One can't prove that God but science makes God unnecessary

last SG · 2013-01-24T10:27:08+00:00

So were you taught or equipped to handle questions asked about the Christian faith? When you had questions how did you deal with them? like said, long forgot...

2009novice SG

Buddha also debated with other religious teaching, yet, His teaching always stands out. most are even converted. is it worst? hmm..kind of enjoying. haha.

i kind of agree with imdestinys, :-

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

i thought Buddha will only debate if people challenge him.. e.g. Cula-Saccaka Sutta

zulkifli mahmood SG

If only a newly born infant can talk, we will know whether there is a ‘GOD’.

sinweiy SG

i thought Buddha will only debate if people challenge him.. e.g. Cula-Saccaka Sutta

that mean many people came to talk/exchange with him. debate might not be the word. exchange is better. exchange between others is on happening. debate might sound like argument and have a sense of anger. when Buddha was young and still learning, he was already very good at it.

fyi tibetan buddhism got "debating" tradition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8cLMyDaOlo

:) train u not to be angry, i think. haha.

StriveOn SG

i thought Buddha will only debate if people challenge him.. e.g. Cula-Saccaka Sutta

Debate, challenge, whatever terms you use...

During Buddha's time, they have these public pavillions where 'wise men' gathers and so called 'shoot' each other. There are also many audiences who listens and some will decide which 'teacher' to follow.

Debate, challenge, 'question and answer sessions', or just plain 'teaching', these were normal activites back then.

StriveOn SG

Buddha also exchange with other religious teaching, yet, His teaching always stands out. most are even converted. is it worst? hmm..kind of enjoying. haha.some doubts and questioning are good to get the mind working.

i kind of agree with imdestinys, :-

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

i didn't see much wisdom from them, only heresy or plain following the bible.

Totally agree with you that a healthy exchange is good.

Like I said, we have to assess our audience.

Among ourselves, when we raise questions, we seek answers.

But with others, they may downplay and critique because of their partial understanding.

We are no where near Buddha's standard to convince others,

but for those who seek, we will be there for them.

For those who have partial understanding,

it would be better to clear one concept at a time.

[imdestinyz] SG

well, i believe when we are trying to have a healthy exchange, we cannot 钻牛角尖... which to no offense i believe is what is going on with BIC now... no effort of explaination can change his purpose in here.

sinweiy SG

Totally agree with you that a healthy exchange is good.

Like I said, we have to assess our audience.

Among ourselves, when we raise questions, we seek answers.

But with others, they may downplay and critique because of their partial understanding.

We are no where near Buddha's standard to convince others,

but for those who seek, we will be there for them.

For those who have partial understanding,

it would be better to clear one concept at a time.

i sometime also don't feel like replying. hmm, are we not clearing one at a time? maybe too many against one already, hah. his critique to me still okay, as it is from outside, not so "nasty" as i seen before. if critique is from inside, then i as mod would have to stop it. last time, there's one.

i think we are also just wanting to clarify for other Buddhists as well. so others will not misunderstand the dharma in a Buddhist forum. maybe u just followed recently, i think most of the questions are pretty general, not so chim as yet. i see a few including me, had gone thru xtianism before converting to Buddhism.

StriveOn SG

........................ if critique is from inside, then i as mod would have to stop it. last time, there's one.

............................................

Last time that one, is it me?

When I don't agree, I questioned. (in line with Budhha's advice)

And I am very particular about what Buddha say, or did not say.

Sorry if I caused any unhappiness in the past,

but my heart is always with you guys.

sinweiy SG

Last time that one, is it me?

When I don't agree, I questioned. (in line with Budhha's advice)

And I am very particular about what Buddha say, or did not say.

Sorry if I caused any unhappiness in the past,

but my heart is always with you guys.

hmm, not u. did u? funny, unless u change name ah? hah.

i think some "giving/dana" of dharma is good thing to do. :)

Nyorai SG

Debate, challenge, whatever terms you use...

Debate, challenge, 'question and answer sessions', or just plain 'teaching', these were normal activites back then.

the above only within sangha during extensive retreat in the 7th months. it is not debate but confession for ill speaking against sangha due to ignorance. during this time, any purpose of the major gathering was to attend Buddha in person for dharma assembly. as in usually occasion, they were scattered around for people to plant blessing and merit as well. And this was the only period from Buddha every year to gather them together. as for the above, it is wiser to only enjoy the journey of attaining enlightenment. is meaningless to debate on issue of critic or scientist over other religion in Buddhism forum. what Buddhist can offer is to ensure that any religions visit this forum is to change them to mind of peace and bodhicitta.

SJS6638 SG

i disagree, i think he's plain stubborn, refuse to look up/within. although, since Buddhanature is within, and it's not an object and not easy to decern, the glasses analogy is not suitable in the sense that one can touch it.

in Buddhism, Buddha states, "Those who see the Dharma, sees the (real) Buddha." and if u do not discern the Dharma, no matter how close u are with Buddha, u do not see the real Buddha.

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Even if a monk, taking hold of my outer cloak, were to follow right behind me, placing his feet in my footsteps, yet if he were to be greedy for sensual pleasures, strong in his passions, malevolent in mind, corrupt in his resolves, his mindfulness muddled, unalert, uncentered, his mind scattered, & his faculties uncontrolled, then he would be far from me, and I from him. Why is that? Because he does not see the Dhamma. Not seeing the Dhamma, he does not see me.

"But even if a monk were to live one hundred leagues away, yet if he were to have no greed for sensual objects, were not strong in his passions, not malevolent in mind, uncorrupt in his resolves, his mindfulness established, alert, centered, his mind at singleness, & his faculties well-restrained, then he would be near to me, and I to him. Why is that? Because he sees the Dhamma. Seeing the Dhamma, he sees me."

Stubborn? Christians are brainwashed by bible and pastors that God and bible are the only source they rely on. Anything not of God is Satanic. As for religion and faith, they are taught that God is the alpha and omega, begining and the end. There is no God other than their God who created earth and human beings.

and that Christianity is the right teaching.

sinweiy SG

Stubborn? Christians are ...

yes, was refering to the glasses analogy. Christians aside..

StriveOn SG

err... what you are saying is not what I meant. The one you are saying is 'chaired' by Buddha.

The one I am saying is more like a public kind of thing where they come together to debate.

BroInChrist SG

yeah, they/scientists are "extra curriculum" in Buddhism. u know who ur parent or ancestors are already, their name, then? it doesn't make u a better person. so i was saying, Buddha rather teach you to be a better person. knowledge is different from wisdom and well-being. knowing to swim, does not make one a great swimmer, and if they have no practice or jump into the water to swim. moreover, know to swim is one thing, but do u help others? Buddha is teaching one to swim and save people!

I have observed that Buddhists generally like to answer a question of knowledge with a moral slant, but this merely sidesteps the question. The quest for knowledge should not be confuse with the building of one's moral character. Yes, it does not make you a better person to know that maybe your ancestor is a warrior in China. It does not make you more honest or reliable as a person. But that's never the intention of such knowledge anyway. Yes, knowledge and wisdom are two different but related things. You can't be wise if you have no knowledge! It's one thing to live a good and upright life, but if that is complemented by a coherent and rational worldview that would even be better. So it is not a false dilemma of either/or, but both/and.

BroInChrist SG

God is redundant to me. i can live without God.

A rebellious son can say that his parents are redundant to him and that he can live without his parents. But without his parents he would not even be around and alive in the first place to be able to say those rebellious words. Get it?

BroInChrist SG

BroInChrist, please do not get agitated if I make statements for argument's sake, not to poke at you.

BroInChrist wrote, ""And in the case of Christianity, the messenger IS the message! The teachings of Jesus cannot be separated from His person. Apart from Christ there is nothing to teach. One cannot teach the truth about Christianity and ignore the person of Christ, though you can do that with Buddhism."

There is a messenger, and there is a message. As an audience, what is of paramount importance? If we revered the messenger too, is it not idol worship? Not that it is wrong, but the message is of paramount importance. (aka the teachings)

BroInChrist wrote, "In what sense is asking about the issue of origins a stupid question? Or a stupid issue for that matter? If that is really the case, then it must be concluded that a lot of scientists are asking stupid questions and answering stupid questions."

There are so many things to find out. Buddha is concerned with how we can get out of samsara (your analogy : go to heaven) The issue of origins (I am speculating) may not be so simple and it does not in any way help us in getting out of samsara. Not stupid questions, but it may raise even more questions, and at the end of the day, does not in any way help us with salvation.

1. No offence, but I think we should try to refrain from arguing for argument's sake.

2. Re the messenger and the message, I am saying that in the case of Christianity, the messenger IS the message. As to revering the messenger, it depends on who the messenger is. Since Christ is God, He deserves worship and there is no issue of idol worship at all.

3. The question of origins is relevant because what we are today is a result of what happened at the beginning. Buddhism would bury the "origins" of death and suffering in the countless rebirths that people go through. Christianity would explain that there was a perfect creation marred by sin which brought in suffering and death. Knowing the cause is often the most effective way to introduce a remedy. The question of origins helps us to make sense of many things, even the need for salvation.

BroInChrist SG

in Buddhism, Buddha states, "Those who see the Dharma, sees the (real) Buddha." and if u do not discern the Dharma, no matter how close u are with Buddha, u do not see the real Buddha.

Wouldn't it be just as correct to say that Buddhists are stubborn too? I think we should refrain from such ad hominem remarks. Having said that, we need to be able to evaluate teachings of religious leaders. I am sure you would agree with this. Lastly, when asked by His disciples to who God to them Jesus answered, "If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father." In other words, Jesus was telling them that God is talking to them in the flesh!

BroInChrist SG

Debate, challenge, whatever terms you use...

Debate, challenge, 'question and answer sessions', or just plain 'teaching', these were normal activites back then.

In the Bible it was written that the apostle Paul went to Athens and spoke to the philosophers there who just like to talk about things. Paul engaged them at length. The response was that some believed, many scoffed, and some said they want to hear more from Paul.

BroInChrist SG

I think I have stated my purpose here earlier. I was drawn to this forum because of the thread about Buddhist concepts analysed in a Christian website. While it can be claimed that the Christian has wrong ideas of Buddhism I also saw that it was also true that the Buddhist has wrong ideas of Christianity. And thus I decided to participate to clarify and defend the Christian position, and in doing so also offer a critique of the Buddhist position in a manner of fair comment and debate, without malice or ill-intent.

BroInChrist SG

Interesting. So you were a Christian before? Mind if I ask you what kind of involvement did you have. Or rather, in what way did the church equipped you to think apologetically about the Christian faith?

« Previous Page Next Page »