Did Buddha claim to be a god & request to be worshiped? If not, will we see him in heaven?

[Grym]

Well, that’s like saying, “I know you mathematicians like to argue that 2 + 2 = 4. That’s why you end up on the losing end of argumentation with Grym.” :whacky:

Exactly! Since 2 + 2 does not always equal 4 in mathematics! For instanse using base 2 which you are so fond of? or why not Ring 4?

Sorry. Mr. Spock is a little before my time.

Oh my gosh! You are just 6 months old? . That would explain your limitations in the departments of logic, quantum physics and maths… .

imdb.com/title/tt1408101/

An absolute truth you’ve just proclaimed, Grym! Your dogmatic proclamation, is, indeed, true.

You are indeed coming around.

Is this Absolutely True?

It does appear to be another dogma you are proclaiming!

Yes this Dogma is Absolutley True. And no two ways about it!

So where do we go from here?

/Victor

 

[PRmerger]

Exactly! Since 2 + 2 does not always equal 4 in mathematics!

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enh...4/anigif_enhanced-buzz-8403-1361476000-14.gif

 

[Grym]

eerm. You are like 6 monthish old? Really? I thought you were joking. He he.

Seriously.

2 + 2 in base 2 is 100. And no “no”:s of your is going to change the minds of the scientific community on that point.

2 +2 in Ring 4 is 0. And the same as above applies to your “no” on that point as well.

.

Shall we move on lill sis?

Kindly
Victor

 

[PRmerger]

That would explain your limitations in the departments of logic, quantum physics and maths… .

Careful, Grym. You are not permitted to insult members here, even if you add a little smilie icon.

I would hate for you to be banned. It is good for you to be here and in dialogue with knowledgeable Catholics, so if I were you I might review some of the posting rules.

Yes this Dogma is Absolutley True. And no two ways about it!

So you are good with people professing dogmas and believing in dogmas.

So where do we go from here?

/Victor

I’d like to know where you think Catholicism gets it wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

2 + 2 in base 2 is 100. And no “no”:s of your is going to change the minds of the scientific community on that point.

I suggest you tell your 5 year old that 2+2 does not equal 4 and see how that works out for her.

Or try to use that as an engineer and tell your boss that you don’t need to follow the dogmas of math. See how far that takes you.

Or try to argue, when you are buying 2 apples and another 2 apples that it doesn’t equal 4 apples, and see how far that gets you.

 

[Grym]

So you are good with people professing dogmas and believing in dogmas.

As I said before. I am a live and let live kind of guy.

I’d like to know where you think Catholicism gets it wrong.

Why would I think Catholicism gets it wrong? I hardly know anything about Catholisism.

/Victor

 

[PRmerger]

As I said before. I am a live and let live kind of guy.

It doesn’t sound like it.

It sounds like you’ve got quite a few ideas about what is right and wrong.

Why would I think Catholicism gets it wrong? I hardly know anything about Catholisism.

/Victor

Then I suggest you explore the CAFs and ask some questions and learn!

 

[Grym]

I suggest you tell your 5 year old that 2+2 does not equal 4 and see how that works out for her.

Or try to use that as an engineer and tell your boss that you don’t need to follow the dogmas of math. See how far that takes you.

Or try to argue, when you are buying 2 apples and another 2 apples that it doesn’t equal 4 apples, and see how far that gets you.

0h but 2+2 equals 4 in Base 10 which you use without knowing it. And also in all bases above base 4. All that I have said are in line with the dogmas of math. Ask your math teacher or find a professor in any university near you.

I am an engineer. I did three years studiying Maths and Physics Then I got a Masters degree in Computor Science.



/Victor

 

[PRmerger]

0h but 2+2 equals 4 in Base 10 which you use without knowing it.

Oh, I know it, Grym.

And also in all bases above base 4. All that I have said are in line with the dogmas of math. Ask your math teacher or find a professor in any university near you.

Well, then go ahead and go to the grocery store and see if you can argue that the 2 apples and 2 apples that you’re buying don’t actually equal 4.

See how this will help you by saying “I am an engineer. I did three years studiying Maths and Physics Then I got a Masters degree in Computor Science.”

 

[rossum]

2 + 2 in base 2 is 100.

Not exactly. The symbol “2” is meaningless in base 2. You probably intended to write,

10 + 10 = 100 in base 2

In base 3, 2 + 2 = 10 is correct, since “2” now has a defined meaning.

Of course, if we use “+” as “concatenate” then 2 + 2 = 22. But this is a game we can play for a long time.



rossum

 

[Grym]

It doesn’t sound like it.

It sounds like you’ve got quite a few ideas about what is right and wrong.

Yepp of course I got ideas. You tend to when you are close to 40 years old.
But I also respect other peoples ideas and beliefs! That is the key to peace and I have learned that a man has to know his limitations!

Then I suggest you explore the CAFs and ask some questions and learn!

I am mostly here out of curiosuty as to what you guys know about buddhism. But I am learning about Catholisism too. Maybe in the future I will know enough to tell you were Catholisism is wrong!

 

[Grym]

Oh, I know it, Grym.

Well, then go ahead and go to the grocery store and see if you can argue that the 2 apples and 2 apples that you’re buying don’t actually equal 4.

See how this will help you by saying “I am an engineer. I did three years studiying Maths and Physics Then I got a Masters degree in Computor Science.”

Here is another thing that You get wrong. see most people think mathemathics describe the real world.

Most real Mathematicians are still trying to figure out exactly why people think that? .

 

[Grym]

Not exactly. The symbol “2” is meaningless in base 2. You probably intended to write,

10 + 10 = 100 in base 2

In base 3, 2 + 2 = 10 is correct, since “2” now has a defined meaning.

Of course, if we use “+” as “concatenate” then 2 + 2 = 22. But this is a game we can play for a long time.



rossum

I know Rossum. But if I had used 10 in place of 2 then I would have lost all hope of conveying the message wouldnt I?



/Victor

 

[weller2]

What you are saying is that a photon can sometimes be a particle, and sometimes be a wave.

More exactly, it is experiment which determines how the photon behaves. You cannot say that photon is one or another inherently. In Wheeler’s experiment you cannot say if the photon took route A/B, or both, because that is decided AFTER it takes the route. So the statement “the photon took route A/B” / “the photon took both routes” is nonsensical, because it would mean that the photon knows what the experimenter will do BEFORE the experimenter makes his decision. The classic explanation of quantum mechanics (Copenhagen) says that the photon is both a wave and a particle until the experimenter decides which question to ask.

If the experimenter asks, “Are you a particle”, the photon will say “Yes.”
If the experimenter asks, “Are you a wave”, the photon will say “Yes.”
And it is not lying… And there is no contradiction!

And it’s an interesting concept to propose that they were “limited” about their understanding of seeing someone crucified and then resurrected.

What was the last time you’ve seen a resurrected guy, that you claim to have a complete understanding of what he is?

Right.

What, exactly, did they get wrong?

They got nothing wrong in the same sense that the guy asking if photon is a particle gets nothing wrong, when he gets his “Yes” answer.

Assume, hypothetically, that a student of Buddhism (B) was present during interrogation of Jesus (J) by Caiphas (C). I posit that the dialogue would go like that:

C - Are you a Son of God?
J - Yes.
B - Are you (an incarnation of) Buddha?
J - Yes.

Buddha means “an enlightened one”. Jesus said “I am the light of the world”. I posit that both terms represent the same underlying concept, just like both particle and wave represent the underlying reality of the photon.

 

[PRmerger]

Not exactly. The symbol “2” is meaningless in base 2. You probably intended to write,

10 + 10 = 100 in base 2

In base 3, 2 + 2 = 10 is correct, since “2” now has a defined meaning.

Of course, if we use “+” as “concatenate” then 2 + 2 = 22. But this is a game we can play for a long time.



rossum

There you go.

 

[PRmerger]

Yepp of course I got ideas. You tend to when you are close to 40 years old.

Some things are always true, no matter who is the receiver or the observer, then.

And some things are always false, no matter who is the receiver or the observer.

:yup:

But I also respect other peoples ideas and beliefs! That is the key to peace and I have learned that a man has to know his limitations!

This is very Catholic.

 

[PRmerger]

Here is another thing that You get wrong. see most people think mathemathics describe the real world.

Again, I suggest you go to your bank and tell them, “The math you use here doesn’t describe the real world. Therefore, the amount that you say I have in my savings accounts is not real.”

See how they respond to you.

And when you try to sell your car, if someone tells you, “Your math doesn’t really describe the real world. I gave you the amount you asked for your car. It’s just I did it in a different reality and even if it appears to you that you received a whole lot less than you asked for, in my reality, it’s exactly what you asked for. So we’re good!”

I’m sure you wouldn’t accept that, Grym.

 

[PRmerger]

More exactly, it is experiment which determines how the photon behaves. You cannot say that photon is one or another inherently. In Wheeler’s experiment you cannot say if the photon took route A/B, or both, because that is decided AFTER it takes the route. So the statement “the photon took route A/B” / “the photon took both routes” is nonsensical, because it would mean that the photon knows what the experimenter will do BEFORE the experimenter makes his decision. The classic explanation of quantum mechanics (Copenhagen) says that the photon is both a wave and a particle until the experimenter decides which question to ask.

If the experimenter asks, “Are you a particle”, the photon will say “Yes.”
If the experimenter asks, “Are you a wave”, the photon will say “Yes.”
And it is not lying… And there is no contradiction!

But there would be a contradiction if you said, 'It’s a particle and not a particle at the same time."

What was the last time you’ve seen a resurrected guy, that you claim to have a complete understanding of what he is?

Oh, I never said that they had a complete understanding of him.

Point is: either they saw him dead and then resurrected, or they lied about it and went around the world proclaiming this lie, or they were confused.

If they were confused, what did they get wrong? Was it the part about him dying that they were wrong about? Or the part about seeing him alive again and eating with him and conversing with him and touching him?

They got nothing wrong in the same sense that the guy asking if photon is a particle gets nothing wrong, when he gets his “Yes” answer.

Can you apply this to the Resurrection?

Assume, hypothetically, that a student of Buddhism (B) was present during interrogation of Jesus (J) by Caiphas (C). I posit that the dialogue would go like that:

C - Are you a Son of God?
J - Yes.
B - Are you (an incarnation of) Buddha?
J - Yes.

Buddha means “an enlightened one”. Jesus said “I am the light of the world”. I posit that both terms represent the same underlying concept, just like both particle and wave represent the underlying reality of the photon.

Again, can you apply this to the Apostles and the Resurrection? Did they see him alive or no?

 

[Irishgal49]

Actually Buddhists do not worship Buddha. They do not consider him a God or even a prophet, Buddhists view Buddha as a man who achieved enlightenment. They venerate him as the ultimate teacher.

Buddhists do not believe in a God (as in a supreme being).

I was told by my son this is true. He also said though that he has a little different take on God. He believes that the “big bang” was God–and that God, in order to experience all that is and will ever be, blew himself into fragments and is literally in everything that exists and ever will. And when something or someone dies, that sliver of God that is what gives life goes back into God with all that it experienced and felt, etc. So you have a sliver of God and so do I. So that when I die, that piece that is God goes back into Him so that eventually all will be in God and God will be all. All that is throughout time is part of one common soul and that soul is God.

 

[weller2]

…]

Let’s cut the chase.

Where are you going with this?