35
   

I am a Buddhist and if anyone wants to question my beliefs then they are welcome to do so...

 
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Mon 14 Oct, 2013 08:20 pm
Frank Apisa claimed:
Quote:
Buddhism is a "belief system."
That is what Christianity is also. And Judaism

Nah, Buddha was a one-man show, an ordinary human who simply gave us his unsubstantiated personal guesses and hunches (like philosophers do).
Christianity and Judaism on the other hand are rooted in centuries of human interaction and close encounters with unearthly beings..Smile
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Mon 14 Oct, 2013 08:47 pm
@Frank Apisa,
That is entirely a matter of perspective and preference.
0 Replies
 
Uncle jeff
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 08:35 am
@igm,
How do you feel about the Buddhist 969 movement to eliminate inferior non Buddhist races from the planet?
IRFRANK
 
  2  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 08:52 am
@Frank Apisa,
That is ridiculous. You are saying 'if you don't know everything with certainty, you know nothing' .
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 09:20 am
@IRFRANK,
IRFRANK wrote:

That is ridiculous.


What is ridiculous?


Quote:
You are saying 'if you don't know everything with certainty, you know nothing' .


I have not come even close to saying that. Why are you making stuff up? Why can't we simply have a reasonable, respectful conversation?
JLNobody
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 09:23 am
@Uncle jeff,
What are you talking about?
Uncle jeff
 
  -1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 10:08 am
@JLNobody,
Well here is a little link
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence?o=2801&qsrc=999&ad=doubleDown&an=apn&ap=ask.com
but you can research more about the current movement of trying to eliminate inferior non Buddhist races from the 969 Buddhist website. They are being quite successful in promoting a Nazi like propaganda of being a superior race.
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 10:37 am
@Frank Apisa,
I apologize Frank. I meant no disrespect. Sometimes I get lazy. When I am on the iPad I don't know how to do the cut and paste quotes. And I'm a bit irritated at the moment from all of this political BS.

Quote:
What is ridiculous?


This is what I an referring to:
Quote:
..the "belief" that the beliefs of Buddhism are somehow appreciably different from the beliefs of other religions.


Beliefs about beliefs just seemed one step too far. But I do understand what you mean. I don't believe they are different, I know they are different. You can question the beliefs themselves, but the conclusions I draw from them and how they relate to my experiences are very real to me. If you allow that to disconnect, them we truly do not know anything. I thought that was your meaning. It seems to me that you use the possibility that anything can be an illusion to negate any possibility of knowledge. I don't have to have a definitive, absolute knowledge of the nature of reality to know that the basic truths and precepts of Buddhism are true.

Again, my post was trite, and you deserve better. I apologize.
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 10:39 am
@JLNobody,
The Buddhists 969 is an extreme, political segment of Buddhism in Burma, Myanmar. It is in Wiki.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 12:29 pm
@IRFRANK,
IRFRANK wrote:

I apologize Frank. I meant no disrespect. Sometimes I get lazy. When I am on the iPad I don't know how to do the cut and paste quotes. And I'm a bit irritated at the moment from all of this political BS.

Quote:
What is ridiculous?


This is what I an referring to:
Quote:
..the "belief" that the beliefs of Buddhism are somehow appreciably different from the beliefs of other religions.


Beliefs about beliefs just seemed one step too far. But I do understand what you mean. I don't believe they are different, I know they are different. You can question the beliefs themselves, but the conclusions I draw from them and how they relate to my experiences are very real to me. If you allow that to disconnect, them we truly do not know anything. I thought that was your meaning. It seems to me that you use the possibility that anything can be an illusion to negate any possibility of knowledge. I don't have to have a definitive, absolute knowledge of the nature of reality to know that the basic truths and precepts of Buddhism are true.

Again, my post was trite, and you deserve better. I apologize.


No problem, Frank. I was being too sensitive myself this morning.

Anyway...my point about "beliefs" was made in an ironical way. You had asked about which "beliefs" I had in mind earlier...and I decided to add "the belief that Buddhist beliefs are appreciably different from other religious beliefs" mostly as an ironic comment.

The fact is that Buddhist "beliefs" ARE different from the "beliefs" of other religions (or non-religions)...but they share a commonality that causes me to consider them not substantively different.

The thing they share...which I personally consider the most important ingredient...is that they are assertions about an unknown...and an unknown that has very little unambiguous evidence for back-up.

A belief that there is a GOD...is an assertion with almost no unambiguous evidence as back-up. A belief that no gods exist...is an assertion with almost no unambiguous evidence as back-up.

A belief that there is no self...no soul...is an assertion with almost no unambiguous evidence as back-up. The notion that one can meditate one's self into a state of (whatever)...is an assertion with almost no unambiguous evidence as back-up.

That was the reason I said what I said.

I understand that you, and other reasonable, intelligent individuals cam disagree with me strongly on this point...but I am sharing what I see to be the case.

JLNobody
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 02:39 pm
@Frank Apisa,
And of course the beliefs that there are and that there aren't unicorns on some planet in another galaxy both have no unambiguous evidence to back them up.
But would you say that it is not unreasonable--given our experience--to assume (believe) that there are no unicorns anywhere?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 02:44 pm
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:

And of course the beliefs that there are and that there aren't unicorns on some planet in another galaxy both have no unambiguous evidence to back them up.
But would you say that it is not unreasonable--given our experience--to assume (believe) that there are no unicorns anywhere?


I would think that it would be absolutely absurd to assume (believe) there are no unicorns anywhere.

JLNobody
 
  2  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 04:38 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I guess that's right: it's absurd to believe BOTH that there are and that there are not unicorns.
As with my form of atheism, I can't even bother to deny there are gods. For that reason agnosticism is absurd.
peter jeffrey cobb
 
  2  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 04:53 pm
@Uncle jeff,
I have read about that jeff, and I think it has nothing to do with the Buddhist practice. Its more a group of people that are spreading the propaganda, and are using the religion's name to do so.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 07:12 pm
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:

I guess that's right: it's absurd to believe BOTH that there are and that there are not unicorns.
As with my form of atheism, I can't even bother to deny there are gods. For that reason agnosticism is absurd.


Agnosticism is not absurd.

I said nothing about guessing or believing both that there are and are not.

0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 07:36 pm
Agnostics require proof of God in order to believe in him, but the problem is NO proof will ever be enough to convince them.
For example if God himself appeared to an agnostic, they'd say to him "Go away, you're just a hallucination"..Wink
maxdancona
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 09:16 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Quote:
For example if God himself appeared to an agnostic, they'd say to him "Go away, you're just a hallucination"


You are suggesting that is a bad thing?

Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Tue 15 Oct, 2013 11:13 pm
@maxdancona,
Any philosopher worth his salt would say to God something like- "Are you in my hallucination or am I in yours?"..Smile
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Wed 16 Oct, 2013 02:55 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
But as for quality…I see all of the “beliefs” to be blind guesses about the true nature of REALITY.
This brings me back to the blind beliefs vs educated guesses problem. It truly appears to be why this thread is endless.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 16 Oct, 2013 03:45 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Agnostics require proof of God in order to believe in him, but the problem is NO proof will ever be enough to convince them.


I cannot speak for all Agnostics (and I have stopped using the word to describe myself), but for the most part Agnostics simply refuse to assert that there is a god or that there are no gods.

If there is a GOD (anything like the god most theists worship)...it seems that GOD could easily provide unambiguous evidence of ITS existence is IT desired. So either there is no GOD or any GOD that does exist prefers not to reveal ITSELF.

I have no problem going with "I do not know."

You do seem to have a problem with that, Romeo. But that is YOUR problem, not mine.

Quote:

For example if God himself appeared to an agnostic, they'd say to him "Go away, you're just a hallucination"..Wink


THAT was the kind of humor that obtained you fan mail???

Good thing you got the mail on the Internet. If it had been snail mail, you would have been disappointed that they mostly were written with crayons.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/16/2022 at 04:25:19