Why Create Us?

[ananda]

I never said anything about verifying.

Here you go.

Again, I'm not sure exactly how you mean the use of that word, so it would help for you to clarify your usage.

Still, the process went like this: The text tells a story. Within the story something happens that is unfamiliar to the listener. The text associates that unfamiliar experience with a familiar experience. If the listener thinks the familiar experience is good, they mimic something from the story. If the action they took produces a new experience that they deem good, they have one instance of trusting the text with a good result.

I think the difference between the approach to our trusted texts is that - as I understand it - the purpose of the stories from my text is to guide me to an experience, and that experience itself is the goal of my text.

On the other hand, it appears that you're saying that the vicarious experiences gained from the stories of your text serve to support your trust in other parts of the text that you can't verify (know) for yourself.

 

[Resha Caner]

Here you go.

That's what you've got? A post where I said verification isn't necessary? Oy. Talk about playing dumb to the context of a comment.

I think the difference between the approach to our trusted texts is that - as I understand it - (A) the purpose of the stories from my text is to guide me to an experience, and that experience itself is the goal of my text.

On the other hand, it appears that you're saying that the vicarious experiences gained from the stories of your text (B) serve to support your trust in other parts of the text that you can't verify (know) for yourself.

I added the numbering to simplify my response. I would say that while your experience is only (A), mine is both (A) and (B). Given (B) is common to so many aspects of life outside the religious, I'm curious to know why you sought a religious experience that avoids (B)?

 

[ananda]

That's what you've got? A post where I said verification isn't necessary? Oy. Talk about playing dumb to the context of a comment.

I thought we were following a single line of related inquiries. My apologies if I was mistaken.

I added the numbering to simplify my response. I would say that while your experience is only (A), mine is both (A) and (B). Given (B) is common to so many aspects of life outside the religious, I'm curious to know why you sought a religious experience that avoids (B)?

That's because the teaching I follow & agree with teaches that only A is necessary.

My summum bonum is (A) lasting peace & happiness, and my texts teach a practicable path through which I can experience (A) for myself. Unverified belief in (B) is not only seen as unnecessary, but ultimately hinders (A).

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

God created us and his omniscience entails he knew a vast number would accept Christ and end up in Heaven and a vast number would not accept Christ and end up in Hell. God does not need us. Why then, did God create us?

I think all the various answers from men cannot compare at all to what God Himself Tells us, when He Wants to. (and In His Word)

 

[renniks]

Is that all there is to being a perfect Human Being? Someone who does no wrong? Is that all you have?

That's not enough? Lol.

 

[Resha Caner]

That's because the teaching I follow & agree with teaches that only A is necessary.

Are you saying you are innately Buddhist? That you've never been other than Buddhist? If not, then I thought you might have an explanation why you think A is superior to A&B, why you chose one over the other? I could equally claim my A&B brings everlasting peace.

 

[ananda]

Are you saying you are innately Buddhist? That you've never been other than Buddhist? If not, then I thought you might have an explanation why you think A is superior to A&B, why you chose one over the other? I could equally claim my A&B brings everlasting peace.

No, I was previously Christian before converting to Buddhism.

A = personally knowable, B = not personally knowable, and can be questioned.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That's not enough? Lol.

Most people never (apparently) see a group,assembly of Ekklesia who live right. In China, it was reported long ago (decades), that some people did see Ekklesia who live right, and some were even converted to following Jesus, being immersed in Him, without a word (by seeing the changed lives of others who were Ekklesia living right) .

But since most people never see this, and most people apparently believe it is impossible, they can't comprehend the reality of people always doing what is right today( always following Jesus, wherever He leads them).

 

[Resha Caner]

No, I was previously Christian before converting to Buddhism.

There is a path back.

A = personally knowable, B = not personally knowable, and can be questioned.

Both can be questioned. You may not question your personal experiences, but some people do. And other people could question your experiences. They are not beyond reproach. But thanks for stating why you chose the path you did. Hopefully at some point you realize A can be questionable as well.

 

[ananda]

There is a path back.

Both can be questioned. You may not question your personal experiences, but some people do. And other people could question your experiences. They are not beyond reproach. But thanks for stating why you chose the path you did. Hopefully at some point you realize A can be questionable as well.

Sure, other people can question my experiences, but I was mainly referring to the fact that my experiences are unquestionable for myself.

Do I need to prove to others that peace/happiness is my summum bonum & that I experience it for myself?

 

[Resha Caner]

Do I need to prove to others that peace/happiness is my summum bonum & that I experience it for myself?

No, probably not. But you were asking me to justify mine ... or at least I got the impression you were asking how I "verify" my beliefs. So, in this forum, it's fair game to question you.

I would ask then: Do you consider your life to be perfect?

 

[ananda]

No, probably not. But you were asking me to justify mine ... or at least I got the impression you were asking how I "verify" my beliefs. So, in this forum, it's fair game to question you.

Certainly. I question, because I am always trying to grow in knowledge & wisdom, even by questioning my own path.

I would ask then: Do you consider your life to be perfect?

Of course not. Yours?

 

[Resha Caner]

Of course not. Yours?

Nope. So how do you know Christ can't address part of that imperfection in your life?

 

[Jonaitis]

God created us and his omniscience entails he knew a vast number would accept Christ and end up in Heaven and a vast number would not accept Christ and end up in Hell. God does not need us. Why then, did God create us?

He created us for his own glory.

 

[ananda]

Nope. So how do you know Christ can't address part of that imperfection in your life?

I've never met him.

On the other hand, I know for myself that the practice of the Buddhist path is addressing that.

 

[Resha Caner]

I've never met him.

OK. Would it make a difference in the efficacy of Christian texts if you did?

 

[ananda]

OK. Would it make a difference in the efficacy of Christian texts if you did?

It would contribute towards a greater measure of trust.

 

[Resha Caner]

It would contribute towards a greater measure of trust.

Then let's hope that happens some day. In the meantime, would it be of any value if you met one of the apostles? I assume you see where this is going.

 

[dlamberth]

That's not enough? Lol.

Nope. I'd think that the potential scope of a perfected Human Being is much more than doing no wrong.

 

[ananda]

Then let's hope that happens some day. In the meantime, would it be of any value if you met one of the apostles? I assume you see where this is going.

It would be of value, but of a far lesser degree than meeting Christ himself.

Where is it going? I see many books (Bible included) that are far, far removed from the time of Christ, which means they are of little worth in terms of knowledge, generally speaking.