The Chain of Infallibility

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Are you saying imperfection is enjoyable ... for the disciples or for the deity?

It confuses the disciples, and casts doubt on the perfection of the deity.

Without doubt we would be automatons.
The only way that joy for both disciples and deity can exist,
is for the imperfection of sadness and death to also exist.


Behold the flashing waters
A cloven dancing jet
That from the milk-white marble
For ever foam and fret
Far off in drowsy valleys
Where the meadow saffrons blow
The feet of summer dabble
In their coiling calm and slow
The banks are worn forever
By a people sadly gay
A Titan with loud laughter
Made them of fire clay
Go ask the springing flowers
And the flowing air above
What are the twin-born waters
And they'll answer Death and Love

With wreaths of withered flowers
Two lonely spirits wait
With wreaths of withered flowers
'Fore paradise's gate.
They may not pass the portal
Poor earth-enkindled pair
Though sad is many a spirit
To pass and leave them there
Still staring at their flowers
That dull and faded are
If one should rise beside thee
The other is not far
Go ask the youngest angel
She will say with bated breath
By the door of Mary's garden
Are the spirits Love and Death

 

[buddhist]

Without doubt we would be automatons.
The only way that joy for both disciples and deity can exist,
is for the imperfection of sadness and death to also exist.


Behold the flashing waters
A cloven dancing jet
That from the milk-white marble
For ever foam and fret
Far off in drowsy valleys
Where the meadow saffrons blow
The feet of summer dabble
In their coiling calm and slow
The banks are worn forever
By a people sadly gay
A Titan with loud laughter
Made them of fire clay
Go ask the springing flowers
And the flowing air above
What are the twin-born waters
And they'll answer Death and Love

With wreaths of withered flowers
Two lonely spirits wait
With wreaths of withered flowers
'Fore paradise's gate.
They may not pass the portal
Poor earth-enkindled pair
Though sad is many a spirit
To pass and leave them there
Still staring at their flowers
That dull and faded are
If one should rise beside thee
The other is not far
Go ask the youngest angel
She will say with bated breath
By the door of Mary's garden
Are the spirits Love and Death

I'm not talking about the imperfections of sadness or death. I'm talking about the imperfections regarding the preservation of its message to humanity.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I'm not talking about the imperfections of sadness or death. I'm talking about the imperfections regarding the preservation of its message to humanity.

Death and sadness and decay (of the message)
are the same Jungian essence, synonymous with 'Saturn'.
The message decays in the same way that the body does.
We forget, we lose; and we become confused and lost.
Without this process, we would be stagnant.

 

[buddhist]

Death and sadness and decay (of the message)
are the same Jungian essence, synonymous with 'Saturn'.
The message decays in the same way that the body does.
We forget, we lose; and we become confused and lost.
Without this process, we would be stagnant.

If there is a message from a perfect creator, I'd rather believe that it's rather important message was and is preserved in the Laws of Reality itself (unchangeable, fixed, and readily observable by everyone throughout space and time - the Dharmic Perspective), rather than the idea that it delivered it's message through an imperfect medium (humans, written documents, human languages, etc. - the Abrahamic Perspective)

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

If there is a message from a perfect creator, I'd rather believe that it's rather important message was and is preserved in the Laws of Reality itself (unchangeable, fixed, and readily observable by everyone throughout space and time - the Dharmic Perspective), rather than the idea that it delivered it's message through an imperfect medium (humans, written documents, human languages, etc. - the Abrahamic Perspective)

That must make me a Dharmic Christian!

Although I use the word Mystic (similar to gnostic), whereas the word 'sacramental' are those that follow the texts
rather than be immersed in the essence of the universe. I'm pretty sure all religions have those who replace God with Religion -
those who idol-worship a book instead of live its philosophy. Yes, the Abrahamic people are particularly prone to this
during our current era. But the Bible itself specifically tells them not to do this. What can be done?

 

[buddhist]

That must make me a Dharmic Christian!

Although I use the word Mystic (similar to gnostic), whereas the word 'sacramental' are those that follow the texts
rather than be immersed in the essence of the universe. I'm pretty sure all religions have those who replace God with Religion -
those who idol-worship a book instead of live its philosophy. Yes, the Abrahamic people are particularly prone to this
during our current era. But the Bible itself specifically tells them not to do this. What can be done?

I would suggest that the Bible should be understood as one people group's interpretation and perspective on "god", and not the "Word of God".

 

[BilliardsBall]

I see no difference. Can you prove that the love you have for your enemies actually originates from a "power from above"?


Again, I've addressed this in one of my prior posts.

I accept the Buddhist teachings because I can verify them for myself in the here-and-now. E.g. I can know for myself that love dispels hate. I can know for myself that practicing the Eightfold Path reduces my suffering. I can see for myself the Law of Kamma in action. I can see for myself the Law of Rebirth in action. Etc.

On the other hand, I do not know for myself that Jesus died on the cross, I do not know for myself that Jesus was the son of god, I do not know for myself that Jesus was raised from the dead, I do not know for myself that god spoke from a burning bush, I do not know for myself that god delivered commandments on a mountain that must be obeyed, I do not know for myself that blood sacrifices removes sin, I do not know for myself that prophecies were given and then subsequently fulfilled, etc. All of these are stories and claims are locked in a point back in time and space which 1. I cannot verify for myself, yet 2. I am demanded to believe that these things truly happened with blind faith in order to obtain "salvation".

In early Buddhism, practice of the Teachings themselves - things which I can know for myself - is of primary importance to achieve the highest goal (nibbana).

In Christianity (like other faith-based religions), blind faith in the true historicity of persons and events recorded in the Bible - things which I cannot know for myself - is of primary importance to achieve the highest goal (salvation).

It doesn't matter who or where the Teachings came from. They're called the "Buddhist teachings" because they originated from the "Buddha", a title for the Awakened, Enlightened One, whomever that might be.

Whether these enlightened teachings originated 1 million, 2500, or 100 years ago, whether from Gotama, or Jesus, or Zeus, or Thor, or Epicurus, or Lao Tze, a monkey, an ant, or even an alien from another planet - that person or animal is "The Enlightened One", and he, she, or it deserves the title "Buddha"; the corresponding teachings are thus the "Buddhist teachings".

You see no difference between being a loving person when in the midst of hateful people and being a loving person and feeling genuine love and affection for someone massacring your family as you watch?

You can verify for yourself, now, personally, that Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead. Surely you’ve heard if you knock it will be opened to you…

 

[BilliardsBall]

Knowing in advance that I will return as the ruler and judge of the Universe? Sure. Wouldn't you?

Ciao

- viole

No, I wouldn't. And the issue here is you are coveting the power as ruler of the universe, which Jesus did not covet--since we've also heard it profits little to gain the world by losing your soul. And no, Jesus was doing exactly what you're saying and prayed "Father, take this cup of suffering away!"

 

[BilliardsBall]

You rarely debate using facts, and a cardinal rule of serious debate is that one doesn't take beliefs and elevate them as if they were slam-dunk facts.

Beliefs are beliefs and facts are facts, and it's impossible to have a serious debate with one who cannot tell the difference between the two and act accordingly. The issue of "love" is taught in pretty much all religions, and many of them include love of even an adversary.

You continue insult people here when you keep claiming that you know more than they do about their own religion. Even after they explain it to you, you again resort to dissing what they know, and that is highly insulting.

I almost always debate facts. Unfortunately, several on here are now debating semantics. You even put "love" in quotes again, saying "it's pretty much all the same in all religions" when that is a stance that is incredibly demeaning to Judaism and Christianity, which are distinctly different than the rest in this area. You are saying in other religions God came down to willingly be tortured for people who remain his enemies eternally and go to perdition? Not so.

I never wrote I know more about Buddhism than Buddhist et al, but I call to question his understanding of how knowledge is safely acquired. I do know what Judaism and Christianity teach and will continue to serve as their apologist.

 

[Neo Deist]

I almost always debate facts.

But you left the Bible out of your statement. The Bible is infallible, so if a church 100% interprets the Bible accurately...

I have a few of questions:

1. Which version of the Bible do you refer to? I can guarantee that some versions are NOT infallible, like the NWT.

2. The original works, called the Autographs, have long been lost or destroyed. Many went up in flames when Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed much of Jerusalem. How do you know for a FACT that the version you read is infallible, when you don't have the originals to compare to? All we have are copies of copies, and those are subject to human error.

3. We are thousands of years removed from the culture of the Bible. Their idioms are lost on us. How do you reconcile that ancient age of mysticism and supernatural superstition with our advanced knowledge of science and medicine? You can't look at the Bible through a modern lense.



Perhaps the focus should be on God, not the Bible. Use that book as a guide, but to think that it is free from error is just silly.

 

[metis]

I almost always debate facts. Unfortunately, several on here are now debating semantics. You even put "love" in quotes again, saying "it's pretty much all the same in all religions" when that is a stance that is incredibly demeaning to Judaism and Christianity, which are distinctly different than the rest in this area. You are saying in other religions God came down to willingly be tortured for people who remain his enemies eternally and go to perdition? Not so.

I never wrote I know more about Buddhism than Buddhist et al, but I call to question his understanding of how knowledge is safely acquired. I do know what Judaism and Christianity teach and will continue to serve as their apologist.

Now you are just being dishonest as you have me saying things I didn't say nor imply. You are again being insulting and condescending towards those in other faiths, and I strongly dislike getting involved with people who do that. If this is what you denomination teaches you, then let me suggest you look for a different one.

 

[viole]

No, I wouldn't. And the issue here is you are coveting the power as ruler of the universe, which Jesus did not covet--since we've also heard it profits little to gain the world by losing your soul. And no, Jesus was doing exactly what you're saying and prayed "Father, take this cup of suffering away!"

And why did He ask that, knowing perfectly well what the course of action would be? Like that nonsense of God having foresaken Him. Did He not discuss this plan in advance with the other two thirds?

Ciao

- viole

 

[buddhist]

You see no difference between being a loving person when in the midst of hateful people and being a loving person and feeling genuine love and affection for someone massacring your family as you watch?

Both can be cultivated as a Buddhist - such examples of love are part of the Brahma-viharas in early Buddhism. In fact, equanimity in the face of such death and persecution is considered an even higher trait than love.

You can verify for yourself, now, personally, that Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead. Surely you’ve heard if you knock it will be opened to you…

How does "knocking" verify Christ? How does it verify that he rose from the dead?

 

[BilliardsBall]

I have a few of questions:

1. Which version of the Bible do you refer to? I can guarantee that some versions are NOT infallible, like the NWT.

**I study the Bible daily including so-called contradictions. The Bible is completely sufficient for life guidance in versions not altered in translation (like JWs changing specific verses).

2. The original works, called the Autographs, have long been lost or destroyed. Many went up in flames when Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed much of Jerusalem. How do you know for a FACT that the version you read is infallible, when you don't have the originals to compare to? All we have are copies of copies, and those are subject to human error.

**I'm aware that we think the autographs are destroyed. Perhaps I can give you a few verses to start, and then you will tell me how they were changed from the original autographs--an impossibility since you don't have the autographs, yes?

3. We are thousands of years removed from the culture of the Bible. Their idioms are lost on us. How do you reconcile that ancient age of mysticism and supernatural superstition with our advanced knowledge of science and medicine? You can't look at the Bible through a modern lense.

**Their idioms are not all lost to us. The Bible is the most studied/reviewed/explored documents of all history. But to say I can't "look at the Bible through a modern lense" is a fallacy if you only apply your statement to me and not to you.

Perhaps the focus should be on God, not the Bible. Use that book as a guide, but to think that it is free from error is just silly.

**Which God do you think is unable to preserve copies of a written document exactly, precisely, wholly?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Now you are just being dishonest as you have me saying things I didn't say nor imply. You are again being insulting and condescending towards those in other faiths, and I strongly dislike getting involved with people who do that. If this is what you denomination teaches you, then let me suggest you look for a different one.

Are you going to play this card again as you have in other threads or do you have a fact in evidence you'd like to debate/discuss?

 

[BilliardsBall]

And why did He ask that, knowing perfectly well what the course of action would be? Like that nonsense of God having foresaken Him. Did He not discuss this plan in advance with the other two thirds?

Ciao

- viole

You seem unaware that this was a prayer of Jesus, and that elsewhere Jesus explained (in John) that His prayers were done for the benefit of those listening/recording.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Both can be cultivated as a Buddhist - such examples of love are part of the Brahma-viharas in early Buddhism. In fact, equanimity in the face of such death and persecution is considered an even higher trait than love.

How does "knocking" verify Christ? How does it verify that he rose from the dead?

Your questions show you haven't knocked. What led you to pursue the truths of Buddhism but not the person of Jesus? (I'm asking you, this is not a rhetorical question.)

 

[Neo Deist]

**Which God do you think is unable to preserve copies of a written document exactly, precisely, wholly?

That is the response that I predicted, as it is often used when someone can't actually respond. If God gave us free will, then God does not have a hand in what we write or how we preserve His word. Thus biblical preservation is subject to human error. If you think that God controls every thing, then every murder, rape, robbery, starving child and every cancer patient is a result of God's will.

Now, go back and answer my questions...if you can.

 

[buddhist]

Your questions show you haven't knocked.

Red herring. I'll take your answer as saying that you do not know how "knocking" verifies Christ & his alleged rising from the dead.

What led you to pursue the truths of Buddhism but not the person of Jesus? (I'm asking you, this is not a rhetorical question.)

The truths of Buddhism are verifiable in the here (space) and now (time). The person of Jesus (or Buddha, or Krishna, or any other historical figure) is NOT verifiable in the here and now.

In Buddhism, the Teachings (Dhamma) are far more important than the Person (Buddha).

 

[viole]

You seem unaware that this was a prayer of Jesus, and that elsewhere Jesus explained (in John) that His prayers were done for the benefit of those listening/recording.

And none of those listening/recording realized the absurdity of Jesus asking about been foresaken when the whole plan was clear from the beginning?

Do logical absurdities provide any measurable benefit?


Ciao

- viole