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do not cite commentries by the followers later on.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.
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.
/\
I do not reject facts and proofs if you can show them. The
question lies not with the facts and proofs, but with the
INTERPRETATION of them. Contrary to what people like to say, facts
DO NOT speak for themselves. If they do then we do not need
lawyers! Evidence and facts must be interpreted within a framework
or belief system. They must be put together to form a coherent and
plausible story.
The issue is not what God can do. God can do anything. He can
even zap the fruit out of Eve's hand before she ate it or blow the
serpent up the moment it went up the tree. But such a God would be
capricious, wouldn't it? The world that God created was perfect,
but the endowment of free will would entail also that consequences
(whether good or bad) must follow and be borne. With free will
comes moral responsibility.
Naturalistic fallacy is part of Buddhism teaching of karma? How
can an impersonal law of nature make moral judgements about
good and bad? The law of gravity does no such thing. But once a
moral law giver is factored in, it makes sense that there is such a
thing as moral judgements.
There is nothing unfair about one not being equal to God. The
Creator by definition is always greater than the creation. By
definition there can only be ONE necessary being. If we are all
equal to God then it means there are numerous beings called God.
This is not monotheism. And logic will tell you that God
cannot create His own equal. As to many being Buddhas, that is just
like saying everyone has the chance to enter heaven so I have no
issue with that at all.
Buddhism may be earlier than Christianity, but the history of
the Bible well precedes Buddhism! On what basis do you conclude
that Christians blindly believe the Bible while you do not blindly
believe what the Buddha texts teach, bearing in mind that your
Buddhist scriptures were written down 500 years after Buddha died?
The events of the Tower of Babel is supported even in the field of
linguistics. People cannot explain where the varieties of human
languages come from. But most agree that the cradle of civilisation
lies in the Middle East. And linguists have traced all languages to
a few families of languages that seemingly just appeared and did
not evolve from a proto-language.
People who have read a lot of myths and legends can read the
Bible and note that it does not fit the label at all. CS Lewis was
one such person.
