Blood Sacrifice

last SG · 2013-01-20T16:32:12+00:00

If God exists, then God would have told us how to get right with Him. Surely this would have implications for your 8 fold path. Buddha did not claim to hear...

BroInChrist SG

I wonder if broinchrist confused 8fold path with the 8 precepts.

The Eight Precepts:

1. I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.

2. I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.

3. I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.

4. I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.

5. I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

6. I undertake the precept to refrain from eating at the forbidden time (i.e., after noon).

7. I undertake the precept to refrain from dancing, singing, music, going to see entertainments, wearing garlands, using perfumes, and beautifying the body with cosmetics.

8. I undertake the precept to refrain from lying on a high or luxurious sleeping place.

______________________________

Usually, a lay person is encouraged to take the basic 5 precepts not necessary the 8 precepts.

The five precepts are:

1. I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking life.

2. I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking what is not given.

3. I undertake the training rule to abstain from sexual misconduct.

4. I undertake the training rule to abstain from false speech.

5. I undertake the training rule to abstain from fermented drink that causes heedlessness.

______________________________

for me, i much prefer precepts to the ten commandments. notice the "i undertake the precept to ....." rather than "thou shalt not ......."

i wonder which approach one prefers - a doctor telling one that smoking is harmful and advise one to refrain from doing so OR government telling one must not / can not smoke? :)

I was referring to the 8 Fold Path, but my points equally applies to the 8 Precepts, or 5 if you wish.

I think you prefer "precepts" as opposed to "commandments" because in Buddhism there is no notion of absolute right and wrong, good and evil. The "thou shall nots" demarcate what is morally right and wrong. Most people don't like that, I can understand that. It is an external authority telling us, and we pretty much prefer our own autonomy.

BroInChrist SG

an enlightened person, would not see the purpose in documenting that he/she has attained nirvana. I think you've made a baseless assumption here. or that, you've choosen to interpret it the christianity way.

It was documented for the Buddha, and his early disciples, right?

sinweiy SG

neither is

the claim of people reborn in heaven and return to speak of the heaven.

NOTE that Nirvana is not annihilation nor a place nor eternalism.

it's the extinction of individual passion, hatred, and delusion: freedom from the binding of karma. True Freedom and happiness if u ask me.

BroInChrist SG

A missionary went to India and saw the Indian making goat and chicken sacrifice to Goddess Kali. He said, “Hindu worships a blood thirsty goddess.” The next trip, he went to Taiwan and saw a family offering prayer to Tu Di Gong with cook chicken, duck and roast pig. He said, “ The Chinese also worships a blood and meat hunger god.” He concludes and proclaims that all pagan god and goddess are blood thirsty in nature; therefore it must be devilish in origin.

A lay man point out to him, didn’t the bible wrote that the God of Israel require his children to make sacrifices to him with blood of dove if you are poor, a lamb if you are rich to atone for the sin. In fact, Abraham was praise by God for having faith in desiring to sacrifice his son, Issac. It was said, none of this sacrifice SATISFIES him until JESUS, his only son was sacrifice. Don’t you think your GOD is also blood thirsty as the pagan gods. Since blood sacrifice is associate with the devil, the man begins to doubt the origin of the Christian god.

Well Bro In Christ, perhaps the sacrifice was about teaching man kind to love one another. The resurrection was about having a symbolic icon of new beginning when we fall. Whether Jesus did rose from dead is debatable, the eye witness were not historian. Do you know the 4 gospel were not written by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John as proclaimed by the church. Perhaps Resurrection was a symbol of hope for the early churches to endure the persecution. Besides, they believe that Jesus is coming back at the turn of century AD 100 which did not took place. That’s y, u r reading this.

If you take a look at today, one wonders where is God?
when the prosperity preachers is living out a expensive lifestyle out of the Christian hard earned money,

when the priest abuse the innocent

when disaster strike at New Zealand, America and Asia

when people is dying of hunger

when girls turn to prositution

when a heroine is injecting drug to escape the abusive environment

If God is as powerful, omniscience and omnipresence as per what is proclaim, why did he not intervene? Why does he allow suffering to exist?

Perhaps u may find the answer by turning to your belief, as much as the Buddhist in the forum can find ours through the Buddha teaching. As Dalai Lama has said, the religion that can make you a better person is the best religion for you.

I wonder where you get this missionary story from? Is it a true account? There are points in this story that suggest that this missionary lacks the theology required to be a missionary!

Anyway, the Bible teaches that the wages of sin is death. Since the Bible teaches that life is in the blood (medical science knows this now), it therefore requires the shedding of blood (death) for the remission of sins. It is either your death, or someone else who can take your place.This sets the backdrop for the blood sacrifices. The Aztecs or Mayans form of religious and cultic human blood sacrifices are perversions of the Biblical notion of blood sacrifices.

Re the resurrection, it would not make sense for the early disciples to preach a literal resurrection if it was just a symbolic expression and Jesus was in fact rotting away in the tomb. The apostles suffered and died to proclaim a literal raising from the dead, and an empty tomb. Yes, they preached that Jesus would come back again, but there was no date set at 100AD. So even if it is the year 2013 it still does not invalidate the Blessed Hope.

It is common to hear arguments against Christianity by pointing out the existence of suffering. But this is illogical. Why should the existence of suffering means the non-existence of God? The existence of suffering also does not logically impact on the attributes of God at all. You may not know WHY God allows this, but that would just be ignorance on our part, how does this warrant concluding there is no God? The point is this: The Bible teaches that God will end suffering. But I think our instant culture insist that it must be now or never.

[imdestinyz] SG

neither is

the claim of people reborn in heaven and return to speak of the heaven.

NOTE that Nirvana is not annihilation nor a place.

it's the extinction of individual passion, hatred, and delusion: freedom from the binding of karma.

I believe by the time someone attained nirvana, it would no longer matter to him whether others know he has attained or not. Henceforth, why would he feel the need to document down "I xxx have attained nirvana blah blah blah"

BroInChrist SG

neither is

the claim of people reborn in heaven and return to speak of the heaven.

NOTE that Nirvana is not annihilation nor a place nor eternalism.

it's the extinction of individual passion, hatred, and delusion: freedom from the binding of karma. True Freedom and happiness if u ask me.

So Nirvana is more accurately a psychological state of mind? Free from Karma means his actions will have neither positive or negative karmic consequeces?

BroInChrist SG

So how can anyone claim something that no one knows? It would just be an assertion without any supporting basis that countless people have attained Nirvana.

troublemaker2005 SG

So how can anyone claim something that no one knows? It would just be an assertion without any supporting basis that countless people have attained Nirvana.

you know or not? you know alsothen say you write like you know nirvana more than god does

troublemaker2005 SG

So Nirvana is more accurately a psychological state of mind? Free from Karma means his actions will have neither positive or negative karmic consequeces?

nirvana is a famouse band back in 1990s that i know.

not free from karman an example is one wife of a pastor take his money go US make music video with black people. waer loose little clothings aginst what her religion preaches.

then its okay becasue the money are willing people giv donate to her MTV 1. gitit?

sinweiy SG

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/nirvanaverb.html

A Verb for Nirvana

[imdestinyz] SG

So how can anyone claim something that no one knows? It would just be an assertion without any supporting basis that countless people have attained Nirvana.

i didn't think you've read whatever others have posted and have absorbed whatever they've been trying to educate you.

troublemaker2005 SG

he only know how to collectr money form people. but to make them willingly give money have to tok. talk lots of rot from their own books. people happy - people contribute money.

reborn76 SG

“Anyway, the Bible teaches that the wages of sin is death. Since the Bible teaches that life is in the blood (medical science knows this now), it therefore requires the shedding of blood (death) for the remission of sins. It is either your death, or someone else who can take your place.This sets the backdrop for the blood sacrifices. The Aztecs or Mayans form of religious and cultic human blood sacrifices are perversions of the Biblical notion of blood sacrifices.” Bro In Christ

This is what I meant the notion of MY SACRIFICE or MY CULTURE is much better than yours is primitive in nature.

In this globalization, we should open our heart to listen. In the narration, the lay person was not putting down on the missionary religion rather pointing out the very thing he hates about others people belief.

Hence try reading stuff written by this John Shelby Spong, you will be surprise that some of the fundamental views held by the churches are questionable in nature. http://johnshelbyspong.com/

Anyway I understand the angle you are coming from, you hoping to share the gospel in order to save the Buddhist in the forum. Mind you I used to be of the same faith as you. When I open my heart, I start to realize the profundity of Buddhism. Today, I still respect Jesus as a bodhisattva who came to show the way to love one another.

Until one is able to ponder and reflect, one will always be a follower of the crowds.
The objective of Jesus and Buddha is very clear.

Jesus said, “ I came u might have life and have it more abundantly.”
Buddha said, “ I came so that you will know the dharma, be enlightened like me.”
It boils down to seeking happiness from within.

zeus29 SG

Your point about my mentality was an obvious ad hominem remark which apparently you were oblivious to.

Fine, since the choice of my words "birth to death" can be so interpreted that I am of such low mentality to think that babies can talk or make decisions, I shall clarify that I use that term to mean one's entire life time. So I am asking whether a person can claim that he has complied and observed the 8 fold path in his life time. Is that now better to you? So you replied that this can be done and has been done. Do you actually personally know of such a person, or have heard of him/her?

BTW, there is a claim made that when Buddha was borned he took 7 steps and said some words which I think you would believe is false? (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Gautama_Buddha#Birth).

I thought I had answered your point about so-called Jesus lost years. One needs to be careful not to impose modern ideas of a biography into ancient times. People back then did not think that it requires a record of one's whole life from birth to death. Anyway, the Gospels recorded the birth of Jesus, His going to the temple at 12 years old with a concluding statement that He went back with His earthly parents and were obedient to them. Then it goes to the beginning of His ministry about 30 years old where it mentioned that Jesus has a custom of attending the synagogue. Using some logical inference, if He had been in India would this statement have made any sense?

Moreover, one should always employ some measure of skepticism whenever such "new" knowledge comes out in recent years attempting to overhaul what has been the mainstream view of things. The fact that this notion arose in the last two centuries should have given you pause, but I suppose everyone loves a groundshaking for Christianity so much so that such wacky and flakey claims receive a lot of attention and promotion.

I recommend that you read this http://www.garyhabermas.com/books/historicaljesus/historicaljesus.htm

“can be so interpreted that I am of such low mentality” -> jumping to conclusions, again?

Who, who who?

-> Milarepa, Angulimala, Shantideva.

"BTW, there is a claim made that when Buddha was borned he took 7 steps and said some words which I think you would believe is false? (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Gautama_Buddha#Birth)."

-> whether it is true or not, it doesn’t matter. You follow?

“I thought I had answered your point about so-called Jesus lost years.” -> I don’t think you did.

“His going to the temple at 12 years old with a concluding statement that He went back with His earthly parents and were obedient to them. Then it goes to the beginning of His ministry about 30 years old” -> and did what?

“Using some logical inference, if He had been in India would this statement have made any sense?” – mormons believe he went to America.

zeus29 SG

In other words, would you agree that since no one is born a Buddhist, and before one becomes a buddhist in life there would have been negative karma accumulated from young? Even then, after becoming a Buddhist it is unlikely that one will perfectly observe the 8 fold path. Naming the Buddha and his disciples are just 2500 years too far away. But if you know of someone who has perfectly observed it, out of countless many, I would be interested to know of such people currently living or in recent years.

i think goenka (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._N._Goenka) does. so do many monks.

broinchrist, it's not like if one declares he or she is buddhist, past karma are gone. and it's not like only buddhist can create good karma.

if you contribute to your church, it's good karma.

if you help to build your church, it's good karma.

buddhism is not exclusive. karma is no exclusive and does not discriminate. it is also true for buddhas and boddhisattva's. in tibetan painting, the painting of skeletons does not mean demonic etc. it simply means buddhas or boddhisattva's look beyond one's beauty or ugliness. no discrimination at all.

zeus29 SG

OK, this would seem to confirm my point that the claim of countless people being enlightened and attaining Nirvana up to the present time has no empirical/documentary support at all. I suppose It is just a claim made by followers who themselves do not actually know of anyone who has attained enlightenment and nirvana?

suppose that i'm a millionaire and own many properties, should i go around the world and shout about my wealth? for what? what good does it serve? if i want to serve, i use my wealth for the betterment of others. through kind actions not through boastfulness.

guru rinpoche, milarepa, shantideva, angulimala etc just to name a few. or this is not the exact answer you have in your mind? if you want to know who has attained nirvana etc, why don't you try and let us know?

zeus29 SG

I wonder where you get this missionary story from? Is it a true account? There are points in this story that suggest that this missionary lacks the theology required to be a missionary!

i wonder how the mayans and their wisdom perished. so did, other cultures too, unfortunately thanks to the 3G - glory, gold and gospel.

and i sympathise those people who died in salem after being accused of witchcraft etc.

sinweiy SG

Until one is able to ponder and reflect, one will always be a follower of the crowds.
The objective of Jesus and Buddha is very clear.

i see a different in western religion from the eastern. like their mentality, they perfer to use reward and punishment. even when young, they use Santa Claus to lie to kids, so they can behave. when grow old already still use this kind of mentality. there's no Santa. ^

BroInChrist SG

This is what I meant the notion of MY SACRIFICE or MY CULTURE is much better than yours is primitive in nature.

Hence try reading stuff written by this John Shelby Spong, you will be surprise that some of the fundamental views held by the churches are questionable in nature. http://johnshelbyspong.com/

Until one is able to ponder and reflect, one will always be a follower of the crowds.
The objective of Jesus and Buddha is very clear.

1. Incorrect. It is not about my sacrifice/culture better than yours, but that there is a corruption in the understanding of the blood sacrifices. But why do you raise this point when Buddhists would also think that their way of salvation is better than others, at least that's what Buddha taught when he decided to reject Hinduism, right?

2. Yes, we should listen to what others are saying, but that doesn't mean accepting what is being said as true. You haven't answered me about whether the narration was a true account or just a fiction. Anyway, like I said, if the missionary thinks that a blood sacrifice is demonic and thus doubts the Bible, I have my grave suspicion as to what kind of missionary he is. Doesn't he know anything about blood sacrifices in the OT and how God instituted it? Again he confuses the distortion with the genuine and threw out the baby with the bath water.

3. Actually I would rather question Spong's views! I can understand why you would recommend Spong because he completely undermines the Christian faith and to you and most nonbelievers such would be deemed as highly commendable and "objective". But that's like asking you to listen to some Buddhist monk whose teachings are at odds with the mainstream teachings.

4. Of course we should strive to exercise the mind and not be a blind follower. But one can be immature and be a crowd follower and still be in the right crowd, though he would find it difficult to defend his choice of following the crowd. Truth be told, there are blind and nominal followers in both Buddhism and Christianity.

5. Correction, Jesus did not come to bring happiness to people around Him. In fact He taught that people would be scandalised because of Him! Families would be divided on account of Him. Abundant life is not about being happy from within. See http://frontlineapologetics.com/2012/03/19/abundant-life-what-did-jesus-mean-in-john-1010/

BroInChrist SG

“can be so interpreted that I am of such low mentality” -> jumping to conclusions, again?

Who, who who?

-> Milarepa, Angulimala, Shantideva.

-> whether it is true or not, it doesn’t matter. You follow?

“I thought I had answered your point about so-called Jesus lost years.” -> I don’t think you did.

“Using some logical inference, if He had been in India would this statement have made any sense?” – mormons believe he went to America.

1. Whether I jumped to conclusions about your engagement in ad hominem or not, your heart knows. I shall not press this further.

2. Why do you say it doesn't matter whether it is true if the Buddha walked those steps at birth and uttered those words? If truth does not matter, then does it matter if what Buddha taught was true or not?

3. The Bible does not record what Jesus did between 12 and 30, but there are clues which I have mentioned but again you overlooked. Jewish children take after the trade of their fathers. So Jesus was likely trained as a carpenter. He was also a regular face at the synagogue. The religious leaders also noted that Jesus was from Nazareth (not India). As to the Mormons, you must be very confused. Mormons do not believe that between 12-30 years of age Jesus went to America. Anyway what's your point? Jesus was a globetrotter?

« Previous Page Next Page »