A Critique of the Bible

MAYBE you simply don't see the seed?

PROBABLY you just made it up to make yourself feel more right

Originally posted by Nellinator
http://www.testimonies.com.au/topics/raised_from_dead_1.htm
Now try this. I thought you might like (or hate) this one because it is the testimony of a Buddhist monk.

I also understand that people will be skepitcal of people being raised from the dead. In fact a better hoax site than the one you gave me is http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/bonnke2.html to show you that I'm not naive.

I was wondering the testimony of this monk there was no mentioned named lucifer or even purgatory. What he says, is quite some kind a copy cat Dante's Divine Comedy. Also, he was mentioning a very similar concept in a Buddhist theory of life and Death. See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_lotus_sutra_study_center/between_death_and_rebirth.htm

I doubt his scheming story..

"Don't believe in anything simply because you heard it.
Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.
Do not believe in anything because it is spoken and rumored by many.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.
Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.
But after observation and analysis, you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept and live up to it." ---The Buddha Sakyamuni

Stories like that are likely made up piecees of crock.

Originally posted by mahasattva
"Don't believe in anything simply because you heard it.
Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.
Do not believe in anything because it is spoken and rumored by many.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.
Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.
But after observation and analysis, you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept and live up to it." ---The Buddha Sakyamuni

I'm just throwing out pieces of testimony. They may or may not be true. But this is true I assure you: God performs miracles through people (people do not perform miracles) and people are healed and things are changed by the faith of true believers.

No. Once again you make a hypocritcal statement.

"[testimony] may or may not be true" but you "assure" us that at least SOME testimony is true.

How do you know if the "miracle" is doen by your god or by a person. How can you tell?

😆 "true" believers 😆

Those people may or may not have been raised from the dead... I do not know for certain, but I do know that God performs miracles.

The Bible says that if someone performs an act in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit they are done by God. That is how I tell if it is God.

Originally posted by Nellinator
This is question many non-Christians repeatedly ask. You called the miracles individual and this is true in many cases. But, this is a good thing because it is how God shows that he loves each person individually and how wants each and every person to come to know him. God does perform major miracles. I have seen hundreds of people praying together with authority to God to spare them from a hurricane and the hurricane (sorry I cannot remember which one) fell two or three classes in one day and then never reached mainland America. Some would say that it was the weather, but I believe God had something to with it. I have farmers pray for rain and receive it in the middle of drought that recently ended in my region. I have herad of people being raised from the dead (and they were actually dead) in the name of Jesus (this is a major miracle in my eyes). My own sister lost control driving on ice and crossed a median into oncoming highway traffic and was tee-boned directly on her door at 100 km/h and lived easily with nothing more than a few scrapes and bruises despite being smashed into the windshield, the side window, and having her seatbelt dig deeply into the pelvis. Some might say it was luck, but I know that it was God's intervention, she would have died otherwise. "For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to show Himself strong on behalf of those whose heart is loyal to Him." 2 Chronicles 16:9 (Another good verse from the Chronicles).

Some of the most bizarre things about Jesus were the miracles he is said to have performed. One of the most famous of these was bringing Lazarus back from the dead. Lazarus had been dead for at least four days and was presumably in heaven, while his family were heartbroken and grieving. In raising him from the dead, Jesus certainly demonstrated his power but what did Lazarus and his family get out of it? Lazarus was removed from heaven and brought back to "this vale of tears" only to have to die all over again some time in the future while his family would also have to go through grieving and distress all over again (Jn 11:1-44).

To the Buddhist this miracle, if it even really happened, seems to be unnecessary, and even cruel. How much more practical and humane was the Buddha's approach to death. On one occasion a young mother named Kisagotami came to the Buddha with her dead son, deranged with grief and pleading with the Buddha to give her son medicine. Full of compassion the Buddha told her to go and get a mustard seed from a house where no one had ever died. In the process of looking for such a seed, Kisagotami gradually came to realize that death is an integral part of life and she overcame her grief ( Dhammapada Atthakatta). Jesus performed showy miracles which seemed to leave people much as they were, the Buddha gently and skilfully led people to understanding. This is what the Buddha meant when he said that education is the highest miracle (Digha Nikaya, Sutta).

Another miracle where Jesus seems to have given little thought to the consequences of what he was doing was the one he supposedly performed at Godara. A man was possessed by devils, and just before Jesus exorcized them the devils asked Je sus if he would send them into a nearby herd of pigs. Jesus obliged, sending the devils into the pigs, which then rushed screaming down the side of a cliff into a lake where they drowned (Mk 5:1-13). The man who had been possessed by the devil must have been very grateful for this but one wonders what the owners of the pigs would have thought. The loss of their animals would have caused them gr financial hardship. Not surprisingly, we are told that after this incident the people from the nearby village came to Jesus and begged him to leave their territory (Mk 5:17). Note that Matthew tells this same story but he exaggerates it, claiming the not one but two men were exorcized (Matt 8:28-32).

This supposed miracle also highlights Jesus utter disregard for nature. He could simply have expelled the devils but instead he chose to do it in a most cruel w by driving to their deaths a large number of completely harmless and innocent animals. On another occasion he used his miraculous powers to kill a fig tree simply because it could not bear fruit (Matt 21:18-20). Apparently he never considered that animals could have eaten its leaves, birds could have nested in branches, travellers could have rested in its shade and its roots would have helped prevent erosion of the soil by the rain and the wind - which probably explains why the tree had been left growing. No advantage at all came from killing the tree was little more than an act of wanton vandalism.

While some of Jesus' miracles were pointless others seem to have verged on the ridiculous. Once Jesus was invited to a wedding. After some time there was Ii wine left to drink so Jesus turned several large jars of water into wine (Jn 2:1 -1l ). No doubt the host must have appreciated not having to go out to buy more alcohol but it does seem a bit incongruous. that God should incarnate as a man, come earth and use his powers just so that people wouldn't run out of drinks at the parties.

Whenever Christians want to convince the truth of their religion they will quote from the Bible, believing as they do, that every word in the Bible is literally true. But when we quote from the Bible to prove that their religion is primitive, silly or illogical (e.g. that smoke comes out God's nose and fire comes out of his mouth, Ps 18:7-8; or that donkeys can talk, Num 22:28) they will say: "That's symbolic, it is not meant to be taken literally." Christians are very selective in how they interpret the Bible. Some passages are 'God's word' and literally true and other parts, usually the embarrassing parts, are not meant to be taken literally. Either the Bible is God's infallible word or it is not, one cannot pick and choose. And if indeed some passages are meant to be taken literally and others are not, how do Christians decide? If the Stories about Balaam 's donkey talking, Adam and Eve eating the apple, or Moses turning his stick into a snake are not meant to be taken literally, perhaps too, the stories about Jesus' resurrection are only symbolic and not meant to be taken literally.

I have a disagreeance with Buddha's teaching because he basically tells the women that death is natural part of life. However, this is not true. God created man for eternal life. Sin ended this, yet the question of eternity and the desire of immortality is still a part of human existance.

Jesus proved a point with many of his miracles. Ruining the fig tree to prove faith. Jesus is eternal (as supported by scripture) and therefore knew that the long term effects of proving the power of faith to humans far outweighed the small benefits to animals (who are insignificant to human life).

I often questioned why Jesus cast the demons into the pigs. However, I realized through research (which I do when I have doubts) that it was actually beneficial to the people. Jews (notice that I say Jews not Christians) did not and do not keep pigs as livestock because their meat is forbidden in the Law of Moses. These pigs were ,therefore, likely wild and detrimental to the economic situation of the region (pigs spread parasites). The people begged Jesus to leave, I believe, because they were afraid of his power.

I fully believe that God communicates in many different ways (by burning bush, by miracles, by prophecy, by donkey if needs be, etc.).

Jesus's resurrection was real but also had symbolic importance in that it showed us that victory over death (and therefore, sin, for the wages of sin is death). This is the good news of Jesus.

And for your pleasure I purposely did not quote the Bible.

Originally posted by Nellinator
I have a disagreeance with Buddha's teaching because he basically tells the women that death is natural part of life. However, this is not true. God created man for eternal life. Sin ended this, yet the question of eternity and the desire of immortality is still a part of human existance.

Jesus proved a point with many of his miracles. Ruining the fig tree to prove faith. Jesus is eternal (as supported by scripture) and therefore knew that the long term effects of proving the power of faith to humans far outweighed the small benefits to animals (who are insignificant to human life).

I often questioned why Jesus cast the demons into the pigs. However, I realized through research (which I do when I have doubts) that it was actually beneficial to the people. Jews (notice that I say Jews not Christians) did not and do not keep pigs as livestock because their meat is forbidden in the Law of Moses. These pigs were ,therefore, likely wild and detrimental to the economic situation of the region (pigs spread parasites). The people begged Jesus to leave, I believe, because they were afraid of his power.

I fully believe that God communicates in many different ways (by burning bush, by miracles, by prophecy, by donkey if needs be, etc.).

Jesus's resurrection was real but also had symbolic importance in that it showed us that victory over death (and therefore, sin, for the wages of sin is death). This is the good news of Jesus.

And for your pleasure I purposely did not quote the Bible.

Firstly, the Buddha is not dead. He has attained Nirvana, a state of utter peace and freedom. The other name of the Buddha gives Nirvana is the Deathless State (Amata) because after one attains it one is no longer subject to birth or death. But this is only expedient means according to the Lotus sutra which Shakyamuni, the Buddha's enlightentement whose life is Eternal. Of course Nirvana is not the naive 'eternal life' described in the Bible, where the body is resurrected and where angels sing. In fact it is so subtle it is not easy to describe. However it is not non-existence, as the Buddha makes very clear (Majjhima Nikaya Sutta; Sutta Nipata).

It is equally untrue to say that the Buddha cannot help us. During his forty year career, the Buddha explained in great detail and with masterly clarity everything we need to attain Nirvana. All we need to do is to follow his instructions. His words are as helpful and as valid today as when he first spoke them. Of course the Buddha doesn't help us in the same way as Christians claim Jesus helps them, and for a very good reason. If a student knew that during the exams he could ask the Leacher for the answers to the exam questions, he would never study and consequently would never learn. If an athlete knew that by merely asking for it the judge would give him the prize, he would never bother to train and develop his body. Simply giving people everything they ask for does not necessarily help them. In fact, it guarantees that they will remain weak, dependent and lazy.

Shakyamuni, the Buddha, pointed us to Nirvana and told us what provisions we would need for the journey. As we proceed, we will learn from our experiences and our mistakes, developing strength, maturity and wisdom as we do. Consequently when we finish our journey we will be completely different persons from when we started. Because of the Buddha's skilful help we will be fully enlightened.

To say that the Buddha is dead and cannot help you is not only wrong it also implies that in contrast, Jesus is alive and can and does help you.

Let us look at these two assumptions. Christians claim that Jesus is alive but what evidence is there of this? They will say that the Bible proves that Jesus rose from the dead. Unfortunately statements written by a few people thousands of years ago don't prove anything. A statement in the Mahabharata (one of the Hindu holy books) says that a saint had a chariot which could fly. But does this prove that the ancient Indians invented the aeroplane? Of course it does not. The ancient Egyptian scriptures say that the god Khnum created everything out of clay which he shaped on a potters wheel. Does this prove that everything which exists is just mud? Of course it does not. A passage in the Old Testament says that a man named Balaam had a donkey which could talk. Is that conclusive proof that animals can speak? Of course it is not.

We cannot uncritically accept claims made in the Bible any more than we can uncritically accept claims made in other sacred books. When we examine Bible claims about Jesus' supposed resurrection we find very good reasons why we should not believe them . In fact, the Bible actually proves that Jesus is not alive. Just before he was crucified Jesus told his disciples that he would return before the last of them had died (Matt 10:23, Matt 16:28, Lk 21:32). That was 2000 years ago. Jesus has still not returned. Why? Obviously because he is dead.

The second assumption is that Jesus always responds when you pray to him. It is very easy to prove that this is not true. Christians die from sicknesses, suffer from misfortunes, have emotional problems, give in to temptations etc just as non-Christians do and despite the fact that they pray to Jesus for help. I have a friend who had been a devout Christian for many years. Gradually he began to doubt and he asked his pastor for help. The pastor instructed him to pray and even got members of the church to also pray for him. Yet despite all these prayers to Jesus for strength and guidance my friend's doubts increased and he eventually left the church. Later he became a Buddhist. If Jesus is really alive and ready to help why do Christians have just as many problems as non-Christians do? Why didn't Jesus answer my friend's prayers and help him to remain a Christian? Obviously because he is dead and cannot help.

YOu might object to answer this question that there are people who can testify that their prayers have been answered. If this is true, it is also true that there are Muslims, Taoists, Sikhs, Hindus, Shintos and devotees of Kuan Yin and not too mention Buddhists who can say the same thing.

Originally posted by mahasattva
My dear friend. If it appears that I have been hard on Christianity, I hope this will not be interpreted as being motivated by malice to criticise for its own sake.

No, that is not my intention. Some Buddhists may object to a thing like this, believing that such a gentle and tolerant religion as Buddhism should refrain from criticizing other religions. This is certainly not what the Buddha himself taught. In the Mahaparinibbana Sutta he said that his disciples should be able to "Teach the Dhamma(law), declare it, establish it, expound it, analyse it, make it clear, and be able by means of the Dhamma to refute false teachings that have arisen. " Subjecting a point of view to careful scrutiny and criticism has an important part to play in helping to winnow truth from falsehood. Criticism of another religion only becomes inappropriate when it is based on a deliberate misrepresentation of that religion, or when it descends into an exercise in ridicule and name-calling. I hope I have avoided doing this.

Originally posted by Wonderer
Maybe what I know about what Buddha really said and what you know what he said is different then. The point is that you will achieve no good by criticising other religions. What makes us Buddhists different than other religions is indeed in the fact that we don't go out trying to convince others of our truth, but that they can see from the example that we set that we are truly humble and that we don't think we are right and others wrong.
There really is no need for criticism, loving-kindness is what we need in the world, you will only cause unnecessary conflict if you try to convince other religions of their faults.
Let us set an example of unconditional loving-kindness without the need to criticise other religions, which is a waste of precious time.

In the spirit of Buddhist Dialogue, a forum like this needs open discussion with an open heart and mind. It is not winning or convincing the truth over what is right and other is wrong but its a matter of expounding the Law or teaching embodied therein ..." to teach the Law, declare it, establish it, expound it, analyse it, make it clear, and be able by means of the Law to refute false teachings(or distorted beleifs) that have arisen..." It is true that we need loving-kindness in times the Law was not obscured and distorted but there are times that we shoud associate compassion to others. It is then our practice to use our wisdom when to stand up this oppression and teach the Law to others.

Originally posted by mahasattva
"Don't believe in anything simply because you heard it.
Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.
Do not believe in anything because it is spoken and rumored by many.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.
Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.
But after observation and analysis, you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept and live up to it." ---The Buddha Sakyamuni

A fine piece of advice...but why should we believe it? 🙂 Is this not just another dogmatic shortcut?

Originally posted by Alliance
A fine piece of advice...but why should we believe it? 🙂 Is this not just another dogmatic shortcut?

🙄 You are your own trap. 🙄

I am or Buddha?

Originally posted by Alliance
I am or Buddha?

What? 😕

The tarp!

...I mean trap.

ITS A TARP!

Originally posted by Alliance
A fine piece of advice...but why should we believe it? 🙂 Is this not just another dogmatic shortcut?

Dogmatic crap can still have good advice. Only a fool ignores good advice because of where it came from.

Originally posted by Regret
Dogmatic crap can still have good advice. Only a fool ignores good advice because of where it came from.

A smart rat can steal the cheese right out of the trap without setting it off.

Originally posted by Wonderer
Very good point, my friend. We are a bit more enlightened when we realise that God works in mysterious ways. 🙂