Re size of humans and dinosaurs in the past. We have fossils of
huge dinosaurs but not huge humans! I would agree that in the past
it seems that the environment was quite different, the pre-Flood
world of Noah. This might explain some form of gigantism but there
are limits to that. The pyramids and other wonders of ancient times
are explained also by the Bible. The Bible teaches that man was
created intelligent to start with and lived hundreds of years.
Imagine the kind of wisdom and knowledge one can accumulate over
that span of time! The pyramids are explained best by human
technology now lost to us, or yet to be discovered. I believe it
requires no alien encounters.
Things that we cannot control is proof that we are NOT masters
of our own destiny. It does not prove not-self. The principle of
reaping what you sow is not denied by the Christian. In fact, this
is an order established and upheld by God. God establishes the
natural laws and the moral laws. You cannot do what you like as you
deem fit because God has set these laws in motion.
The notion of a fallen world is not newly come up idea. It is as
old as the Bible itself! The Bible teaches that when Adam fell
creation fell with him as well. Thorns and thistles and pain in
childbirth are just some of the repurcussions of the fall. The Fall
is trhe context that explains all the death and suffering we see.
Buddhism simply acknowledges the observation we see but does not
provide a satisfactory explanation for why it is so. The answer is
well hidden in the countless past eons. Appeal to natural law of
karma does not explain why we can call it unfairness. Nature does
what it does, so to be consistent you have no basis to call it fair
or unfair. This is the naturalistic fallacy.
Again the Buddhist's notion of a decayed world bears similarity
to the Bible's fallen and cursed world, as do the hope of a coming
Matreiya to bring restoration. Why the similarities? I believe this
goes back to the events in the Tower of Babel. There the shared
memory is communicated in the same universal language. Once
divided, that shared memory becomes distorted over time though some
vestige and remembrance of it still remains.
In Buddhism, i agreed that they are more clever and moral in
the past, or even have some spiritual powers. it proved our slowly
degrading generations. i ever saw a giant human leg
fossil discovery, but anyway, i think they are sort of
of spontaneous body as i
mentioned to zulkifli mahmood, fossil is not for spontaneous body化生. u said no
fossil, i can also say no remain of high tech equipment? i think
for u even if the prove is there, u will still reject it or come
out with another excuse. do cite the bible text of the fallen? but
do not cite commentries by the followers later on. beside, why
can't the personal being remove the fallen or make it not happen,
if he's all power?
But if u are ur Self, u should be able to control yourself. u
only say no as a form of believe but not as a form of inner
investigation.
by unfairness, i also mean one cannot be equal to 'God', but in
buddhism, we can or are equal to Buddha.
in the teaching of karma, to blame it on naturism or randomism
is also an error. i think u lack a thorough understanding of karma
to deny it as a satisfactory explanation. naturalistic fallacy IS a
part of karma. karma is very complex.
There are three philosophies which are considered by Buddhism to
be wrong view and which must be carefully distinguished from the
teaching of kamma:
1. Pubbekatahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and
suffering arise from previous kamma (Past-action determinism).
2. Issaranimmanahetuvada: The belief
that all happiness and suffering are caused by the directives of a
Supreme Being (Theistic determinism).
3. Ahetu-apaccayavada: The belief that
all happiness and suffering are random, having no cause
(Indeterminism or Accidentalism/randomism).
http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma6.htm
Buddhism teaches that all things, both material and immaterial,
are entirely subject to the direction of causes and are
interdependent. This natural course of things is called in common
terms "the law of nature," and in the Pali language
niyama, literally meaning "certainty" or "fixed way,"
referring to the fact that specific determinants inevitably lead to
corresponding results.
The laws of nature, although uniformly based on the principle of
causal dependence, can nevertheless be sorted into different modes
of relationship. The Buddhist commentaries describe five categories
of natural law, or niyama. They are:
1. Utuniyama: the
natural law pertaining to physical objects and changes in the
natural environment, such as the weather; the way flowers bloom in
the day and fold up at night; the way soil, water and nutrients
help a tree to grow; and the way things disintegrate and decompose.
This perspective emphasizes the changes brought about by heat or
temperature.
2. Bijaniyama: the
natural law pertaining to heredity, which is best described in the
adage, "as the seed, so the fruit."
3. Cittaniyama: the
natural law pertaining to the workings of the mind, the process of
cognition of sense objects and the mental reactions to them.
4. Kammaniyama: the
natural law pertaining to human behavior, the process of the
generation of action and its results. In essence, this is
summarized in the words, "good deeds bring good results, bad deeds
bring bad results."
5. Dhammaniyama: the
natural law governing the relationship and interdependence of all
things: the way all things arise, exist and then cease. All
conditions are subject to change, are in a state of affliction and
are not self: this is the Norm. http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma1.htm#law
http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma.htm#Contents
erm, Buddhism is already well acknowledged in history that its
about 500 yrs eariler than Xtianism. beside the former is based on
wisdom, detailed text, test it with ur self to believe it's true
while the latter is base on story that one Must blindly believe
it's true. the Tower of Babel is to me a way ur all want to win the
who-is-the-first race. sorry, i see, the other way round of
distortion by the followers.
lastly, i feel it's best we communicate by starting " In
Buddhism..." or "In Xtianism....". the argument that I am the real,
while u are the distorted, is pointless, as all are debatable
topics. its better, as those with inner eyes will judge for
themselves who is real or distorted.
/\
