Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Buddhism Is Not Unstable or Wavering

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2012 6:56:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Gileandos claims that Buddha Dharma is so unstable that a "sneeze" in the room will cause a Buddhist to change beliefs as opposed to Christianity which he describes has a "completely consistent, large and coherent core against all thoughts or viewpoints."

I would argue that on the contrary, Buddha Dharma is on par with the Christian doctrine if not superior when it comes to having a large and coherent core.

Buddhisms tenets are clearly stated and vastly expanded upon. He has no evidence at all to believe that Buddha Dharma is wavering and less substantial than Christian doctrine.

He also states that Buddha Dharma is based on subjectivity whereas Christian doctrine is based on transcendental truth that comes from somewhere other than himself. That's false as Buddha Dharma is also based on transcendental truth, however, the transcendental truth is found by discovering it yourself rather than have it fed to you by God. The Buddha is merely a guide.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2012 7:16:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
"This Dharma of the imagelessness of the Essence-nature of Ultimate Reality is the Dharma which has been proclaimed by all the Buddhas, and when all things are understood in full agreement with it, one is in possession of Perfect Knowledge, and is on his way to the attainment of the Transcendental Intelligence of the Tathagatas."
-- the Buddha [Lankavatara Sutra]
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Physik
Posts: 686
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2012 7:17:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
as opposed to Christianity which he describes has a "completely consistent, large and coherent core against all thoughts or viewpoints."

I laughed.
"Just don't let them dissuade you. Stick to your beliefs no matter what and you'll be fine." - ConservativePolitico, the guy that accused me of being close-minded.

"We didn't start slavery, they themselves started it. When the white man first got to Africa they had already enslaved themselves, they just capitalized on an opportunity." - ConservativePolitico

"The Bible to me is a history book and requires very little faith to believe in." - ConservativePolitico
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2012 7:27:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/1/2012 6:56:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I would argue that on the contrary, Buddha Dharma is on par with the Christian doctrine if not superior when it comes to having a large and coherent core.

*Edit: I should say rather a constant and unwavering core. Certainly Christianity isn't the most coherent when it comes to it's core doctrines, see Trinity.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2012 9:36:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/1/2012 7:27:57 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/1/2012 6:56:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I would argue that on the contrary, Buddha Dharma is on par with the Christian doctrine if not superior when it comes to having a large and coherent core.

*Edit: I should say rather a constant and unwavering core. Certainly Christianity isn't the most coherent when it comes to it's core doctrines, see Trinity.

That is a clear distortion or I did not come across clear.

Trinity is a core doctrine. Any religious organization that disavows the Triune nature of God is not Christian by definition.

It is like pointing out moss that is NOT the rock, but growing on the rock. Then knocking the moss of and saying you damaged the rock.

There have been many attempts to change the fundamental core doctrines of the Christian faith. The point was clear that those core beliefs have not been able to be changed.
To be a Christian church is defined as believing in the Triune nature of God.

You could be an individual and question the Trinity during your spiritual walk and still be called christian but not an organization disavowing the trinity as one of your core doctrines.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 3:00:09 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/1/2012 9:36:21 PM, Gileandos wrote:
That is a clear distortion or I did not come across clear.

Trinity is a core doctrine. Any religious organization that disavows the Triune nature of God is not Christian by definition.

What are you talking about? I fully agree with that and explicitly stated that the Trinity is a core doctrine. I said that the Trinity is not COHERENT. I fully agree the Trinity is a core doctrine.

There have been many attempts to change the fundamental core doctrines of the Christian faith. The point was clear that those core beliefs have not been able to be changed.

Again, fully agreed. I agree that Christianity has clear core beliefs.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 3:20:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/1/2012 9:37:05 PM, Gileandos wrote:
As to Dharma there is already a forum discussing it.... why post a second?

This thread is about a separate point. There's hundreds of threads on Christianity, why post another? Why? Because there's many different things to be discussed about Christianity. Likewise, Buddha Dharma is a vast subject. From that could step hundreds of threads just like Christianity.

Btw, you didn't address anything I said in the OP of this thread.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 10:03:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/2/2012 3:00:09 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/1/2012 9:36:21 PM, Gileandos wrote:
That is a clear distortion or I did not come across clear.

Trinity is a core doctrine. Any religious organization that disavows the Triune nature of God is not Christian by definition.

What are you talking about? I fully agree with that and explicitly stated that the Trinity is a core doctrine. I said that the Trinity is not COHERENT. I fully agree the Trinity is a core doctrine.


There have been many attempts to change the fundamental core doctrines of the Christian faith. The point was clear that those core beliefs have not been able to be changed.

Again, fully agreed. I agree that Christianity has clear core beliefs.

How is the Trinity not coherent?

From my understanding you claimed Christianities core beliefs were not consistent.
You then pointed to alternate beliefs on the Triune nature of God as evidence.

You cannot point to non-Christians beliefs to detract from the core of Christians beliefs.

I used the analogy of the moss growing on a rock. You cannot knock the moss off and claim you damaged the rock.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 10:16:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/2/2012 10:03:21 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 1/2/2012 3:00:09 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/1/2012 9:36:21 PM, Gileandos wrote:
That is a clear distortion or I did not come across clear.

Trinity is a core doctrine. Any religious organization that disavows the Triune nature of God is not Christian by definition.

What are you talking about? I fully agree with that and explicitly stated that the Trinity is a core doctrine. I said that the Trinity is not COHERENT. I fully agree the Trinity is a core doctrine.


There have been many attempts to change the fundamental core doctrines of the Christian faith. The point was clear that those core beliefs have not been able to be changed.

Again, fully agreed. I agree that Christianity has clear core beliefs.

How is the Trinity not coherent?

From my understanding you claimed Christianities core beliefs were not consistent.
You then pointed to alternate beliefs on the Triune nature of God as evidence.

You cannot point to non-Christians beliefs to detract from the core of Christians beliefs.

I used the analogy of the moss growing on a rock. You cannot knock the moss off and claim you damaged the rock.

A rolling stone gathers no moss. So let's rock'n'roll.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 11:24:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/2/2012 3:00:09 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/1/2012 9:36:21 PM, Gileandos wrote:
That is a clear distortion or I did not come across clear.

Trinity is a core doctrine. Any religious organization that disavows the Triune nature of God is not Christian by definition.

What are you talking about? I fully agree with that and explicitly stated that the Trinity is a core doctrine. I said that the Trinity is not COHERENT. I fully agree the Trinity is a core doctrine.


There have been many attempts to change the fundamental core doctrines of the Christian faith. The point was clear that those core beliefs have not been able to be changed.

Again, fully agreed. I agree that Christianity has clear core beliefs.

Jehovahs witnesses reject the trinity, yet we consider them christian.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 2:59:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/2/2012 10:03:21 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 1/2/2012 3:00:09 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/1/2012 9:36:21 PM, Gileandos wrote:
That is a clear distortion or I did not come across clear.

Trinity is a core doctrine. Any religious organization that disavows the Triune nature of God is not Christian by definition.

What are you talking about? I fully agree with that and explicitly stated that the Trinity is a core doctrine. I said that the Trinity is not COHERENT. I fully agree the Trinity is a core doctrine.


There have been many attempts to change the fundamental core doctrines of the Christian faith. The point was clear that those core beliefs have not been able to be changed.

Again, fully agreed. I agree that Christianity has clear core beliefs.

How is the Trinity not coherent?

Im just pointimg out that the Trinity is one of the less coherent doctrines of Christianity.

From my understanding you claimed Christianities core beliefs were not consistent

False. I agree with you that Christianity's core beliefs are consistent, I never stated otherwise.

You then pointed to alternate beliefs on the Triune nature of God as evidence.

I dont recall doing such a thing. I know that the Trinity is a core concept and that there is a common understanding amongst nearly all Christians of this fact.

You cannot point to non-Christians beliefs to detract from the core of Christians beliefs.

I didnt. I am almost in full agreement with you about Christian doctrine . Where I disagree with you is on Buddha Dharma.

.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 3:06:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Those poor deluded unitarians who believe they are Christian.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 4:30:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Coherency of core doctrine is not necessarily a good thing. Islamic terrorists get lots of points for consistent and unwavering beliefs, but so what?

If a core doctrine has no way to be tested, it can endure. Christians can have any belief they want about the nature of the Trinity, and there is no chance whatsoever that new data from satellites --or anything else in the real world-- will overthrow it. Because it has so little relation to the real world it is harmless. If moral behavior is promoted by the belief, it's a net plus.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 5:32:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/2/2012 4:30:22 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
Coherency of core doctrine is not necessarily a good thing. Islamic terrorists get lots of points for consistent and unwavering beliefs, but so what?

If a core doctrine has no way to be tested, it can endure.

Buddhist doctrine is testable. You must not be familiar with Buddhist philosophy.

"Truth is subject to practice and testing. If it is proper Truth, we definitely should be able to acquire sweet fruits through practice right away. If it only abstractly promises a reward in the next life, this may be an irresponsible trick to delude the ignorant."
-- the Buddha

Christians can have any belief they want about the nature of the Trinity, and there is no chance whatsoever that new data from satellites --or anything else in the real world-- will overthrow it.

That's because science can't test that. That's like using a microscope to learn about cosmology. The proper tool to scrutinize the Trinity is philosophy and test through philosophically reasoned means.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 5:48:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/2/2012 11:24:10 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 1/2/2012 3:00:09 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/1/2012 9:36:21 PM, Gileandos wrote:
That is a clear distortion or I did not come across clear.

Trinity is a core doctrine. Any religious organization that disavows the Triune nature of God is not Christian by definition.

What are you talking about? I fully agree with that and explicitly stated that the Trinity is a core doctrine. I said that the Trinity is not COHERENT. I fully agree the Trinity is a core doctrine.


There have been many attempts to change the fundamental core doctrines of the Christian faith. The point was clear that those core beliefs have not been able to be changed.

Again, fully agreed. I agree that Christianity has clear core beliefs.

Jehovahs witnesses reject the trinity, yet we consider them christian.

Define we, only the family gets to determine who is in the family. You cannot force your way into the family by crashing the family reunions.

If no one in the family recognizes you are a family member....
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 5:50:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/2/2012 2:59:56 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/2/2012 10:03:21 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 1/2/2012 3:00:09 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/1/2012 9:36:21 PM, Gileandos wrote:
That is a clear distortion or I did not come across clear.

Trinity is a core doctrine. Any religious organization that disavows the Triune nature of God is not Christian by definition.

What are you talking about? I fully agree with that and explicitly stated that the Trinity is a core doctrine. I said that the Trinity is not COHERENT. I fully agree the Trinity is a core doctrine.


There have been many attempts to change the fundamental core doctrines of the Christian faith. The point was clear that those core beliefs have not been able to be changed.

Again, fully agreed. I agree that Christianity has clear core beliefs.

How is the Trinity not coherent?

Im just pointimg out that the Trinity is one of the less coherent doctrines of Christianity.

From my understanding you claimed Christianities core beliefs were not consistent

False. I agree with you that Christianity's core beliefs are consistent, I never stated otherwise.

You then pointed to alternate beliefs on the Triune nature of God as evidence.

I dont recall doing such a thing. I know that the Trinity is a core concept and that there is a common understanding amongst nearly all Christians of this fact.

You cannot point to non-Christians beliefs to detract from the core of Christians beliefs.

I didnt. I am almost in full agreement with you about Christian doctrine . Where I disagree with you is on Buddha Dharma.



Well, I am glad we clarified that we are in agreement.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 5:57:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/2/2012 4:30:22 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
Coherency of core doctrine is not necessarily a good thing. Islamic terrorists get lots of points for consistent and unwavering beliefs, but so what?

If a core doctrine has no way to be tested, it can endure. Christians can have any belief they want about the nature of the Trinity, and there is no chance whatsoever that new data from satellites --or anything else in the real world-- will overthrow it. Because it has so little relation to the real world it is harmless. If moral behavior is promoted by the belief, it's a net plus.

One of the core foundational criterion for something to be transcendentally True is that it will be stable.
Something that is stable is in the ballpark.
Something that wavers like a bent reed in the wind at any change that comes from the outside obviously does not posses that quality of transcendence.

Same concept behind a scientific study.
To be accurate there is a necessary locus.
Precision all around the scale is irrelevant.

Philosophical transcendent Truth is the same concept of the necessary locus called accuracy.