Announcement

Collapse

General Theistics 101 Guidelines

This area is open for nontheists and theists to interact on issues of theism and faith in a civilized manner. We ask that nontheist participation respect the theistic views of others and not seek to undermine theism in general, or advocate for nontheism. Such posts are more suited for and allowable in Apologetics 301 with very little restriction.

The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

How's this sound?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Paprika View Post
    All is illusion.
    Yeah I guess that's anther thing that makes me uncomfortable about it, there's no ultimate truth about what you're experiencing, it's all pretend.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
      Yeah I guess that's anther thing that makes me uncomfortable about it, there's no ultimate truth about what you're experiencing, it's all pretend.
      Suffering results from clinging on to the illusion.

      Enlightenment comes from acceptance: all is illusory and meaningless. Embrace this truth, and you shall transcend everything.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Paprika View Post
        Suffering results from clinging on to the illusion.

        Enlightenment comes from acceptance: all is illusory and meaningless. Embrace this truth, and you shall transcend everything.
        That would mean love is also an illusion, what kind of existence will you transcend to without love? Buddha and also Jesus taught that unrealistic desires like want of fame and fortune lead to much unnecessary suffering. Healthy desires like wanting to have love and compassion for people lead to less suffering.

        It's probably more practical to focus on ridding ourselves of unhealthy desires that cause us to chase after illusions, and to accept the reality we do have. For example if most people think being hungry is just an illusion and they try to starve themselves, they're probably going to end up with some unnecessary suffering. Buddha accepted that reality, ate, and got Enlightened.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
          I was being serious, mostly, critiques were requested. Where, "He pretends that he is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, plants, all the rocks, and all the stars." If what you believe is actually a god pretending to believe something because he's pretending to be you, how would you ever know what you really believe?
          Okay, I think I got it.
          Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Kelp(p) View Post
            The difference though, is that Jesus remains a man at the same time as He is inhabited by God and most Christians would say he is still is a godman eternally.

            As I understand it, Hinduism and Buddhism don't allow that. Rama was not always aware that he was an avatar of Vishnu. It had to be revealed to him by Indra. When Rama died, Vishnu ceased to be Rama. Vishnu would latter be born as Krishna.
            I agree that though religions may appear to be similar in their generalities...they differ in their details and nuances......
            Hinduism is much too diverse and therefore difficult to discuss....but in some Hinduism, Atman (soul) is Brahman(God) therefore it (soul) is eternal...so,.... all human beings are (potential) "godmen"........
            Some Hinduism differentiates between Atman (soul) and Prana (life-force), others don't.....

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by siam View Post
              I agree that though religions may appear to be similar in their generalities...they differ in their details and nuances......
              Hinduism is much too diverse and therefore difficult to discuss....but in some Hinduism, Atman (soul) is Brahman(God) therefore it (soul) is eternal...so,.... all human beings are (potential) "godmen"........
              Some Hinduism differentiates between Atman (soul) and Prana (life-force), others don't.....
              Point taken.
              O Gladsome Light of the Holy Glory of the Immortal Father, Heavenly, Holy, Blessed Jesus Christ! Now that we have come to the setting of the sun and behold the light of evening, we praise God Father, Son and Holy Spirit. For meet it is at all times to worship Thee with voices of praise. O Son of God and Giver of Life, therefore all the world doth glorify Thee.

              A neat video of dead languages!

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Kelp(p) View Post
                To me it sounds depressing. I don't know if I'll ever understand the Hindu and Buddhist hatred of differentiation and duality. Getting rid of suffering by giving up one's independent existence seems like curing a migraine by shooting oneself in the head.

                It also sounds extremely lonely. I don't know about you, but I don't want us to be the same person. If we're the same person then we can't be friends.
                Curious, I have studied Hinduism and Buddhism for many years, and never found them to hate anything.

                I have been a fan of Allan Watts since the 1960's, I will comment more on Allan Watts.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by siam View Post
                  This Alan Watts seems to be a really bad communicator......if what he is trying to explain are the (original) concepts of Atman/Avatar (Hinduism) and Tathagatagarba (Buddhism).
                  Careful with trying interpret Allan Watts specifically, because in a parts of his writing he ranges to very not serious, to sarcastic and ironic in an effort to get people to think and does not follow the deep warn grove of the many possible choices some call their 'One true path.'
                  .
                  Allan does not follow a literal linear logical line of reasoning, and sometime he does not mean what he says.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    Curious, I have studied Hinduism and Buddhism for many years, and never found them to hate anything.

                    I have been a fan of Allan Watts since the 1960's, I will comment more on Allan Watts.
                    Hatred was too strong a word. I meant their rejection of it. In my admittedly limited knowledge, they seem to label duality as the fountain of all pain and suffering. "Realize that all is one and then you will be free of desire because you already have all that you need," things like that (that wasn't a quote of anything, just my attempt to sum up the teaching as I understand it).

                    Note: I'm not saying contentment and fulfillment is a bad thing. It's something I try to practice myself.
                    O Gladsome Light of the Holy Glory of the Immortal Father, Heavenly, Holy, Blessed Jesus Christ! Now that we have come to the setting of the sun and behold the light of evening, we praise God Father, Son and Holy Spirit. For meet it is at all times to worship Thee with voices of praise. O Son of God and Giver of Life, therefore all the world doth glorify Thee.

                    A neat video of dead languages!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                      Curious, I have studied Hinduism and Buddhism for many years, and never found them to hate anything.

                      I have been a fan of Allan Watts since the 1960's, I will comment more on Allan Watts.
                      Explain Hindu and Buddhist violence in the world. You speak only theoretically. You ignore what is going on in the world.
                      Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        Careful with trying interpret Allan Watts specifically, because in a parts of his writing he ranges to very not serious, to sarcastic and ironic in an effort to get people to think and does not follow the deep warn grove of the many possible choices some call their 'One true path.'
                        .
                        Allan does not follow a literal linear logical line of reasoning, and sometime he does not mean what he says.
                        "One true path"?---In a time of Global identity crises, and changing national circumstances....an exclusivity in Eastern religious traditions may be prominent....but, IMO, traditionally Eastern "religions" have been more elastic.....In that sense, the saying of the Rig Veda---"Truth is One, the wise call it by many names" may represent the traditional (elastic) world-view of Eastern "religions".....and certainly, the diversity of Hinduism.......?.......

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                          Explain Hindu and Buddhist violence in the world. You speak only theoretically. You ignore what is going on in the world.
                          I am not sure of the connection you are looking for here equating conflict and violence in history related to the statement ', . . the Hindu and Buddhist hatred of differentiation and duality.' First. violence in the world is a very human thing throughout history for many reasons not related to this statement. Second, The reasons for violence in the Vedic and Buddhist cultures could be hardly be equated with 'I'll ever understand the Hindu and Buddhist hatred of differentiation and duality.' by the evidence in history. Third, Buddhism is the least violent in history then any other religion of the world. Fourth, The history of violence in the Vedic and Buddhist countries and regions of the world are mostly directly related to the history of invasion of Islam and western colonialism.

                          An added note is that much of the conflict and violence in Africa and the Middle East can be traced back to colonialism, and the artificial colonial divisions of boundaries that became boundaries of countries, mixing and dividing different religious and ethnic groups for manipulation, divide, conquer and control resources.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            I am not sure of the connection you are looking for here equating conflict and violence in history related to the statement ', . . the Hindu and Buddhist hatred of differentiation and duality.'
                            He isn't. He's connecting it to your statement,

                            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            Curious, I have studied Hinduism and Buddhism for many years, and never found them to hate anything.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by siam View Post
                              "One true path"?---In a time of Global identity crises, and changing national circumstances....an exclusivity in Eastern religious traditions may be prominent....but, IMO, traditionally Eastern "religions" have been more elastic.....In that sense, the saying of the Rig Veda---"Truth is One, the wise call it by many names" may represent the traditional (elastic) world-view of Eastern "religions".....and certainly, the diversity of Hinduism.......?.......
                              This is interesting, but I am trying address Allan Watts view and how he writes.

                              In addressing the above statement, the problem addressed by Allan Watts, which I agree, remains that clinging to ancient world paradigms at the exclusion of others remains a problem in both the east and the west as is commonly addressed in the theme of Allan Watts writings. This does directly translate to much of the nationalism, conflict and violence in both the east and west.
                              Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-14-2014, 10:19 AM.
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                                He isn't. He's connecting it to your statement,
                                Needs more explanation?!? As far as what he wrote he is if he is on topic.The problem with the statement is clear regardless
                                Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-14-2014, 03:51 PM.
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X