You and your you-language.

You and your deflection.

*sigh*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-message


Can you formulate what you want to say in the form

"When Baker says [insert what you're referring to], I [Tom Storm] feel ____ / think ____ ."

The thing is that you're not distinguishing between my words and your interpretation of my words. You're conflating the two.

The thing is that you're not distinguishing between my words and your interpretation of my words. You're conflating the two. — baker

That’s funny coming from someone who has a habit of interpreting things in the most sneering manner possible.

This is not relevant to the thread and an ongoing distraction. If you want to explore further via PM’s fine, otherwise..

In Theravada and Early Buddhism kamma is intention. Generally, only intentional actions have kammic consequences. This is why two people, externally acting the same way, could face very different kammic consequences if their intentions for doing the actions differ, respectively. — baker

That’s how the law works too. If, for example, you unintentionally kill someone you may be off the hook, depending on the particulars (perhaps including such things as the color of your skin). If you intentionally kill someone you’re going to be in hot water with the law, particularly if you’re poor and can’t afford good legal representation.

The practice of law follows a series of well established steps that take intention into account and is not imponderable.

What you describe looks like Jainism, like I already said. — baker

Yes, I remember you saying that.

Do you remember me asking you: You're claiming that karma & rebirth in Buddhism are not based on cause & effect?

I think this has sometimes more to do with an unwillingness to engage in time-consuming explanations to people who seem hostile rather than anything else. — baker

Sorry I upset you. Maybe try to focus on the “anything else” part and ignore the hostility, if you’re capable. A few deep breaths might help.

And the attitude you've been displaying here certainly doesn't suggest that you're interested in learning about the Buddhist concepts of kamma and rebirth. So why bother? — baker

My mission is not necessarily to learn, though I’m certainly open to the prospect. You responded to statements that I made, not questions.

Why bother? I don’t know.

You should also know that in Buddhism, at least for monks, there are restrictions as to whom they can or should speak about Dhamma and to whom they shouldn't. Lay Buddhist people may also adopt those restrictions. — baker

Not sure why you mention this.

If you find that the Buddhists you're talking to don't seem all that open or willing to discuss things with you, then consider the possibility that you have ticked one or more boxes on that list of restriction criteria. (In my opinion, you have.) You can hardly blame people for setting boundaries on whom they spend their time on. — baker

Are you suggesting that some Buddhists may be able to answer ‘imponderable’ questions about karma and rebirth but don’t because they’re stingy with their time? I don’t think so. I think they can’t answer because they don’t know. Just like no one can answer questions about God.

If they seem evasive to you, bear in mind that from their perspective, you're evasive too. — baker

That covers them and me to some degree, not that it is in any way relevant to our chat. I would ask why you’re evasive, if I cared.

Unanswerable question #2:
What is it that travels from one body to the next body in Buddhist rebirth? They say it’s a soul in Hinduism.

I agree.

I define a regressive person as someone who is uneducated, superstitious, gullible, fearful, and angry. — Art48

I have a degree in Philosoophy and a post grad degree as well, I’m not the least bit superstitious (way more interested in a scientific explanation for any phenomena than some deus ex machina storytelling), not gullible at all as any 55 year adult on this planet should not be anymore. I’m really not as afraid as I probably should be, and I’m definitely too angry, but I know it, and can control it if you’d like.

And I go to Mass every Sunday.

Do I have to explain how your definition of regressive and your linking it to the essence of religion is really nothing more than an insult to religious people?

You have to really know religion, really study a life lived by one who knows and loves god, to build a convincing reduction of religion to ignorant fear, etc. Your sketches of the breadth and depth of religion seem narrow, shallow, and frankly old and tired.

But I am not going to judge some measure of your brain matter that led you to ask if religion promotes backwardness. I’m sure it’s an honest question (if I’m not being too gullible).

Religion, like anything else, must occupy my mind, my body, my desire, my whole human being. Like going to the movies. We all have to choose our content.

For no less than an hour a week, I watch and listen at church. At the movies, I get popcorn and hopefully something to think about, something awesome to see, something beautiful, something terrifying, and maybe something inspirational. I get all of these every week at church (well, bread and wine instead of popcorn).

I know why you look down so low on religion. That’s easy enough to see - all the stupid people who say “Jesus”. But you have to go way further back than the Romans or the Old Testament to find the really stupid, uneducated, fight or flight folks. The ancient Egyptians or Chinese or Sumerians - the slaves of Marcus Aurelius - they are your cousins and uncles and moms and dads, just a generation away, really like yesterday, or when you yourself were 14, no matter what university degree we’ve “advanced” and progressed to. We’re no different, no better. Haven’t come very far at all.

Nothing’s progressed to any degree worth bragging about, or worthy of looking so far down on superstition.

Everyone is still as full of shit as always.

To show me how religion essentially holds us back, you have to show me some great advanced place far from religion where we might go.

The progressive cerebral cortex gave us eugenics, and the nuclear bomb, and so many other highly educated developments, so high above superstition. Should I tie inhumanity to progressivism? Religion gave us the university and the hospital.

Religion can be a source of hope for progress, that there might be some value in progressing at all among you people, my fellow slaves, using that cerebral cortex to maybe find wisdom in love, goodness in the experience of beauty, and these words in any mouths of “progressive man”.

No, the problem is the flamboyant pseudo-intellectuals who have over-reacted to things for the past century, probably for social or even financial profit. There's nothing wrong with scouting your mind for theories about how life began, other life and why and how to be moral.

Because of these people we get ideas like: gender identity, going to Mars (for a need to 'get off the planet'), pointless wars(whereas religious wars were generally more meaningful), unfair trade, and much much more.

The pope doesn't seem like such a bad guy, he doesn't seem like the type to promote stupid policies, at least under his leadership our policies would be wise. It beats a quick look and moan about how confused you are.

Protestant barbarians came up with their own blood libel mythology against Catholics, all the while defending hormones for children, worshipping rabbis and Zionism for decades until Twitter and CNN changed their Python-scripted opinion, shielding Islam against criticism, and pushing the normalisation of sodomy.

They don't hate child abuse, they just hate Catholics, hate Europeans, especially Latin and Greek who they hold so much jealousy for, hate stable families and marriages, hate tradition, hate culture.

I have a degree in Philosoophy and a post grad degree as well, I’m not the least bit superstitious (way more interested in a scientific explanation for any phenomena than some deus ex machina storytelling), not gullible at all as any 55 year adult on this planet should not be anymore. I’m really not as afraid as I probably should be, and I’m definitely too angry, but I know it, and can control it if you’d like.

And I go to Mass every Sunday. — Fire Ologist

I was taught in Catholic school that an unforgiven, unrepented mortal sin at the time of death results in hell. Do you believe that? I was also taught that intentionally missing Sunday Mass without a good reason was a mortal sin. Suppose one Sunday you skipped Mass merely because you didn’t feel like going. Do you believe that if you died unexpectedly later that day that you’d go to hell forever? If you do, you’re a faithful Catholic and IMHO gullible. If you don’t, then you pick and choose like most self-identifying "Catholics". Which is it? Or is this a false dilemma?

To show me how religion essentially holds us back, you have to show me some great advanced place far from religion where we might go. — Fire Ologist

Genuine religion can lead us to God. The idea of the perennial philosophy describes such religion. But religions of state are polluted religions perverted to serve the needs of nations. Christianity “hit the big time” when it was declared the official religion of the Roman Empire. Here’s some references for further philosophical exploration, if you’re interested.
78 - What Is God? https://youtu.be/8_vwtXMNj1M
79 - True God, False Gods https://youtu.be/gzFdC9fTJw0

Scripture teaches us that technological/social progress does not necessarily coincide with the elevation of humanity/spiritual progress (see the Tower of Babel). In other words, that these are two different things. Religion can be regressive, of course, since religion is much more than just Scripture -- religion is also extremely broad making it an easy target. But I think the fundamental scriptural lesson is sound -- a society can be very technologically advanced yet be essentially insane or operating from a very wicked morality. In modernity it is tempting to see progress purely in terms of technology.

"Unrepented mortal sin leads to hell" - Catholic tradition.

I was taught in Catholic school that an unforgiven, unrepented mortal sin at the time of death results in hell. Do you believe that? I was also taught that intentionally missing Sunday Mass without a good reason was a mortal sin. Suppose one Sunday you skipped Mass merely because you didn’t feel like going. Do you believe that if you died unexpectedly later that day that you’d go to hell forever? — Art48

"Unrepented mortal sin leads to hell" - Catholic tradition. — BitconnectCarlos

Unrepented - that is the key. Do we really need to blame God for hell?

You do something you know is wrong (regardless of whatever rule you think exists, be it go to Mass on Sunday, or eat meat on Friday, whatever), you yourself know it is wrong, and that it will hurt others, hurt God himself maybe, and you don't care, and you do it anyway, for spite, just because you want to. That's the mortal sin part. You have to knowingly do evil for evil's sake. Then, having consciously and proudly committed this sin, maybe those harmed ask for help because of their harm, or those wronged simply ask for some small notion of "I'm sorry", but no, the mortal sinner at that moment still could care less about the harm caused and still being caused, he still thinks the act that he himself said to himself was "wrong" and did it anyway, he says "I will not repent. I love my sins first and foremost."

Sounds like a hell of life to me. Sounds like Gaza right now, like Gaza when Jesus walked it. Like earth since humans have been in charge.

Are there sins we can commit that demand punishment? Satan is probably still bragging about his wonderful sins. "I tricked them into killing Jesus on a cross." Like we needed any help anyway - some of us today still want all of that credit.

But it's the unrepentance that is the key - all you have to do is say "whoops, sorry" and God will throw a banquet for you and sit you at his table in paradise.

So this frightening scenario of a mortal sin checklist is for children who need to learn to decide for themselves whether to go to church or not. I'm not saying there are not sins that land us in hell; I'm saying be an adult and that's nothing to fear at all. Once you are an adult, God is going to see your heart and see if you sinned mortally for sake of evil itself, or if you just made a mistake, and what's more, if you say "sorry" he will forgive you immediately even a "mortal" sin.

I know there is more to it all, and the church enforces the rules too, but it's better to understand Jesus whose rules were to love and to forgive others, and to serve. Break those commandments and rules before you fear Jesus.

Short answer to your question, yes, if you die with an unrepented mortal sin, you go to hell as you lived in hell. But that requires the sinner (who, remember, called something a sin, agreed it was a sin, and did it anyway, for spite, to harm, because the sin was what he wanted) - hell requires the sinner to say "I am not sorry."

You can't mortally sin if you don't agree your action is a sin. You have to know it is wrong and do it anyway. So many of us avoid mortal sin because we are ignorant, or we are 7 years old.

God didn't live as a poor beggar to be tortured and die on cross for us, only to later tell us "Well, it says on the checklist that you skipped church a few times, and you didn't honor your father as much as your mother, and you never asked for forgiveness, so, take the elevator to the basement - that's the rules. It's too late for you according to this checklist I have here; I loved you to the point of sacrificing my life on a cross, but the book says hell, so, looks like we are both sorry now."

I know all of that sounds like something a priest might say - but priests are sometimes just actually people, as ignorant as anyone else.

That doesn't sound anything like anything Jesus ever said. A grave sin that cannot be forgiven, I know it exists, but I hope I don't ever want such a thing.

To hell with all of the rules: simple solution to hell - forgive others who sin against you. Be a forgiver. God will throw away all of the rules for one who is merciful. Like Jesus was.

Do we really need to blame God for hell? — Fire Ologist

Of course not, because hell is a fairy tale to scare the gullible, so your mini-sermon that attempts to justify hell is moot.

I know all of that sounds like something a priest might say - but priests are sometimes just actually people, as ignorant as anyone else.

That doesn't sound anything like anything Jesus ever said. A grave sin that cannot be forgiven, I know it exists, but I hope I don't ever want such a thing. — Fire Ologist

It sounds as if you yourself disagree with some things the Catholic Church says in favor of your opinion of what Jesus taught. Here's Matthew 15:1-4 where Jesus is speaking. Can you justify that, too?

1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!” 3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’[a] and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’

Once you are an adult, God is going to see your heart and see if you sinned mortally for sake of evil itself, or if you just made a mistake, and what's more, if you say "sorry" he will forgive you immediately even a "mortal" sin. — Fire Ologist

There's a lot to repentance both in Judaism and Catholicism. I'd like to believe it's that simple.

I believe the purpose of hell, Gehenna, is purification. There the full repentance takes place. Our sinful selves are very often not fit to be in God's presence immediately after death so we must undergo purification before reunion with God. I don't believe in eternal hell.

I don't know whether an internal apology truly covers everything. Murder a few hundred, apologize afterwards -- "we're in the clear!" The murderer won't see the true scope of what he did. That's what I like to think hell is -- the true realization/understanding of one's actions. God may be love, but he is also justice.

And absolutely repent here on Earth as well. Gehenna will be granted out of love. The truly irredeemable will be annihilated.

a fairy tale...with some things the Catholic Church says...... — Art48

If we are talking fairy tales, we can say anything we want, so any attempt at a conversation about something real is moot.

Can you justify that, too? — Art48

But I'll take that as an honest question anyway, for sake of conversation.

Wasn't Jesus in your quote asking them to think again what the law is and who is breaking it? He wasn't telling them why they were wrong. He was asking them why they were happy to enforce the law against some for eating with dirty hands, while they were not enforcing the law against others who cursed their fathers and mothers. This quote doesn't talk about Jesus' relationship to the law, or what the law is, or how or when it should be enforced, or what the result of enforcement is.

He wasn't saying we should be lining people up for execution for cursing their dads and not waste time lining people up for execution for not washing their hands. He was saying the Pharisees were picking the wrong people to enforce the law against.

But back from the fairy tale as you call it, the authority to kill is in all of our hands. I mean, we see people authorizing, and, with their own hands, killing, everyday. If God is just a fairly tale, the authority to kill, or place someone in hell, already always is in our hands. This quote says, "you are not using your authority wisely."

One can also forgive despite authority to kill.

Do you really want to keep talking about all of the laws and commandments, and the complexity of understanding them, and the complexities of enforcing them, from a fairy tale?

I believe the purpose of hell, Gehenna, is purification. ... I don't believe in eternal hell. — BitconnectCarlos

Not to quibble on the details, I basically agree with you.

I think most of us won't be going right to any paradise or heaven. We wouldn't understand how to live there. We need a purification.

And I don't believe there are many in hell. Why would God go to all of the trouble that is saving any one of us, dying on a cross even, to leave any one in hell who simply cried for "God!" and meant it?

But I do believe there are those who are in hell for eternity. At least there may be. They must freely, and truly, see God's hand, slap it away, and run into hell. Such is the great power we've been given - we can earn hell; we can reject love from not just anyone, but love from God. Only such power makes us lovable, only in freedom can such power do good, and only by knowingly rejecting the good, can we seek out hell.

I don't know whether an internal apology truly covers everything. Murder a few hundred, apologize afterwards -- "we're in the clear!" The murderer won't see the true scope of what he did. — BitconnectCarlos

It's good to know there's a sacrament of Penance, an act, taking effort, to openly confess out loud, in front of another person, a priest, to whom you can show your understanding of your sin, and show you understand you need forgiveness now, and seek that forgiveness knowing that you do not have it yet while you seek it.

But ultimately, the internal confession is all that really matters, even during a sacrament. Internally, is where God sees the sin and grants the forgiveness, and internally is where the sin is committed and forgiveness received.

Wasn't Jesus in your quote asking them to think again what the law is and who is breaking it? He wasn't telling them why they were wrong. He was asking them why they were happy to enforce the law against some for eating with dirty hands, while they were not enforcing the law against others who cursed their fathers and mothers. This quote doesn't talk about Jesus' relationship to the law, or what the law is, or how or when it should be enforced, or what the result of enforcement is. — Fire Ologist

So, God "inspires" in two places in the OT the evil command to kill a child who curses a parent .
* Leviticus 20:9 says, “If there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he shall surely be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother, his blood guiltiness is upon him.”
* Deuteronomy 21:18–21 (verses omitted)
Jesus and his Father are one, so the OT commands are the commands of Jesus as much as his Father.

Then, God in the person of Jesus specifically cites the OT commands with approval.
And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, . . ..‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’

But some priest or preacher says when God writes "serpent" God "really means Satan" and when God says kill the child who curses a parent, God "really means don't." Which all goes to demonstrate that Christians follow their priests and preachers, NOT God and not even the (sometimes evil) Bible.

So if everything in the Bible was made consistent and syllogistic for you, would you still call it a fairy tale?

And you set the contradiction up with a bias. “The evil command to kill a child..”

What is a “curse” as you mean it as used in the Old Testament?

1. Genesis says God REGRETTED making humanity and so sent a worldwide flood to wipe it out (aside from Noah and his family). Even if the Genesis story was internally consistent, it would still be a fairy tale (and a lie about God.)
2. Do you think the command to kill a child who curses a parent is not evil?
3. The dictionary will tell you what "curse" means.

Do you believe in God? You seem to say Genesis is a lie about God, and you capitalize God. We can’t talk about what God means in the Bible if you don’t believe there is a God. Do you believe there is a God?

Or are you just trying convert me to atheism?

Again, I’ll give my best answer (instead of pointing you to a dictionary), and hope these are your honest questions.

The flood is life in the universe. We all die, drowned by the next day, or the next. We’re experiencing the flood right now. The Ark is open to all who seek hope in God.

No human being should be cursing any fellow human being. Cursing is using words and rituals to wish and invoke physical harm, spiritual harm, misfortune and death - it’s a cowardly way of attempting to torture and murder someone. Cursing is evil for selfish evil’s sake. The one who curses fully believes in some God, and then seeks that God’s power, to do evil for their own self-serving reasons. Cursing asks God to do evil for you. Now direct such a curse at one’s own parents, who gave that person life in the first place. It’s not an evil command to stop some one who curses others, let alone curses their own family, let alone their parents. Today we can stop them without killing, and today, so few believe in curses anyway. But if you believed in the power of cursing, directed it at your parents, in a small village circa 2000 plus BC, it could destroy many lives, many families, many generations, dissolving the whole village - like spiritual flood.

Call it Karma if it makes you feel better, but cursing leading to a death sentence need not be such a clear “evil command”, unless you don’t believe in God or curses anyway. Then it’s killing some kid for nothing. But then, the kid isn’t cursing either - just spinning yarns about some fairy tale.

Someone tells you “that’s a poison apple - anyone who eats it will die in minutes.” And you think “I hate my mom, so I’m going to feed her this apple.” And you give it her and watch her eat it. Turns out it was just an apple - but what have you done? Is there any punishment that might be due?

Do you believe in God? You seem to say Genesis is a lie about God, and you capitalize God. We can’t talk about what God means in the Bible if you don’t believe there is a God. Do you believe there is a God?

Or are you just trying convert me to atheism? — Fire Ologist

Great question. Yes, I do. I'll elaborate. There are (literally!) more stars in the known universe than grains of sand on all the beaches of Earth. Imagine a planet with intelligent rabbit-like beings who worship the Great Furry Mother Rabbit. And there's a special book! For me, the Christian God is too small. The Bible contains some wisdom, no doubt, but it also IMHO contains lots of nonsense and evil commands (e.g., Thou shall not suffer a witch to live.) The God I believe in is similar to Spinoza's God or to non-dual Vedanta's Brahman. It's The One. It has been claimed (for example, by Aldous Huxley in his Perennial Philosophy) that such The One is common to the experiences of mystics of all religions.And there's the idea that Gods who are Persons are personifications of The One. I could go on but I won't. If interested, here are two YouTube clips I made.
78 - What Is God?
79 - True God, False Gods

So you just think God is not fully or always accurately reflected in the Bible. Well I just say good for you! You have God too! You see the hugeness of it all and give it all back to God too.

Why do we need to see which God is bigger though? Doesn’t God, to you, mean the one that by definition must be the biggest, must touch all things, must incorporate the “All”?

Means the same thing to me. I see him speaking directly to tiny grain of sand me, in the Bible, not because of the wisdom in it, but because He wants me to see it. You don’t. You see God elsewhere. Show me what you see, not how what I see is wrong, because I see a God that belittles everything, including all of our philosophies and thoughts about what we think we know about God. A God for whom all the grains of sand and all the stars add up to a rain drop in his ocean.