Poll: Give up your religion to save a stranger

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Not really a good example. People can quit smoking cold turkey, easily, with little effort or negative consequences, just toss the pack out and not smoke anymore (yes, they can, I've done so myself), and it doesn't change who they are as a person. It is different than giving up a core part of WHO YOU ARE. Smoking cigarettes is not who you are. It is a habit. Like brushing your teeth or biting your nails or tapping your foot to music. You can consciously decide to not do those things as they are actions. Religion isn't an action. It is a whole system in place within you that affects both who you are and what you do. I think the main problem we are having here is definition of religion itself. You seem to think that religion is merely actions separated from actual belief when religion is actually the whole kit-n-kaboodle which encompasses BOTH belief and practice. If you think you have the ability to drop your religion at the drop of a hat then you have no true religion. You have motions you go through. You have habits. You don't have a religion.

But my thought experiment was "imagine if you had a cigarette religion", if you believed that your entire religious identity forced you to smoke.

There are people who believe life begins at conception. They attach a value to a zygote unsupported by biblical, historical, biological, or psychological precedence. Ted Cruz is only offering water to Flint if they say they are pro life (or something to that effect). For him, his religion is more important than the lives of CHILDREN as well as everyone else.

The Good Samaritan, as well, is an exercise in determining if you are willing to go outside your comfort zone to help others.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I agree with you that honestly held beliefs lead to actions.

But I again state that personally I would not lay down my beliefs to save a human life. The reasons for this are as follows:

1. In most cases one can save someone's life without denying their religion. In fact in many religions doing so is an act of love.
2. I believe God is an active being that is watching over us. Therefore I believe I should rather trust in God to sort something out than trusting my own judgment.
3. I believe in a choice between two actions, the better action is the one that brings about the most good or the least evil over the longest time.
4. Save someone's physical life (who will die again anyway) is less important than saving my spiritual life (which is eternal).
5. I must also consider that by giving up my religious beliefs and saving that one life, I might well go on to destroy many other lives (perhaps abusing, raping and murdering many others).

All in all I think the benefits of saving one person's life do not justify the consequences of giving up my religious beliefs.

Hmm. Thank you. I respect that.

Sometimes I disagree with; but, I'm sure you kinda skimmed a lot of my posts.

 

[Quintessence]

@Quintessence

Can I ask you something real quick? Does this statement make sense?

Seems like I'm talking in circles.

"We are what we practice. What we practice is our beliefs."

It's not how I would frame things, no. It more easily follows to say "we are what we practice, and practices are often informed by beliefs (and vice versa)."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's not how I would frame things, no. It more easily follows to say "we are what we practice, and practices are often informed by beliefs (and vice versa)."

That makes sense. I'd probably say, going off of that, "We are what we practice, and practices define our beliefs".

Is that a another way to understand it?

 

[Misunderstood]

Yes, I would to save another person. You say ' would you give up your religion (your life) to save someone. My faith says that my life is meaningless more or less, meaning there is not much value in it, so what is there to hold onto? Also, to give ones life to save another's soul is very good.

 

[JoStories]

Do you get my point?

How do you believe in God and the Buddha's teachings if your actions aren't what you truely believe in the two?

Do you get my point? I can and do believe in God without the need for actions. I don't know how to make that any clearer.

 

[JoStories]

I hear what you're saying; and, I don't understand it to really disagree.

Meditation, showing compassion, practicing mindfulness, right view, right action, etc are all verbs. These are things the Buddha taught. These are beliefs. How can we have right meditation as a belief if we don't meditate? What does that really mean to you if you just see it in mid-air as a belief?

What I emphasized, with the exception of right view, are ALL actions. They are NOT beliefs. They are the actions one would potentially do if one embraced Buddhism. However, one does not need any of those in order to believe in God. Belief in God requires no action whatsoever, if and unless, one decides to put their belief into action.

 

[JoStories]

I cannot separate action from religious belief. The Buddha did not sit in his home and believed that suffering should end without actually teaching/verb what suffering is. He actually did something. That action was his faith. His belief. Who he was. He he is.

To see religious belief as just thoughts in the mind about, say god, disturbs me. I can't believe in something I dont relate to practice.

The Buddha put his beliefs into action. He did not have to. He could have retained his knowledge and simply gone on to his next life or become fully enlightened with God. The action was not who he was, it was the culmination of what actions he chose due to his beliefs.

 

[JoStories]

JoStories, you say you believe in god. That's a nice statement, but how do I know this is actually your belief? How do I know that god is your life? How do I know that god is part of your lifestyle?

It is your practice.

The difference here is that I don't have to prove my belief to you at all. It is mine. Why do I have to prove my belief to you at all? It is not my practice to prove anything I believe to anyone. I have repeatedly said on this forum that I do believe in God but will not try to prove that to anyone because I can't. You seem to have the opinion that one can prove their belief by practice. How does a practice prove that there is a God? It is impossible to prove the existence of God and no practice on earth will do that. What you practice only proves that YOU believe in God, not that God exists. And I can believe in God without needing to practice at all. Nor do I have to prove my belief to anyone because the bottom line is that no one can prove God or their belief.

 

[JoStories]

You say you follow Buddhist teachings. You believe in the four noble truths and eight-fold path. These are not isolated teachings. These are practices.

There are many Buddhists who do not believe in God at all. How does your theory explain that one? I follow the Teachings of the Buddha because I feel they are the best route to becoming one with the Godhead. I could as easily follow Christianity or Hinduism or Islam. I don't because I feel the practices of those faiths take precedence over the true belief in God. This is particularly true in Orthodox Catholic Christianity where the rote practices are simply that, rote. People mouth the platitudes and go their merry way thinking they have appeased God and all is well with the world. What I practice of Buddhism is more about my journey and not about my belief in God at all. And in fact, I could set all those practices aside and still simply believe in God with no practice at all.

 

[JoStories]

@JoStories #216 is my overall point. You dont have to flip through the other posts if you dont want to. I just want you to understand what I am saying. Disagreeing with me doesn't make me wrong.

No one is right or wrong here. It is simply a disagreement on how we view this issue. And no amount of discussion will change that I see this very differently than you. But that does not mean you are wrong.

 

[JoStories]

I suppose we are all free to strive for whatever level of righteousness we are willing to achieve. I too believe I can learn from my mistakes God says:

And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them. - Ether 12:27​

God knows we have weaknesses and it is for our own good that these weaknesses are there. But note again how the end goal is to overcome them. That is my goal, to overcome all my weaknesses and to set aside all my sins. My goal is to have a pure heart and mind. Through the Lord Jesus Christ I know I will achieve it. If my God has the power to create this whole universe and order it, I believe it is a small thing for him to help me reach perfection. The only thing that stands between me and my perfection is me.

I don't disagree that the end goal is to overcome those weaknesses but where we differ is that we can only truly do that with multiple lifetimes and much learning. My weaknesses are there for me to learn from. I cannot simply set them aside. And of course, I don't believe in the concept of sin. So in that one, I cannot comment. IMO and my belief, one cannot attain a 'pure heart and mind' until one has become enlightened and that requires a very long time over many lives. And btw, how is God just 'your/my God'. I was not aware that God could be belong to one person.

 

[Thanda]

I don't disagree that the end goal is to overcome those weaknesses but where we differ is that we can only truly do that with multiple lifetimes and much learning. My weaknesses are there for me to learn from. I cannot simply set them aside. And of course, I don't believe in the concept of sin. So in that one, I cannot comment. IMO and my belief, one cannot attain a 'pure heart and mind' until one has become enlightened and that requires a very long time over many lives. And btw, how is God just 'your/my God'. I was not aware that God could be belong to one person.

As you are well know "my" doesn't always denote possession. My God is the one I believe in. He is obviously quite a different character from the God you believe in. In the end he is either more like my perception, your perception or neither.

My belief is that we can never attain a pure heart and mind without God's assistance, no matter how long we are given. And further I believe that with God's help it doesn't even require a lifetime to achieve it.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Do you get my point? I can and do believe in God without the need for actions. I don't know how to make that any clearer.

How?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What I emphasized, with the exception of right view, are ALL actions. They are NOT beliefs. They are the actions one would potentially do if one embraced Buddhism. However, one does not need any of those in order to believe in God. Belief in God requires no action whatsoever, if and unless, one decides to put their belief into action.

I don't feel you can put Buddhism in the same catagory as believing in god.

When I meditate, I come to my cushion with a blank mind. I don't think "Oh. I believe in peace. I want peace, so I am going to meditate." No. My action IS peace. My action IS my experiences. My action ARE my beliefs. If I tried labeling and "believing" (as defined by abrahamic traditions) before coming to meditate, I'm already out of the "Zen" state of mind. In my practice and faith, it does not work that way. If I am being compassionate, I don't "believe in"' compassion while siting in my house doing nothing. When I am compassionate, that actions is my belief-they are what I hold true. Is the action. Thoughts, pondering, and all that Draka define has nothing to do with it.

In belief in god, I learned and practice from a practice-focused religion. We believed in god or Christ not just because he saved us from our sins. Anyone can believe that and still, I dont know, go against Christ's teachings. Anyone can say they are Christian. If they believe it, is it true?

We believe in Christ because we were baptized.
We believe in Christ because we repented
We believe in Christ because we took commuion.

We believe in Christ because of our actions. I keep telling you that beliefs/actions are interconnected.

I see beliefs as actions. You don't. That doesn't mean I am wrong. We are expressing things differently.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The Buddha put his beliefs into action. He did not have to. He could have retained his knowledge and simply gone on to his next life or become fully enlightened with God. The action was not who he was, it was the culmination of what actions he chose due to his beliefs.

Oh. I totally disagree. Not because of my opinion, which is 100 percent agrees with the sutras, but the sutras themselves. Let me take my opinion out of this.

Christ emphasis we need to believe. He says we need to believe first and from our belief comes actions.

The Buddha emphasis that we need to act. He believes that the wisdom and knowledge we gain first will lead us to act.

In Christian point of view, I cannot see beliefs as actions because Christians believe that you can be a Christian doing nothing.

Buddhism, on the other hand, is an action-based religion. You can call yourself a Buddhist because you took the vows, that is fine. You can't call yourself a Buddha because those beliefs/wisdom/knowledge means Nothing without actions.

They are interconnected.

I dont understand how you can compare belief in god, which is based on belief (in most denominations) with following The Buddha.

On these notes above:

In my OP I am asking, can you give up your religion--your practices--to save another human being (this is for belief-based religions)

In my OP, I am asking asking can you give up your belief to save another human being. (this is for practice-based religions)

You would be under the first one. Can you give up what you do in order to save someone else?

You are not under the second one. Unless what you do is what you believe you cannot answer the question.

Which do you fall under?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The difference here is that I don't have to prove my belief to you at all. It is mine. Why do I have to prove my belief to you at all? It is not my practice to prove anything I believe to anyone. I have repeatedly said on this forum that I do believe in God but will not try to prove that to anyone because I can't. You seem to have the opinion that one can prove their belief by practice. How does a practice prove that there is a God? It is impossible to prove the existence of God and no practice on earth will do that. What you practice only proves that YOU believe in God, not that God exists. And I can believe in God without needing to practice at all. Nor do I have to prove my belief to anyone because the bottom line is that no one can prove God or their belief.

You're taking it personal. I didnt ask you to proove it to me.

If John believes in god, how would he show Jane that he believes if his belief is not interconnected with his actions?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You have an interesting faith. Anyone can show compassion, and other things the Buddha taught. Why call following the Buddha's teachings? The Buddha taught common-sense teachings. Personal preference?

There are many Buddhists who do not believe in God at all. How does your theory explain that one?

How does that have anything to do with what we are talking about?

Buddhist believe in deities. They don't believe in the Abrahamic god and no concept of a Creator.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No one is right or wrong here. It is simply a disagreement on how we view this issue. And no amount of discussion will change that I see this very differently than you. But that does not mean you are wrong.

True. It sounds like a huge confliction between our two beliefs. And what makes it more a conflict is we are both saying we follow the Buddha's teachings but for some reason, when you add god to it, in my point of view belittles what the Buddha's teachings are for. It's like using a car as a skateboard to go to the store. I mean, the both have wheels. They both have ways to gain momentum to get from one place to another. However, because of the nature of the two "mobiles", they just don't add up well.

In other words, anyone can have compassion, and all of that in which the Buddha taught without calling ourselves Buddhist. What part of the Buddha's teachings let's you say you follow the Buddha as well as God?

Mysticism or something?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@JoStories

In my opinion, you don't express your beliefs. You are the expression of your beliefs.