anyone can reach Buddahood in this lifetime / many Buddhas existent in the past reincarnated as their leaders). Until China invaded them and killed a 1/6th of their population in the 1940s they lived four centuries in "peace" (Not to say they didn't have their problems, but in comparison to all other nations on earth at this time: peace). Today about 1/5th of their population has fled the country to escape religous persecution. China is still baffled as to why their "supperior" system hasn't been excepted by the inhabitants and they continue to occupy them. And ironically, it has stemmed the spread of Tibettin Buddhism because the displaced people started new monestaries on other countries that have begun to teach others interested in its ways.
Here then is an example of a religiously run country which found peace itself, and ( ) it's not Christian or Judaic or Islam! Its also not Hindu, Taoist or confucian! Or Atheistic! If you want to go by tangeable results, Tibettin Buddhism is the most applicable to the religious system it seems!
A Sea Lawer is simply you putting your stamp of approval on my arguments or not. To others, my arguments may seem quite applicable, and I even argue FOR your side sometimes Ray (My infamous devils advocate positions, hehe ). If I am right and you are wrong, it doesn't matter because upon death your individual self won't exist anymore, at least not in its current judging aspect (How can one thing judge itself without comparison to any other?). If you are right, and I am wrong, I will be severely disapointed because I will have gone from one existence where everyone judges everyone else, to an existence where I get judged constantly by one unquestionable person/thing, and THAT Ray would be Hell for me. Call me satan, but "Non servium".
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
You see, I am not here to win the masses. I am not here to convert, just share. If you dont like what I have to say... great dont read it Ieuan I am judged just as harsh as I judge others. Though in truth, the world out there judges others way worse than what I do. I could care less what you look like, what you wear, what you drive, and the list goes on.
I am also here because I have been challenged, and because if I dont say something, all that will happen will be a bunch of people who think they know something will sit around a bitch and moan because they either dont believe or just dont give a damn. Then they bitch because things just arnt peachy keen for em! They seek an outlet for blame (notice how it is never their fault) and they choose the very one who they dont believe in!
What does money have to do with truth? Truth doesnt change because you are rich, truth doesnt change because you are poor.
However like you said, if I am wrong then I die and nothing happens, but if I am right... then I am in a world of hurt if I dont believe!
You see, I am not here to win the masses. I am not here to convert, just share. If you dont like what I have to say... great dont read it Ieuan I am judged just as harsh as I judge others. Though in truth, the world out there judges others way worse than what I do. I could care less what you look like, what you wear, what you drive, and the list goes on.
I am also here because I have been challenged, and because if I dont say something, all that will happen will be a bunch of people who think they know something will sit around a bitch and moan because they either dont believe or just dont give a damn. Then they bitch because things just arnt peachy keen for em! They seek an outlet for blame (notice how it is never their fault) and they choose the very one who they dont believe in!
What does money have to do with truth? Truth doesnt change because you are rich, truth doesnt change because you are poor.
quote:How can this be unsatisfactory, you are Toaist, everything is satisfactory!?!
...which is completely unsatisfactory to me...
However like you said, if I am wrong then I die and nothing happens, but if I am right... then I am in a world of hurt if I dont believe!
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
GOLD Member
member
82 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
member
82 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
I have heard quite a few Christians use that argument in debate "Yeah, but since no one can know for sure, I'd prefer to be right and live in Heaven than wrong and live in Hell." This argument seems to me like someone just hedging their bets, someone who is afraid more than anything. If you were at peace, surely you wouldn't even be thinking about Heaven or Hell. If you were at peace, surely you wouldn't even be worrying about death. If you were at peace, surely you would be completely happy/comfortable in your current environment, with yourself, and with the interactions between yourself and that environment.
I guess it all comes back again to how do you define "at peace"? A Christian will just say "I don't worry about death because I believe I will go to heaven." But what I'm striving for, and in alot of ways have already attained, is the ability to say "I don't worry." I personally see religion as a short-cut way to attaining the mental state of "no worry", and hence far less satisfying to myself. In fact, there is no appeal there for me what so ever.
Is Peace attainable through religion? I would say yes. However, this forum asks if it is ONLY attainable through god, and to be honest, I find the question mildy insulting, which is probably why everyone is getting so heated. A less biased title would have have been preferable.
I have heard quite a few Christians use that argument in debate "Yeah, but since no one can know for sure, I'd prefer to be right and live in Heaven than wrong and live in Hell." This argument seems to me like someone just hedging their bets, someone who is afraid more than anything. If you were at peace, surely you wouldn't even be thinking about Heaven or Hell. If you were at peace, surely you wouldn't even be worrying about death. If you were at peace, surely you would be completely happy/comfortable in your current environment, with yourself, and with the interactions between yourself and that environment.
I guess it all comes back again to how do you define "at peace"? A Christian will just say "I don't worry about death because I believe I will go to heaven." But what I'm striving for, and in alot of ways have already attained, is the ability to say "I don't worry." I personally see religion as a short-cut way to attaining the mental state of "no worry", and hence far less satisfying to myself. In fact, there is no appeal there for me what so ever.
Is Peace attainable through religion? I would say yes. However, this forum asks if it is ONLY attainable through god, and to be honest, I find the question mildy insulting, which is probably why everyone is getting so heated. A less biased title would have have been preferable.
I do poi nearly every day. But it's not like I'm addicted or anything. I mean, sure, I am always conscious of exactly where my poi are at all times, but I'm not obsessed. um.. Anyone have the number for Poi-ers Anon?
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Raymund disagreed so I created this thread.
I find it strange that you should see it as being mildly annoying and would disagree that is is biased, given that it is a question, and one whose context was well explained in the first post.
If it had been phrased 'is peace attainable through God' it would have been a totally different question; the reason it asks '..only through God..' is because that was the point under dispute.
[ 31. October 2003, 16:01: Message edited by: onewheeldave ]
quote:The reason it asks if it is ONLY attainable through God is that it arose from posts on a previous thread where I had put forward the view that peace, and a meaningful life, could be had without any reference to God.
Originally posted by SlightlySinged:
Is Peace attainable through religion? I would say yes. However, this forum asks if it is ONLY attainable through god, and to be honest, I find the question mildy insulting, which is probably why everyone is getting so heated. A less biased title would have have been preferable.
Raymund disagreed so I created this thread.
I find it strange that you should see it as being mildly annoying and would disagree that is is biased, given that it is a question, and one whose context was well explained in the first post.
If it had been phrased 'is peace attainable through God' it would have been a totally different question; the reason it asks '..only through God..' is because that was the point under dispute.
[ 31. October 2003, 16:01: Message edited by: onewheeldave ]
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
I thought i8beefy2's points about Tibetan Buddhism were good, I've long had a major interest in spirituality/religions and, having looked long and hard at most of them, I have an especial respect for buddhism.
Firstly because it's very practical, it's aim being to eliminate suffering and it stating clearly some effective ways to bring this about.
Secondly it's very down to earth, the Buddha stressed that he was a man, not a supernatural or godlike being; he also stressed that his teachings were not gospel, they were there to be accepted/rejected by the individual once they had tried them.
Concerning questions of God (i.e. does He exist or not), supernatural realms, the origin of the world, psychic powers etc; he neither affirmed or denied them, simply saying that they were irrelevant to the matter at hand i.e. the elimination of suffering.
Another good thing about buddhism is that, where living correctly is concerned, it's focus is on oneself; rather than the condemning/converting of others which God based religions seem inclined to focus on.
When I was younger I despised Christianity because of all the harm that had been done in it's name, and because of the unquestioning blind logic that seemed rife amongst its followers.
Having looked deeply into it over many years I have come to see that much of the evil done in its name was the work of corrupt individuals/organisations who misused its teachings.
However, even though the harm done in its name was due to misinterpretation of christian doctrine, the fact remains that it is very open to misinterpretation due to the way the teachings are phrased.
I also came to see that if one dug deep enough, the central message of christian teaching had much in common with that of the Buddha.
But again, even though that message is there, the fact is that it is buried very deeply; whereas buddhism states it clearly and concisely.
quote:That makes a lot of sense, and pretty much sums up my viewpoint as well.
Originally posted by SlightlySinged:
I guess it all comes back again to how do you define "at peace"? A Christian will just say "I don't worry about death because I believe I will go to heaven." But what I'm striving for, and in alot of ways have already attained, is the ability to say "I don't worry."
I thought i8beefy2's points about Tibetan Buddhism were good, I've long had a major interest in spirituality/religions and, having looked long and hard at most of them, I have an especial respect for buddhism.
Firstly because it's very practical, it's aim being to eliminate suffering and it stating clearly some effective ways to bring this about.
Secondly it's very down to earth, the Buddha stressed that he was a man, not a supernatural or godlike being; he also stressed that his teachings were not gospel, they were there to be accepted/rejected by the individual once they had tried them.
Concerning questions of God (i.e. does He exist or not), supernatural realms, the origin of the world, psychic powers etc; he neither affirmed or denied them, simply saying that they were irrelevant to the matter at hand i.e. the elimination of suffering.
Another good thing about buddhism is that, where living correctly is concerned, it's focus is on oneself; rather than the condemning/converting of others which God based religions seem inclined to focus on.
When I was younger I despised Christianity because of all the harm that had been done in it's name, and because of the unquestioning blind logic that seemed rife amongst its followers.
Having looked deeply into it over many years I have come to see that much of the evil done in its name was the work of corrupt individuals/organisations who misused its teachings.
However, even though the harm done in its name was due to misinterpretation of christian doctrine, the fact remains that it is very open to misinterpretation due to the way the teachings are phrased.
I also came to see that if one dug deep enough, the central message of christian teaching had much in common with that of the Buddha.
But again, even though that message is there, the fact is that it is buried very deeply; whereas buddhism states it clearly and concisely.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
member
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.
Posted:
Ive struggled with depression and low self-esteem and an overwhealming sense of self-loathing my whole life (some of my earliest memories I have are of me being depressed and demeaning myself) Theres been a few points in my life where I have had a zen like calmness and understanding of myself and the people around me and the world in general and was able to love myself. Some of these were at periods of my life where I considered myself a christian and I considered it a religious/spiritual experiences. Others were when I considered myself a outright athiest.
Really I don't think spirituality had anything to do with the inner peace and understanding I had at those times. I didn't feel any more at peace when I had accepted christ as my saviour then I did when I thought the concept of christianity was absurd.
Sure maybe I didn't reach the ultimate area of inner peace or something but whatever.
Ive struggled with depression and low self-esteem and an overwhealming sense of self-loathing my whole life (some of my earliest memories I have are of me being depressed and demeaning myself) Theres been a few points in my life where I have had a zen like calmness and understanding of myself and the people around me and the world in general and was able to love myself. Some of these were at periods of my life where I considered myself a christian and I considered it a religious/spiritual experiences. Others were when I considered myself a outright athiest.
Really I don't think spirituality had anything to do with the inner peace and understanding I had at those times. I didn't feel any more at peace when I had accepted christ as my saviour then I did when I thought the concept of christianity was absurd.
Sure maybe I didn't reach the ultimate area of inner peace or something but whatever.
veteran
1,463 posts
Location: Florida
1,463 posts
Location: Florida
Posted:
cough cough cough...
The simplest pleasures in life are often ignored.
cough cough cough...
The simplest pleasures in life are often ignored.
JUGGLEwithyourmind!
member
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.
Posted:
Yeah ill just pay attention to some simple pleasures and snap out of it eh?
Yeah ill just pay attention to some simple pleasures and snap out of it eh?
GOLD Member
playing the days away
7,263 posts
Location: The Middle lands, United Kingdom
playing the days away
7,263 posts
Location: The Middle lands, United Kingdom
Posted:
Still waiting for an answer tho bout which Cristianity is the correct one...if there is one of course.
quote:Yeah it's not nice is it.
Originally posted by Raymund Phule:
Ohh going in with the insults now
Still waiting for an answer tho bout which Cristianity is the correct one...if there is one of course.
Let's relight this forum
GOLD Member
playing the days away
7,263 posts
Location: The Middle lands, United Kingdom
playing the days away
7,263 posts
Location: The Middle lands, United Kingdom
Posted:
quote:Sorry Ieuen forgot that one, and no doubt many others. Is it Pagenism that has Bacchus - God of Beer? Now that's one God that makes sense!
Originally posted by ieuan:
custom bug, hmmmmm....what about good old fashioned paganism?
Let's relight this forum
BRONZE Member
holy man
110 posts
Location: Upstate, NY, USA
holy man
110 posts
Location: Upstate, NY, USA
Posted:
Don't forget Loki and Dionysis. . . .
Don't forget Loki and Dionysis. . . .
Gather your harps from the willow trees, dust off the ancient strings. Call the bards and prophets, let them sing healing and freedom. Let light and love flow from the strings, colors of revelation.
member
64 posts
Location: Cardiffy, Londony places
64 posts
Location: Cardiffy, Londony places
Posted:
Hey guys I've been reading up and I've found this fantastic new religion that I think may convince me to believe in it. Basically, if I decide to believe in this religion they promise that I won't spend the rest of my souls eternity in perpetual torment, but if I do believe in it they promise that my soul will be in a near perpetual state of ecstacy after my corporeal body has passed away (with all the trimmings...). The only problem with it is that it isn't in anyway a christian faith, so if I choose either one, I'll be damned if I'm wrong.
so what should I do, do I hedge my bets and decide that one of them is absolutley correct and the other has no credence (though in my eyes they are both contestabley flawed) and therefore take it upon myself to deride all other faiths to convinve myself I am right, or do I decide that they both may be right either way, live my life to the fullest I can now and cross the whole being dead thing when I get there...
What do you guys think the dilema is a serious one and I think I need to give it serious thought lest my soul gets hijacked by an ununderstanding deity, what do I do?...
On paganism, I think Frostpaw is right; its a pretty loose term coined by colonial christian parties to name most anything that wasn't chirstian (I think, if someone knows better please do tell, and give me evidence of it too, I ). But the God's mentioned so far are Greek and Greko-Romano Gods (Bachus was a God of Orgy-ness... groovy!) but Loki is a Norse God I think. Interestingly these religions all believed in a variety of Gods and didn't really go round killing everyone if they didn't believe otherwise... in fact the Romans pinched most of th Greek Gods when they found them (Jupiter=Zues, Mars=Ares, Apollo=Sol [the sun], etc... there were an aweful ot of them). So yeah, you can only really use the term Paganism unless you're a monodominant fundamentalist.
Hey guys I've been reading up and I've found this fantastic new religion that I think may convince me to believe in it. Basically, if I decide to believe in this religion they promise that I won't spend the rest of my souls eternity in perpetual torment, but if I do believe in it they promise that my soul will be in a near perpetual state of ecstacy after my corporeal body has passed away (with all the trimmings...). The only problem with it is that it isn't in anyway a christian faith, so if I choose either one, I'll be damned if I'm wrong.
so what should I do, do I hedge my bets and decide that one of them is absolutley correct and the other has no credence (though in my eyes they are both contestabley flawed) and therefore take it upon myself to deride all other faiths to convinve myself I am right, or do I decide that they both may be right either way, live my life to the fullest I can now and cross the whole being dead thing when I get there...
What do you guys think the dilema is a serious one and I think I need to give it serious thought lest my soul gets hijacked by an ununderstanding deity, what do I do?...
On paganism, I think Frostpaw is right; its a pretty loose term coined by colonial christian parties to name most anything that wasn't chirstian (I think, if someone knows better please do tell, and give me evidence of it too, I ). But the God's mentioned so far are Greek and Greko-Romano Gods (Bachus was a God of Orgy-ness... groovy!) but Loki is a Norse God I think. Interestingly these religions all believed in a variety of Gods and didn't really go round killing everyone if they didn't believe otherwise... in fact the Romans pinched most of th Greek Gods when they found them (Jupiter=Zues, Mars=Ares, Apollo=Sol [the sun], etc... there were an aweful ot of them). So yeah, you can only really use the term Paganism unless you're a monodominant fundamentalist.
member
64 posts
Location: Cardiffy, Londony places
64 posts
Location: Cardiffy, Londony places
Posted:
out of interest if we were to be at inner peace, wouldn't this mean that we would be totally unphased by everything and for this to happen, wouldn't we have to not care about anything strongly either way. So for this to happen, surely having a strong belief would be an inhbiting factor in all of this...
It all just kind of hit me at once just now and I'm thinking off the top of my head, but surely to have complete inner peace, our outlook must be one of: 'Hey, who gives...'
Having said this, if this were the state of mind we would have to be in, we wouldn't find anything interesting and thus nothing would be fun. So under the terms I just said, it would only a be a state of bliss if you didn't like anything, which by definition would mean you'd have a problem with something and you'd not be in a state of bliss...
So I guess its just a question of how much fun you have in your life, and how much crap we choose to put up with, and being a single person, living in a city amongst others (under a government who in no way hears me or my friends) I have to admit that however much I enjoy my life right now, and the things I do, and read, and talk about still won't catapult me to instant bliss until I can ignore all the bollucks... but then, I must choose what the bollucks is I ignore before I ignore it and therefore recognise it as an' un-fun' thing for me to be associated with and promptly be dethroned from my blissful pedestal of candy floss...
Am I being silly or does this logic make sense to anyone else out there... I guess it sounds a little Taoist at heart...
out of interest if we were to be at inner peace, wouldn't this mean that we would be totally unphased by everything and for this to happen, wouldn't we have to not care about anything strongly either way. So for this to happen, surely having a strong belief would be an inhbiting factor in all of this...
It all just kind of hit me at once just now and I'm thinking off the top of my head, but surely to have complete inner peace, our outlook must be one of: 'Hey, who gives...'
Having said this, if this were the state of mind we would have to be in, we wouldn't find anything interesting and thus nothing would be fun. So under the terms I just said, it would only a be a state of bliss if you didn't like anything, which by definition would mean you'd have a problem with something and you'd not be in a state of bliss...
So I guess its just a question of how much fun you have in your life, and how much crap we choose to put up with, and being a single person, living in a city amongst others (under a government who in no way hears me or my friends) I have to admit that however much I enjoy my life right now, and the things I do, and read, and talk about still won't catapult me to instant bliss until I can ignore all the bollucks... but then, I must choose what the bollucks is I ignore before I ignore it and therefore recognise it as an' un-fun' thing for me to be associated with and promptly be dethroned from my blissful pedestal of candy floss...
Am I being silly or does this logic make sense to anyone else out there... I guess it sounds a little Taoist at heart...
member
1 post
Location: Every where at once
1 post
Location: Every where at once
Posted:
The Lord God Almighty,
Hi everyone,
I've noticed quite a few threads on the subject of my good self and my plan for humanity etc, so thought I'd pop in and clear up a few things for you.
There seems to be a lot of debate about the bible, so, first of all let me make it clear that it was written by men and my input was fairly minimal.
To be honest I'm not that impressed by the latest editions; they contain a few glaring inconsistencies and, in parts, makes me out to be quite a nasty character. Nevertheless, there's some good bits mixed up in there; just don't go forcing it on those who aren't particularly interested.
My plan for humanity- it's up to you really, that's why you've got free will. My recomendation is that you aspire to a profound inner peace. The search for peace will lead to you understanding the world and the people in it.
You may have noticed that the world is not a particularly pleasant place for much of the time; try to see the good side of this i.e. it's a bit of a testing ground- inner peace born of adversity will be strong.
I'd like to point out that you'll be better off focusing on your own selves and the way you behave rather than criticising others (there's a nice story in my book about 'casting the first stone').
Am I male? I've just had a look and can report that I have no penis! In fact I have no physical body whatsoever and no characteristics that have anything to do with gender.
Basically, the confusion arose because the early editors of my book were all blokes and lived in a culture where women were not highly regarded. You lot, however, live in a supposedly sophisticated and rational culture, so there's really no excuse to maintian this mistake by refering to me as 'He'; 'Almighty God' will suffice.
Can I be known by humanity? Technically no, I am unknowable.
However you can know what I am not, and, if you know enough things that I am not, then you can approach an understanding of what I am. Things that I aren't include, bearded, male, vengeful... the list goes on.
Some of you may be thinking that, since there's so many things that I'm not, what sense does it make to say that I'm good and compassionate.
The truth is that things like peace, goodness and compassion aren't actual qualities that are possessed, rather they're an absense of qualities like bitterness, hatred and fear.
Peace, goodness and compassion are the destiny of all who effectively deal with the pain, fear and hate within themselves.
Oh! While I'm here, has anyone got any good tips for reverse 5 beat weave? I keep bashing my head!
[ 02. November 2003, 04:16: Message edited by: Lord God Almighty ]
The Lord God Almighty,
Hi everyone,
I've noticed quite a few threads on the subject of my good self and my plan for humanity etc, so thought I'd pop in and clear up a few things for you.
There seems to be a lot of debate about the bible, so, first of all let me make it clear that it was written by men and my input was fairly minimal.
To be honest I'm not that impressed by the latest editions; they contain a few glaring inconsistencies and, in parts, makes me out to be quite a nasty character. Nevertheless, there's some good bits mixed up in there; just don't go forcing it on those who aren't particularly interested.
My plan for humanity- it's up to you really, that's why you've got free will. My recomendation is that you aspire to a profound inner peace. The search for peace will lead to you understanding the world and the people in it.
You may have noticed that the world is not a particularly pleasant place for much of the time; try to see the good side of this i.e. it's a bit of a testing ground- inner peace born of adversity will be strong.
I'd like to point out that you'll be better off focusing on your own selves and the way you behave rather than criticising others (there's a nice story in my book about 'casting the first stone').
Am I male? I've just had a look and can report that I have no penis! In fact I have no physical body whatsoever and no characteristics that have anything to do with gender.
Basically, the confusion arose because the early editors of my book were all blokes and lived in a culture where women were not highly regarded. You lot, however, live in a supposedly sophisticated and rational culture, so there's really no excuse to maintian this mistake by refering to me as 'He'; 'Almighty God' will suffice.
Can I be known by humanity? Technically no, I am unknowable.
However you can know what I am not, and, if you know enough things that I am not, then you can approach an understanding of what I am. Things that I aren't include, bearded, male, vengeful... the list goes on.
Some of you may be thinking that, since there's so many things that I'm not, what sense does it make to say that I'm good and compassionate.
The truth is that things like peace, goodness and compassion aren't actual qualities that are possessed, rather they're an absense of qualities like bitterness, hatred and fear.
Peace, goodness and compassion are the destiny of all who effectively deal with the pain, fear and hate within themselves.
Oh! While I'm here, has anyone got any good tips for reverse 5 beat weave? I keep bashing my head!
[ 02. November 2003, 04:16: Message edited by: Lord God Almighty ]
I've been widely misunderstood
Diamond In The Rough
459 posts
Location: Richmond, Virginia
459 posts
Location: Richmond, Virginia
Posted:
And as long as You're here, where's the best Skeeball?
And as long as You're here, where's the best Skeeball?
Dance like it hurts; Love like you need money; Work like someone is watching.
Never criticize someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes. That way, when you DO criticize them, you are a mile away, and you have their shoes.
GOLD Member
member
82 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
member
82 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
These are a couple of books that I found very interesting. They are both more or less concerned with finding "inner peace".
"Way of the Peaceful Warrior" by Dan Millman
"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert M. Pirsig
At least read the first book - it's short and can be read within a week comfortably. I would be very interested to know what a religious person thinks of both these books. Does it complement what you already believe?
These are a couple of books that I found very interesting. They are both more or less concerned with finding "inner peace".
"Way of the Peaceful Warrior" by Dan Millman
"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert M. Pirsig
At least read the first book - it's short and can be read within a week comfortably. I would be very interested to know what a religious person thinks of both these books. Does it complement what you already believe?
I do poi nearly every day. But it's not like I'm addicted or anything. I mean, sure, I am always conscious of exactly where my poi are at all times, but I'm not obsessed. um.. Anyone have the number for Poi-ers Anon?
SILVER Member
member
52 posts
Location: Iowa, USA
member
52 posts
Location: Iowa, USA
Posted:
Coming rather late to the thread, I've probably missed places where what I'm about to say has already been said, but here goes anyway..
Around the world people have used the same the qualities to describe the God; peace, grace, love, perfection.. warring over semantics and names is like a couple of people getting into a fight over different words for the colour "green". Isn't Inner Peace the same as Finding God? If it isn't, what exactly is the difference?
Search for the Divine has been part of the human experience for as long as we've records of our existence; at it's basis it is possibly the most fundamental of human motivations, a flight from fear, pain and ignorance towards peace and illumination. Even the most confirmed atheist has to acknowledge that the taste for the Absolute is an integral part of life, so what does it matter that we give our goal different names? When all's said and done, the experience is all that matters.
"...But listen to me: for one moment,
quit being sad. Hear blessings
dropping their blossoms
around you. God." -- Rumi
Coming rather late to the thread, I've probably missed places where what I'm about to say has already been said, but here goes anyway..
Around the world people have used the same the qualities to describe the God; peace, grace, love, perfection.. warring over semantics and names is like a couple of people getting into a fight over different words for the colour "green". Isn't Inner Peace the same as Finding God? If it isn't, what exactly is the difference?
Search for the Divine has been part of the human experience for as long as we've records of our existence; at it's basis it is possibly the most fundamental of human motivations, a flight from fear, pain and ignorance towards peace and illumination. Even the most confirmed atheist has to acknowledge that the taste for the Absolute is an integral part of life, so what does it matter that we give our goal different names? When all's said and done, the experience is all that matters.
"...But listen to me: for one moment,
quit being sad. Hear blessings
dropping their blossoms
around you. God." -- Rumi
busy-tofu!
133 posts
Location: montreal: bagel capital
133 posts
Location: montreal: bagel capital
Posted:
I believe inner-peace can be found byfinding the devine. I also believe it can be found through other means. So for all you atheists and agnostics out there, rest assured: we too can find peace, compassion, and goodness in ourselves.
I don't think I'll ever find God (or the devine) should I go looking. Not because they don't exist, but because their existance doesn't interfere with mine, and I know for having been there, that they are not at the end (nor on the way) of my path to inner-peace.
quote:Finding God might be the same as inner peace, the debate is weather it can only be acheived through finding God. I'll drop the capital and bring it one level up, is inner peace the only acheivable through finding the divine. I don't think is true, and that inner peace is available to all who journey for it.
Isn't Inner Peace the same as Finding God? If it isn't, what exactly is the difference?
quote:I'll strike that off my list of arguments because it could be debated that religion does indeed bring us into ignorance, and therefore is not the path to inner peace according to this definition.
Search for the Divine has been part of the human experience for as long as we've records of our existence; at it's basis it is possibly the most fundamental of human motivations, a flight from fear, pain and ignorance towards peace and illumination.
I believe inner-peace can be found byfinding the devine. I also believe it can be found through other means. So for all you atheists and agnostics out there, rest assured: we too can find peace, compassion, and goodness in ourselves.
I don't think I'll ever find God (or the devine) should I go looking. Not because they don't exist, but because their existance doesn't interfere with mine, and I know for having been there, that they are not at the end (nor on the way) of my path to inner-peace.
there is no better way to say I love you than with the gift of a spatula!
SILVER Member
member
52 posts
Location: Iowa, USA
member
52 posts
Location: Iowa, USA
Posted:
It's difficult to be empirical about the matter since what we're talking about is purely subjective, but when I talk to people who are searching for inner peace, they're looking for exactly the same things as the people who are looking for god. Lao Tsu who never uttered the word God in his life I think would have gotten on very well with Shankara (who talked about some expression of God or another every other breath).
So again, what exactly is the difference? If you mean to ask whether or not you need religion to find Inner God that's another matter entirely - and i think it'd be very difficult indeed to argue that you do. But otherwise, isn't "God" just a convenient umbrella term for the source of peace and grace people experience? You might want to re-badge it if words like "divine" and "god" offend you - and there's plenty of reasons they might these days - but the reality of what those ideas are sposed to represent is universal, and the idea that you can find peace without recourse (conscious or not) to the source of peace within you seems like saying you want heat without fire.
quote:I was proposing that the experience of finding god IS the experience of finding inner peace; you might as well title the thread "Peace. Only through Peace?"
Finding God might be the same as inner peace, the debate is weather it can only be acheived through finding God. I'll drop the capital and bring it one level up, is inner peace the only acheivable through finding the divine. I don't think is true, and that inner peace is available to all who journey for it.
It's difficult to be empirical about the matter since what we're talking about is purely subjective, but when I talk to people who are searching for inner peace, they're looking for exactly the same things as the people who are looking for god. Lao Tsu who never uttered the word God in his life I think would have gotten on very well with Shankara (who talked about some expression of God or another every other breath).
So again, what exactly is the difference? If you mean to ask whether or not you need religion to find Inner God that's another matter entirely - and i think it'd be very difficult indeed to argue that you do. But otherwise, isn't "God" just a convenient umbrella term for the source of peace and grace people experience? You might want to re-badge it if words like "divine" and "god" offend you - and there's plenty of reasons they might these days - but the reality of what those ideas are sposed to represent is universal, and the idea that you can find peace without recourse (conscious or not) to the source of peace within you seems like saying you want heat without fire.
GOLD Member
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
Posted:
On which Christianity is the REAL one: Well, which Buddhism is the real one? All religions have factions emphasizing different aspects of the same texts, but they are the same in spirit. A good analogy I heard was that of three sons of the father. When asked who their father was, each gave a different answer (or interpetation, take your pick), but all had the same conception of their father.
Now let me clear up a few things about Buddhism. First off this whole thing about Buddhists not believing in heaven or hell... Quite the opposite in fact, not only do they believe in heaven and hell, but they enumerate them into literally dozens of different TYPES of heavens and hells. The main difference in CONCEPT is that they believe in the idea of rebirth (Christians believe in rebirth too, they just stop after the first one, IE into eternity), where Buddhists believe that rebirth from a heaven or hell is possible too. Hells are considered "eternity", but not in the Judeo-Christian sense. Rebirth from these realms occurs just like ours, BUT the ability to ascend is greatly deminished, and they SEEM to last for eternity because of the tremendous suffering experienced there. Heaven apply too: tremendous amounts of "good" blind them into thinking they want nothing else... these beings are usually reborn into hells after their death. The human realm offers the most chance for "enlightenment". Thus gods are not gotten rid of, instead they are incredibly IMPORTANT to WHY people become so devoute on the Buddhist path: fear of reincarnation in a hell realm, much like Judeo-Christians.
Second, to say that Buddhists gain enlightenment within themselves and dont try to push it on others is just plain wrong. Me thinks you all need to read up on the bodhisattva path (Do searches for the three vehicles, or Mahayana Buddhism, the second of the three vehicles, if youd like). Many (I refuse to say all because I may be wrong then) Buddhists take a vow of the bodhisattva, thus they gain enlightenment not for themselves, but in order to return to teach others. The idea being, that upon reaching enlightenment (disolution of the ego), it is realized that we are all the same, undifferentiated consciousness, thus "true enlightenment" is not possible unless all beings are enlightened (Notice all beings, not all humans). In many ways, Buddhists are MORE concerned with others' spiritual path than Christians, they just don't try to force their knowledge on others but prefer to do it passively (Not to label Christians or others as such).
Third, the Dharma is a medicine. It serves to remove the blocks in ourselves that hide our Buddha nature from ourselves. Not everyone has the same blocks, so not ALL parts of the Dharma apply to EVERYONE (Lets exclude Buddhism through the Universal Vehicle or Lotus Sutras for now), rather certain parts have certain effects on the person in theory. Teachers thus are necessary, as they serve the part of the doctor, prescribing Dharma to heal the suffering of patients.
Finally allow me to pull again from the wealth that is Tibetan Buddhism and one of the most compassionate people on earth, the Dalai Lama. In one of his discourses he stated that all religions are true in that their goal is common: compassion toward all other beings. Any path that leads toward that goal is a noble one and should be embarked on. It breeds a sense of selflessness (Another word for enlightenment in some circles) like this: if you have universal compassion for everything, then you have no ego, tada, enlightenment.
Thus compassion is the road to peace common in all religions, and all virtuous philosophies. Its one of the simplest things to do, and all it requires is losing your ego. And yet it is so hard for all of us... odd that is.
And I am not the apitamy of Taoism Ray, you should know that by now. It is just a nice philosophy that I am only beginning to warm up to. Actually my major backgrounds are in Christianity and Buddhism.
On which Christianity is the REAL one: Well, which Buddhism is the real one? All religions have factions emphasizing different aspects of the same texts, but they are the same in spirit. A good analogy I heard was that of three sons of the father. When asked who their father was, each gave a different answer (or interpetation, take your pick), but all had the same conception of their father.
Now let me clear up a few things about Buddhism. First off this whole thing about Buddhists not believing in heaven or hell... Quite the opposite in fact, not only do they believe in heaven and hell, but they enumerate them into literally dozens of different TYPES of heavens and hells. The main difference in CONCEPT is that they believe in the idea of rebirth (Christians believe in rebirth too, they just stop after the first one, IE into eternity), where Buddhists believe that rebirth from a heaven or hell is possible too. Hells are considered "eternity", but not in the Judeo-Christian sense. Rebirth from these realms occurs just like ours, BUT the ability to ascend is greatly deminished, and they SEEM to last for eternity because of the tremendous suffering experienced there. Heaven apply too: tremendous amounts of "good" blind them into thinking they want nothing else... these beings are usually reborn into hells after their death. The human realm offers the most chance for "enlightenment". Thus gods are not gotten rid of, instead they are incredibly IMPORTANT to WHY people become so devoute on the Buddhist path: fear of reincarnation in a hell realm, much like Judeo-Christians.
Second, to say that Buddhists gain enlightenment within themselves and dont try to push it on others is just plain wrong. Me thinks you all need to read up on the bodhisattva path (Do searches for the three vehicles, or Mahayana Buddhism, the second of the three vehicles, if youd like). Many (I refuse to say all because I may be wrong then) Buddhists take a vow of the bodhisattva, thus they gain enlightenment not for themselves, but in order to return to teach others. The idea being, that upon reaching enlightenment (disolution of the ego), it is realized that we are all the same, undifferentiated consciousness, thus "true enlightenment" is not possible unless all beings are enlightened (Notice all beings, not all humans). In many ways, Buddhists are MORE concerned with others' spiritual path than Christians, they just don't try to force their knowledge on others but prefer to do it passively (Not to label Christians or others as such).
Third, the Dharma is a medicine. It serves to remove the blocks in ourselves that hide our Buddha nature from ourselves. Not everyone has the same blocks, so not ALL parts of the Dharma apply to EVERYONE (Lets exclude Buddhism through the Universal Vehicle or Lotus Sutras for now), rather certain parts have certain effects on the person in theory. Teachers thus are necessary, as they serve the part of the doctor, prescribing Dharma to heal the suffering of patients.
Finally allow me to pull again from the wealth that is Tibetan Buddhism and one of the most compassionate people on earth, the Dalai Lama. In one of his discourses he stated that all religions are true in that their goal is common: compassion toward all other beings. Any path that leads toward that goal is a noble one and should be embarked on. It breeds a sense of selflessness (Another word for enlightenment in some circles) like this: if you have universal compassion for everything, then you have no ego, tada, enlightenment.
Thus compassion is the road to peace common in all religions, and all virtuous philosophies. Its one of the simplest things to do, and all it requires is losing your ego. And yet it is so hard for all of us... odd that is.
And I am not the apitamy of Taoism Ray, you should know that by now. It is just a nice philosophy that I am only beginning to warm up to. Actually my major backgrounds are in Christianity and Buddhism.
GOLD Member
member
82 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
member
82 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Okay, my final argument.
I feel no guilt. I look at my life, what I have done, and I know within myself that I have forgiven myself for everything. I understand how I came to be where I am today, and I am at peace with that. If there is some diety that will pass judgement when I die, I know that I will show no shame. And in that knowledge of self, that diety must accept me as I am. I there is no diety, as I tend to believe, then I know that I will become part of this world as a positive force. This sounds egotistical, but if you understand what I mean, then you know it's not like that at all.
(yeah, ok, I'm a tad stoned.. hehe but it's the second day of summer in three weeks here in Melbourne. Summer takes a while to kick in here.. so I've had a brilliant day)
Okay, my final argument.
I feel no guilt. I look at my life, what I have done, and I know within myself that I have forgiven myself for everything. I understand how I came to be where I am today, and I am at peace with that. If there is some diety that will pass judgement when I die, I know that I will show no shame. And in that knowledge of self, that diety must accept me as I am. I there is no diety, as I tend to believe, then I know that I will become part of this world as a positive force. This sounds egotistical, but if you understand what I mean, then you know it's not like that at all.
(yeah, ok, I'm a tad stoned.. hehe but it's the second day of summer in three weeks here in Melbourne. Summer takes a while to kick in here.. so I've had a brilliant day)
I do poi nearly every day. But it's not like I'm addicted or anything. I mean, sure, I am always conscious of exactly where my poi are at all times, but I'm not obsessed. um.. Anyone have the number for Poi-ers Anon?
GOLD Member
playing the days away
7,263 posts
Location: The Middle lands, United Kingdom
playing the days away
7,263 posts
Location: The Middle lands, United Kingdom
Posted:
If you have a VCR you could try one of the vids available from this site?
Or an even better idea, come to my house on Saturday and me and a friend will give you a few tips to get you started. You know where I live and don't forget the parrafin!!
quote:Yo G, long time no see. I'd think you just need more practice to make your non existent wrists a little more flexible. Don't worry, it'll come in time and I'm sure you have plenty of that!
Originally posted by Lord God Almighty:
The Lord God Almighty,
Hi everyone.....has anyone got any good tips for reverse 5 beat weave? I keep bashing my head!
If you have a VCR you could try one of the vids available from this site?
Or an even better idea, come to my house on Saturday and me and a friend will give you a few tips to get you started. You know where I live and don't forget the parrafin!!
Let's relight this forum
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
i.e. he neither affirmed nor denied them, just said that they were of no consequence.
You're right that there are many variations on buddhism today; some of them do emphasise heaven and hell realms, particularly Tibetan buddhism.
There are even some highly corrupt buddhist states in South East asia, where buddhism is misused in the way that christianity has been in the west.
However, the original, and very clear/consise teachings have survived, and there is a very specific 'parable' in which the buddha specifically states that metephysical speculation on matters such as the existence of God, the size of the universe, existence of heaven/hell; are basically irrelevant.
[ 05. November 2003, 02:35: Message edited by: onewheeldave ]
quote:Buddhists may believe in heaven and hells and consider them to be significant, but the Buddha himself considered all such metephysical questions to be irrelevant to the matter at hand (the elimination of suffering).
Originally posted by i8beefy2:
Now let me clear up a few things about Buddhism. First off this whole thing about Buddhists not believing in heaven or hell... Quite the opposite in fact, not only do they believe in heaven and hell, but they enumerate them into literally dozens of different TYPES of heavens and hells.
i.e. he neither affirmed nor denied them, just said that they were of no consequence.
You're right that there are many variations on buddhism today; some of them do emphasise heaven and hell realms, particularly Tibetan buddhism.
There are even some highly corrupt buddhist states in South East asia, where buddhism is misused in the way that christianity has been in the west.
However, the original, and very clear/consise teachings have survived, and there is a very specific 'parable' in which the buddha specifically states that metephysical speculation on matters such as the existence of God, the size of the universe, existence of heaven/hell; are basically irrelevant.
[ 05. November 2003, 02:35: Message edited by: onewheeldave ]
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
member
103 posts
Location: Halifax, N.S
103 posts
Location: Halifax, N.S
Posted:
okay. in most forms of buddahism heaven is nirvana. there is no hell only reincarnation in to a lower social class. hevan and hell are from catholism and christanity. I study buddah for my religous studys class.
okay. in most forms of buddahism heaven is nirvana. there is no hell only reincarnation in to a lower social class. hevan and hell are from catholism and christanity. I study buddah for my religous studys class.
some will understand. -buddah
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [peace god] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > Meditation [7 replies]
- Forums > Peace. Only through God? [92 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com