Buddist on Catholic answers?

[ProdigalSun]

Observe the shifting of the goalposts. In your original post, you talked about “animals”:

nicely done! BUt I’m sure yuo understand the diffence behing proving to me that all animals we not allowed to be eaten and dietary laws of the old testament.

CHeers:thumbsup:

Pigs are animal. God condemns the eating of pigs. Only for the Jewish culture, and then in the New Testament he allowed the killing and eating of pigs

Having lost the original argument, you insert a new, previously unseen, qualifier: “all”.
Oh… I’m sorry I did not realize you are ok with killing and eating some animals. I was under the impression you had a problem killing any animal. My mistake and I certainly apologize if I misunderstood!

Using your logic, then the commandment “You shall not kill” is meaningless, because not “all” killing is disallowed: self-defence etc. God does condemn killing, but He does not condemn all killing. It is also worth noting that God did not give animals to man for food until after the flood. Adam was only given plants to eat: Genesis 1:29. Prior to the flood, all meat eating was disallowed.
The Commandment to not Kill is better defined as “you shall not muder”
This of course only applies to Humans killing humans.
Well I’m glad to see you coming around to seeing that God did indeed give animals to humans for consupmtion.

rossum

 

[rossum]

BUt I’m sure yuo understand the diffence behing proving to me that all animals we not allowed to be eaten and dietary laws of the old testament.

Indeed I do undertand, which is why I pulled you up on your attempt to change the question after I had answered it. You added the word “all” which was not included previously.

I suggest that you study the “No True Scotsman” fallacy.

rossum

 

[ProdigalSun]

Indeed I do undertand, which is why I pulled you up on your attempt to change the question after I had answered it. You added the word “all” which was not included previously.

I suggest that you study the “No True Scotsman” fallacy.

rossum

I concede I brought up the “all” because I thought you had the opinion that we should not kill or eat any/all animals. I’m happy to see I was mistaken about that. I didn’t realize you were only talking about the ones that were part of Old Testament Jewish Dietary laws.

Evidence that these dietary laws were changed are in the New testament so that in a sense takes care of the objection to these animals being eaten.

I quess my question would be why is it ok to kill some animals but not others?
Peace!

 

[rossum]

Evidence that these dietary laws were changed are in the New testament so that in a sense takes care of the objection to these animals being eaten.

We both agree that God used to object to some animals being eaten in the past. I have no problem with God changing His mind over the rules.

I quess my question would be why is it ok to kill some animals but not others?

The rule of thumb for Buddhists is that if you do have to kill an animal, then the smaller the less bad. All killing is bad, but some killing is worse than others. Killing a human is worse than killing a mouse.

rossum

 

[Grym]

Ah but can you prove that? I mean logically?

Yes I beleive there is certainly a logical argument against for the fallacy of reincarnation.

So please do present your arguments by all means so we can have a laugh together.

Ah but can you prove that? . Sounds pretty illogical to me, more like a James Bond movie. You only live twice? Eer btw does this mean you do belive in reincarnation?

Yes I’m sure it does seem illogical to you.anyone that sees logic in the illogical concept of reincarnation is bound to have a bit of disordered thinking!

Are you talking about your belief in limited two time reincarnation? Yes it seems like a bit of disordered (unlogical) thinking going on there. Frankly I do not understand why you keep bringing up reincarnation? Its very central to your belief I am guessing? You see me myself do not get hung up on things that can not be proven.

And guess what. You are gonna get sick, grow old and die. Congrats for having such a generous God and just remember to say “Thank You God” next time you catch the flu.

I Thank God for all my misfortune as well as my fortune. Because I Love Jesus who is God and all that he does for me.

Yeah for thats very logical to bestow sorrow, grief, pain and death on his creations when he according to you is so full of love for the same? How do you explain that please? Logically?

I mean whats logcal about that? Why not just skip to the part where you guys live forever in Eden?

Live forever in Eden?

Whatever floats your boat.

(Btw how about your Ma and Pa? Logically speaking I would say they had something to do with you being alive too?)

Of course this is the way God has set up nature for procreation of our species. It certainly works quite well and is very pleasurable! Thank YOu God for this!

So God made up sex? How very inventive of him. All types would you say?

Regards
Victor

 

[Grym]

I forgot to mention. It is not something made up that people in genereal spend more time longing for things they want rather than enjoying the things they have. Is it?
ProdigalSun;11763696:

This is because we are physiacally seperated from God. Our spirit longs to be with God. In a sense there is a void that we try to fill. Many people believe that if we fill that longing with things of this world it will stop the longing but it only works for a short time and then the void is back. We need to fill this ovid witht he things of God and that void certainly grows fuller giving us more Peace. Peace of Mind, Body, and Soul. This is how you stop the longing for things of this world.

Peace!

Oh then you* do agree* that the world is generally full of people that most of the time are dissatisfied and that Buddhism is hence right on this? Nice to see that I have changed your mind on this.

/Victor

 

[Grym]

You can not prove that he was never reborn. Maybe if fooled himself as well as all of you and came back as a gnat! Maybe by now he has worked himself up to a 6 point elk. He could even be the one I have hanging on my wall. eeek!

Again I am astounded by your hung-up-ness on reincarnation. But a serious answer is that the self that is reborn is exposed for what it is already in this life. And when you get there there is nolonger something that can be reborn. Hence if there is reincarnation or no reincarnation* there still is nothing* that can be reborn.

See simple, logical and elegant. Like all of the Dhamma.

/Victor

 

[Grym]

Originally Posted by Grym View Post
Well because Christianity does not respect the animal life and nature the way Buddhism does is one of the reasons Buddhism is more logical than Christianity. That is a rediculous assumption and not logical at all!

Just look at what we are doing to the planet and animal farming is one of the big reasons the planet is going downhill. No it is not!
See I can make a statement too!

/Victor

Lol!

I never thought you were gonna fall for that one anyway.

Cheers
Victor

 

[ProdigalSun]

We both agree that God used to object to some animals being eaten in the past. I have no problem with God changing His mind over the rules.

The rule of thumb for Buddhists is that if you do have to kill an animal, then the smaller the less bad. All killing is bad, but some killing is worse than others. Killing a human is worse than killing a mouse.

rossum

Why? Because it is smaller? Would killing an adult Human be worse than killing and Infant Human? the infant is smaller. What does size have to do with the dignity of the animal?

 

[eddie_too]

natural religions and man-made religions are necessarily incomplete and contain errors.

that is not true of the RCC which is a supernatural (established by God) Church.

all natural or man-made religions agree that their founders possessed only one nature. that nature is a human nature.

the RCC was created by a divine Person who had two natures. the nature of Perfect and Infinite Being and human nature.

what typically occurs when this distinction is made to members of man-made or natural religions is for those members to change their teachings and to begin claiming that their founders also had two natures. the problem is of course that until these types of relgionists met a RC or a member of most other christian sects, the concept of one person and two natures never existed in their religions or in the teachings of their founders.

 

[ProdigalSun]

Ah but can you prove that? I mean logically?

So please do present your arguments by all means so we can have a laugh together.
Reincarnation is illogical for one there is no proof of it happening ever. How can a human come back as a gnat. It is so illogical that my stomach hurts laughing about it.

Ah but can you prove that? . Sounds pretty illogical to me, more like a James Bond movie. You only live twice? Eer btw does this mean you do belive in reincarnation? Ahh no I do not believe in reincarnation!

Are you talking about your belief in limited two time reincarnation? Yes it seems like a bit of disordered (unlogical) thinking going on there. Frankly I do not understand why you keep bringing up reincarnation? Its very central to your belief I am guessing? You see me myself do not get hung up on things that can not be proven. Reincarnation does not exsist. This is from yur belief not mine.

And guess what. You are gonna get sick, grow old and die. Congrats for having such a generous God and just remember to say “Thank You God” next time you catch the flu.

Yeah for thats very logical to bestow sorrow, grief, pain and death on his creations when he according to you is so full of love for the same? How do you explain that please? Logically?
The Physical world is very logical and understandable where would we be witout it?

I mean whats logcal about that? Why not just skip to the part where you guys live forever in Eden?

Whatever floats your boat. This was a question back to you, hence the question mark. It means I’m not understanding your reference to Forever in Eden??? Not sure what this means. I do have a nice boat though.

(Btw how about your Ma and Pa? Logically speaking I would say they had something to do with you being alive too?)

So God made up sex? How very inventive of him. All types would you say? Of course he did. He is the authour of everything. Unfortunately we as humans with free will have an uncanny ability to take something that is pure and good and louse it up.

Regards
Victor

 

[ProdigalSun]

ProdigalSun;11763696:

I forgot to mention. It is not something made up that people in genereal spend more time longing for things they want rather than enjoying the things they have. Is it?

Oh then you* do agree*

that the world is generally full of people that most of the time are dissatisfied and that Buddhism is hence right on this? Nice to see that I have changed your mind on this.

/Victor
Changed my imnd on what? The fact that our soul desires the Lord and until we are with him in heaven we will always long for him… I didn’t konw that was a buddist idea.

The Church teaches that all world religions including atheism and Buddism can have some truth even if that truth is incomplete. For instance Buddism is correct that people seek things to satify and sulfil there lives with materials. This is a very basic observation that most grade 3’s can grasp. Where you go off the rails is what you think actually fills this longing. You think nothing fills it but the church teaches that only when we are with God that are hearts will be at peace!

 

[rossum]

Why? Because it is smaller?

It was a rule of thumb, it is not a set moral rule, like avoiding pork or shellfish was.

Would killing an adult Human be worse than killing and Infant Human?

In general, no.

What does size have to do with the dignity of the animal?

Smaller animals can breed more quickly and hence replace their lost population more easily. The Buddha was an ecologist before ecologists were invented.

rossum

 

[eddie_too]

what we know about the buddha was written hundreds of years after he allegedly lived.

you will notice from the commments written here by self-identified buddhists that buddhism has few, if any, universally accepted teachings.

buddhism is an honest attemtpt by sinful mankind to know and understand divine mysteries. it is nothing more than that and nothing less than that.

judaism-christianity is God’s attempt to help sinful mankind understand the divine mysteries.

buddhism has no concept of salvation or redemption. sins are of minor, if any, importance to buddhists.

since sin does not exist for a buddhist, universal justice is an irrational concept.

i understand that buddhists like to try and translate their multitude of subjective beliefs in to a christian perspective, but the christian teachings were completely foreign to the buddha because he preceded them.

what todays buddhists know of buddha comes primarily from documents written down many generations after the buddha died.

 

[ProdigalSun]

It was a rule of thumb, it is not a set moral rule, like avoiding pork or shellfish was.

In general, no. In General?

Smaller animals can breed more quickly and hence replace their lost population more easily. The Buddha was an ecologist before ecologists were invented.
Sounds pretty wishy washy to me? How do you know that Buddha was a ecologist do you have aany writings from him? A lot of what you and your companions have beeen saying does not add up. How do you know anything about what Buddha believed and did. If he was so detached from self and the world as you say he was in order to go to nirvenah I doubt he had much want to teach ya’ll about himself.



rossum

 

[rossum]

what we know about the buddha was written hundreds of years after he allegedly lived.

What we know about the Buddha was memorised by people who knew him while he was alive, and passed on orally for hundreds of years. The scriptures were only written down later. This is in common with many Indian texts, such as the Vedas, the Puranas and the Upanishads. They were too sacred to be written down.

buddhism has no concept of salvation or redemption. sins are of minor, if any, importance to buddhists.

Christianity has no concept of enlightenment or nirvana. Buddhism has no concept at all of sin; the nearest equivalent is unwise actions, that delay your own enlightenment.

since sin does not exist for a buddhist, universal justice is an irrational concept.

Since karma does not exist for a Christian, universal justice is an irrational concept.

what todays buddhists know of buddha comes primarily from documents written down many generations after the buddha died.

As I said, the date they were written was long after the date they were composed. The date of writing is not particularly relevant in the case of Buddhist scriptures. The date of composition is more important.

rossum

 

[ProdigalSun]

What we know about the Buddha was memorised by people who knew him while he was alive, and passed on orally for hundreds of years. The scriptures were only written down later. This is in common with many Indian texts, such as the Vedas, the Puranas and the Upanishads. They were too sacred to be written down.
I see… So why are they written down now?

Christianity has no concept of enlightenment or nirvana. Buddhism has no concept at all of sin; the nearest equivalent is unwise actions, that delay your own enlightenment. So here is one major error of your philosphy/religion.

Since karma does not exist for a Christian, universal justice is an irrational concept. On the contrary Christians undestand what real universal justice means not some abstract concept of it.

As I said, the date they were written was long after the date they were composed. The date of writing is not particularly relevant in the case of Buddhist scriptures. The date of composition is more important. Of course it is relevant, unless the truth of something is protected by the Holy Spirit (GOD) then they can not be quarunteed. Does not Budddhism teach that Humans are disatified and only seek self gratification. How do you kow that what was written done was not done out of self gratification and changed from the original for the purpose of self gratification?
Nope sorry can’t be trusted…!

rossum

 

[rossum]

In general?

Self defence and similar circumstances.

rossum

 

[rossum]

On the contrary Christians undestand what real universal justice means not some abstract concept of it.

Here is my understanding of the Christian concept of universal justice:

Action: steal $100. Consequence: an eternity in heaven or an eternity in hell, depending.

Action: murder one person. Consequence: an eternity in heaven or an eternity in hell, depending.

Action: murder 1,000 people. Consequence: an eternity in heaven or an eternity in hell, depending.

In these cases, “depending” varies between Christian denominations, and includes things like confession, repentance, faith in Jesus, predestination, baptism and others.

Please indicate where I have erred.

rossum

 

[ProdigalSun]

Here is my understanding of the Christian concept of universal justice:

Action: steal $100. Consequence: an eternity in heaven or an eternity in hell, depending.

Action: murder one person. Consequence: an eternity in heaven or an eternity in hell, depending.

Action: murder 1,000 people. Consequence: an eternity in heaven or an eternity in hell, depending.

In these cases, “depending” varies between Christian denominations, and includes things like confession, repentance, faith in Jesus, predestination, baptism and others.

Please indicate where I have erred.

rossum

If you could call it an error it would be your child like understanding of the relationship between Sin, Repentance and forgiveness. If you would like to take some time to learn the truth about these things with an open heart I do not see why the Holy Spirit would not hellp you to understand the Love of Christ for us and why he choose to become man and Die for our sins so that we may live with him in heaven. Christ loves all of us and wishes for all us to join him. It is up to us to say yes to him. He will do nothing without our consent.

Peace!