Huh?
Our lord tells us that one must not have sin to enter heaven. Our Lord is the Savior who takes away sin and reconciles mankind back to God through forgiven sin.
Personally I think ours makes way more sense then duhkka
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Huh?Why do people seek "God"?
Buddhism explains our search in terms of dukkha (aka suffering, discontentment, displeasure, etc.). That is, because of dukkha, we seek out god(s), saviors, prophets, psychics, doctors, politicians, love, food, money, sex, sleep, entertainment, etc.
Why not address dukkha itself, as the Lord Buddha taught, instead of seeking to treat its symptoms? Dig out the roots (of dukkha), instead of endlessly snipping its offshoots.
Personally I think ours makes way more sense then duhkka
See that's the difference.It's a good thing there is so many various spiritual paths as it's quite clear people see things differently. I find duhkka a much better way to understand the human condition.
See that's the difference.
I have a personal relationship with the living God. Not a philosophy
Your philosophy after death will send you to hell. Seek Christ who died for all mankind. He wishes none too perish.
God is not a philosophy. But a living God.
Ok. End of discussion. I'll be moving along.Indeed. Different people require different paths.
I am glad for you. I don't like philosophies either. Waste of time.
Your philosophy after death will send you back into the samsara for another rebirth. Seek Amida, who vowed to save all beings. He wishes none to be stuck in endless rebirth or sent to the hells.
Whatever works for you good sir.
Yes, you gained something personally from your experience of God which produced your desire to seek God, is that correct?Ah, this is where the quote comes from.
In answer to your question, I was drawn to seek God from an early age. Peace has been a later result.
It was the early knowledge of and experience of God that produced the desire, and that desire has turned out to be greater than any other. Peace, joy, contentment, these things come as a result of relationship with God, gifts through His grace working in us. But it was the relationship I initially wanted. I didn't know in the earliest times to even hope for or expect the rest. They were, as I said, an added bonus. In my case, it would have been wrong if I had desired peace, joy, or contentment, and simply used God as a means to get them.
I hope that makes sense.
I understand the Christian dogma you pointed out, but unfortunately I have no way to verify it.Huh?
Our lord tells us that one must not have sin to enter heaven. Our Lord is the Savior who takes away sin and reconciles mankind back to God through forgiven sin.
Personally I think ours makes way more sense then duhkka
Well, it may not be pretty, but wouldn't you agree that everything we do is motivated by dukkha? It seems obvious to me. Can you point out the error in my analysis?
Dukkha doesn't only mean suffering; it also suggests discontentment, displeasure, pain, dissatisfaction. Discontentment brings motivation to do something, or change something, about it - activity. Contentment brings stillness and peace - inactivity.
The Buddha's Path has proven fruitful for me so far; his progressive spiritual exercises provide progressively greater relief from dukkha (and greater sukkha and bliss that goes far beyond anything that ordinary life offers), the further I advance.However, spiritual exercise is only temporary alleviation of dukkha. As pointed out, suicide is the only effective method to avoid suffering.
What is this proof? and the methodology acceptable to everyone?The real predicament, the terminal tumour is the non effectiveness of ALL exercises. Only Christianity provides the definitive "cure", provable by a methodology acceptable to all.
Yes, you gained something personally from your experience of God which produced your desire to seek God, is that correct?
Many have written things about God, and not all that's written is veryI'm beginning to wonder if that's the case since I've read some of the Old Testament that I'd hardly call beautiful, loving, or wise. In fact I'd call it very much the opposite.
The Buddha's Path has proven fruitful for me so far; his progressive spiritual exercises provide progressively greater relief from dukkha (and greater sukkha and bliss that goes far beyond anything that ordinary life offers), the further I advance.
What is this proof? and the methodology acceptable to everyone?
What is the significance of that?Buddha is dead
What is your proof?Jesus is alive.
I agree; however, feelings of love towards another is a form of sukkha, and a type of relief from dukkha.It wasn't so much what I gained, as it was wanting to be close to someone I met.
Have you ever met a person and really, really, REALLY liked them, wanted to be in their company? Not because of something you gained from it, but just because you love them. I suppose yes, there is pleasure in that, but it comes from the identity of the person you love.
But not because they give you some gifts, or favors. You just love who they are.
Agreed.Everything depends on how one understands the situation.
Is this your proof regarding the Christian "cure", with your methodology which is accepted by all?...Similarly it's very easy to fall into the trap of thinking the human predicament is the presence of suffering. The problem is not suffering. The problem is futility ... Your solution rests on reducing the impact of suffering. However it does not address the problem of aimlessness. You say that the progressive reduction of suffering leads to a state of absence of suffering and increase in joyful experiences. However, sickness and death nullify all your achievements, reduce them to nil .... the game is totally meaningless . It's not really going anywhere, and there are no real winners ...
I think you are familiar with the evidence already. However, you seem confused about how much evidence is sufficient to justify belief. Even if there is only a small but reasonable possibility that Jesus is alive, that is better than the certainty that Buddha is dead.What is your proof?
Evidence isn't proof, as I'm sure you know.I think you are familiar with the evidence already. However, you seem confused about how much evidence is sufficient to justify belief. Even if there is only a small but reasonable possibility that Jesus is alive, that is better than the certainty that Buddha is dead.
This puts me in mind of my training in psychology. Everything for the Buddhist is based on negative reinforcement, apparently, with no possibility of positive reinforcement?I agree; however, feelings of love towards another is a form of sukkha, and a type of relief from dukkha.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?