Why are you not a Christian

[Asher]

Blake: I think you missed your calling as a cheesy infomercial salesman on latenight TV.

[Blake]

Q) What's the difference between what Buddhism offers and what cheesey infomercials offer?

A) The infomercials seem more plausible.

although there is also another key difference

[Darius871]

Re: Why are you not a Christian

Originally posted by Jon Miller
I have been wondering what the general response would be to this for a while.

Responses like "It is all BS" aren't all that useful, please say why it is BS, if you think so.

This is not suppose to be a debate thread, I will try my best not to debate with the nonChristians, and I would ask other Christians not to debate with them either (even if you know they are wrong). Rather it is suppose to be an informational thread. A discussion thread might come later

I think I know why some of you aren't Christians, but I am interested in why others of you aren't... and I am interested in knowing if I am wrong about those who I have hypothesis on.

The clearer, the better, of course. While we shouldn't debate you, presenting a reason why you aren't a Christian that was addressed 1000 years ago is a bit ignorant.

I think the real answer was in somebody's sig here (I thought Rufus but can't be sure since it's changed now):

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ. – Gandhi

The fact is that most people understandably associate the sheer assholishness of many (most?) fundie Christians to such an extent that the entire religion seems distasteful.

It really is a shame that the people who purport to carry the banner of Christianity are the very people who are bringing about its demise, but it's not like they can be persuaded otherwise. Oh well, it had some real potential at the start but of course humans were bound to **** it all up.

[Berzerker]

yup

[Perfection]

Originally posted by Blake
Q) What's the difference between what Buddhism offers and what cheesey infomercials offer?

A) The infomercials seem more plausible.

although there is also another key difference

The informercials sometimes deliver?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Asher


This is very true, whether you can comprehend it or not.

The opinions you express on these boards are usually incredibly common.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Blake


I'll give the Buddhist Perspective.

During meditation, or even during daily life (probably during a contemplative moment), it is possible for very powerful mental phenomena to arise, possibly like a bright light, a glow, a warmth - it wont be the same for each person.

It is clearly these things, which lead to people believing in God and such, because they are SO powerful, so warming, and so on. If someone heard some religious teaching, dwelled on it, then experienced such a state, they could very easily and reasonably take it as proof that the religious teachings were true, they could believe they were touched by a God or some such. it is that powerful.

Buddhism is clear on what to do with these; let them go! They aren't important, if you get distracted by these experiences, attribute meaning to them, let your imagination weave stories around them, and so on, you wont enter deeper meditative states, because your mind is like a monkey jumping up and down with excitement over what it is seeing - that's bad for meditation.

And if you do let go of them, you go on to experience even more powerful things. Which really proves quite conclusively that while what you initially encountered may have been a thousand times more powerful than anything you'd ever experienced before; it was still nothing special.

From descriptions and such, it's pretty clear that most religious experiences are quite shallow in terms of buddhist meditative states, they happen at "a thousand times more powerful" not "a million times more powerful".

I must say, if you're serious about experiencing sensations a thousand times more powerful than "bright light, a glow, a warmth," then what you really need is about 100 mg of Haloperidol with each breakfast.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Darius871


I must say, if you're serious about experiencing sensations a thousand times more powerful than "bright light, a glow, a warmth," then what you really need is about 100 mg of Haloperidol with each breakfast.

Or 3without food, that, I assure you, will do it

Gramps"In the Know" Troll

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Grandpa Troll
Or 3without food, that, I assure you, will do it

Gramps"In the Know" Troll

Nah, based on the extreme symptoms Blake is describing, an experimental dose is warranted.

[Grandpa Troll]

Visodddin is kicking in right now, will try to shaere this:

I have been in past, deeply devoted to martial arts training.

Many teachings or disciplines depend on certain religsuies fuoundational truths.

Even prior to accepting my Lord, I studied deeply, had to memorize to pass certain tests,in fact one of my Hyungs or patterns was after a 16th century buddist monk, Won-Hyo Hyung.

Now this was a special pattern for me, since it mirrors many traditional Japanese style Kata's.

While not a follower, I can respect a person dedicated to the promotion and Indomitable spirit of those promoting a disciple.

Gramps

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Darius871


I must say, if you're serious about experiencing sensations a thousand times more powerful than "bright light, a glow, a warmth," then what you really need is about 100 mg of Haloperidol with each breakfast.

Pop psychiatry

[Blake]

Originally posted by Darius871
I must say, if you're serious about experiencing sensations a thousand times more powerful than "bright light, a glow, a warmth," then what you really need is about 100 mg of Haloperidol with each breakfast.

Why, when I can effortlessly will myself out of such a mindstate, if I wish?

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Pop psychiatry

Even anti-psychotic medication falls into the pop psychology category now? Then what the hell doesn't?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
The opinions you express on these boards are usually incredibly common.

Leave it to a philosopher to express the opinion that original thought means you must never be an opinion others may have.

I think you've mistaken the process of thinking for oneself with having an opinion that other people may have as well. They are very different things.

I am an original thinker in that I don't align myself with any theology -- atheist nor theist, etc. The fact that my resultant opinions from original thought may be shared by many others doesn't discredit the process those thoughts and opinions came from. When I am told or taught something, I challenge it and investigate it myself to the best of my ability. That's helped me a lot especially in my profession, because I dig into every aspect of it and work things out myself instead of just reading the blanket statements in textbooks. It leads to a deeper understanding.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Pop psychiatry

While I'm on the subject, the opinions you express here are common. You must have no capacity for original thought.