Originally posted by DigiMark007
True, but Quiero just has it in for atheists. He makes blanket assumptions about them, despite not being one himself (most of them bigoted and false), and doesn't believe that anyone else is right but him. I've attempted to reason with him before, and also preach tolerance and understanding, but some of his statements paint atheists almost as lesser humans (and at the very least uninformed and simplistic in their ideologies) and he never really relented from such opinions, as his comments here elucidate....but along your point's line, you could also phrase it as "There's belief and non-belief," and so by that account he's casually ignoring half of the spectrum. I'd tend to favor agnosticism and atheism on equal footing with the others, rather than a greater share of importance. Or if we consider worldwide adherents, agnosticism would be #4 (#3 if you add atheists to the total). But in either case he's just ignoring them because of his personal biases, not because they deserve to be ignored.
Look at the title of the thread; Another Religion. I was answering the question. Atheism is not a religion.
And I don't seek out Atheists and beat them up, in case you think that.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
OK, what do you call a person who believe that all gods are man made, but that the universe was a living being, and therefore, God?
A fake Buddhist.
Originally posted by Bardock42
That's not quite correct. You could possibly be a theistic agnostic as well. Not very common I guess.
True. However, one may argue that a reasonable person cannot hold a belief to be true while simultaneously holding the belief that he does not know whether or not his belief is true.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
There are two types of Atheism; Positive Atheism is the affirmative belief that gods do not exist, and Negative Atheism is the absence of belief that gods exist.
Ah. I'm familiar with the distinction and I'm glad you made it as well...I had just never heard it called negative atheism. Most are the latter, since the former is difficult to defend.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Look at the title of the thread; Another Religion. I was answering the question. Atheism is not a religion.And I don't seek out Atheists and beat them up, in case you think that.
That's playing semantics. Atheism is a set of beliefs, and falls along the spectrum of "religion." If it isn't, what is atheism doing in this forum? And just like no two Christians are alike in their exact beliefs, you'll find variance among atheists as well, so you're mischaracterization of atheism earlier is still false.
As for the latter, I realize you don't go looking to pick fights, but having harmful or incorrect opinions about a group of people is no less acceptable if you only express them when asked. The degree is perhaps lesser, but the hatred and ignorance persists.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
That's playing semantics. Atheism is a set of beliefs, and falls along the spectrum of "religion." If it isn't, what is atheism doing in this forum? And just like no two Christians are alike in their exact beliefs, you'll find variance among atheists as well, so you're mischaracterization of atheism earlier is still false.
Its not word games at all. Is being anti-politics a politcal party? Is being anti-music a musical genre? No. Those are just antagonistic responses to something that exists. Same with being atheist; it exists outside of the religious spectrum completely.
Originally posted by Quiero MotaYet, to give a full view of human relations towards Religion you'd have to illuminate that part as well. Just saying if you want to teach "the big 5" it would just be reasonable to give an introduction to atheism as well.
Its not word games at all. Is being anti-politics a politcal party? Is being anti-music a musical genre? No. Those are just antagonistic responses to something that exists. Same with being atheist; it exists outside of the religious spectrum completely.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yet, to give a full view of human relations towards Religion you'd have to illuminate that part as well. Just saying if you want to teach "the big 5" it would just be reasonable to give an introduction to atheism as well.
👆
...which is a better way of stating what I was trying to get at. He played semantics to say atheist thought isn't necessary. Ok, but from a practical standpoint it deserves equal say with the others, regardless of whether or not one categorizes it as a religion or not.
Stephen Jay Gould has a famous quote that's something to the affect of "To understand the human condition, you must understand religion." Similarly, to understand religion and the social phenomenon that is religious interaction in the world, it does a person a world of good to understand the entirety of the spectrum.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I wasn't joking. Buddha never talked about the universe being a living thing. Your adding to your religion. He also never posited that God was made up.
Buddha did not talk about any gods, or about the origin of the universe. However, there is no restriction in my religion on the topic of god. My views belong to me, but I am still a Buddhist.
What you are saying is something that Christians say about other Christians. Things like “Mormons are not true Christians” are just silliness even among Christians, but when you try to apply that flawed thinking to Buddhists, it is laughable. All types of Buddhists are Buddhists.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Buddha did not talk about any gods, or about the origin of the universe. However, there is no restriction in my religion on the topic of god. My views belong to me, but I am still a Buddhist.What you are saying is something that Christians say about other Christians. Things like “Mormons are not true Christians” are just silliness even among Christians, but when you try to apply that flawed thinking to Buddhists, it is laughable. All types of Buddhists are Buddhists.
It's technically true. You're adding to your religion. Buddha never talked about any of that, and you're just taking it upon yourself to adhere to beliefs that your religion has nothing to do with.
Like I've said; you're an American pseudo Buddhist.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It's technically true. You're adding to your religion. Buddha never talked about any of that, and you're just taking it upon yourself to adhere to beliefs that your religion has nothing to do with.Like I've said; you're an American pseudo Buddhist.
No, I am not a coffee house Buddhist, if that is what you mean by "American pseudo Buddhist". Someone like that would not have a practice. They would just read a few books and talk about the philosophy . I have a daily practice, and I go to meeting and Buddhist activities. In many ways I'm more active in my religion them a lot of Christians I know. Sure I was not born into the religion, but that is my parent's fault.
Buddha never talked about evolution. So, if a Buddhist believed in evolution, would you call them an American pseudo Buddhist?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, I am not a coffee house Buddhist, if that is what you mean by "American pseudo Buddhist". Someone like that would not have a practice. They would just read a few books and talk about the philosophy . I have a daily practice, and I go to meeting and Buddhist activities. In many ways I'm more active in my religion them a lot of Christians I know. Sure I was not born into the religion, but that is my parent's fault.Buddha never talked about evolution. So, if a Buddhist believed in evolution, would you call them an American pseudo Buddhist?
Yes you are. Go to Thailand, Vietnam, Bhutan, or any other country that has a large population of real Buddhists. Ask them if they think the universe is alive or if a god has anything to do with their lives. The answer will be no, because they don't add to their religion's founder's teachings. I'm thoroughly convinced that Buddhism in the US is just a fad, and people like you and SpearofDestiny show it. It's no different than those middle-aged white guys who call themselves Hare Krishnas and play drums on street corners on Saturday nights.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Yes you are. Go to Thailand, Vietnam, Bhutan, or any other country that has a large population of real Buddhists. Ask them if they think the universe is alive or if a god has anything to do with their lives. The answer will be no, because they don't add to their religion's founder's teachings. I'm thoroughly convinced that Buddhism in the US is just a fad, and people like you and SpearofDestiny show it. It's no different than those middle-aged white guys who call themselves Hare Krishnas and play drums on street corners on Saturday nights.
If Buddhism was a type of religion that required people to adhere to a strict book of beliefs, it might as well be Christianity.
You don't know me or SOD. I will judge you by the same measure you judge me. Cars are not a part of Christianity. If you could ask Jesus about cars, he would not know what you are talking about. Therefore you are adding to your religion by working on or talking about cars.
You see, when I talk about God, or the universe being alive, I am only talking about something as important as cars.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If Buddhism was a type of religion that required people to adhere to a strict book of beliefs, it might as well be Christianity.You don't know me or SOD. I will judge you by the same measure you judge me. Cars are not a part of Christianity. If you could ask Jesus about cars, he would not know what you are talking about. Therefore you are adding to your religion by working on or talking about cars.
You see, when I talk about God, or the universe being alive, I am only talking about something as important as cars.
That was the stupidest analogy in history. What does my profession have to do with your opinion on the origin of the cosmos? Absolutely nothing. Being a mechanic has nothing to do with religion, at all.
And you keep saying that there's no stringent rules in Buddhism about theistic teachings, and maybe that's why its popular with some people in the US. You can call yourself a Buddhist, and all the while be lazy about the religion, hell you can even torque it to suit your arbitrarily made up beliefs.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
That was the stupidest analogy in history. What does my profession have to do with your opinion on the origin of the cosmos? Absolutely nothing. Being a mechanic has nothing to do with religion, at all.
…and having an opinion that is outside of my religion has nothing to do with my religion.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
And you keep saying that there's no stringent rules in Buddhism about theistic teachings, and maybe that's why its popular with some people in the US. You can call yourself a Buddhist, and all the while be lazy about the religion, hell you can even torque it to suit your arbitrarily made up beliefs.
I am never lazy about my religion. My religion is a practice, not talk.
In the defense of the view of others, it's been my experience that in America most buddhists are following a fad. It's kind of like that song that says: "But isn't she pissed at all the other non-conformists; listening to that same obscure band!" Your typical American "buddhist" has read a few books; maybe went out and bought a buddha statue that he lights a scented candle in front of everyday; probably even sits on a mat a few of times a week and thinks about his life, and calls all that striving for enlightenment.
If I was the dalai lama, I'd be shitting my pants over the Scream 4, independant film festival, starbucks, consumerism version of buddhism that's going on in America today.
And before a bunch of you jump on me, that was not directed at anyone in particular. It was just an observation based on experience. And if there are any real buddhists here, they should be angry over the poor representation of buddhism that is presented by these types of in-name-only buddhists.