0
   

Buddhists...what have they ever done for us?

 
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 01:06 pm
Asherman wrote:
As you commented earlier Setanta, trying to have discussion with Rex is pointless and a waste of time. He has fixated on one position to the exclusion of all others, and is unwilling to even imagine that his faith might have the slightest flaw, or that other religions might have equal value. Oh well, let him rave .......

It was a nice try Asherman, I commend you for it. But I have to quote myself...
rosborne979 wrote:
Asherman wrote:
Rex,

Let me repeat myself; Rex, you don't know the least thing about Buddhism.


You're not trying to have an actual conversation with RexRed are you? This could be fun Smile

Rex is like a self contained path to enlightenment; a finger pointing at itself.
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 01:18 pm
I'm sorry Rosborne, I thought it was Setanta who pointed out the futility of trying to hold a discussion with Rex.

I hate to see a person make a fool of themselves. Rex's ignorance of Buddhism couldn't go unanswered, risking that other innocent readers might be led astray. Rex has closed his mind, and not even a trace of information that might disagree, or call into question his beliefs, is permitted. Oh well ... I tried to treat respectfully with Rex as an adult. That was a failure, but some day his faith may be strong enough to consider other points of view. There are better things to do with our time than in holding our breath waiting for Rex to grow up.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 01:29 pm
Asherman wrote:
I'm sorry Rosborne, I thought it was Setanta who pointed out the futility of trying to hold a discussion with Rex.


I wouldn't be surprised if Set said something similar as well. Smile
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 01:33 pm
You are all dancing around the subject. Give me some specific gripes.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 01:57 pm
Maybe the frustration some of you are having is because the truths I speak are immutable.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 02:40 pm
Asherman wrote:
Oh well ... I tried to treat respectfully with Rex as an adult. That was a failure, but some day his faith may be strong enough to consider other points of view.


I doubt it. Rex seems quite enamored with his world. I don't think he has any reason to look beyond it.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 03:00 pm
rosborne979 wrote:
Asherman wrote:
Oh well ... I tried to treat respectfully with Rex as an adult. That was a failure, but some day his faith may be strong enough to consider other points of view.


I doubt it. Rex seems quite enamored with his world. I don't think he has any reason to look beyond it.


If someone would give me a specific reason to I might entertain the thought. Yet it seems the dissent I get from others is superficial at best.

The basic premise, are there many ways to God? Do we reach nirvana by clothing ourselves with our own image or by donning the image of our creator?

These are very concrete questions they are not metaphysical but testable by practical living and measured in the application of Biblical principles.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 03:18 pm
I was taught that words have very specific meanings.

Like the words "know thyself" and the words "know God"... they mean different things.

Ephesians 3:19
And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 04:09 pm
Quote:
I was taught that words have very specific meanings.


Your "teacher" obviously never read Wittgenstein ! :wink:

"Truth" is to "Christianity" as "Goal" is to "Soccer"....an example of parochial blinkered usage which Wittgenstein called "private language".
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 04:18 pm
RexRed wrote:


Where with Christianity, studying only grants approval of God but not the sanctity of God for the Christian God is "not a respecter of persons". God does not like one over another because they meditate longer or burn the incense with more servitude. He looks to the spirit which is a product of "his own" likeness not our own.



The first few chapters of the bible has god liking Abel's offering but not Cain's. So this is just another instalment in the endless litany of worthless drivel that spews from your keyboard each day.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 06:04 pm
fresco wrote:
Quote:
I was taught that words have very specific meanings.


Your "teacher" obviously never read Wittgenstein ! :wink:

"Truth" is to "Christianity" as "Goal" is to "Soccer"....an example of parochial blinkered usage which Wittgenstein called "private language".


Some words are meant for the purpose of ambiguity and some for the purpose of clarity.

Words of the Bible written during the classical period were meant for clarity because they were written within a rich reference environment.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2007 06:15 pm
Wilso wrote:
RexRed wrote:


Where with Christianity, studying only grants approval of God but not the sanctity of God for the Christian God is "not a respecter of persons". God does not like one over another because they meditate longer or burn the incense with more servitude. He looks to the spirit which is a product of "his own" likeness not our own.



The first few chapters of the bible has god liking Abel's offering but not Cain's. So this is just another instalment in the endless litany of worthless drivel that spews from your keyboard each day.


Very good point (nearly obscured by an apparently bad attitude).

As I said the spirit has come in the form of different catalysts. God is not respecter of persons under this dispensation of grace that we now live where the spirit is given as a gift and not based upon the works of the flesh. But in the past the spirit was based upon other conditions where in the garden the condition of the spirit was to not eat of a certain tree. In Cain and Abel's time it was based upon how one gave worship toward God.

It has been based upon a promise of Noah and the letter of the law of Moses until it came to our day and time where the spirit is based upon simple belief and we are granted access to it's graces.

One problem is mistaking changes in dispensations for contradictions. God as Jehovah relates to his creation dynamically under the varied conditions of cultures and times. This is why we need to understand "to whom" each particular verse of the Bible is addressed. Some are addressed directly "to" the church and some are only "for" our learning. Because they were addressed to peoples of different spiritual conditions and times. God has changed with the times and altered the conditions in our favor though Christ Jesus.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2007 06:58 am
Set, it seems you are the one with the reasoning problem and your goon hit and run cohorts.

You have massed up a mountain of ill informed replies and venomous prattle.

When people start talking to me you do not come in and add to the discussion you attack me? Bad form...

Should I follow you around and when people start to converse with you ask them why they are talking to such a loser?

You do not recognize truth when you see it and if you do not have any grounds whatsoever to dispute this truth and this makes you angry, unfortunately for you.

Get over your ego before it consumes what little brain power you do still have to work with (which is as of lately precious little). I will be here to toss the truth in your face wherever and whenever it suits me and you will be here to toss our your rude and uneducated comments about matters you have not a single clue about.

For if you knew what you were talking about you would have something to add specifically concerning what I have said. Don't think that just because I am a Christian that I will give you a free ride on this matter. I will nail your lack of netiquette and don't think that for one moment this "Christian " here is a wimp. Far from it, I am not a push over for your vain and empty handed antics.

You are sore because my few thousand posts render nearly all of your posts obsolete.

That would put me in a sorry state too.

GET OVER IT!

Face it Set, you are not reasoning with me because my reasoning leaves your futile attempts at logic in the dust. Some would consider that cowardly attack and run stance of yours immoral.

Jesus died so we could live... Jesus was beat up and pushed around so Christians would not have to follow suit. Just ask yourself, who burned Rome?
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2007 07:46 am
Acts 22:19
And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee:
0 Replies
 
I Stereo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2007 10:06 am
Isn't this supposed to be a thread about buddhism?

Christians can't stand people discussing anything other than them...
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2007 06:12 pm
I Stereo wrote:
Isn't this supposed to be a thread about buddhism?

Christians can't stand people discussing anything other than them...


One way to understand "contrast" is to add a differing view.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2007 06:23 pm
I Stereo, no one is stopping you from talking about Buddhism...

The question is not, what had Buddhism has added to itself.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2007 07:50 pm
The thing about buddhism that has perhaps not been mentione is that buddhism is of such a nature that if the "truths" of christianity were really true, all buddhists would be christians. They'd find their way to it in time, because every answer would point them towards it.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2007 10:50 pm
Cyracuz wrote:
The thing about buddhism that has perhaps not been mentione is that buddhism is of such a nature that if the "truths" of christianity were really true, all buddhists would be christians. They'd find their way to it in time, because every answer would point them towards it.


That would be observable if "true" Christianity were not so obscured.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 12:40 am
RexRed,

Congratulations on your usage of "true" as "a four letter word" ! :wink:
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 06/16/2024 at 03:20:23