Religion, what's the point?

To be fair, Science probably does only know about 1% of all there is to know. Still, that's 1% more than Religion.
 
Yes, Sam Harris had a good quote about that:

"I would challenge anyone here to think of a question upon which we once had a scientific answer, however inadequate, but for which now the best answer is a religious one. Now, you can think of an uncountable number of questions that run the other way, where we once had a religious answer and now the authority of religion has been battered and nullified by science, and by moral progress, and by secular progress generally."
Click to expand...
Science isn't an ideology or a moral position of any kind, so it's literally meaningless to say that science has caused any harm.
 
Saliph said:
Yes, Sam Harris had a good quote about that:


Science isn't an ideology or a moral position of any kind, so it's literally meaningless to say that science has caused any harm.
Click to expand...

Load of cow dung. Science doesn't exist. Sam Harris is a troll.
 
Saliph said:
Science isn't an ideology or a moral position of any kind, so it's literally meaningless to say that science has caused any harm.
Click to expand...
The issue is more complex than that. What is science? Science is done by scientists, human being with prejudices of different kinds (both scientific and non-scientific) just like everyone else. A lot of research is commercially funded, and thus often not neutral. Regardless, there's plenty of examples of harmful science, such as this and that.
 
Laphroaig said:
The issue is more complex than that. What is science? Science is done by scientists, human being with prejudices of different kinds (both scientific and non-scientific) just like everyone else. A lot of research is commercially funded, and thus often not neutral. Regardless, there's plenty of examples of harmful science, such as this and that.
Click to expand...

Nobody's denying that. I'm talking about science itself, because it always annoys me when people talk about science in a way that suggests that there's a logical connection between the methodology of science and doing bad things. Science is value-neutral, scientists obviously aren't; you can be an asshole and use the scientific method to do horrible things.
 
There's no logical connection between "the methodology of science" (whatever that is, there's no real consensus) and doing bad things, science isn't inherently evil of course. But I'm not as confident as you that we really know what "science itself" or "the methodology of science" is. It's certainly not value-neutral, science is based on (or dependent on) the value of truth and knowledge (and perhaps also stuff like honesty).

(Just to be clear: I'm not saying that the evils conducted in the name of science is close to the evils conducted in the name of religion(s) or political ideology. I'm just not comfortable with the idea of value-neutral science and science as morally pure or amoral.)
 
Of course the scientific method (which is what I'm referring to when I say science) is value-neutral (and amoral). Scientists depend on valuing truth, knowledge and intellectual honesty in order to do (good) science.

I don't criticize religion because I think people do bad things in the name of it, I criticize it because I think people often do bad things because of it. That distinction is key. Of course you can claim to do bad things in the name of science, but I would argue that you can't do bad things because of science in a way that's analogous to doing it because of your religious beliefs. It's a non-sequitur.
 
Mockney said:
To be fair, Science probably does only know about 1% of all there is to know. Still, that's 1% more than Religion.
Click to expand...

Firstly, I am not quite sure whether you would classify Buddhism as religion, some do, while others tend to feel the Pali Canon contains philosophical writings.
However Satipatthana Sutta, (mindfulness teachings) contains some quite remarkable and insightful observations on the plasticity of the brain. And recently neuroscience has begun to investigate the effects of mindful meditation and Vipassana meditation on the brain. There is now some good evidence that meditation has a positive effect in the treatment of many mental health conditions, such as Anxiety and depression.

Now taking into account the radical views and treatment of common mental health disorders in the last 100 years, ideas based on the theories of Freud, Adler and skinner. (whom many reguard as the three most important minds in the field of Psychology). It could be argued that Siddhartha Gautama was in fact 2000+ years ahead of the game.
 
bqOqR.jpg
 
CircusMonkey said:
Firstly, I am not quite sure whether you would classify Buddhism as religion, some do, while others tend to feel the Pali Canon contains philosophical writings.
However Satipatthana Sutta, (mindfulness teachings) contains some quite remarkable and insightful observations on the plasticity of the brain. And recently neuroscience has begun to investigate the effects of mindful meditation and Vipassana meditation on the brain. There is now some good evidence that meditation has a positive effect in the treatment of many mental health conditions, such as Anxiety and depression.

Now taking into account the radical views and treatment of common mental health disorders in the last 100 years, ideas based on the theories of Freud, Adler and skinner. (whom many reguard as the three most important minds in the field of Psychology). It could be argued that Siddhartha Gautama was in fact 2000+ years ahead of the game.
Click to expand...

Siddharta Gautama had remarkable insights into the nature of reality as well, for a guy dwelling in a jungle with nothing but is mind as a tool.

As to whether or not Buddhism is a religion. If you read the buddhist teachings as literally as many people do with Christian, Judastic or islamic teachings then it certainly is a religion. Many buddhist teachings mention Gods, half-gods, maras(demons) and the whole shebang. In a lot of Sutras including the Lotus Sutra, Buddha Shakyamuni(Siddharta) is expounding his teachings in celestial realms. Not to mention the frequent descriptions of the Buddhas supernatural powers.

What separates Buddhism from other religions, is that Buddha was not a god, a son of a god, or a prophet of a god. He was a human who was a spiritual seeker and attained Nirvana and omniscience through the practice of dharma(the accumulation of goodness and wisdom)

The first utterance of Lord Buddha after he attained enlightment.

Deep and quiet,
simple, clear, unformed.

A truth that is
like nectar, I have found.

Whoever I explain it,
no one will understand.

So, in the jungle,
silent, I remain.

Through this truth he found, he attained a happiness, a freedom, a pure and perfect state of being that is not tainted by the impermanent nature of this world and cannot be taken away by anything or anyone, not even death.

The reason, why he was reluctant to share this truth, is that no one would understand, because Nirvana is beyond conceptual understanding. The only to gain insight into nirvana is to train your mind to let go of all mental fabrications(thoughts, emotions, fantasy's, hopes, fears, etc).

Initially though when he was reluctant to teach, the hindu gods Brahma and Indra showed up to encourage him to teach the world. So he went into meditative absorbtion for a few weeks, to gain the knowledge he needed, and set out to teach the world the most rapid ways to attain Nirvana, and he taught tirelessy for around 46 years and gave 80000 different teachings to 80000 different people.

He could just have taught the same teaching, to all the 80000 people, but the Buddhas are aware that people have different capacities of understanding and ability to practice, so he tailored every teaching to the recepient so they benefit from it.

The Buddha never clamied to that he was the first Buddha to ever exist in this world, not to be the only one to every teach in this world. According to Buddha shakyamuni he was the 4th Buddha to appear and teach in this world and he said that in total a 1000 buddhas will have appeared and taught in world before it ends.

Since Buddha Shakyamuni we have had Padmasambhava(Guru Rinpoche) the 5th buddha of our world, and then we have Karmapa the 6th buddha of our world, who is still teaching through his 17th reincarnation the 17th Karmapa, who I was lucky enough to meet in Old Trafford around 5 months ago, and he's a very special guy, I might add. ;)
 
Wibble said:
That you met a reincarnated Buddah I'd guess?
Click to expand...

Yes. He's given me the most incredible and meaningful experiences of my life, and even though my caf persona might not reflect that, I'm one on of the the most negative and closed minded people I know. It takes a lot to impress me.

Yes, I have since about 1,5 years ago, started to believe in recincarnation and I believe the 17th Karmapa is essentially the same person as the 2nd Karmapa who converted Kublai Khan to buddhism centuries ago. Marco Polo actually mentions him in his stories about his meetings with the Khan.
 
Perhaps not reincarnation but that our energy becomes/finds another life source to harbor it. If it is true that energy is neither created nor destroyed. I find reincarnation or transfer of energy far more likely than an afterlife.


Einstein - "Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another."
 
Apart from faith and afterlife which is very subjective to each and everyone of us.

I'd simply say that religion (christianity) is as good as chicken soup for my soul, call it cliche or bullshit, but that 2hours of church every week strengthen and feed my soul, offering me serenity and courage to live another day.

We've paid for movie, indulge ourselves in alcohol and other sort of entertainment to make ourselves feels good, and if Religion makes one feels good, why not.
 
MrMarcello said:
Perhaps not reincarnation but that our energy becomes/finds another life source to harbor it. If it is true that energy is neither created nor destroyed. I find reincarnation or transfer of energy far more likely than an afterlife.


Einstein - "Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another."
Click to expand...

From a buddhist point of view, you are already in the afterlife, you're just not aware of it. From that point of view, we've been born and died countless times, and will continue to do so i varying shapes and forms as long as we produce karma.

from a buddhist pov, this is not the first and only universe either. In buddhist cosmology there exists a more or less inifinite amount of universes and it is taught that the universe goes through 4 phases. These 4 phases are taught to be equal in length of time.

In the first phase, the universe expands and forms galaxies and planets, and the possibility for life is established

in the 2nd phase, lifeforms emerge and life takes it's course.

in the 3rd phase, the universe goes through the process of destruction and ends up contracting in a kind of big crunch as a oppsosed to the big bang.

in the fourth phase, there is only voidness. It would wrong to say that there is nothing what so ever, but it's more like an empty space brimming with potentials.
 
Out of interest, what are the main religion of people on the CAF? I used to be a Jehovah's Witness, but due to 'hierachy issues' I will call it, we decided to leave the faith (We being my family as this was up until I was around 11) - However I still largely believe in God and he plays a daily part in my life... what about others out of interest?
 
I think most caftards are atheists. I think there are probably more practicing hindus or muslims on the caf than there are practicing christians.
 
I'm a christian in as much as I try to practice Christ's teachings but I don't feel that I need to go to any one church although I'll take what I want or not from any church visit.
 
Apparently there's a (somewhat confused) Catholic called Leonetti in the newbies who just sent me a couple of (semi-angry) PM's:

I can not post in current events but I came across your posts about religion:

You make of science and religion as if they are positives and negatives. For example if I believe in religion I cannot believe in science. There is absolutely no truth in this at all. You may get a high-five from your buddies for saying this but our intelligence tells us that they are not mutually exclusive.
Science and religion cannot be mutually exclusive for instance we know that 1 man plus 1 woman having sexual intercourse has the possibility of making another human being if they are both fertile. This is both scientific and religious.
The Catholic Church (I will speak only of my view in the Catholic Church and not other religious beliefs) and science both value truth. How they come about it may be different or may in fact be the same but if the truth is the truth does that really matter how it came about? For instance human evolution science says evolution exists while the Catholic Church also concurs that evolution exists however the prime movers are different in science and Catholic belief yet neither has been proven false in this case. Both the Catholic Church and science have come up with theories which have been proven wrong at later dates but allowing ideas to flow has been what has allowed us to progress in intellect. Now you may say that the Catholic Church stopped Galileo from expressing his view on heliocentricity but we all will agree that he was not 100% right or proven in his theory that the sun was stationary. Heliocentricity was not proven until nearly 100 years later and was initially theorized by a Jesuit Priest he actually took it a step further by claiming it 100% proven yet could not prove it.
Click to expand...

Second post sorry it is so long I thought I could post in current events:

You say that no one has committed mass murder “in the name of science” is absurd. The Nazi’s held a scientific theory that not all races were equal in fact some were inferior to them. You may argue that their theory is wrong but the fact that they did what they did because of the theory does not get diminished due to a wrong theory otherwise you would need to say the same about the inquisition which I am sure you are not prepared to do. I am sure we can both agree looking in hindsight that what happened during the holocaust and inquisition was wrong in the end. We can also agree that people thought it was wrong at the time as well.
Saying science is value neutral may be correct but you are implying that religion would be value negative from what I gather (please correct me if I am wrong). Again I will take it from the Catholic Church, Christianity is value positive only but the people themselves are subject to sin and the teachings or the person could be used in negative manner themselves. This last part is what you claim of science as well so I see no difference other than your claim of neutral and mine of positive. By saying value positive in Christianity I mean that the graces through Jesus Christ are positive and are meant to bring you closer to the goal of salvation.
Your claim of science only can easily be refuted as me saying Jesus only. It makes no sense as no one can achieve pure science only and no one can achieve to be Jesus himself. We are all subject to our intellect/good deeds/bad deeds therefore there is nothing pure in what comes from man. Scientists who wish to discover a new agent to kill will more than likely succeed in doing so therefore their science is infected by the person and “bad things” do come about. The same goes with a religious person if they wish to deceive others in to believing a “new salvation” there is every possibility of them succeeding as well. Evil begets evil and good begets good and nothing is pure.
Click to expand...
 
Muslim turned atheist. This is the one place when I think atheists are majority, good feeling :D
 
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-910282?hpt=hp_c2

Excellent blog post but it might get removed by the angry, whiny xians. It's already flagged for review. Sigh.

Why I Raise My Children Without God
By TXBlue08 | Posted January 14, 2013 | Texas

When my son was around 3 years old, he used to ask me a lot of questions about heaven. Where is it? How do people walk without a body? How will I find you? You know the questions that kids ask.

For over a year, I lied to him and made up stories that I didn’t believe about heaven. Like most parents, I love my child so much that I didn’t want him to be scared. I wanted him to feel safe and loved and full of hope. But the trade-off was that I would have to make stuff up, and I would have to brainwash him into believing stories that didn’t make sense, stories that I didn’t believe either.

One day he would know this, and he would not trust my judgment. He would know that I built an elaborate tale—not unlike the one we tell children about Santa—to explain the inconsistent and illogical legend of God.

And so I thought it was only right to be honest with my children. I am a non-believer, and for years I’ve been on the fringe in my community. As a blogger, though, I’ve found that there are many other parents out there like me. We are creating the next generation of kids, and there is a wave of young agnostics, atheists, free thinkers and humanists rising up through the ranks who will, hopefully, lower our nation’s religious fever.

Here are a few of the reasons why I am raising my children without God.

God is a bad parent and role model.
If God is our father, then he is not a good parent. Good parents don’t allow their children to inflict harm on others. Good people don’t stand by and watch horrible acts committed against innocent men, women and children. They don’t condone violence and abuse. “He has given us free will,” you say? Our children have free will, but we still step in and guide them.

God is not logical.
How many times have you heard, “Why did God allow this to happen?” And this: “It’s not for us to understand.” Translate: We don’t understand, so we will not think about it or deal with the issue. Take for example the senseless tragedy in Newtown. Rather than address the problem of guns in America, we defer responsibility to God. He had a reason. He wanted more angels. Only he knows why. We write poems saying that we told God to leave our schools. Now he’s making us pay the price. If there is a good, all-knowing, all-powerful God who loves his children, does it make sense that he would allow murders, child abuse, wars, brutal beatings, torture and millions of heinous acts to be committed throughout the history of mankind? Doesn’t this go against everything Christ taught us in the New Testament?

The question we should be asking is this: “Why did we allow this to happen?” How can we fix this? No imaginary person is going to give us the answers or tell us why. Only we have the ability to be logical and to problem solve, and we should not abdicate these responsibilities to “God” just because a topic is tough or uncomfortable to address.

God is not fair.
If God is fair, then why does he answer the silly prayers of some while allowing other, serious requests, to go unanswered? I have known people who pray that they can find money to buy new furniture. (Answered.) I have known people who pray to God to help them win a soccer match. (Answered.) Why are the prayers of parents with dying children not answered?

If God is fair, then why are some babies born with heart defects, autism, missing limbs or conjoined to another baby? Clearly, all men are not created equally. Why is a good man beaten senseless on the street while an evil man finds great wealth taking advantage of others? This is not fair. A game maker who allows luck to rule mankind’s existence has not created a fair game.

God does not protect the innocent.
He does not keep our children safe. As a society, we stand up and speak for those who cannot. We protect our little ones as much as possible. When a child is kidnapped, we work together to find the child. We do not tolerate abuse and neglect. Why can’t God, with all his powers of omnipotence, protect the innocent?

God is not present.
He is not here. Telling our children to love a person they cannot see, smell, touch or hear does not make sense. It means that we teach children to love an image, an image that lives only in their imaginations. What we teach them, in effect, is to love an idea that we have created, one that is based in our fears and our hopes.

God Does Not Teach Children to Be Good
A child should make moral choices for the right reasons. Telling him that he must behave because God is watching means that his morality will be externally focused rather than internally structured. It’s like telling a child to behave or Santa won’t bring presents. When we take God out of the picture, we place responsibility of doing the right thing onto the shoulders of our children. No, they won’t go to heaven or rule their own planets when they die, but they can sleep better at night. They will make their family proud. They will feel better about who they are. They will be decent people.

God Teaches Narcissism
“God has a plan for you.” Telling kids there is a big guy in the sky who has a special path for them makes children narcissistic; it makes them think the world is at their disposal and that, no matter what happens, it doesn’t really matter because God is in control. That gives kids a sense of false security and creates selfishness. “No matter what I do, God loves me and forgives me. He knows my purpose. I am special.” The irony is that, while we tell this story to our kids, other children are abused and murdered, starved and neglected. All part of God’s plan, right?

When we raise kids without God, we tell them the truth—we are no more special than the next creature. We are just a very, very small part of a big, big machine–whether that machine is nature or society–the influence we have is minuscule. The realization of our insignificance gives us a true sense of humbleness.

I understand why people need God. I understand why people need heaven. It is terrifying to think that we are all alone in this universe, that one day we—along with the children we love so much—will cease to exist. The idea of God and an afterlife gives many of us structure, community and hope.

I do not want religion to go away. I only want religion to be kept at home or in church where it belongs. It’s a personal effect, like a toothbrush or a pair of shoes. It’s not something to be used or worn by strangers. I want my children to be free not to believe and to know that our schools and our government will make decisions based on what is logical, just and fair—not on what they believe an imaginary God wants.
 
You know all those non-believers, most of them who ends up as a devout religious practitioner, not because they suddenly sees miracles and shit , but simply because at their desperate time and they have nothing to console them, they turn their heads up, and pray to God. That's when they throw away their walls of logic, and simply put their hands up, in despair, knowing that nothing and no one can help them, then they cried to god above.

At least that's my story
 
MrMarcello said:
Perhaps not reincarnation but that our energy becomes/finds another life source to harbor it. If it is true that energy is neither created nor destroyed. I find reincarnation or transfer of energy far more likely than an afterlife.


Einstein - "Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another."
Click to expand...

A couple of months ago I had someone try to convince me in the street that karma was real because Newton's 3rd law states that 'for every action there is an equal but opposite reaction.' I couldn't help but laugh!
 
Say Goodbye said:
A couple of months ago I had someone try to convince me in the street that karma was real because Newton's 3rd law states that 'for every action there is an equal but opposite reaction.' I couldn't help but laugh!
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Karma is real because of the inertia.
 
MrMarcello said:
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-910282?hpt=hp_c2

Excellent blog post but it might get removed by the angry, whiny xians. It's already flagged for review. Sigh.

Why I Raise My Children Without God
By TXBlue08 | Posted January 14, 2013 | Texas

When my son was around 3 years old, he used to ask me a lot of questions about heaven. Where is it? How do people walk without a body? How will I find you? You know the questions that kids ask.

For over a year, I lied to him and made up stories that I didn’t believe about heaven. Like most parents, I love my child so much that I didn’t want him to be scared. I wanted him to feel safe and loved and full of hope. But the trade-off was that I would have to make stuff up, and I would have to brainwash him into believing stories that didn’t make sense, stories that I didn’t believe either.

One day he would know this, and he would not trust my judgment. He would know that I built an elaborate tale—not unlike the one we tell children about Santa—to explain the inconsistent and illogical legend of God.

And so I thought it was only right to be honest with my children. I am a non-believer, and for years I’ve been on the fringe in my community. As a blogger, though, I’ve found that there are many other parents out there like me. We are creating the next generation of kids, and there is a wave of young agnostics, atheists, free thinkers and humanists rising up through the ranks who will, hopefully, lower our nation’s religious fever.

Here are a few of the reasons why I am raising my children without God.

God is a bad parent and role model.
If God is our father, then he is not a good parent. Good parents don’t allow their children to inflict harm on others. Good people don’t stand by and watch horrible acts committed against innocent men, women and children. They don’t condone violence and abuse. “He has given us free will,” you say? Our children have free will, but we still step in and guide them.

God is not logical.
How many times have you heard, “Why did God allow this to happen?” And this: “It’s not for us to understand.” Translate: We don’t understand, so we will not think about it or deal with the issue. Take for example the senseless tragedy in Newtown. Rather than address the problem of guns in America, we defer responsibility to God. He had a reason. He wanted more angels. Only he knows why. We write poems saying that we told God to leave our schools. Now he’s making us pay the price. If there is a good, all-knowing, all-powerful God who loves his children, does it make sense that he would allow murders, child abuse, wars, brutal beatings, torture and millions of heinous acts to be committed throughout the history of mankind? Doesn’t this go against everything Christ taught us in the New Testament?

The question we should be asking is this: “Why did we allow this to happen?” How can we fix this? No imaginary person is going to give us the answers or tell us why. Only we have the ability to be logical and to problem solve, and we should not abdicate these responsibilities to “God” just because a topic is tough or uncomfortable to address.

God is not fair.
If God is fair, then why does he answer the silly prayers of some while allowing other, serious requests, to go unanswered? I have known people who pray that they can find money to buy new furniture. (Answered.) I have known people who pray to God to help them win a soccer match. (Answered.) Why are the prayers of parents with dying children not answered?

If God is fair, then why are some babies born with heart defects, autism, missing limbs or conjoined to another baby? Clearly, all men are not created equally. Why is a good man beaten senseless on the street while an evil man finds great wealth taking advantage of others? This is not fair. A game maker who allows luck to rule mankind’s existence has not created a fair game.

God does not protect the innocent.
He does not keep our children safe. As a society, we stand up and speak for those who cannot. We protect our little ones as much as possible. When a child is kidnapped, we work together to find the child. We do not tolerate abuse and neglect. Why can’t God, with all his powers of omnipotence, protect the innocent?

God is not present.
He is not here. Telling our children to love a person they cannot see, smell, touch or hear does not make sense. It means that we teach children to love an image, an image that lives only in their imaginations. What we teach them, in effect, is to love an idea that we have created, one that is based in our fears and our hopes.

God Does Not Teach Children to Be Good
A child should make moral choices for the right reasons. Telling him that he must behave because God is watching means that his morality will be externally focused rather than internally structured. It’s like telling a child to behave or Santa won’t bring presents. When we take God out of the picture, we place responsibility of doing the right thing onto the shoulders of our children. No, they won’t go to heaven or rule their own planets when they die, but they can sleep better at night. They will make their family proud. They will feel better about who they are. They will be decent people.

God Teaches Narcissism
“God has a plan for you.” Telling kids there is a big guy in the sky who has a special path for them makes children narcissistic; it makes them think the world is at their disposal and that, no matter what happens, it doesn’t really matter because God is in control. That gives kids a sense of false security and creates selfishness. “No matter what I do, God loves me and forgives me. He knows my purpose. I am special.” The irony is that, while we tell this story to our kids, other children are abused and murdered, starved and neglected. All part of God’s plan, right?

When we raise kids without God, we tell them the truth—we are no more special than the next creature. We are just a very, very small part of a big, big machine–whether that machine is nature or society–the influence we have is minuscule. The realization of our insignificance gives us a true sense of humbleness.

I understand why people need God. I understand why people need heaven. It is terrifying to think that we are all alone in this universe, that one day we—along with the children we love so much—will cease to exist. The idea of God and an afterlife gives many of us structure, community and hope.

I do not want religion to go away. I only want religion to be kept at home or in church where it belongs. It’s a personal effect, like a toothbrush or a pair of shoes. It’s not something to be used or worn by strangers. I want my children to be free not to believe and to know that our schools and our government will make decisions based on what is logical, just and fair—not on what they believe an imaginary God wants.
Click to expand...

I have nothing to add to this apart from the fact it is spot on. I have not told any stories of God to my children and will let them find out for themselves. Constantly reminding them that there is someone in the sky will make me a liar and if I want my children to take what I say as the truth then, religion is certainly not going to be one of the subjects that I will tell them since it will be a tissue of lies and conceit, and to be honest, I cannot do that, to lie to my daughters. I have often heard the expression "Tell the truth and shame the devil", and whilst it may be true, I cannot tell them something that I know very little of, and if I create a story, then it is going to be lies. I would be, in effect lying and this goes totally against the expression "Tell the truth and shame the devil."
 
MichaelS said:
Siddharta Gautama had remarkable insights into the nature of reality as well, for a guy dwelling in a jungle with nothing but is mind as a tool.

As to whether or not Buddhism is a religion. If you read the buddhist teachings as literally as many people do with Christian, Judastic or islamic teachings then it certainly is a religion. Many buddhist teachings mention Gods, half-gods, maras(demons) and the whole shebang. In a lot of Sutras including the Lotus Sutra, Buddha Shakyamuni(Siddharta) is expounding his teachings in celestial realms. Not to mention the frequent descriptions of the Buddhas supernatural powers.

What separates Buddhism from other religions, is that Buddha was not a god, a son of a god, or a prophet of a god. He was a human who was a spiritual seeker and attained Nirvana and omniscience through the practice of dharma(the accumulation of goodness and wisdom)

The first utterance of Lord Buddha after he attained enlightment.

Deep and quiet,
simple, clear, unformed.

A truth that is
like nectar, I have found.

Whoever I explain it,
no one will understand.

So, in the jungle,
silent, I remain.

Through this truth he found, he attained a happiness, a freedom, a pure and perfect state of being that is not tainted by the impermanent nature of this world and cannot be taken away by anything or anyone, not even death.

The reason, why he was reluctant to share this truth, is that no one would understand, because Nirvana is beyond conceptual understanding. The only to gain insight into nirvana is to train your mind to let go of all mental fabrications(thoughts, emotions, fantasy's, hopes, fears, etc).

Initially though when he was reluctant to teach, the hindu gods Brahma and Indra showed up to encourage him to teach the world. So he went into meditative absorbtion for a few weeks, to gain the knowledge he needed, and set out to teach the world the most rapid ways to attain Nirvana, and he taught tirelessy for around 46 years and gave 80000 different teachings to 80000 different people.

He could just have taught the same teaching, to all the 80000 people, but the Buddhas are aware that people have different capacities of understanding and ability to practice, so he tailored every teaching to the recepient so they benefit from it.

The Buddha never clamied to that he was the first Buddha to ever exist in this world, not to be the only one to every teach in this world. According to Buddha shakyamuni he was the 4th Buddha to appear and teach in this world and he said that in total a 1000 buddhas will have appeared and taught in world before it ends.

Since Buddha Shakyamuni we have had Padmasambhava(Guru Rinpoche) the 5th buddha of our world, and then we have Karmapa the 6th buddha of our world, who is still teaching through his 17th reincarnation the 17th Karmapa, who I was lucky enough to meet in Old Trafford around 5 months ago, and he's a very special guy, I might add. ;)
Click to expand...

Don't forget the love guru.
 
MrMarcello said:
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-910282?hpt=hp_c2

Excellent blog post but it might get removed by the angry, whiny xians. It's already flagged for review. Sigh.

Why I Raise My Children Without God
By TXBlue08 | Posted January 14, 2013 | Texas

When my son was around 3 years old, he used to ask me a lot of questions about heaven. Where is it? How do people walk without a body? How will I find you? You know the questions that kids ask.

For over a year, I lied to him and made up stories that I didn’t believe about heaven. Like most parents, I love my child so much that I didn’t want him to be scared. I wanted him to feel safe and loved and full of hope. But the trade-off was that I would have to make stuff up, and I would have to brainwash him into believing stories that didn’t make sense, stories that I didn’t believe either.

One day he would know this, and he would not trust my judgment. He would know that I built an elaborate tale—not unlike the one we tell children about Santa—to explain the inconsistent and illogical legend of God.

And so I thought it was only right to be honest with my children. I am a non-believer, and for years I’ve been on the fringe in my community. As a blogger, though, I’ve found that there are many other parents out there like me. We are creating the next generation of kids, and there is a wave of young agnostics, atheists, free thinkers and humanists rising up through the ranks who will, hopefully, lower our nation’s religious fever.

Here are a few of the reasons why I am raising my children without God.

God is a bad parent and role model.
If God is our father, then he is not a good parent. Good parents don’t allow their children to inflict harm on others. Good people don’t stand by and watch horrible acts committed against innocent men, women and children. They don’t condone violence and abuse. “He has given us free will,” you say? Our children have free will, but we still step in and guide them.

God is not logical.
How many times have you heard, “Why did God allow this to happen?” And this: “It’s not for us to understand.” Translate: We don’t understand, so we will not think about it or deal with the issue. Take for example the senseless tragedy in Newtown. Rather than address the problem of guns in America, we defer responsibility to God. He had a reason. He wanted more angels. Only he knows why. We write poems saying that we told God to leave our schools. Now he’s making us pay the price. If there is a good, all-knowing, all-powerful God who loves his children, does it make sense that he would allow murders, child abuse, wars, brutal beatings, torture and millions of heinous acts to be committed throughout the history of mankind? Doesn’t this go against everything Christ taught us in the New Testament?

The question we should be asking is this: “Why did we allow this to happen?” How can we fix this? No imaginary person is going to give us the answers or tell us why. Only we have the ability to be logical and to problem solve, and we should not abdicate these responsibilities to “God” just because a topic is tough or uncomfortable to address.

God is not fair.
If God is fair, then why does he answer the silly prayers of some while allowing other, serious requests, to go unanswered? I have known people who pray that they can find money to buy new furniture. (Answered.) I have known people who pray to God to help them win a soccer match. (Answered.) Why are the prayers of parents with dying children not answered?

If God is fair, then why are some babies born with heart defects, autism, missing limbs or conjoined to another baby? Clearly, all men are not created equally. Why is a good man beaten senseless on the street while an evil man finds great wealth taking advantage of others? This is not fair. A game maker who allows luck to rule mankind’s existence has not created a fair game.

God does not protect the innocent.
He does not keep our children safe. As a society, we stand up and speak for those who cannot. We protect our little ones as much as possible. When a child is kidnapped, we work together to find the child. We do not tolerate abuse and neglect. Why can’t God, with all his powers of omnipotence, protect the innocent?

God is not present.
He is not here. Telling our children to love a person they cannot see, smell, touch or hear does not make sense. It means that we teach children to love an image, an image that lives only in their imaginations. What we teach them, in effect, is to love an idea that we have created, one that is based in our fears and our hopes.

God Does Not Teach Children to Be Good
A child should make moral choices for the right reasons. Telling him that he must behave because God is watching means that his morality will be externally focused rather than internally structured. It’s like telling a child to behave or Santa won’t bring presents. When we take God out of the picture, we place responsibility of doing the right thing onto the shoulders of our children. No, they won’t go to heaven or rule their own planets when they die, but they can sleep better at night. They will make their family proud. They will feel better about who they are. They will be decent people.

God Teaches Narcissism
“God has a plan for you.” Telling kids there is a big guy in the sky who has a special path for them makes children narcissistic; it makes them think the world is at their disposal and that, no matter what happens, it doesn’t really matter because God is in control. That gives kids a sense of false security and creates selfishness. “No matter what I do, God loves me and forgives me. He knows my purpose. I am special.” The irony is that, while we tell this story to our kids, other children are abused and murdered, starved and neglected. All part of God’s plan, right?

When we raise kids without God, we tell them the truth—we are no more special than the next creature. We are just a very, very small part of a big, big machine–whether that machine is nature or society–the influence we have is minuscule. The realization of our insignificance gives us a true sense of humbleness.

I understand why people need God. I understand why people need heaven. It is terrifying to think that we are all alone in this universe, that one day we—along with the children we love so much—will cease to exist. The idea of God and an afterlife gives many of us structure, community and hope.

I do not want religion to go away. I only want religion to be kept at home or in church where it belongs. It’s a personal effect, like a toothbrush or a pair of shoes. It’s not something to be used or worn by strangers. I want my children to be free not to believe and to know that our schools and our government will make decisions based on what is logical, just and fair—not on what they believe an imaginary God wants.
Click to expand...

I'm confused, does this person actually believe that God exists, but he is in disagreement with what he thinks is God's character? Or does he believe that God does not exist, in which case I'm not sure why he'd be discussing the character of some God that he doesn't even believe exists?!
 
Mihajlovic said:
I'm confused, does this person actually believe that God exists, but he is in disagreement with what he thinks is God's character? Or does he believe that God does not exist, in which case I'm not sure why he'd be discussing the character of some God that he doesn't even believe exists?!
Click to expand...

He's discussing the "god" that you think exists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.