Post Reply
Page 4 of 10  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Buddhist similarities with Christianity
2 years ago  ::  Apr 11, 2012 - 2:05PM #31
Bob0
Posts: 485
It was you claim that they were similar based on the misinformation you provided. No one said they were opposites. We said they are not the same or similar. Buddhism is Buddhism and Christianity is Christianity. One claims a virgin birth, one does not. You just won't give it up. You are like AKA in that when you reach a block in your argumentation you attempt to wiggle to a new also irrelevant argument just to keep it going.

 

Your insistence on using Wickipedia as your source for what is Buddhism in lieu of Buddhists who actually practice Buddhism makes discussion difficult and argumentation inevitable. Of course this is your aim, to argue with Buddhists on the Buddhist boards.

 

I repeat, the words you are struggling to say are: "I'm sorry, I was wrong in my assertion."


 
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 11, 2012 - 2:20PM #32
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Bob,


I've said they are opposites, and shown how on multiple occassions.  I have argued that they are similar only in the way that all religion is similar:  It attempts to answer the question of happiness.


One says this world, the other says the next world.


One says rely on the self, the other says rely on something outside the self:  a magical guy named "jesus".


One says karma, the other says "god".


One says happiness is in the mind, the other says it's in a place elsewhere, in some land, called "heaven".


One offers answers on life, the other says "don't ask, your puny human mind cannot fathom...".



And so on.  In all these cases and so many more, the two teachings are not just opposites, but mutually exclusive.  

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 11, 2012 - 2:46PM #33
mainecaptain
Posts: 21,783

Apr 11, 2012 -- 2:20PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:


Bob,


I've said they are opposites, and shown how on multiple occassions.  I have argued that they are similar only in the way that all religion is similar:  It attempts to answer the question of happiness.


One says this world, the other says the next world.


One says rely on the self, the other says rely on something outside the self:  a magical guy named "jesus".


One says karma, the other says "god".


One says happiness is in the mind, the other says it's in a place elsewhere, in some land, called "heaven".


One offers answers on life, the other says "don't ask, your puny human mind cannot fathom...".



And so on.  In all these cases and so many more, the two teachings are not just opposites, but mutually exclusive.  




I find many faiths and systems of belief to be mutually exclusive with Christianity. For all the reasons you stated.

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato..
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 11, 2012 - 5:01PM #34
Bob0
Posts: 485
Bob:


First of all, I love you Buddy. You make me smile, but his dualism claim was directed at me. He seems to be trying to fabricate an argument where none exits. A dog is a dog. It isn't somewhat cat and somewhat dog. Virgin birth isn't a Buddhist teaching and it is a Christian teaching. Neither beliefs fall into the sliding scale of dualism. That she was or wasn't a virgin at the time of The Buddha's birth isn't a dualistic position. There is no argument as to the degree of her virginity. That equivocal argument was reserved for some of the girls I used to date when I was younger. The virgin birth assertion is fabricated in the minds of a few non-Buddhists who have done shoddy research, most likely with an argumentative agenda. To state that both Buddhism and Christianity are alike in their teaching of virgin birth isn't a dualistic position. It is fabricated misinformation.


I would offer that an assertion that they are opposites is stepping into the trap of dualism. But you recover nicely when you state that the two teachings are mutually exclusive. Very clearly stated. I prefer that Christianity and Buddhism are "different" because as you have pointed out, they are similar in the most general of comparisons. They both are practiced religions on earth. But to argue such silly generalized similarities is a waste of time and important only to the non-Buddhists.


But it is obvious that dualism has become the latest misunderstood argumentative buzz word in an attempt to win a losing argument.


Bob
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 11, 2012 - 5:52PM #35
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Apr 11, 2012 -- 5:01PM, Bob0 wrote:


Bob:


First of all, I love you Buddy. You make me smile, but his dualism claim was directed at me. He seems to be trying to fabricate an argument where none exits. A dog is a dog. It isn't somewhat cat and somewhat dog. Virgin birth isn't a Buddhist teaching and it is a Christian teaching. Neither beliefs fall into the sliding scale of dualism. That she was or wasn't a virgin at the time of The Buddha's birth isn't a dualistic position. There is no argument as to the degree of her virginity. That equivocal argument was reserved for some of the girls I used to date when I was younger. The virgin birth assertion is fabricated in the minds of a few non-Buddhists who have done shoddy research, most likely with an argumentative agenda. To state that both Buddhism and Christianity are alike in their teaching of virgin birth isn't a dualistic position. It is fabricated misinformation.


I would offer that an assertion that they are opposites is stepping into the trap of dualism. But you recover nicely when you state that the two teachings are mutually exclusive. Very clearly stated. I prefer that Christianity and Buddhism are "different" because as you have pointed out, they are similar in the most general of comparisons. They both are practiced religions on earth. But to argue such silly generalized similarities is a waste of time and important only to the non-Buddhists.


But it is obvious that dualism has become the latest misunderstood argumentative buzz word in an attempt to win a losing argument.


Bob



All well argued and understood.  And I wasn't trying to "butt in" perse, but simply stand up to admit I have indeed made that claim, being the brutally honest scoundrel I am.


But upon listening to you, perhaps the word "opposite" is indeed the wrong word to use.  As mutual exclusion does not require "opposite" but rather contradictory parts that simply will not fit together.  And the latter is the heart of the argument-as there is no question in my mind that they are simply not compatible for a variety of obvious reasons-but likely even the simplest arguments, no matter how obvious they may be, are beyond the comprehension of those with agendas that sacrifice truth.



And I'm pleased that I make you smile from time to time :)

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 11, 2012 - 6:40PM #36
mainecaptain
Posts: 21,783

You make us all smile Mr. LunaticTongue Out

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato..
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 11, 2012 - 6:52PM #37
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Apr 11, 2012 -- 6:40PM, mainecaptain wrote:


You make us all smile Mr. Lunatic



You're sweet.  No question the 3 of us have at least 2 things in common:  Reason and Cats.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 11, 2012 - 11:53PM #38
IDBC
Posts: 4,516

Howdy Bob0


Information and misinformation. Truth and falisty.  Understanding and misunderstanding. 


Sounds like dualism to me.  


Apr 10, 2012 -- 9:54PM, Bob0 wrote:




If you say a cat is a dog. that isn't dualism. That's misinformation. If Joseph Campbell says it's true, it is still misinformation.


  



I agree that that if I say that a cat is a dog it is not misinformation or if Joseph Campbell or Guatama Buddha were to say it that it would not be dualism.   Dogs and cats are NOT OPPOSITES.    The dualism would be in the misinformation to in claiming they ARE OPPOSITIES.



Apr 10, 2012 -- 9:54PM, Bob0 wrote:




If you say that Pope is female. That isn't dualism. It's misinformation. If Joseph Campbell says it's true, it is still misinformation.




The opposite of the Pope is not a female.   No Dualism.  


The opposite of a female is a male. Dualism.   


The claim that the Pope is a female is incorrect information.    


The claim that the Pope is a male is correct information.  


The dualism is between "correct" information and "incorrect" information.   


Wether I, or Joseph Campbelll or Guatama Buddha were to claim that the Pope is a female we would be wrong regardless of wether we are Buddhist, Hindu, or Secular Humanist.  


Wether I, or Joseph Campbelll or Guatama Buddha were to claim that the Pope is a male we would be right  regardless of wether we are Buddhist, Hindu, or Secular Humanist.





Apr 10, 2012 -- 9:54PM, Bob0 wrote:




If you say that Buddhism teaches dualism or a virgin birth, that isn't dualism. It's misinformation. If Joseph Campbell says it's true, it is still misinformation.




I agree that may saying that Buddhism teaches either dualism, is not dualism.  It is saying that only that Buddhism teaches the myth of the virgin birth or dualism.  


You disagree.   Agreement and disagreement are opposites.   Agreement and disagreement is dualism.   


 






But I do think that it is true that the belief-theory-myth of the miraclous conception of Buddha does exist and that Buddhist believe in the myth-theory.




Apr 10, 2012 -- 9:54PM, Bob0 wrote:






Now you are quibbling and using AKA logic.[/quote[


Now you are using ad homiens! Cry Cry Cry


AKA's "logic ( ? ) as I understand it is grounded in his religious faith. He does not claim that the "virgin births miraclous conceptions"  are myths they are facts.  Both the Buddha and Jesus are "messengers" of Allah accoring to Bahai doctrine.   The       


 



Apr 10, 2012 -- 9:54PM, Bob0 wrote:




This is not a Buddhist teaching. Any Buddhist who teaches this would be in a most steep minority.




I think that one reason a Buddhist would teach that Buddha had a miraclous conception is because they think or believe that while he was a human being he was an "exceptional" human being while he is not a "god" in the same way that Jesus was a "god"  he did deserve exception reverance.   And by teaching this myth it is showing special reverance. 


A Buddhist might also ask why it is that Buddha was such an exception human being.  They myth could be a way of explaining why he was exceptional.


I doubt very much that this myth was started by a Christian or Catholic.  Jesus Christ was the ONLY man who was concieved by God.    Mary was the only woman whom God knocked up.   To make up a story that another woman was knocked up by god detracts from Jesus special status. 







Apr 10, 2012 -- 9:54PM, Bob0 wrote:




It didn't come from the Buddha's mouth.




It may not have come from Buddhist sutras.   But that doesn't mean that it is not a Buddhist teaching.     


If Buddhist sutras are the only valid source of Buddhist teaching and if all the teachings that are in Buddhists sutras are "historicaly" valid.   Then I would agree.  


But are all "miracles" that are told about Buddha that are in the Buddhists Sutras "historicaly"  true?  


I would also ask you if there are any Buddhist's sutras that do give a biography of Buddha?


I believe there is a story in a Buddhist sutra that tells of Buddha walking on water.  If it is in the Buddhist sutra is it "historicaly" true.



Apr 10, 2012 -- 9:54PM, Bob0 wrote:




The words you are struggling for are: "I'm sorry. I was wrong." You can do it and with your admission the tone of this thread will improve immediately.




Those are not the words I am struggling for.   The words that I am struggling for are the words from the Mouth of Buddha- Buddhist Sutra that in which he taught his history-biography. 








 


Apr 11, 2012 -- 2:42AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:


Hey Bob0 did you know that Charles Dickens and Stephen King are both writing about the same thing?  No, it's true:  Both of them use trees turned into paper and put words on them, then bind them in a book.  You'll also find that for example there is a dog in both Oliver Twist and in Cujo.  Therefore, the content, plot, story, characters, and point of each story inside is the same.  And King is actually the reincarnation of Dickens.  Yep, it's true.


Didn't you ever notice that?  It's obvious.




No they are not "writing" the about the same thing.  For one thing I am fairly certain that Charles Dickens is no longer writing.   But if he was he would not be "writing about the same thing" but using the same thing "paper" to write "On".   And it may be that Stephen King does his "writing" on a computer and not paper. 




HAVE A THINKING DAY MAY REASON GUIDE YOU
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 12, 2012 - 12:40AM #39
Aka_me
Posts: 12,197



sounds like the story of Jesus.


except for


14. "'Ânanda, when the Bodhisat leaves his mother's womb, he does not touch the ground: four sons of the devas stand before his mother and receive him. "Be thou a blessed goddess," they say: "unto thee is born an eminent son."



I don't think Jesus flew with devas.

not being able to debate is one thing, employing censorship to avoid debate is beyond words.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 12, 2012 - 8:18PM #40
IDBC
Posts: 4,516

Howdy aka me


My question  to you , "So what if there are  "similarities"  between Christianity and Buddhism? 


There are also "differences"  between Buddhism and Christianity. 


 .   

HAVE A THINKING DAY MAY REASON GUIDE YOU
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 4 of 10  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook