Is God A super being?

Originally posted by Oneness
Because I believe that refusal to create a life you were meant to live is actually worse than drowning. Worse than death.

A life of randomized mediocrity, which for me led to unavoidably miserable circumstances almost daily.

All religions were influenced by circumstances of coincidentally convenient circumstances, I believe.

In Buddhism I create the life I am meant to live. I take responsibility and do not need to be saved from someone else's sin against a god that is man-made.

The Bible is notorious for the irrefutable facts it lays down. This is before science demonstrated why it is unwise to make anything irrefutable (the human element). It is quite egotistical to claim that any man-made idea cannot be refuted by another man's idea.

When new facts that are controversial to contemporary beliefs are added to the table; it will be logic that is the deciding factor on what stays and what goes, not the ignorance of logic.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
In Buddhism I create the life I am meant to live. I take responsibility and do not need to be saved from someone else's sin against a god that is man-made.

If someone doesn't really have a desire to do something (like run over your best friend); but does so merely because there're circumstantial signs that he shouldn't run over that person (this is equivalent to sinning against God I suppose), then you pay for the sins committed by another against God.

There're are many, many examples of collateral damage when the system is off-put. You are kinda damned for "sinning against God"; in my experience. There's a direct retribution, an eye for an eye. I've experienced it myself. My unfortunate event could be ironically correlated to an earlier event in which I victimized another. I busted someone's nose and got away with it, then someone busted my nose and got away with it.

Originally posted by Oneness
Not quite.

If someone doesn't really have a desire to do something (like run over your best friend); but does so merely because there're circumstantial signs that he shouldn't run over that person (this is equivalent to sinning against God I suppose), then you pay for the sins committed by another against God.

No. I would pay for the sin against my friend who I ran over.

Originally posted by Oneness
There're are many, many examples of collateral damage when the system is off-put. You are kinda damned for "sinning against God"; in my experience. There's a direct retribution, an eye for an eye. I've experienced it myself. Irony.

No.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No. I would pay for the sin against my friend who I ran over.

The friend that was run over was a friend of yours, not the murderers.

No.

I'm referring to karma, retribution for a sin, carried out upon the sinner. The flip-side of collateral damage caused by sin, damage to the innocent.

Originally posted by Oneness
The friend that was run over was a friend of yours, not the murderers.

Yes.

I'm referring to karma, the other side of collateral damage caused by sin. Damage to the innocent.

If I didn't run him over, then I didn't sin against him. Now I will suffer because of my attachment to him, but that is a good thing.

I don't think you understand what Karma is. Sin has nothing to do with Karma.

Christian philosophies that are not thought of in Buddhism, and Buddhist philosophies that are not thought of in Christianity, may build upon the collective of what we're all trying to understand.

Frank Herbert made a comment about this in the foreword of his best-selling work Dune.

Originally posted by Oneness
Christianity philosophies that are not stated in Buddhism, and Buddhist philosophies that are not stated in Christianity, may build upon the collective of what we're all trying to understand.

Frank Herbert made a comment about this in the foreword of his best-selling work Dune.

My bible has read text for the words of Jesus. When I read just the red text, I am reading Buddhism.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If I didn't run him over, then I didn't sin against him. Now I will suffer because of my attachment to him, but that is a good thing.

My example has implications for why damnation may be valid.

I don't think you understand what Karma is. Sin has nothing to do with Karma.

A miserable act by you on another has born a miserable act on you by another; in my second example.

That is a karmic response.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
My bible has red text for the words of Jesus. When I read just the red text, I am reading Buddhism.

Why label it Buddhism? I'd label all of it simply as "nature".

Originally posted by Oneness
My example has implications for why damnation may be valid.

A miserable act by you on another has born a miserable act on you by another; in my second example.

That is a karmic response.

Not really. That is a Christianization of Karma.

Here's a better example of damnation.

You have nothing to be gained for stealing another man's woman, but you do so simply because God has, in some form of divinity, commanded you specifically not to. It turns out your child with that particular woman ends up being disfigured at birth. The child bares the weight of your sins.

Damnation, just like Adam and Eve. Karma and damnation may both have some validity; they may recur for everyone should we be daring enough to test these notions.

Originally posted by Oneness
...Why label it Buddhism?...

I'm a Buddhist.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Christianization of Karma.

Eye for an eye.

The Golden Rule.

Dark times call for a walk in the light.

Cause and effect.

You limit yourself by not being able to look at something from multiple perspectives.

Originally posted by Oneness
Why label it Buddhism?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I'm a Buddhist.

😆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I'm a Buddhist.

First and foremost.

Science is only a way of demystifying fact from fiction. The best way to uncover the truth of nature.

When myth-busting is applied to philosophies (beliefs about nature, as opposed to its cold hard facts) like Buddhism and Christianity, it can only improve said viewpoints. When you can take what's new or unusual, in an interesting way, from each religion and combine it, and put that collective philosophical understanding under the microscope of science, you get the kind of ideology in which I practice.

And I've been called a "Saganist".

Because this is something that Carl Sagan did, as well.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I create the life I am meant to live.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
That sounds like an oxymoron.

Consider who I was talking to.

Wondering why you'd consider me a moron.

Originally posted by Oneness
Wondering why you'd consider me a moron.

Not a moron, but you can't communicate. Your thoughts are disjointed, and illogical. Perhaps you should go for a time without taking any drugs at all. See if your head clears. I would suggest professional help, if you haven't already done that.