Announcement

Collapse

Comparative Religions 101 Guidelines

Welcome to Comp Religions, this is where the sights and sounds of the many world religions come together in a big World's Fair type atmosphere, without those delicious funnel cakes.

World Religions is a theist only type place, but that does not exclude certain religionists who practice non-theistic faiths ala Buddhism. If you are not sure, ask a moderator.

This is not a place where we argue the existence / non-existence of God.

And as usual, the forum rules apply.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Being a religion of peace

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by Jesse View Post
    Oh I see. So you would rather throw out baseless assumptions of what you think Christian's meant, instead of dealing with the facts of what they actually meant. I am not going to go into the Crusades, because if you can't even get the interpretation of a simple parable correct, I doubt anything you believe about the Crusades has any merit. Carry on then.
    I find know specific evidence of 'facts' of what they actually meant at the time of the 'parable.' Remember this is a parable and not a 'factual statement.
    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


    • #77
      Originally posted by siam View Post
      Exploitation for political purpose---Agreed...that was my point from the beginning....that those religions/philosophies that gain influence (political influence and control territories under them) such as Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Buddhism...such religions are exploited for political wars because religions offer meaning and that fits right in with politicians who want to go to war for political reasons but want to justify it as "meaningful" warfare....
      The politicians were Shinto in Japan and Confucian in China.

      Scripture---Again...agree. But there are passages and ideas in Buddhism that were misused for violence.....
      There is no significant misuse of scripture, just political domination and misuse by dominant Shinto in Japan, and Confucianism in China.

      Japan/Emperor---the Emperor was a puppet during the Shogunate period (as well as WW---the military simply exploited the idea)
      It does not make any difference whether the emperor was a puppet or not, or whether the military is in control or not, it remains Shinto. Militarism is a Shinto belief, not a Buddhist teaching nor concept.

      Buddhism and assimilation---Here I disagree with you...Buddhism assimilates so much so that it almost becomes a fusion...such as China with Taoism/Confucianism, Japan with Shinto, Southeast Asia with Hinduism...etc...
      Disagree here. Confucianism dominated China, and Shinto dominated Japan. The problem with Buddhism is its apparent passive nature, not assimilation or the misinterpretation of Buddhist scripture.


      There are areas where Buddhism has a vacuum....such as Kingship---the legitimacy for Kingship is filled with other religions/philosophies such as Confucian/Tao, Shinto, Hindu...(In Buddhism, Siddartha gives up his kingdom....not an idea that power hungry Kings are going to embrace....)
      Not sure where your going with this. It is confusing.



      Ahimsa(Non-Violence)---what is your understanding of the is issue?
      Ahimsa is ahimsa the dominant non-violent philosophy of Hindu/Buddhist belief. More dominant in Buddhism. Compassionate killing when referenced is for defense only.

      There are problems of militarism and Nationalism in Buddhist countries particularly in recent times, but by far the dominant history of Buddhism has not involved militarism and aggressive warfare.
      Last edited by shunyadragon; 05-13-2015, 11:20 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


      • #78
        Originally posted by Paprika View Post
        That's precisely your problem: you can't suspend your own beliefs to properly consider another set of beliefs.


        Is Allah not loving? Yet will he not judge unbelievers?


        The Kingdom does not originate from this world but it is for this world.

        If you are saying that my "Beliefs" (paradigm) colors the way I approach an NT text---I agree....that is how Christians also approach the OT text.

        "Judgement" process in Islam is different from Christianity....as is how the term "love" (Divine love) is understood.....

        What is "Kingdom"? is Kingdom and Judgement the same thing?

        Comment


        • #79
          @Shuny

          Non-Voilence (in Buddhism)---I meant how do you think about it as a philosophy? is it practical?....

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by siam View Post
            If you are saying that my "Beliefs" (paradigm) colors the way I approach an NT text---I agree....that is how Christians also approach the OT text.
            Nah, I'm not saying that they merely colour but warp.

            "Judgement" process in Islam is different from Christianity....as is how the term "love" (Divine love) is understood.....
            I don't care, really; my point is that they are not contradictory in Christianity analogously to how they are not contradictory in Islam.

            What is "Kingdom"?
            A domain ruled by a King.

            is Kingdom and Judgement the same thing?
            What do you think?

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by siam View Post
              @Shuny

              Non-Voilence (in Buddhism)---I meant how do you think about it as a philosophy? is it practical?....
              Yes, the principle like in the Baha'i Faith only allows for self defense, bans any form of aggressive violence, holy wars. I believe the concept of compassionate killing applies to self defense, and when necessary killing animals for food.
              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


              • #82
                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                Yes, the principle like in the Baha'i Faith only allows for self defense, bans any form of aggressive violence, holy wars. I believe the concept of compassionate killing applies to self defense, and when necessary killing animals for food.
                So, a Baha'i in Texas would have a tough time, where a legitimate reason for justified homicide is "yer honor, he just needed killin".
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  So, a Baha'i in Texas would have a tough time, where a legitimate reason for justified homicide is "yer honor, he just needed killin".
                  Actually we're ok in Texas, but in Iran . . .

                  I like Austin.
                  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


                  • #84
                    @ Shuny

                    Dharma (Morality/Ethics) as a social/civic legal system...

                    I can't find the link to it, but, an article I was reading, about the concept of Compassionate Killing made an interesting point that Buddhism was not designed as a civic/social system---it was designed for individual "liberation" (from Karmic cycle). So the concept of compassionate killing is concerned with the soul (and Karmic consequences) of both the actor of compassionate killing as well as the victim. Because of this vacuum, the concept can be abused when used in a political situation.....(such as defense of the country/community by Sinhalese Buddhists (Sri Lanka) against colonialism).

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by siam View Post
                      @ Shuny

                      Dharma (Morality/Ethics) as a social/civic legal system...

                      I can't find the link to it, but, an article I was reading, about the concept of Compassionate Killing made an interesting point that Buddhism was not designed as a civic/social system---it was designed for individual "liberation" (from Karmic cycle). So the concept of compassionate killing is concerned with the soul (and Karmic consequences) of both the actor of compassionate killing as well as the victim. Because of this vacuum, the concept can be abused when used in a political situation.....(such as defense of the country/community by Sinhalese Buddhists (Sri Lanka) against colonialism).
                      Your grasping at straws to justify a corruption scripture for non-compassionate killing. I already mentioned the problems contemporary Nationalism and political movements that are not remotely Buddhist in concept nor belief. The movements such as those in Sri Lanka are by far the exception in the history of Buddhism.

                      Your correct, Buddhism was never intended to be a theocracy centered belief as Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and was not intended to be civic/political in nature. Unlike western religions where the corruption of scripture and belief may be the case to justify an aggressive war. The belief in Buddhism is not used for the justification for an aggressive war or even rebellion as is the case in Sri Lanka
                      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