Dao Hao Now
Active Member
Well, it’s certainly incorrect.
One merely needs to consider a bat.
Whether it amounts to a lie, I would think, depends on subjective factors.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Great Lie.
- Thread starter an anarchist
- Start date
One merely needs to consider a bat.
Whether it amounts to a lie, I would think, depends on subjective factors.
Let's start with your assumption that it's an analogy.
It's not an analogy. It's a parable.
Life would be boring without suffering and hence why some prefer to offload this on to others so as to make these other lives more interesting. 
But apart from this flippant comment, even if true to some extent, suffering seems to ride along with existence, and even if we can ignore physical pain - examples to show this - and as to much else simply being down to our responses to any suffering, the very nature of life (as pointed out by others) is towards survival, and as to such, conflict inevitably arises because there are such a variety of lifeforms.
As top predator, why would we think that our suffering means more than any others? Apart from any belief that we are in some ways so superior to all else. And where would this notion come from - oh gee, so many of the religions, and where such beliefs might just have come about to justify our superior stance. The superiority is not a view I have come to believe, and as to why I am less inclined towards having favourable views concerning religions - as seemingly being so anthropomorphically biased (Gods as projections of humanity).
To me, the elimination of suffering, if even possible, would likely lead to a very sterile world, the destruction of so many other lifeforms, the emasculation of humanity, and probably, the pointlessness of even existing. And this coming from a very non-religious viewpoint.
But apart from this flippant comment, even if true to some extent, suffering seems to ride along with existence, and even if we can ignore physical pain - examples to show this - and as to much else simply being down to our responses to any suffering, the very nature of life (as pointed out by others) is towards survival, and as to such, conflict inevitably arises because there are such a variety of lifeforms.
As top predator, why would we think that our suffering means more than any others? Apart from any belief that we are in some ways so superior to all else. And where would this notion come from - oh gee, so many of the religions, and where such beliefs might just have come about to justify our superior stance. The superiority is not a view I have come to believe, and as to why I am less inclined towards having favourable views concerning religions - as seemingly being so anthropomorphically biased (Gods as projections of humanity).
To me, the elimination of suffering, if even possible, would likely lead to a very sterile world, the destruction of so many other lifeforms, the emasculation of humanity, and probably, the pointlessness of even existing. And this coming from a very non-religious viewpoint.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I think it is talking about 1) Christ taking on the sins of the world, dying, and then rising again (it lists for instance, many who saw Him). Then it talks of 2) burying "seed" which is of course our bodies, and them being raised again after death and being glorified and "heavenized." It talks about all sorts of seeds and raising them as well. Then it talks about being victorious over death and the VERY FEW people who are alive at the time of the last trumpet blowing perhaps not actually dying. Finally, it says to believers to stand firm and do not let anything move us or you or whatever because we know that our labor is not in vain.
What do you think it's saying in a nutshell?
Last edited:
Dao Hao Now
Active Member
And a parable is a type of metaphorical analogy.
Now that we’ve gotten past the pedantry….
The obvious questions remain.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Have you ever allowed someone to put that to test?
Your pedantry accusation is ironic given the questions you asked about this parable.
I’ll be happy to answer questions regarding the parable and how it relates to pain and suffering for anyone who wishes to better understand it, but I won’t engage someone who is simply interested in ignoring the lesson wholesale and introducing “problems” by asking sophomoric questions intended to discredit it.
If the parable has no value to you and you’re not here to learn, move on.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
Indeed a tricky problem, but one we are far from addressing. As I stated earlier in this thread, the physicality of reality and suffering will be a final obstacle for future generations, but we have to get them there. There is so much work to do in order to eliminate suffering that doesn't factor in the physical nature of suffering. Much we can do presently to reduce suffering
Why would you assume I need a someone to test it?
an anarchist
Your local loco.
Perhaps I should say ...
"The inevitability, as well as the ceaselessness of suffering is a great lie. Through force of will, morality, evolution, and other unknown factors, we can eventually overcome suffering. "
an anarchist
Your local loco.
It is our (current generation) lot to suffer. We aren't at the point to where we can overcome suffering. What I am advocating is for us to clear the way for future generations to overcome suffering. That's why I said "eventually we can overcome suffering."
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Because talking is easy.
I agree wholeheartedly. But you didn’t ask me if I tested it. You asked me if I allowed someone to put that to the test. I just found that to be a rather odd question.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
OK but you gave no time line. I intend to live a long, long time. Maybe I will stop missing my late husband eventually. Oh but wait, I've already suffered his loss. So I guess I don't count. Meanwhile though, I do feel like losing him has made me a better person.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
I don't think any living person has what it takes to put that to an actual test, not when it comes down to themselves at least.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
Hell I doubt I will live to see the end of suffering, and I am only 25. I intend on outliving everyone on this site haha! Even if my plans to start a New Religious Movement centered around the ideal of the elimination of suffering goes perfectly, there is still generations of work to do I believe.
We all suffer loss. I am sorry for yours. But I reject that humanity has to perpetually suffer for our entire existence. I wholly reject that. You're a Christian, yes? Then you reject that too, and accept that it is our lot to suffer presently. Though we have different reasons for believing so. (I think it a Christian if I remember some of your postings correctly).
I believe the first tangible step in eliminating suffering is eliminating the institution of government. And that's just a first step. I'm sorry that we both have to suffer until I get the whole suffering issue sorted out ;-;
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I am a Christian.
You keep saying that you intend to eliminate suffering, but I don't believe that you mean that. What it sounds like you mean is that you want to eliminate perpetual suffering. Those are two different things entirely. For instance, it has been 3.5 years or even closer to 4 years since my late husband passed away, and I don't feel as if I am SUFFERING currently, even though I long for him sometimes. I don't go around longing for him every second of every day, but I swear I used to. I felt so raw right after it happened, and I don't feel like that now. But I still suffered and I may continue to suffer occasionally, who knows?
Thank you by the way.
Okay.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
Let me reiterate. I believe that suffering can be eliminated entirely, eventually.
I suppose I was tasked with this knowledge in a vision. A mystical experience. Perhaps it's just a idealistic hunch. Perhaps, even if impossible, the elimination of suffering is the most noble goal. So even if not possible, working towards it anyways is a must. But if people believe in the inevitability of suffering, they will for sure forever suffer.