Paganism versus Christianity

[gord44]

Unfortunately, Buddha himself needed the Savior.

Which Buddha?

 

[juvenissun]

Well, I'll just object and say that I'm not pagan.

I see. It is a classification problem.

There are many improper names used in many classification systems. Basically, I treat these names as symbols. As long as the definition is clearly made, there should be little problem. I can see in this case, the definition of pagan has historical factors involved. It is not a surprise, but is unfortunate.

 

[juvenissun]

I figured that out over the last year. Thankful for the Amida Buddha and his compassionate vow to save all beings from their karma and unenlightenment. I hope you make that decision soon!

I thought in Buddhism (any branches), the only one who can save a person is the person himself. Is it not?

 

[Rajni]

and which of the world religions wouldn't be called pagan..??? sorry for the questions...

I've seen the term used to refer to religions outside of the
Abrahamic trio (Christian-Jewish-Muslim). That's pretty
much how I apply it to myself, even though much of my
spirituality still carries influences from my Christian/Catholic
background, the rest being influenced by Vaishnavism.


-

 

[gord44]

I thought in Buddhism (any branches), the only one who can save a person is the person himself. Is it not?

Not in Jodo Shinsu Buddhism. Teaches the opposite. That all beings (humans, gods, etc) in this age of dharma decline are completely incapable of saving themselves so they must rely on the compassionate vow of the Amida Buddha who said he would save all beings and bring them to his Pureland after death, where they would become Buddha's. All one has to do is say the Nembutsu a few times.

 

[Zoness]

Actually every human being needs the Savior. The need may not be apparent, but the reality does not change.

The need is certainly not apparent, that's for sure.

 

[juvenissun]

Not in Jodo Shinsu Buddhism. Teaches the opposite. That all beings (humans, gods, etc) in this age of dharma decline are completely incapable of saving themselves so they must rely on the compassionate vow of the Amida Buddha who said he would save all beings and bring them to his Pureland after death, where they would become Buddha's. All one has to do is say the Nembutsu a few times.

This is why I do not like Buddhism. It is changing with time and becomes obviously inconsistent. The whole system is obviously a product of human wisdom.

 

[awitch]

This is why I do not like Buddhism. It is changing with time and becomes obviously inconsistent. The whole system is obviously a product of human wisdom.

In a dynamic world full of dynamic cultures, a static religion will only become more irrelevant.

 

[gord44]

This is why I do not like Buddhism. It is changing with time and becomes obviously inconsistent. The whole system is obviously a product of human wisdom.

Yes. Dang those Jodo Shinsu hipsters. Everyone knows Buddhist theologies from the 1200's are just following today's trends.

 

[juvenissun]

In a dynamic world full of dynamic cultures, a static religion will only become more irrelevant.

Other things can change.
God should NEVER change.

 

[juvenissun]

Yes. Dang those Jodo Shinsu hipsters. Everyone knows Buddhist theologies from the 1200's are just following today's trends.

Is your thinking clear on that statement?
It demonstrates the serious flaw of a unstable religion.

 

[grasping the after wind]

The need is certainly not apparent, that's for sure.

I'm am curious about your statement. IMO it is very apparent that humanity is far from perfect and that there is something not quite right about us or we would not all be so self centered that we would be willing to cause others to be miserable if it meant we could e a little more comfortable. Are you so perfectly content with the state of the human condition that you find nothing unsatisfactory about it? If not, then how, other than from some kind of outside influence , a savior of one sort or another, could you see the situation improving.

 

[gord44]

Is your thinking clear on that statement?
It demonstrates the serious flaw of a unstable religion.

Sorry. I'll try to make my sarcasm more obvious next time! :-D

 

[awitch]

Are you so perfectly content with the state of the human condition that you find nothing unsatisfactory about it? If not, then how, other than from some kind of outside influence , a savior of one sort or another, could you see the situation improving.

No one is saying humans are perfect, but WE can improve our society. Well, at least we could if fundamentalist religions didn't hold us back so much.

 

[awitch]

Other things can change.
God should NEVER change.

Such a god should be pitied, not worshiped.

 

[juvenissun]

Such a god should be pitied, not worshiped.

A god, or a man, who changes can not be trusted.

 

[awitch]

A god, or a man, who changes can not be trusted.

Why not?

 

[gord44]

Why not?

Obviously a person that tries to improve themselves are not to be trusted. A drunk should stay a drunk. Or a person with anger issues should stay angry instead of trying to deal with it in a more positive way. Clearly only deviant scum try and seek self improvement to change their ways.

 

[Eryk]

The immutability (changelessness) of God is important for at least two reasons.

A change in a perfect being would be a change for the worse. He actually wouldn't be perfect in the first place because perfection cannot be lost.

A change in God's nature - from faithfulness to fickleness - would render worthless his promises and our trust.

 

[awitch]

Why isn't the whole "New" Testament a change then? Shouldn't the "Old" Testament have been sufficient? Having an old and a new sounds like a change to me, so clearly I can't choose the religion in front of you.