What can you say about the following claims?

[rossum]

Since you don’t know, don’t care, or find it irrelevant which fifth-dimensional first Creator created the Universe, then why not choose the religion where the great sacrifice of laying down one’s life for spouse and kids will produce True, romantic, sacrificial, Love to serve as an example for others??? Buddhism seems effective to produce enlightened glee for self, but what compelling reason exists in Buddhism that would compel a person to place others ahead of self??? Do you have kids? How many?

You would do well to study more about Buddhism before talking about what Buddhism says. In particular read the story of the Bodhisattva and the hungry tigress.

Why do you follow a religion whose founder only fed 5,000 people? The Bodhisattva Vimalakirti fed 80,000 people from a single bowl of rice.

rossum

 

[ManOnFire]

You would do well to study more about Buddhism before talking about what Buddhism says. In particular read the story of the Bodhisattva and the hungry tigress.

Why do you follow a religion whose founder only fed 5,000 people? The Bodhisattva Vimalakirti fed 80,000 people from a single bowl of rice.

rossum

He sacrificed his human life so that the hungry tigress wouldn’t eat her young? Interesting. If he were Catholic, he probably would have fallen madly in love, had a few kids with his wife, and fed his family with the tigress. But, to each his own.

The soul food has fed billions.

 

[Douglas_Kraeger]

I suspect we are not going to agree on this.
I do not see where you have provided any evidence or reasoning to try and show that my explanation, that God is doing everything, always, we just do not see it all, at this time, is not possible. If the Catholic teachings that 1. All things maintain their existence in Christ and 2. We shall be like Him because we shall see Him AS HE IS, if these are both true and “all things” does mean all space and all times AND partial knowledge does cease and we are given the grace of presence at all points of space and time, and we shall be there for the sapling and for the mature tree, always present to all things, and we shall see thereis no change because we shall always see God doing all He does at “once”.
You and I see “change”, we see different things at different times, this does not prove that God changes, only that we, now, see change. You keep repeating that we see change and do not address the possibility that my explanation is possible, almost as if you do not want to consider the possibility that your understanding of your perception of the world is not 100% correct. Remember what you said early on in this thread about mental images of the world all being in error and then add to that our understanding of those mental images may also be in error. Do you admit that it is possible, that even though you see “change” at this time, if I am correct, then in the end we shall see how there is no change in God? Do you claim that I can not be correct? Why not?

Both deny your particular version of God. Is Christianity atheist because it denies Zeus, Durga, Amaterasu etc? Are Judaism or Islam atheist because they deny the trinity?

I believe it was Plato who said It is obvious that there can only be one true GOD, any other arrangement can not be true God. It seems that you do not make a distinction between the ONE TRUE GOD and many “gods” (therefore no one TRUE GOD). That muslims, Jews, and Christians try to worship the One TRUE GOD, they can not be cnsidere atheist , and I do not understand why you would ask sucha question. This is a similar issue whe you say you have an objective morality, but your definition of “objective” is not the same as most people’s, you say it is only something outside of yourself (the subjective opinions of others), not truly objective as most people use it as “true no matter how many individuals do not agree”.
Sin is a Christian concept, not a Buddhist one. The closest Buddhism comes to “sin” is “unwise action”, which is rather different, and will not support the argument you are making. Arguments from sin will only be meaningful to Christians.

  As to your question for Manonfire, "Why do you follow a man who only feed 5000 people?" Because He died on a cross and rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. He suffered when He has the power to not suffer, to show us true love.The man who sacrificed his life for the hungry tigris is a story that shows a shadow of the love that Jesus shows for all sinners.   Your statement concerning "sin being a christian " concept is also not quite accurate. Sin is a concept that all who believe in a True Creator God accept. They know there are absolute shoulds and should nots. They know that parents should do all they can to help their children love the whole truth with their whole heart, mind, soul and strength.         Do you agree?                        They know there are absolute moral responsibilities and obligations and some rights that each persn has, not from the government, but that each person has from The Creator and if there is no Creator, there can be no absolute rights or wrongs there can be no sins, only the law of might makes right, the law of the jungle.

You said in a post,"I am not enlightened, but the Simsapa sutta, above, tells us that the Buddha knew a lot more than he told us. The Buddha was certainly aware of the Abrahamic God and furthermore told us of the situation and true status of that God in the Brahmajala sutta. The Abrahamic God cannot deliver on what He promises, though He does sincerely believe that He can. He is mistaken. All the heavens, and that includes the heaven run by the Abrahamic God, are temporary. A temporary heaven obviously cannot provide permanent happiness. Searching for permanent happiness in any temporary place is one of the errors Buddhists should avoid.

I responded,“Your bottom answer is, “Buddha believed and said it, you believe it, that settles it” But, what if the buddha was in error?”

You do not address my last point. Also, I do agree with your statement, “Searching for permanent happiness in any temporary place is one of the errors Buddhists should avoid.” That is why I try to follow Jesus Christ as closely aspossible because He rose from the dead and has the powerto give all eternal happiness (even though your buddha denies this without proof).

Your answers, or rather your lack of addressing (implicit, although not intentional, evasion of) the crux of my responses, seems to indicate that you do not have good answers to my positions, and rather than address them, you place your trust in a man who died, and did not rise from the dead by His own power. Why would you place your trust in such a wimpy founder?

rossum

 

[sinnerdexter]

Error 1: There’s no such thing as absolute truth.
Truth is conformity of mental images and ideas with what is “out there.” If two people see a dog, one might say, “That is a dog,” while the other says, “That is a fox.” The first statement is true because it conforms to reality; the other is false because it does not. Such realism is the normal human reaction to reality, the natural position of the human mind and indispensable for avoiding skepticism.

And what if one of those two people are crazy? If one person sees a man who is out to get him and another person next to him sees nothing, which one is right? What is the truth?

**
How could saying “there is no such thing as absolute truth” be absolutely true? It is a contradiction in terms.
**
Of course, just like saying God is the most evil thing in the world but also the most good, would be a contradiction. Of course, since you never said that that wouldn’t be a problem for you. But if you want me to defend the above statement you made, then I shall ask you to defend the above statement I made. Seem fair?

 

[sinnerdexter]

does 2+2=5 for this person? of course not, what they mean is that what they believe may be different than what you do, but that doesnt change what the truth actually is.

For what person? 2+2=5 for very large values of 2 (I have done this and verified it to be true). Also, there is no reason to have the value of 5 be IIIII rather than IIII. The only reason 2+2=4 is because of how we define 2, +, =, and 4. Define them differently and you get a different result.

 

[jmcrae]

For what person? 2+2=5 for very large values of 2 (I have done this and verified it to be true). Also, there is no reason to have the value of 5 be IIIII rather than IIII. The only reason 2+2=4 is because of how we define 2, +, =, and 4. Define them differently and you get a different result.

Yes, which is why language only works when we all agree on the same meanings for things.

 

[Abu]

Error 1: There’s no such thing as absolute truth.

sinnerdexter
And what if one of those two people are crazy? If one person sees a man who is out to get him and another person next to him sees nothing, which one is right? What is the truth?

Why should you bring in insanity to dispute truth? Sanity is the ability to face reality and to use our God-given reason from cause to effect in the natural moral law to acquire truth. The fact that we live in an ordered world created by God and endowed with reason means that He wants us to discover His laws.

The fact of Original Sin has clouded our intellects and distorted our wills for doing good, so God sent His only Son to redeem us and show us His Way to Him through His Church which has the fullness of His truth.

 

[mangy_dog]

These [claims] are a veiled version of the communist manifesto and the philosopies of Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, Hitler et al.

Communism is the [Red Beast] of the Apocalypse. There’s nothing to refute here.

Jesus Christ is the one, true Lord and God of all. He is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

The Catholic church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first pope…264 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI. And the gates of hell will never prevail against her

…surely not these 5 falsehoods designed by Lucifer himself and candy coated throughout the ages to suit each generation differently.

 

[Tuno]

1. There’s no such thing as absolute truth. What’s true for you may not be true for me.

God is Absolute as ALL. Everything else is relative and has relative value insofar as it points to the Allness of God as an experience…

1. Christianity is no better than any other faith. All religions lead to God.

Neither religions nor non religions lead either to or away from God. That is all makework until one Knows God IS. Everything else is ad hoc perception and interpretation until THAT is Known.

1. I don’t need to go to Church. As long as I’m a good person, that’s all that really matters.

The “church” is always that structure of heart and mind together that acknowledges God as the Source of every good and perfect gift by living as the Great Commandment, The Golden Rule, and in Self inquiry.

1. You don’t need to confess your sins to a priest. You can go straight to God.

All actions have their direct and perfect consequence. Experiencing that, one might go to someone who evidences that they live as Love and ask for guidance.

1. Dissent is actually a positive thing, since we should all keep our minds open to new ideas.

To be open minded is to allow thoughts to come and go without claiming ownership, while watching which ones are attributable to an Ideal, and giving attention to those. Then one finds Life to be always New. That promotes interest in innovation and creativity sponsored by Wonder, which might appear as dissent to sticks in the mud.