If you really want to make him nuts, why don’t you outline all the “teachings of Jesus” that have their roots in Buddhism or Eastern thought? That will make his head implode :)[/quote]
You don’t know me well then… I am not a bible thumper if you haven’t noticed. Most cultures managed in some way shape or form, to develop ‘Christian’ tenets for themselves. However, if you argue the direct link between eastern thought and Christianity “ripping it off” I am going to have to demand proof.[/quote]
If they developed Christian “tenets” how is it that theirs predates Christianity?
"In 1883, Max MÃ?¼ller, the pioneering scholar of comparative religion and orientalist, asserted in his India: What it Can Teach Us: “That there are startling coincidences between Buddhism and Christianity cannot be denied, and it must likewise be admitted that Buddhism existed at least 400 years before Christianity.”
Do I really have to spell it out for you? I simply alluded that other cultures and/ or religions would have some fundamentals at their core that a lot of people would identify as Christian tenets. Not that they are soley Christian and yet some how manage to predate Christianity.
And I have no issues with Buddhism or hinduism or any other ism. If they have any legitimacy what so ever they should preach peace over fighting, love over hate, spirituality over materialism. If they do not at least preach such things then they have no legitimacy of religion or faith. I am making the claim that this is not exclusive to Christianity.
[quote]ironcross wrote:
Galileo was put under house arrest by the Catholic Church because his findings contradicted religious beliefs at the time[/quote]
Careful…
I know of even two prominent atheists on PWI who will be happy to tell you that your statement here is rather, um, wrong. [/quote]
I have hundreds of history books that say my statement is right. Even a quick google search, under regular or scholar, will verify this.
http://www.enotes.com/topics/galileo-galilei http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node52.html
“Galileo lay down the chief elements of his mechanics in Dialog on the Two Chief Systems of the World (1632), which was supposed to be an objective debate between the Copernican and Ptolemaic system. Unfortunately, Galileo put the Pope’s favorite argument in the mouth of one of the characters, then proceeded to ridicule it. Galileo suddenly lost favor with the church, and was forced to recant his Copernican views and put under house arrest. Misner et al. (1973 p. 38)” http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Galileo.html
[quote]pat wrote:
Most cultures managed in some way shape or form, to develop ‘Christian’ tenets for themselves. However, if you argue the direct link between eastern thought and Christianity “ripping it off” I am going to have to demand proof.[/quote]
I’m not knocking christianity here but most, if not all of the tenets existed in many cultures long before there was a christian religion.
[/quote]
Yup. Even the rituals. [/quote]
Buddhism, Christianism, Taoism and Confucianism have one essential thing in common :
They tried to replace the neolithic law of violent retribution with a new law : a law of universal love.
Christianity did it in a very unique way : its founder sacrified himself.
One “scapegoat” to abolish the need of scapegoating forever.
I’m often quite surprised to see how few people actually understand this. Even amongst christians.
You might be interested in the Dalai Lama’s collaboration with neuroscientists to research whether or not the claims of certain Eastern beliefs regarding the power of meditation and mind over matter are true. http://www.dalailama.com/news/post/104-how-thinking-can-change-the-brain
[/quote]
I’m just slapping at low-hanging fruit here, but you don’t find it ironic that it is Western scientists he is working with to get to the bottom of this issue?
;)[/quote]
LOL! That occurred to me too.
[/quote]
Not at all. Now, let’s speed back a couple thousand years. All of the Western philosophers would be copying each others’ doctrines, which were not always accurate while the Eastern philosophers were branching out in radical pathways that were randomly useful to others a small percentage of the time. Now that the Western philosophy has changed to implement a process of questioning, the East can implement it in their old tradition of questioning to confirm personal anecdote. It’s the evaporation of a dichotomy.
[/quote]
How about providing some examples of Eastern Philosophers branching out in to radical pathways, because I don’t see it. It may be lack of exposure though which is why I am asking for an example.
Western philosophers don’t copy each other’s doctrine, because they don’t write doctrine. It’s a discipline that studies it’s own history as it should. You need to know what’s already been done in order to move forward. If the information isn’t being exchanged, then the same shit is being rediscovered over and over again and not moving forward. That is what I am accussing eastern philosophy of doing.
I assure you, food safety in the west is light years ahead of the Chinese. You know all the mercury poisoning and shit. Little things like that. I like my Chinese food made in America.
[quote]
There is truth to many of the claims in Eastern medicine, but the old forms of supplementation often destroy the active compounds. By completely dismissing all of the old claims, we would miss out on many active compounds that can be isolated and used to progress medicine. It’s a mistake to dismiss old wisdom, but progress to see what part of the story is true. Unfortunately, the West often dismisses all old anecdote and tries to start from scratch, with the result of wasting trillions of dollars on manufacturing compounds that are too toxic to make it past the FDA.[/quote]
I agree it’s a mistake to disregard old wisdom. There were herbs and compounds that did and do work. But if I am deathly ill and have the choice between eastern and western treatments, I am going west young man…[/quote]
I think our definition of “eastern medicine” is different. I’m referring to how to glean useful knowledge from old anecdote and apply it in scientifically effective ways. You’re talking about just applying the old ways.
If I’m deathly ill, I’m not going to completely trust either research on supplements or research on newly manufactured chemicals; I’m going to do some research on my own. No country has the complete story in all medicine at this time. It really depends on what you have. What I wouldn’t do is simply rely on old wives tales or untested medicine, which is not what I’m referring to above.
Over time these distinctions will probably meld into one global network of knowledge. The truth is that the West is driven by the power of the dollar and there’s little incentive to research things that you can’t slap a patent on (garlic or other supplements). Other countries research spends more money on these things. I don’t know what their monetary incentive is.
[quote] pat wrote:
How about providing some examples of Eastern Philosophers branching out in to radical pathways, because I don’t see it. It may be lack of exposure though which is why I am asking for an example.
Western philosophers don’t copy each other’s doctrine, because they don’t write doctrine. It’s a discipline that studies it’s own history as it should. You need to know what’s already been done in order to move forward. If the information isn’t being exchanged, then the same shit is being rediscovered over and over again and not moving forward. That is what I am accussing eastern philosophy of doing. [/quote]
Kamui’s statement resolves this pretty well.
[quote]
Actually, our labels “philosophy” and “religion” are a bit misleading here.
Strictly speaking, Eastern philosophies are neither religion nor philosophy as we know it.
They aren’t theories. They are praxis. Methods. First and foremost.
You have to figure out why it works and how it works.
If you think it’s incorrect, it’s not really because you are wrong, but because you are doing it wrong.
If we could meaningfully compare western religions and eastern religions, we should compare Christianity and Shintoism, or Christianity and traditionnal ancestors worship. Not Christianity and Buddhism, or Christianity and Confucianism.
The only thing vaguely close to dharmic philosophies we have had in the West were the spiritual exercises of Stoicism and Epicurianism.
Both are long lost. [/quote]
[quote]pat wrote:
Most cultures managed in some way shape or form, to develop ‘Christian’ tenets for themselves. However, if you argue the direct link between eastern thought and Christianity “ripping it off” I am going to have to demand proof.[/quote]
I’m not knocking christianity here but most, if not all of the tenets existed in many cultures long before there was a christian religion.
[/quote]
Yup. Even the rituals. [/quote]
Buddhism, Christianism, Taoism and Confucianism have one essential thing in common :
They tried to replace the neolithic law of violent retribution with a new law : a law of universal love.
Christianity did it in a very unique way : its founder sacrified himself.
One “scapegoat” to abolish the need of scapegoating forever.
I’m often quite surprised to see how few people actually understand this. Even amongst christians.
[/quote]
I am surprised at how well you understand it… You are unique among Agnostics, you’re the only one I have conversed with that doesn’t have a bone to pick. My curiosity is piqued. And I don’t wish to make a mistake, do you consider yourself agnostic or atheist?
[quote]pat wrote:
Most cultures managed in some way shape or form, to develop ‘Christian’ tenets for themselves. However, if you argue the direct link between eastern thought and Christianity “ripping it off” I am going to have to demand proof.[/quote]
I’m not knocking christianity here but most, if not all of the tenets existed in many cultures long before there was a christian religion.
[/quote]
Yup. Even the rituals. [/quote]
Buddhism, Christianism, Taoism and Confucianism have one essential thing in common :
They tried to replace the neolithic law of violent retribution with a new law : a law of universal love.
Christianity did it in a very unique way : its founder sacrified himself.
One “scapegoat” to abolish the need of scapegoating forever.
I’m often quite surprised to see how few people actually understand this. Even amongst christians.
[/quote]
I am not quite convinced that Daoism is promoting universal love.
This goes back to the topic which started the thread, which is the results of the practice of Eastern and Western religion. One of the outcomes of Judeo-Christian religions is the need to “save others” whereas Eastern religions focus on the need to separate one’s self from outcome. While all religions are attempting to solve the same problem, the methods and demands placed on the person following them are quite different. This has resulted in them playing drastically different roles in the progression of human history.
[quote]pat wrote:
Most cultures managed in some way shape or form, to develop ‘Christian’ tenets for themselves. However, if you argue the direct link between eastern thought and Christianity “ripping it off” I am going to have to demand proof.[/quote]
I’m not knocking christianity here but most, if not all of the tenets existed in many cultures long before there was a christian religion.
[/quote]
Yup. Even the rituals. [/quote]
Buddhism, Christianism, Taoism and Confucianism have one essential thing in common :
They tried to replace the neolithic law of violent retribution with a new law : a law of universal love.
Christianity did it in a very unique way : its founder sacrified himself.
One “scapegoat” to abolish the need of scapegoating forever.
I’m often quite surprised to see how few people actually understand this. Even amongst christians.
[/quote]
I am not quite convinced that Daoism is promoting universal love.[/quote]
really ?
“Act without expectation.” is probably one the best definition of universal love i have ever read.
or this :
“Embracing Tao, you become embraced.
Supple, breathing gently, you become reborn.
Clearing your vision, you become clear.
Nurturing your beloved, you become impartial.
Opening your heart, you become accepted.
Accepting the World, you embrace Tao.
Bearing and nurturing,
Creating but not owning,
Giving without demanding,
Controlling without authority,
This is love.”
the new-age version of Daoism which is currently sold in the West, especially in the martial arts world, do not empashize Love… probably because it would make it sound too much christian.
[quote]ironcross wrote:
Galileo was put under house arrest by the Catholic Church because his findings contradicted religious beliefs at the time[/quote]
Careful…
I know of even two prominent atheists on PWI who will be happy to tell you that your statement here is rather, um, wrong. [/quote]
I have hundreds of history books that say my statement is right. Even a quick google search, under regular or scholar, will verify this.[/quote]
You have hundreds of history books? I like history, but your really, really like history. Damn.
He was under house arrest for publishing a book and being to “Copernican” in his writing, when he said he wouldn’t be. The church has retracted and apologized for the mistake. Man you hold a grudge, that was 500 years ago.
Just like people, churches run by people make mistakes. But it was learned from and corrected. Further, if it weren’t for this mistake, the church would not have opened it’s heart to science and the revelation that science is non-contradictory to religion. Truth is truth no matter where is comes from.
-There is no need to “save others” in Christianity.
Christ already saved them. Once for all.
You just have to tell people the good news. And testify.
It’s what “Evangil” means.
-Not all Eastern philosophies are focused on individual salvation. Collective (or even universal) salvation are core tenets of some versions of Buddhism.
This is not something the East solved long ago. It’s an open question, and an hard one. The main reason of the schism between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism.
This goes back to the topic which started the thread, which is the results of the practice of Eastern and Western religion. [/quote] No, it was about eastern and western philosophy, not religion. But I have an inescapable feeling this is going to get linked no matter what.[quote]One of the outcomes of Judeo-Christian religions is the need to “save others”[/quote] No. There is no need to ‘save’ others. People can’t save people, religion can’t save people, only God can do that. We are called to serve others.[quote] whereas Eastern religions focus on the need to separate one’s self from outcome. [/quote] What outcome and how do you save your self from it? [quote]While all religions are attempting to solve the same problem, the methods and demands placed on the person following them are quite different. This has resulted in them playing drastically different roles in the progression of human history.[/quote]
Religions aren’t trying to solve any problems. The purpose of religion is to communicate with that which is greater than it’s creation. Religion is a way of doing that. It’s a vehicle not an end in itself. Having a goal of anything other than drawing closer to God is a misuse of religion.
[quote]ironcross wrote:
Galileo was put under house arrest by the Catholic Church because his findings contradicted religious beliefs at the time[/quote]
Careful…
I know of even two prominent atheists on PWI who will be happy to tell you that your statement here is rather, um, wrong. [/quote]
I have hundreds of history books that say my statement is right. Even a quick google search, under regular or scholar, will verify this.[/quote]
You have hundreds of history books? I like history, but your really, really like history. Damn.
He was under house arrest for publishing a book and being to “Copernican” in his writing, when he said he wouldn’t be. The church has retracted and apologized for the mistake. Man you hold a grudge, that was 500 years ago.
Just like people, churches run by people make mistakes. But it was learned from and corrected. Further, if it weren’t for this mistake, the church would not have opened it’s heart to science and the revelation that science is non-contradictory to religion. Truth is truth no matter where is comes from. [/quote]
Repost:
have hundreds of history books that say my statement is right. Even a quick google search, under regular or scholar, will verify this.
[quote]ironcross wrote:
Galileo was put under house arrest by the Catholic Church because his findings contradicted religious beliefs at the time[/quote]
Careful…
I know of even two prominent atheists on PWI who will be happy to tell you that your statement here is rather, um, wrong. [/quote]
I have hundreds of history books that say my statement is right. Even a quick google search, under regular or scholar, will verify this.[/quote]
You have hundreds of history books? I like history, but your really, really like history. Damn.
He was under house arrest for publishing a book and being to “Copernican” in his writing, when he said he wouldn’t be. The church has retracted and apologized for the mistake. Man you hold a grudge, that was 500 years ago.
Just like people, churches run by people make mistakes. But it was learned from and corrected. Further, if it weren’t for this mistake, the church would not have opened it’s heart to science and the revelation that science is non-contradictory to religion. Truth is truth no matter where is comes from. [/quote]
Repost:
have hundreds of history books that say my statement is right. Even a quick google search, under regular or scholar, will verify this.
This goes back to the topic which started the thread, which is the results of the practice of Eastern and Western religion. [/quote] No, it was about eastern and western philosophy, not religion. But I have an inescapable feeling this is going to get linked no matter what.[quote]One of the outcomes of Judeo-Christian religions is the need to “save others”[/quote] No. There is no need to ‘save’ others. People can’t save people, religion can’t save people, only God can do that. We are called to serve others.[quote] whereas Eastern religions focus on the need to separate one’s self from outcome. [/quote] What outcome and how do you save your self from it? [quote]While all religions are attempting to solve the same problem, the methods and demands placed on the person following them are quite different. This has resulted in them playing drastically different roles in the progression of human history.[/quote]
Religions aren’t trying to solve any problems. The purpose of religion is to communicate with that which is greater than it’s creation. Religion is a way of doing that. It’s a vehicle not an end in itself. Having a goal of anything other than drawing closer to God is a misuse of religion.[/quote]
Fact of life #42: religion is misused. The consequences of this are what I’m talking about.
[quote]pat wrote:
Most cultures managed in some way shape or form, to develop ‘Christian’ tenets for themselves. However, if you argue the direct link between eastern thought and Christianity “ripping it off” I am going to have to demand proof.[/quote]
I’m not knocking christianity here but most, if not all of the tenets existed in many cultures long before there was a christian religion.
[/quote]
Yup. Even the rituals. [/quote]
Buddhism, Christianism, Taoism and Confucianism have one essential thing in common :
They tried to replace the neolithic law of violent retribution with a new law : a law of universal love.
Christianity did it in a very unique way : its founder sacrified himself.
One “scapegoat” to abolish the need of scapegoating forever.
I’m often quite surprised to see how few people actually understand this. Even amongst christians.
[/quote]
I am not quite convinced that Daoism is promoting universal love.[/quote]
really ?
“Act without expectation.” is probably one the best definition of universal love i have ever read.
or this :
“Embracing Tao, you become embraced.
Supple, breathing gently, you become reborn.
Clearing your vision, you become clear.
Nurturing your beloved, you become impartial.
Opening your heart, you become accepted.
Accepting the World, you embrace Tao.
Bearing and nurturing,
Creating but not owning,
Giving without demanding,
Controlling without authority,
This is love.”
the new-age version of Daoism which is currently sold in the West, especially in the martial arts world, do not empashize Love… probably because it would make it sound too much christian. [/quote]
-There is no need to “save others” in Christianity.
Christ already saved them. Once for all.
You just have to tell people the good news. And testify.
It’s what “Evangil” means.
-Not all Eastern philosophies are focused on individual salvation. Collective (or even universal) salvation are core tenets of some versions of Buddhism.
This is not something the East solved long ago. It’s an open question, and an hard one. The main reason of the schism between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism.
[/quote]
Do you disagree that the missionaries of Judeo-Christian religion played a part in the spread of Western culture throughout areas that the West eventually attempted to colonize?
Pat, please don’t put words in my mouth. You talked about “lesser men”, not me.
Okay, I wouldn’t have pegged you as someone who feel this way about nuns/mons and monestaries. At least i’ve learned something today!
[quote]Ahhh, we don’t know that. Purging yourself from suffering just means you aren’t suffering, it does not mean your happy. Besides, is incorrect to say that attachments make you unhappy. Relationships make people happy, to relinquish them makes people sad and lonely, not enlightened. Go ahead, relinquish everything and everybody and see how happy you are. This theory is testable.
It may be wonderful to sit in the Tibetan mountains, moan and meditate, but you aren’t doing a lot of people very much good.
Happiness comes from service to people and attachments to people and yes some things, not a lack. If you have nothing and no one all you are is a lonely motherfucker. You may be enlightened, but then your just an enlightened, lonely motherfucker.[/quote]
It’s indeed testable. That is why I’m telling you this eventhough it’s useless. I don’t know why you feel the need to lash out like this, but allright.
Sitting in silence allows for all things to be as they are, and when this happens all there is is happiness.
The only thing required is that you move out of the way.
[quote]ironcross wrote:
Galileo was put under house arrest by the Catholic Church because his findings contradicted religious beliefs at the time[/quote]
Careful…
I know of even two prominent atheists on PWI who will be happy to tell you that your statement here is rather, um, wrong. [/quote]
I have hundreds of history books that say my statement is right. Even a quick google search, under regular or scholar, will verify this.[/quote]
You have hundreds of history books? I like history, but your really, really like history. Damn.
He was under house arrest for publishing a book and being to “Copernican” in his writing, when he said he wouldn’t be. The church has retracted and apologized for the mistake. Man you hold a grudge, that was 500 years ago.
Just like people, churches run by people make mistakes. But it was learned from and corrected. Further, if it weren’t for this mistake, the church would not have opened it’s heart to science and the revelation that science is non-contradictory to religion. Truth is truth no matter where is comes from. [/quote]
Repost:
have hundreds of history books that say my statement is right. Even a quick google search, under regular or scholar, will verify this.
My point was that Eastern Religious figures have sought science to verify their beliefs whereas the Western ones have not. Are there any Judeo-Christian religious figures who are seeking the approval of science? I was under the impression that they assume science will approve of them and therefore there is no need to question.
[quote]
Do you disagree that the missionaries of Judeo-Christian religion played a part in the spread of Western culture throughout areas that the West eventually attempted to colonize?[/quote]
-the judeo- part of the expression never had missionaries. Judaism is not an universalist religion.
-i will agree that the missionaries of Christianity played a complex role in the spread of Western Culture.
But I will disagree (as would any serious historian) that this role was entirely negative.
Acculturation is a destructive process that occured each time an isolated culture is contacted by a more technologically advanced culture.
Even without religious missionarism and military imperialism, the contact between the West and the rest of the world would have been devastating.
In some areas, the works of the missionaries actually preserved some local languages, stories, knowledge that would have been lost forever.