Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou appear to have lost the context here Robbie. You stated that "Buddhists and Muslims as well as Jews also profess belief [in satan], making your assertions, as ludicrous as ever" and you then used this 'sacred' text to back up this erroneous assertion. It is simply not true, as I suspect you know, but I accept that despite this knowledge you will be unable to admit that you are wrong. I am continually puzzled - but no longer surprised - by your steadfast refusal to recognise shortcomings or failures in your arguments. It makes the prospect of discussion with you a rather unattractive prospect, I must say.
whether they are to be taken literally or otherwise is not the point, both you and void
spirit are attempting to argue away the fact that there is a basis in some form or
another, that its not a literal devil is a proviso added by you and him, not by me. The
assertion was and remains true, you bad ol putty cat.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatand yet here you are, the one claiming you are correct, ironic really.
You appear to have lost the context here Robbie. You stated that [b]"Buddhists and Muslims as well as Jews also profess belief [in satan], making your assertions, as ludicrous as ever" and you then used this 'sacred' text to back up this erroneous assertion. It is simply not true, as I suspect you know, but I accept that despite this knowledge yo ...[text shortened]... ts. It makes the prospect of discussion with you a rather unattractive prospect, I must say.[/b]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyes indeed and you supported my view by bringing the buddhist mara into the discussion, which is also not a literal devil.
whether they are to be taken literally or otherwise is not the point, both you and void
spirit are attempting to argue away the fact that there is a basis in some form or
another, that its not a literal devil is a proviso added by you and him, not by me. The
assertion was and remains true, you bad ol putty cat.
when you began to decide for the buddhists what it is that they believe, you had already lost the argument.
Originally posted by karoly aczelhehe. right. after all, from that one link that is posted and didn't read, he learned more about buddhism than life long buddhists.
welcome to this eerie other side of robbie carrobie. Tis true you may have met him but I believe this unique- all- knowing- JW- prophet- carpenter was much more prevelant in these parts just before you arrived. With the standard back and forth with various forum members robbie would slay them one by one then ride off on his steed on a daily basis.
So if he says Buddhists believe in the devil then who am I to disagree?
Originally posted by VoidSpiritfirst of all, no one stated that it needed to be literal, it was a proviso introduced by you
yes indeed and you supported my view by bringing the buddhist mara into the discussion, which is also not a literal devil.
when you began to decide for the buddhists what it is that they believe, you had already lost the argument.
when faced with certain incontrovertible facts, those being that Buddhist literature
contains references to evil spirits, in the form of mara. I decided nothing of the sort i
merely produced a reference which for all intents ans purposes refuted your silly
assertion.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHere is what I found on Wiki:
first of all, no one stated that it needed to be literal, it was a proviso introduced by you
when faced with certain incontrovertible facts, those being that Buddhist literature
contains references to evil spirits, in the form of mara. I decided nothing of the sort i
merely produced a reference which for all intents ans purposes refuted your silly
assertion.
"In traditional Buddhism four senses of the word "mara" are given.
Klesa-mara, or Mara as the embodiment of all unskillful emotions.
Mrtyu-mara, or Mara as death, in the sense of the ceaseless round of birth and death.
Skandha-mara, or Mara as metaphor for the entirety of conditioned existence.
Devaputra-mara, or Mara the son of a deva (god), that is, Mara as an objectively existent being rather than as a metaphor.
Early Buddhism acknowledged both a literal and "psychological" interpretation of Mara. Mara is described both as an entity having a literal existence, just as the various deities of the Vedic pantheon are shown existing around the Buddha, and also is described as a primarily psychological force — a metaphor for various processes of doubt and temptation that obstruct spiritual practice"
2 edits
Originally posted by sonhouseThankyou. Void spirit should put it in a pipe and smoke it.
Here is what I found on Wiki:
"In traditional Buddhism four senses of the word "mara" are given.
Klesa-mara, or Mara as the embodiment of all unskillful emotions.
Mrtyu-mara, or Mara as death, in the sense of the ceaseless round of birth and death.
Skandha-mara, or Mara as metaphor for the entirety of conditioned existence.
Devaputra-mara, or Mara th a metaphor for various processes of doubt and temptation that obstruct spiritual practice"
2 edits
Originally posted by jaywillChrist could have been speaking to VoidSpirit when he said the following:
I don't like to try to discuss things with you because when you get yourself into a corner in error it seems your way out is to be insulting and blasphemous.
there is no individual "satan" being in the old testament. "satan" is a generic term meaning "the opposer/the accuser." (similar to prosecutor in modern terminology)
The oldest the invention of someone that was not already revealed in the Old Testament.
"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks it out of his own possessions; for he is the liar and the father of it." (John 8:44)
http://bible.cc/john/8-44.htm
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord!
Originally posted by RJHindsWow, it's in the bible. must be true.
Christ could have been speaking to VoidSpirit when he said the following:
"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks it out of his own possessions; for he is the liar and the father of it." (John 8:44)
http://bible.cc/john/8-44.htm
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord!
NOT.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieit has become clear now. you have no idea what you're arguing for or against. why didn't you say you had no clue from the very beginning? it would've cleared up a lot of things.
first of all, no one stated that it needed to be literal, it was a proviso introduced by you
when faced with certain incontrovertible facts, those being that Buddhist literature
contains references to evil spirits, in the form of mara. I decided nothing of the sort i
merely produced a reference which for all intents ans purposes refuted your silly
assertion.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyou're the one smoking it.
Thankyou. Void spirit should put it in a pipe and smoke it.
" Mara as metaphor for the entirety of conditioned existence. "
no devil person in buddhism (not that it's relevant at all to my argument).
my original argument remains uncontested:
satan didn't become a literal person until the new testament rolled around.
Originally posted by VoidSpiritYou seem to overlook the fact that the New Testament resulted from the life and revelation of Christ, the Son of God.
you're the one smoking it.
" Mara as [b]metaphor for the entirety of conditioned existence. "
no devil person in buddhism (not that it's relevant at all to my argument).
my original argument remains uncontested:
satan didn't become a literal person until the new testament rolled around.[/b]
5 edits
Originally posted by SuziannePlease don't try to convince me that my Savior does not exist, that my salvation is a sick and twisted daydream, that my Creator is as real as Santa Claus...
Freedom FROM religion is up to you.
If you feel content in "taking your ball and going home", then by all means do so.
What I want is Freedom from "Freedom FROM religion".
Please don't try to convince me that my Savior does not exist, that my salvation is a sick and twisted daydream, that my Creator is as real as Santa Claus. I have as much Free W religion"? Then please grant me Freedom from your "Freedom FROM religion".
Aye...it's going to sting when the "penny drops", after you one day sit back and muse to yourself:
"demons of hell, the AntiChrist, Jesus the miracle worker, strawberry spiral lollipops & dancing sunflowers & robin red breasts in some twinkle-dust playground in the sky when I die, an all-seeing "God" that has been judging my every action in life ... ... do I, a grown woman, seriously believe this $hit!!?" :[
I have as much Free Will as you do. I can decide my fate just as you can. My choice is not a "fairy tale", it is as real as your choice. Furthermore, I am as convinced that I know the truth of my choice as you are. You aren't going to change my mind. As far as I am concerned, I cannot logically or rationally make any other choice.
An inability to believe in magic, absolutely, isn't parallel to an inability to fail at believing in one narrow brand of magic (your religion). If you are as logical as you make out, this should be apparent.
That you can't change your conviction has little to do with logic or rational thought - but more to do with the fear most of us share of death - and "what it would be like" to not exist ever again, and a lack of good questioning.
So stop trying to cram your non-belief down my throat by laughing at my choice. I don't particularly care that you find it funny. It is not a laughing matter to me. Unlike you, I fully expect to be put to death for my belief at a future time after Christianity becomes illegal. So until then, please stop trying to convert me to your non-belief. Frankly, it's insulting to me for you to assume I can just casually discard my faith.
For someone who wants to distance herself from the fundies, you certainly have your fair share of wacky ideas. Put to death for believing in fairy-tales!? come on Suzianne! it's 2012 and most of us can't be arsed trying to get revenge for the non-believers and heretics burnt at the stake by those wonderful Christians back in the dark ages!!!
But anyway, we have to laugh because...well...what you and your close fundamentalist cousins believe really is hilarious. Non-theism is on the rise Suzianne; and it is on the rise because it is more acceptable for people to question the crap you've been suckling on with a naive smile all your life. The more we ridicule you, the less likely it is that non-theists will queue up to buy into your delusions. :]
Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. Your choice is "none". I get that. You demand respect for your choice, please give me the same measure of respect for my choice. And, please, for the love of Bud Selig, Roger Goodell, Sepp Blatter, or whatever God of Recreation you choose to follow on Sunday, stop telling me that my choice is "dangerous" to other human beings on Planet Earth.
Your religion was dangerous in the dark ages, and it's just as (if not more) dangerous now Suzianne. So long as people believe in promises of magic that they and others can only cash in after they die then they'll carry on doing the silly things which scare the hell out of people like me who just want to get on with our lives in peace.
Originally posted by AgergWe don't live in the dark ages and don't have to worry about the possibility of dangerous dinosaurs today. 😏
[b]Please don't try to convince me that my Savior does not exist, that my salvation is a sick and twisted daydream, that my Creator is as real as Santa Claus...
Aye...it's going to sting when the "penny drops", after you one day sit back and muse to yourself:
[i]"demons of hell, the AntiChrist, Jesus the miracle worker, strawberry spiral lollipops & dan ...[text shortened]... out of people like me who just want to get on with our lives in peace.[/b]