The best documentary on Reincarnation I have ever seen

last SG · 2013-02-05T22:07:21+00:00

the bible is just a book written by manif man sins so wat makes the bible?You digressed.The issue is whether reincarnation is a central dogma of Christianity...

Steveyboy SG

@2009novice,

Yes, I totally agree with you. I think that any of the major religions have a role and purpose in the spiritual development of an individual. Buddhism may work for some of us and it may not work for others. The same thing it would be for Christianity. However, If you ask me, it is a lot easier to embrace Christianity because it is a relatively easy faith to understand and embrace when compared to the philosophy-heavy Buddhism. This does not mean it is better or worse, it is just an observation of mine.

BroInChrist SG

@2009novice,

When it comes to issues of truth one cannot take the pragmatic approach of whether it works for you or for me. Truth applies to everyone, it cannot be for you or for me.

Steveyboy SG

When it comes to issues of truth one cannot take the pragmatic approach of whether it works for you or for me. Truth applies to everyone, it cannot be for you or for me.

Precisely. Please share what is the truth of God? What is our purpose on earth? To live a mundane life, worship God and die?

BroInChrist SG

Precisely. Please share what is the truth of God? What is our purpose on earth? To live a mundane life, worship God and die?

You can actually read about this in Genesis 1 and 2. It will answer what role God gave to man on earth. Anything but mundane and no death at all.

Steveyboy SG

Sorry, the book of genesis is a chapter of the bible that I find it the hardest to believe in. The story of our creation cannot be that simplistic. Anyway, here's an interesting documentary I watched recently of a biblical scholar of what she thought of the Garden of Eden:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fei91b_Uqk8

BroInChrist SG

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fei91b_Uqk8

There are many people who do not find Genesis hard to believe at all. The creation account in Genesis is simplistic? What do you mean by that? Compared to what? I have already commented on this scholar who hardly deserves to be considered "Biblical" in the true sense of the word. She is a nonbeliever and admitted atheist, it is no wonder that what she promotes here undermine the truthfulness of the Bible. But this is not just an ad hominem attack, her ideas can be refuted as well.

See http://www.christiandoctrine.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=768:bbc2-the-bibles-buried-secrets-part-three-the-real-garden-of-eden-more-nonsense&catid=176:history&Itemid=552

Steveyboy SG

@BroInChrist

Of course she is a biblical scholar. Bear in mind that biblical scholars are not theologians and I trust her view point more than a theologian because they are unbiased and in fact, very logical. I read the 'rebuttal' and I am sorry, I find it biased and half of it was a character assassination and I think such fresh views would elicit such response and it may make the writer seemed angry. An angry response to me means that the writer was provoked by fear. Is there a less biased review of the program?

BroInChrist SG

@BroInChrist

What makes you think that these non-believing Biblical scholars are unbiasd? An atheist is 100% biased against God to begin with.

Steveyboy SG

@BroInChrist - Well, its very easy to see non-believing Biblical scholars are unbiased -they base their research on scriptural, archaelogical and socio-political conditions of the time the bible was written. Theologians based theirs on fixed established theological beliefs. Even if the Atheist doesn't believe in God like Dr Francesca, she's saying that based upon research and archaelogical findings. They don't come up with it arbitrarily. You may not agree with Dr Francesca but you cannot really deny that her findings and her summary is compelling and believable.

BroInChrist SG

It is easy to say that it is easy to see that nonbelieving so-called Bible scholars are unbiased, question is, is it true that they are unbiased? What about other Bible scholars who disagree with her? It is fallacious to allege that believing Bible scholars are biased and their conclusions cannot be trusted simply because they are believers. It would be very naive to think that nonbelievers are objective and nonbiased simply because they are nonbelievers. Truth is, there is no such thing as an unbiased person. Such a creature does not exist in reality. So long as you are human you are biased. Recognition of such bias is more important than denial of it.

zeus29 SG

seems like broinchrist knows a lot of "truth"

Steveyboy SG

Dear BroInChrist,

I didn't say that bible scholars are unbiased. I said that they present their research based on scriptural, archaelogical and socio-political conditions of the time the bible was written. Theologians based theirs on fixed established theological beliefs. Therefore, for me it would seem that the scholars are more compelling. You may not agree with that, its ok but that's what I think right now. It has really got nothing to do with bias or non-bias.

BroInChrist SG

seems like broinchrist knows a lot of "truth"

Sarcasm is no substitute for an argument.

BroInChrist SG

Dear BroInChrist,

It is fallacious to think that one is either a Bible scholar or a theologian, and see it as one vs the other as you have done so here. Has it ever occurred to you that many theologians are also Bible scholars? A fine example is http://richardbauckham.co.uk/

sinweiy SG

Truth is, there is no such thing as an unbiased person. Such a creature does not exist in reality. So long as you are human you are biased. Recognition of such bias is more important than denial of it.

in Buddhism, there are three form of poisons for suffering(mental). greed, hatred and folly.

greed is related to attachment/clinging to what's yours or mine. it can also be clinging to a certain view.

hatred is related to discrimination/bias thinking to things that one dislike.

folly is related to delusion, ignorance and also wandering thoughts of thinking too much.

they can be a gradual path. first are mostly attained by arahats, second by bodhisattvas and third by Buddhas.

so getting rid of discrimination/bias-ness is one of the aim in Buddhism. Buddhas/mahasattvas do not have bias-ness/dualism.

zeus29 SG

Sarcasm is no substitute for an argument.

There's no argument. What constitutes a win or lose? Just different perspectives, no?

Steveyboy SG

Dear BroInChrist,

Well, actually I didn't know there was a difference until I started talking to you. I am sure there are theologians who are bible scholars. Anyway, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter really. We have sort of diverted from the topic here. I was talking about reincarnation so it has got nothing to do with bible scholars.

BroInChrist SG

There's no argument. What constitutes a win or lose? Just different perspectives, no?

Indeed that was no argument at all, it was just pure sarcasm. Yet another either/or fallacy? A different perspective can also be a wrong perspective.

zeus29 SG

Indeed that was no argument at all, it was just pure sarcasm. Yet another either/or fallacy? A different perspective can also be a wrong perspective.

Huh? so my "sarcasm" is the center of the entire thread? What was the real argument? And what is right or wrong perspective? If You wear red glasses, you see things red. Another wears blue sees things blue. Who's right and who's wrong?

BroInChrist SG

Chill man, I was simply pointing out that you made a sarcastic remark. Both sets of color lenses would be wrong if the right lenses are the clear ones.

« Previous Page Next Page »