Blood Sacrifice

zeus29 SG

Looking back at our exchanges It seems to me that you are unable to articulate any rational defense of Buddhism, except to vary your answers along the same self-refuting and self-defeating slogan of "what's true for you is true for you but not for me" which is intended to be conversation-stopper.

What's even worst is that you can't see how the slogan is nonsensical and self-defeating since you are expecting me to agree with you that the slogan is true for me as well as it is for you which renders the slogan false. If it is true then it is false! Or is that slogan just true for you??? Why should it apply to me?

You thus fail to see that statements like “That’s true for you, but not for me” are not only self-contradictory but guilty of the self-excepting fallacy. You cannot even be consistent on applying it to yourself.

BroInChrist SG

Like I said, the answers you gave are but variations of the "true for you but not for me" self-refuting slogan. The irony is that such replies are immature and ridiculous.

I am telling you that your repeated slogan of "true for you but not for me" is false, and till now you still can't see that? I know you don't believe in God, or rather, you don't know if there is a God or not since that is a question the Buddha evaded. I am referring to your wrong ideas about the nature of truth.

I think you have trouble understanding that you yourself intended the statement "true for you but not for me" to be true for both you and for me too.

zeus29 SG

Like I said, the answers you gave are but variations of the "true for you but not for me" self-refuting slogan. The irony is that such replies are immature and ridiculous.

I think you have trouble understanding that you yourself intended the statement "true for you but not for me" to be true for both you and for me too.

BroInChrist SG

In what way is the question of God's existence irrelevant? I think it is very relevant and has big implications for Buddhism. Why? Because if God exists, then many of the doctrines and teachings of Buddha would have to be reconsidered. Same for Christianity, if there is no God there would be grave implications for my faith. I cannot simply say I don't care and think that would make the problem go away. To do so would be exhibiting blind faith.

I do not know what you intend to demonstrate with that mathematical issue. You think I have a problem with that? I don't. There are infinite mathematical equations to get the number 2. But what is this supposed to prove anyway? Every single equation there is objectively true, just as 1+1=2 is. It seems that you are making a categorical mistake in assuming all truths can be reduced to mere mathematical truths.

zeus29 SG

>>>> "In what way is the question of God's existence irrelevant?" > good for you. for us, we've told you before. no point going in circles.

>>>> "I think it is very relevant and has big implications for Buddhism." -> exactly, that's only what you think.

>>>> "Why? Because if God exists, then many of the doctrines and teachings of Buddha would have to be reconsidered." -> not really. we are action-oriented. refer to eightfold path

>>>> "I cannot simply say I don't care and think that would make the problem go away." -> is it a problem? what is the problem?

>>>> "To do so would be exhibiting blind faith." -> we don't. do you remember the following?

– Do not believe anything on mere hearsay.

– Do not believe in traditions merely because they are old and have been handed down for many generations and in many places.

– Do not believe anything on account of rumors or because people talk a a great deal about it.

– Do not believe anything because you are shown the written testimony of some ancient sage.

– Do not believe in what you have fancied, thinking that, because it is extraordinary, it must have been inspired by a god or other wonderful being.

– Do not believe anything merely because presumption is in its favor, or because the custom of many years inclines you to take it as true.

– Do not believe anything merely on the authority of your teachers and priests.

– But, whatever, after thorough investigation and reflection, you find to agree with reason and experience, as conducive to the good and benefit of one and all and of the world at large, accept only that as true, and shape your life in accordance with it.

The same text, said the Buddha, must be applied to his own teachings.

– Do not accept any doctrine from reverence, but first try it as gold is tried by fire.

>>>> "I do not know what you intend to demonstrate with that mathematical issue. You think I have a problem with that? I don't." -> ok. let me explain. we believe in many paths, hence the 84,000 dharma doors. there is no just one way. Some meditate, some chant, etc. another way, one chooses to walk the christian path, buddhist path, muslim path, jewish path, hindu path, sikh path, bahaii path etc. if the teaching resonates with one and helps one become a better person, why not? THERE IS NO ONE WAY. EVERYONE IS UNIQUE. JUST LIKE YOU AND ME.

>>>> "It seems that you are making a categorical mistake in assuming all truths can be reduced to mere mathematical truths." -> first of all, mistake? what mistake? you decide? you make the call on what's mistake or not? i don't think i gave you the mandate. secondly, eh, i thought you said "if one is true, it's true for all". no? anyway, how do to test something so abstract such as the existence of this creator god. i put aside my buddhism, you put aside your christianity. pray tell, how to test?