Which God is truthful?

[paarsurrey]

Go through the first paragraph of my post above. Do you disbelieve all these people? The Companions of the Prophet (the Sahaba)?

"On the contrary, if someone were to clearly deny any part of the account categorically mentioned in the Quran, he would be deemed to have gone beyond the fold of Islam."

Does Quran say that it was a vision, or you are adding this on your own? Modifying the word of Allah?

Quran is the first and the foremost source of guidance of Muslims, whatever the denomination.
Other sources are only believed if they don't contradict Quran. One has to point out origin of everything from Quran. Please
Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yeah, Isra and Miraj are mentioned in Quran and it does not say that it was a vision.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yeah, Isra and Miraj are mentioned in Quran and it does not say that it was a vision.

"Isra"

Isra and Mairaj are spiritual visions and have nothing to do with superstitions.
In Isra Muhammad was informed as to how Islam will be revived in latter days by coming of Messiah and Mahdi and the End Times Reformer of all revealed religions including the religion of Veda and Krishna. And it has taken place exactly.
Please
Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

That is the problem. Sons come, messengers come, manifestations come, mahdis come, but the world remains much the same.

 

[paarsurrey]

That is the problem. Sons come, messengers come, manifestations come, mahdis come, but the world remains much the same.

Because G-d has given free-will to the human beings in this world, the accountability will be in the hereafter. Please
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

Because G-d has given free-will to the human beings in this world, the accountability will be in the hereafter. Please
Regards

That is quite the arbitrary belief, with hardly any clear meaning, and all too often degenerates outright into thinly concealed arrogance and presumption to know better about other people's beliefs and destiny.

Besides, mutually exclusive variations on that theme occur in other revealed religions as well. Christians expect much the same to happen, except that the relevant entities will not be Muslim. I assume the Bahai are not too different, either.

Notably, not so much in Hinduism - which is one good reason to question your classification of it as a "revealed" religion.

 

[paarsurrey]

That is quite the arbitrary belief, with hardly any clear meaning, and all too often degenerates outright into thinly concealed arrogance and presumption to know better about other people's beliefs and destiny.

Besides, mutually exclusive variations on that theme occur in other revealed religions as well. Christians expect much the same to happen, except that the relevant entities will not be Muslim. I assume the Bahai are not too different, either.

Notably, not so much in Hinduism - which is one good reason to question your classification of it as a "revealed" religion.

It is a matter of revealed religions.
Well, Atheism are not affected, they neither believe in G-d nor in the hereafter. They are free to enjoy free-will, no compulsion.
Gospel of Buddha mentions, that Buddha went to heaven to meet his mother who had died.
It does reflect, however, that Buddha believed in the hereafter.
Please correct me if I am wrong. Please
Anybody, please
Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes, you are not correct. Buddha said that 'when Tathagata dies, even Brahma and Indra will not find him if they search for him'. Buddha was very strong on 'anicca' (non-permanence) and 'anatta' (non-substantiality).

Yeah, we have the free-will. So let us do things which are beneficial to others if we can and not things that give pain to others. This is social duty. One should not need the fear of God or hell to do this.

 

[LuisDantas]

It is a matter of revealed religions.
Well, Atheism are not affected, they neither believe in G-d nor in the hereafter. They are free to enjoy free-will, no compulsion.
Gospel of Buddha mentions, that Buddha went to heaven to meet his mother who had died.
It does reflect, however, that Buddha believed in the hereafter.
Please correct me if I am wrong. Please
Anybody, please
Regards

The Gospel of Buddha is an arguably misguided attempt at syncretism. It is not at all representative of Buddhism.

 

[Muffled]

Which God is truthful?
This is an internal subject of the believers from which-ever God/gods they select for themselves on their own choice and responsibility.
Dawkins and the like are sure laymen on Revealed Religion or God. Please
The believers of Revealed Religions consider the non-revealed religions, with the same group Atheism or the like, as superstitious, denying reality/Truth.
Unless of course if they justify their "no-god"/many gods position/no-position with positive and reasonable arguments without reference to the believers.
Right? Please

Regards

_______________
This thread was conceptualized from the following posts:
#55 Altfish
#56 paarsurrey
One many like to read these posts. Regards

I believe it is the one who speaks the truth.

 

[Muffled]

The gods are liars for they created us in their own image.

I don't see a lie in that. Working to clone a man out of a blood clot one must have some image of what man is. The scientists who put flesh on bones to show us what ancient man looked like are working with an image of what they think ancient man would look like.

 

[Muffled]

John 14:6
Jesus told him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.

I believe anyone can claim that but it seems to me that Jesus is what He say He is.

 

[paarsurrey]

paarsurrey said: ↑
It is a matter of revealed religions.
Well, Atheism are not affected, they neither believe in G-d nor in the hereafter. They are free to enjoy free-will, no compulsion.
Gospel of Buddha mentions, that Buddha went to heaven to meet his mother who had died.
It does reflect, however, that Buddha believed in the hereafter.
Please correct me if I am wrong. Please
Anybody, please
Regards

The Gospel of Buddha is an arguably misguided attempt at syncretism. It is not at all representative of Buddhism.

Images for Buddha went to heaven to meet his dead ...

I find that Buddha went to heaven to meet his mother who had died in many a sites belonging to Buddha:
"The king of this realm is called Indra. The Indra who was king at that time was also Buddha’s disciple and he invited Buddha to go there. So Buddha went to benefit his mother and also, at Indra’s request, to benefit the other gods living there. He stayed three months, and then returned on this day."
Buddha’s Return from Heaven Day - Kadampa Buddhism
So Buddha believed in after life. Right? Please

Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

No, he did not. It is the "new" Kadampa tradition (if it is new, then it is not tradition) that some one is trying to sell his Buddhism in the West. Good luck to him.

 

[LuisDantas]

So Buddha believed in after life. Right? Please

Regards

Honestly, I have no idea. I suspect he did not know whether he believed in afterlives either.

The vibe I get from his teachings is that he did not find the matter worth of consideration.

Or maybe I am just projecting, since I do not. Who knows?

 

[paarsurrey]

Honestly, I have no idea. I suspect he did not know whether he believed in afterlives either.

The vibe I get from his teachings is that he did not find the matter worth of consideration.

Or maybe I am just projecting, since I do not. Who knows?

But Buddha would have not gone to the heavens to meet his mother:

• If Buddha had not considered it worthwhile and Buddha would have not given it full consideration
• If Buddha had not believed in heaven
• If Buddha had not believed in afterlife
• If Buddha had not believed in reward for the good-people and punishment for the wrong doers
• This could not happen if Buddha had not believed in ONE to judge the people

Right? Please
Regards

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Statisticians are excluded, as they are not pure Mathematicians. They are mongrels.

That is absurd. A pure statistician is without a doubt a mathematician. They have to take many of the same classes, but they split off into a much greater focus on linear, probability and statistical mathematics.

The problem is not the pure statisticians; it is all the pseudo-statisticians; almost every field of science has to learn a little stats, some more than others. People who take maybe only 2 or 3 classes, but not all of it, and they certainty do not need to learn as much math as a pure statistician.

They learn enough statistics to do hypothesis testing, and some data analysis. With that limited knowledge too many of them do it wrong and give stats a bad name. Not to say all of them do it wrong, but enough of them do wrong that it is a recognized problem by American Statistical Association.

 

[Brickjectivity]

That is absurd. A pure statistician is without a doubt a mathematician. They have to take many of the same classes, but they split off into a much greater focus on linear, probability and statistical mathematics.

The problem is not the pure statisticians; it is all the pseudo-statisticians; almost every field of science has to learn a little stats, some more than others. People who take maybe only 2 or 3 classes, but not all of it, and they certainty do not need to learn as much math as a pure statistician.

Just having a little fun. The theory of accuracy in measurement is very Mathematical. Given a collection of data its important to minimize the error in estimating its character.

They learn enough statistics to do hypothesis testing, and some data analysis. With that limited knowledge too many of them do it wrong and give stats a bad name. Not to say all of them do it wrong, but enough of them do wrong that it is a recognized problem by American Statistical Association.

Yes, and they have dangerous tools. I have learned a tiny amount of R, so I know its like a magic wand. Anyone with a PC can be a holy terror.

 

[von bek]

• This could not happen if Buddha had not believed in ONE to judge the people

Right? Please
Regards

That does not necessarily follow. The Buddha teaches karma as a natural law, akin to gravity. In this system, a judge is not needed. I am not telling you I know this to be true, only suggesting a different way of considering the matter.

 

[von bek]

I wonder if the OP can conceive of the Supreme as a Goddess? I ask because I only see the names of male deities listed...