A serious question: religion?

[gougou]

Besides I think these discussions will only end in flames.

Why so negative? This is the fourth page already, and there hasn't been one person flaming yet. Quite on the contrary, people have been apologizing preventively...

For the rest, I'd agree:

However even those few theories that became accepted as laws and principles can be overturned as soon as someone disproves it with a new theory.

That's probably the reason why science is not as popular as religion: people don't want their lifes to be overturned.

[Song You Shen]

By the way, the Bible has alot of mistakes, reading the Bible in a translation is the first mistake, and reading the Bible in the original language gives the mistake that there are about 600 places where the short vowel could be incorrect, Old testament only...

Most of the major Abrahamic religions of today are the result of humanity changeing from a matriarchial society to a patriarchial society. The invention of writing gave males the advantage allowing only one hemisphere of the brain to function at its peak rather than both hemispheres functioning with an equal amount. This is also where the modern standards of objectivity and abstract thinking came to the domination of modern human thought.

Um, you just mixed both the Evolution theory and Biblical thought together. That doesn't work. Ok, you say the Bible has a lot of mistakes... and that reading the Bible in translation is a mistake... then how is that the Bible's problem? Wouldn't that be the language barrier problem? Either way, your statement "reading the Bible in the original language gives the mistake that there are about 600 places where the short vowel could be incorrect, Old testament only" doesn't make any sense. I'll try to comment more later, i gota go for now,

Youshen

P.S. Did you know that Darwin recanted on all of his Evolution theory a few years before he died. Even crazier, he actually became a Christian.

[nipponman]

Shi4bo2, you seem well versed in physics, yes a very knowledgeable individual indeed. However, knowledge cannot save you. Basically, the question comes down to "what do you want?" And really, religion gives you the final word, because you get to choose, do you want to go to hell or heaven? God sends people to hell as a last act of love, because people who cheat, steal, etc. wouldn't be happy in heaven with all of the non-cheaters, and non-theives etc. So, if, shi4bo2, you decide your fate, but what choice to make? Well, like any intelligent individual, you will weigh the choices, and make your decision based on what you think is best. Only problem is, you instinctively don't know what's best. Everyone has pride, everyone thinks that they are smart enough to make their own decisions, but in the end you don't know everything and can't always make the wisest decisions.

Most of the major Abrahamic religions of today are the result of humanity changeing from a matriarchial society to a patriarchial society. The invention of writing gave males the advantage allowing only one hemisphere of the brain to function at its peak rather than both hemispheres functioning with an equal amount. This is also where the modern standards of objectivity and abstract thinking came to the domination of modern human thought.

I don't get it, are you saying that you like feminism?-one of the worst influences on our society as a whole today? Well, that is off-topic anyway.

I didn't know that Darwin renounced evolution, if the father of evolution renounced it, why do people still believe it?

[xuechengfeng]

Shibo --

Just as people are close-minded with their religion, as is the same with some and their science. There have been plenty of scientists who refused to toy with the idea of the Big Bang, simply because it demonstrated a moment of Creation, which could imply God. Of course, the overwhelming evidence eventually forced others to accept the conclusion as the most stable model. The reason the religious often do not alter their views is because (1) text is subject to interpretation, so you may think showing the earth is not 6,000 years old, like some fundamentalists believe, demonstrates the Bible is wrong and others must change their beliefs; however, there are people who interpret the word 'yom' as more than a 24 hour period, and find that God's creation is fits perfect with the Big Bang and 15 some billion years. The other reason would be (2) there isn't much 'evidence' that can be conclusive that can force one to alter their worldview with their religion, as opposed to science, which is demonstratable. For most events, like Jesus rising from the dead, you cannot prove to me it did not happen. You can tell me it sounds preposterous, but you probably won't find overwhelming evidence that it did not happen. Miracles are not reproducible.

[Jun Heng Clinic]

Wow this has been a busy discussion; I've been trying to catch up with it since Saturday. Only just managed it!

Well, it seems to me that some people (the two Christians, Song You Shen and Nippon) are saying that there are only two choices: God and Satan. They claim you must either be a supporter of God or Satan - essentially. I used to hold this view - was a devoted Christian for the greater part of 15 years.

Others (including Outofin) are saying that there is a third way: agnosticism (ie to have no knowledge, or be undecided). I can now empathise with this view. Actually I think that, technically, I am probably an agnostic; I have no firm view on the existence or worthiness of any particular god, though I am open to the possibility.

But what I want to write about in this message is that there is a *fourth* way. When spirituality and the 'meaning of life' comes up in peoples' minds we often jump to the question: "Which God?" But have you thought of choosing a *philosophy* as the guiding light of your life rather than a religion? There is more to life than gods (real or imaginary).

Now there is a major problem, in my view, with much modern philosophy is that it gets very theoretical and disconnected from everyday life. If you were to apply some of the modern philosophies I think you might quickly find yourself jumping off the local bridge or gassing yourself in the garage.

But Chinese philosophy is known for being intensely practical and applicable.

I have for the last five years or so been very interested in Taoist philosophy and I can now say confidently that it fills the gap in my life that Chrisitanity once filled.

I am not writing about *religious* Daoism.This is a development of philosophical Taoism that I have read started around the Eastern Han Dynasty, when China was strongly influenced by Buddhism from India. I believe that religious Daoism involves the worship of gods and I know nothing of this - though would be grateful if someone could eluminate me in this thread.

I am writing about Taoist *philosophy*, which is older and is empitomised by books such as the 'Dao De Jing' of Laozi.

The essence of Taoism is beautifully portrayed in the opening verses of 'Dao De Jing':

The way that can be spoken of

Is not the constant way;

The name that can be named

Is not the constant name.

The nameless was the beginning of heaven and earth;

The named was the mother of the myriad creatures.

Hence always rid yourself of desires in order to observe its secrets;

But always allow yourself to have desires in order to observe its manifestations.

The essence of Taoism is that man ain't as hot as he likes to think that he is; he likes to imagine that he can completely understand a thing. This is what we do when we *name* a thing isn't it? We put a ring around it and say boldly, "This thing is *XYZ*!" We become quite proud of our definition. We then form a club of likeminded people who agree with us and get quite cliquee with them. We then might start to exclude and condemn anyone who doesn't agree that that thing is *XYZ*. In some cases, we actually slaughter anyone who won't join our club.

But, in fact, man is just a part of much larger scheme and his understanding is very finite and limited. With man's finite powers of data collection and analysis (compared with the fairly infinite amount of data out there) he will never fully elucidate the laws of the universe.

The Taoist is encouraged to follow the natural order of things without trying to find the ultimate meaning of the universe. Harmony should be his or her goal. To fit in with the natural way of nature.

The Taoist is encouraged to passionately study the laws of nature from the point of view of *flowing* with it and *working* with it (ie "observe its manifestations" in the text above). But not to try to find the unifying theories (ie "observe its secrets").

For this reason, philososphical Taoists tend to be meditators. They tend to live remotely - or in today's world, perhaps they might live within society but not enter the 'rat race' as much as others.

But you cannot totally define a Taoist - or indeed Taoism. For the moment you try to pin it down (ring-fence it) you are denying Taoism for you are trying to name the unnameable.

It is a flexible friend - a dynamic way of living that can bring peace and joy to the heart in a very uncertain world.

Historically speaking, Taoism has a misty origin - we don't know exactly how it started. We don't even know exactly who Laozi was - or whether he is an emblem for many Taoist sages. The 'Dao De Jing' is in some places difficult to understand - and we know that this is in part because the ancient Chinese books were written on strips of bamboo tied together, which would sometimes become separated - so paragraphs can get out of place.

Nonetheless, try reading a copy of 'Dao De Jing' and see if it resonates with your heart. There are free translations on the web.

I recommend Taoism to you.

[elina]

This is a strange topic, does it have much to do with Chinese society in particular or with society in general?

I think the answer is: yes. Let’s see if changing the original topic as this one:

Comparing with western religions or western opinions, what do you think of Chinese religions, which react on people’s thought and behavior in Chinese society?

But it’s too long to be a topic. And now maybe we are just in the first step: whether it is a super power?

Welcome Jun Heng Clinic and Taoist Philosophy: the “fourth way”. What made you change your mind from believing in Christianity to Taoist, suddenly or gradually? By yourself or by a person someone like a teacher or a guider? What will happen after a person dies in Taoist Philosophy?

Hence always rid yourself of desires in order to observe its secrets; But always allow yourself to have desires in order to observe its manifestations

I think it may be a kind of similar with Buddhism:

One of my colleague, who is an almost 20-year Buddhist, once said: 不要过于执著那些你还不懂的事，在将来，也许是别人说的一些话，也许是你自己经历了一些事，等等，你会慢慢明白。Let me translate: do not excessively persist in something which you do not understand, in the future, maybe some statements said by others, or maybe something experienced by yourself, can let you understand slowly. It sounds reasonable to me. I’d like to use the example which was raised by nipponman: Mother said to her very young child “Don't put your fingers in your mouth, son”. At that time, the son may be too young to understand what mother said or what bacilli means. He could choose to 先听从母亲 / follow the statement of mother at first. When the son grows older, he will understand what mother said, even he can observe the bacilli with a microscope.

For this reason, philososphical Taoists tend to be meditators. They tend to live remotely - or in today's world, perhaps they might live within society but not enter the 'rat race' as much as others.

It is also similar with Buddhism: 忍让 / self-surrender，不与人争执 / no dissension with others.

Did you know that Darwin recanted on all of his Evolution theory a few years before he died. Even crazier, he actually became a Christian

If it is true, he must 悟出了什么.

[雅各]

As a Reformed Baptist, I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and that he is the only way to heaven. I am thankful for his work on the Cross for my sins and want to glorify him in everything I do.

I personally believe in Christianity because of the four witnesses to the life, deeds, death and resurrection of my Lord (namely Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). The motives for providing the testimonies that they did seem psychologically implausible unless they were true, particularly under the Roman threat of death for spreading Christianity at the time.

I believe in the Trinity and share this belief with the majority of Christian denominations.

[Jun Heng Clinic]

Hi elina

Thank you for the welcome!

____

elina wrote:-

Welcome Jun Heng Clinic and Taoist Philosophy: the “fourth way”. What made you change your mind from believing in Christianity to Taoist, suddenly or gradually?

____

Well, elina, I started to read the Bible in a more and more open frame of mind. I cast aside all the doctrine that I had been taught and decided to read the Bible to find out what the *authors* were actually saying - I mean really saying. I decided to be willing to think the unthinkable. What did the Bibly actualy *say*.

I started reading and re-reading (time after time) its component books, sometimes in the original languages and sometimes using literal (source-language oriented) translations. I gradually developed a feel for the large-scale thematic flow of each book - and used this feel for the grand flow of ideas to help me interpret the strange and tricky phrases and sentences that invariable crop up. This was a tremendously exciting time for me as I felt much of the New Testament open itself up and actually start to make sense.

But as I did this I gradually became more and more convinced that the Bible taught that: 1) Jesus was not God, only the son of God; 2) the Bible did contain errors and corruptions and was not infallible &/or inerrant; and 3) salvation was by works, not faith.

Most of modern Christendom takes a very dim view of these three claims. Most Christians are adamant about the Trinity; the doctrine that God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are all both separate and yet also, at the same time, one. The moment you suggest that Jesus is not God, you are branded as being a heretic - and very possibly not going to heaven. The moment you suggest that the Bible is not perfect you are made to feel unwelcome. And when you say that salvation is not by faith you are considered dangerous.

I was actually not too troubled by these discoveries - they did not affect my basic faith in God and I hoped to continue to join in with my church's activities. At times I shared my thoughts with others - and when I did people were horrified. I knew that I was being considered akin to a Jehovah's Witness, which in modern evangelical Christianity (the type of Christianity that I was in), is close to being a swear word.

So I started to hide these thoughts. But I knew that because I carried these thoughts in my heart, whatever friendships I created within the church would one day be severed when (eventually, albeit after one, two, ten or twenty years) these thoughts came out. I was living an unreality within the church, so I gradually drifted away from organized Christianity.

On the outside I then noticed the pride and arrogance of much of the organized church. When you're on the inside it's difficult to see because you're so full of it yourself. That observation of their pride and arrogance has been the one thing that has persuaded me that Christianity was (mostly) not true. I maintain an open mind on God. But Christianity is not for me.

Does that answer your question? I dreaded writing the above; for years I have felt quite bitter about what has happened. But amazingly I now feel that my heart has healed. Maybe time can heal.

You mentioned that some of Taoist philosophy resembles Buddhism. Yes, the same has occurred to me - though I would like a Buddhist to comment - I know almost nothing about Buddhism.

elina wrote:-

___

What will happen after a person dies in Taoist Philosophy?

___

To be honest, I can't actually remember! I don't remember what Laozi wrote about it. I have just found this passage from Chuangzi, the other great writer of Taoist philosophy:

"The universe gives me my body so that I may be carried, my life so I may toil; my old age so I may repose, and my death so I may rest. To regard life as good is the way to regard death as good. A boat may be hidden in a creek or a mountain in a lake. These may be said to be safe. But at midnight a strong man may come and carry it away on his back. An ignorant person does not know that even when the hiding of things, large or small, is perfectly well done, still something will escape you. But if the universe is hidden in the universe itself, then there can be no escape from it. This is the great truth of things in general.

We posses our body by chance and we are already pleased with it. If our physical bodies went through ten thousand transformations without end, how incomparable would this joy be! Therefore the sage roams freely in the realm in which nothing can escape and all endures. Those who regard dying a premature death, getting old, and the beginning and the end of life as equally good are followed by others. How much more is that to which all things belong and on which the whole process of transformation depends (that is, Tao)?"

I interpret this as saying that death is rest. But even when we die we do not disappear. Our component parts (whatever these may be) stay within the *universe*. The *universe* (ie the whole of nature) is what is most important and nothing escapes from that. And when we understand that the whole *universe* is in a constant state of re-birth we can rejoice with nature a thousand times!

My personal belief is that man has a spiritual part, which may, or may not, live on after death.

But I need to research more into what Toaist philososphy says about death - I currently really only have a feel for what it says about life. I think Toaism does teach the importance of 'Now' ie living in the present, so maybe a Toaist philosopher would not want to spend too much time analysing the future - particularly if this gets in the way of her experiencing the present.

All the best

David

[elina]

Does that answer your question? I dreaded writing the above; for years I have felt quite bitter about what has happened. But amazingly I now feel that my heart has healed. Maybe time can heal.

David, I’m sorry to make you recall the past. I cannot differentiate which one is right, and which one is wrong. It also makes me confused. But I may say: if a person meets the religion which is suitable to he/she, it’s a happy; if on the contrary, it’s really a hurt.

Because my English is not so good, I cannot express myself well in English or well understand what you people say. It SEEMS to me that:

1. western people are open-minded, democratic, while Chinese people are some kind of conservative

2. when the situation enters into the field of religions, I have a FEELING: western religion goes to the extreme, while Chinese religion is open-minded. I think that’s why some people here in this topic cannot agree with the religion, and that’s why I cannot completely follow my mother.

[Battosai]

I am a Buddhist. For me Buddhism answers my spiritual needs and gives me a tool to deal with the constant changes in life. It doesn’t tell me what life is about but provides me with a tool to explore life. I think that Buddhism is concerned mostly with matters of value, morality and psychology. In this way it is not at all in conflict with science. Despite the way it was presented here, reincarnation is not an important part of the Buddha’s doctrine. Reincarnation was part of Indian culture at the time but Buddhism can work very well without it. In his 4 noble truths Buddha spoke of the suffering in life, the reason for suffering, the ending of suffering and the path to achieve it.

I have to agree with elina who sees the difference between monotheistic (‘Western’) religion and polytheistic (‘Eastern) religion. Monotheism believes in one God , one truth. It divides the world into the dualism of true and false, holy and sin. It is therefore very difficult for it to live in harmony with anything that is different. Because if Jesus is the Truth than Buddha must be false. But polytheistic religions are not dualistic they assume that there could be several paths of value. The Buddha himself told his students that his path is the most excellent he ever encountered but if they ever come across a better path they should follow it instead of Buddhism.

Buddhism is a tough path as it requires facing life constantly without escaping or dependence on outer forces. This might be very difficult and perhaps unsuitable for some people ,for those people the Abrahamic religions can offer a better solution as they provide something to cling to and a sense of community and perhaps a ‘meaning’.

[elina]

Ah, I have been waiting and now see a real Buddhist coming here, finally!

In his 4 noble truths Buddha spoke of the suffering in life, the reason for suffering, the ending of suffering and the path to achieve it.

How to say “4 noble truths” in Chinese character? I’d like to read it when I have time.

Monotheism believes in one God, one truth. It divides the world into the dualism of true and false, holy and sin. It is therefore very difficult for it to live in harmony with anything that is different

I have heard but not confirmed that western religion disdains Buddhism because it is polytheistic, what you said here makes me find that Buddhism is right. 我以前曾听到这句话：“万物皆有佛性wàn wù jīe yǒu fó xìng”，我觉得莫名地感动 / when I have ever been hearing this sentence: “Everything has its power of Buddha”, I feel touching, touching to my heart, no reason.

The Buddha himself told his students that his path is the most excellent he ever encountered but if they ever come across a better path they should follow it instead of Buddhism.

Did he really say that? He’s soooooooooooooooo great!

Battosai, you are a western person, aren’t you? At the beginning, what made you meet Buddhism? Are your parents against your believing in Buddhism?

[Battosai]

How to say “4 noble truths” in Chinese character? I’d like to read it when I have time.

Battosai' date=' you are a western person, aren’t you? At the beginning, what made you meet Buddhism? Are your parents against your believing in Buddhism?[/quote']

The 4 noble truths (四聖諦) are: 苦, 集, 滅 and道. You can read more about it HERE

I am indeed a Western person. I was always interested in psychology and philosophy. I began to read and explore Buddhism when I was traveling in India about 10 years ago. I was so surprised. I was brought up to believe that religion is about God and what we should do to please him (A very superficial view I admit, I was very much influenced by father’s strict atheist stance). In Buddhism I found a different kind of religion. A practice centered on understanding reality and achieving happier and deeper states of mind. My understanding of Buddhism has changed through the years and now I see it very differently from the way I did at the beginning. At first my parents thought it is ‘just a phase’, after a while they realized it will not go away and perhaps got a little worried. But they are not religious people and they see that I am ok, happily married with a steady job – so they have nothing against Buddhism.

[elina]

Thank you for the link, Battosai. I just had a look on it, and there’s something I don’t understand. I mean I can read traditional Chinese without problem, but this kind of articles needs reading accompanied with thinking carefully. I’ll be busy on redesigning our website in next several months. After that, I’ll repeat reading again and again, and bring forward new questions here.

I’d like to share with you two other links, which were provided by our colleague, who is a nearly 20-year Buddhist:

www.amtb-aus.org

www.budaedu.org.hk

On the second website, there is a sentence: 看破，放下，自在，随缘，念佛(it’s too recondite for me to translate it into English)，I like the first four phrases much: 看破，放下，自在，随缘. But many times I 看不破 and also 放不下

[nipponman]

Wow, in 14 years of reading english (the first 4 don't really count), I have never encountered the word " recondite".

[elina]

nipponman, I know my English is not very good and I mentioned that several times before. Therefore, every time I write every message on this website, I write it in a Word document offline as well as use the function of spelling and grammar checking in a Word document. If there is something I cannot express in English, I use 金山词霸 to find the expression. When I wrote the last post, 金山词霸 showed:

recondite

(1) Not easily understood; abstruse.

难懂的, 不容易理解的；深奥的

Even if my English is not so good, but I think my study attitude is pretty good. And I think you don’t mind:

When you improve your Chinese on this website, at the same time I practise my poor English here too.

[Jun Heng Clinic]

Hi Battosai

Good to hear from you. I feel an affinity with Buddhists and am encouraged by your words.

I have one thought about one thing you said:

"Buddhism is a tough path as it requires facing life constantly without escaping or dependence on outer forces."

My own experience of Taoist thought is that it too teaches the importance of living in the 'Now' and not being too wrapped up in the past or future. It teaches me to face reality - things as they are - and not run away to my imaginary world.

But I find that living in the 'Now' bring me life and joy. Perhaps largely because when I follow the Way I cannot worry; worry is totally antagonistic to the Way of peace and truth. Worry deceives you about the past and the future - and stops you from living in the present. But to face truth is to abandon worry and *deal with* the present. I find this inspirational and releases my faculties to deal with my life. I don't find it a 'tough path' really. Could you explain what you said in more detail? Maybe I have misunderstood it - or maybe you have only shared part of your understanding. Or maybe I have another depth to go to in my life here ... ;)

Many thanks

[Song You Shen]

wow, ok, so I wish I could spend a lot of time and comment on everything that I want to, but I don't have that luxury right now at work... so here is what I'll comment on...

I used to hold this view - was a devoted Christian for the greater part of 15 years

What were you devoted to? To the religion? To the ideas of Christianity? I don’t want to be mean when I say this, but you were not devoted to God if you consider yourself agnostic now. I’m sorry to hear that.

I started to read the Bible in a more and more open frame of mind. I cast aside all the doctrine that I had been taught and decided to read the Bible to find out what the *authors* were actually saying - I mean really saying. I decided to be willing to think the unthinkable. What did the Bibly actualy *say*…. But as I did this I gradually became more and more convinced that the Bible taught that: 1) Jesus was not God, only the son of God; 2) the Bible did contain errors and corruptions and was not infallible &/or inerrant; and 3) salvation was by works, not faith.

Really? I find it hard to believe that what has been approved as doctrine over the last 500-1000 years was completely overturned by you. The moment you allowed yourself to “think the unthinkable” (i.e. doubting the Bibles truth, demoting Christ’s to nothing more than a son of God and claiming that works alone can save a person) is where your doctrine went awry. Ok, please tell me how you concluded that Jesus was not part of the trinity. If you truly studied the Bible you would have understood the first mention of the trinity was in the Book of Genesis where it says “and created man in *our* image.” The plurality of the word indicated that there was more than 1, if you study out the word you will find that it describes the 3 in 1 factor of the trinity. There are plenty of other places in the Bible (Old and New Testament) where it confirms the Trinity and the deity of Christ. You claim the Bible to have errors or corruptions, please name one so that I can correct you. So you say salvation is based on works? Where does it describe this? Doesn’t the Bible say “Without faith it is impossible to please God”? Doesn’t is also say that the “Justified shall live by faith”? Faith and works go hand in hand. You cannot do one without the other, that is why the scripture says “Faith without works is dead.”

I started reading and re-reading (time after time) its component books, sometimes in the original languages and sometimes using literal (source-language oriented) translations. I gradually developed a feel for the large-scale thematic flow of each book - and used this feel for the grand flow of ideas to help me interpret the strange and tricky phrases and sentences that invariable crop up. This was a tremendously exciting time for me as I felt much of the New Testament open itself up and actually start to make sense.

What are these “component books” you are talking about? There are no component books to the bible. You talk about original languages (i.e. more than 1 language), but the New Testament was only written in Greek. You also talk about using literal translation. By using literal translation you are basically throwing out contextual meaning. Did you also know that you have to take into account cultural aspects during these writings? You say you used your feelings and thoughts to help you “interpret” hard-to-understand sentences. The Bible says the wisdom of man is as foolishness to God. The Bible was not meant to be interpreted by Man (as to what the Bible “must be” saying), but to be revealed by God (as to what the Bible “is” saying).

In these responses, I do not want them to seem as an attack. But I need to bring correction to what you are saying. You said that because of the way you perceived the pride in the Church, you couldn’t be a Christian anymore. I am sorry to hear that you allowed your personal relationship with God to be affected by something that man did.

I was brought up to believe that religion is about God and what we should do to please him (A very superficial view I admit, I was very much influenced by father’s strict atheist stance).

It is intriguing how you think that doing things in life to make God happy is superficial. Have you ever made someone else happy? How does it make you feel? I hope it makes you feel good (it should). I know that when I know I’ve made someone that I care fore happy, I feel great. When I know that I can live a life that is pleasing to the Lord, there is no greater feeling. Yet you believe in Buddhism. Buddhism is self-centric (the ultimate superficiality). Buddhism teaches that everything you need in life is already in *you*. That your goal is to find the unity of everything, but this can’t happen until *you* have found a deeper level of *introspection*. So I am not sure how you can claim something to be superficial.

Did he really say that? He’s soooooooooooooooo great!

Have you ever studied the origins of Buddhism? The original Buddha was very much like Mahatma Gandhi. They were both very “good” men in their lives. Buddha, however, is not the typical Buddha that you see today. The first/original Buddha was so skinny that he almost died many times. This is extremely contrary to the fat Buddha that is used as an iconic symbol today. The rise of Buddhism in China brought a lot of poverty to the people as well, as the Buddhist priests roamed city to city they would accept food and money offerings (for “blessing” people). Many monks in this time became extremely corrupt and this is where the statues of Buddha, portrayed as a fat man, come from.

Buddhism on this message board has only discussed the introspection aspects and hasn’t really touched on the “deity” aspect yet. In religion, you cannot pick and choose what you want to believe. Is it true that in Buddhism, you pray to Buddha? Isn’t it true that you buy idols to pray to? This goes back to my original statement… how powerful is a religion where you have to buy the gods you pray to? I have known many Buddhists, and the single greatest thing that turned them away was that they got tired of buying their gods and seeing no results when they are praying.

nipponman, I know my English is not very good and I mentioned that several times before.

I don’t think nippoman was commenting on whether your English was good or bad, I think he was just referring to the words you used. Your English is great. And to talk on such a tough topic like religion is very impressive. I have only heard the word recondite used a few times before, and that is why I think it is so strange to us. Often times, when learning a different language, foreigners use words that are not commonly used. Anytime you hear these words, it is always funny. It is funny because we are fluent in English and we are still learning new words that foreigners use.

Youshen

[nipponman]

nipponman, I know my English is not very good and I mentioned that several times before. Therefore, every time I write every message on this website, I write it in a Word document offline as well as use the function of spelling and grammar checking in a Word document. If there is something I cannot express in English, I use 金山词霸 to find the expression. When I wrote the last post, 金山词霸 showed:

recondite

(1) Not easily understood; abstruse.

难懂的, 不容易理解的；深奥的

Even if my English is not so good, but I think my study attitude is pretty good. And I think you don’t mind:

When you improve your Chinese on this website, at the same time I practise my poor English here too.

Yes, Elina, I didn't want to be mean or ignorant, I was just relflecting my lack of vocabulary, that's all. I thought you were a native in the beginning if that helps.

Really? I find it hard to believe that what has been approved as doctrine over the last 500-1000 years was completely overturned by you. The moment you allowed yourself to “think the unthinkable” (i.e. doubting the Bibles truth, demoting Christ’s to nothing more than a son of God and claiming that works alone can save a person) is where your doctrine went awry.

Be careful You shen, the idea that Jesus isn't technically "God" is a hotly contested debate in some religious circles, and shouldn't be displaced so lightly. How? can you ask? well, Jesus is "God" in the sense that he is almighty, and all powerful. But, as the Bible many times states, The Father is the only true God. Jesus himself says, "My Father is greater than I." And "Why callest thou me good? There is none good, but the Father." I agree that Jesus, is the Son of God, and that he is all powerful, but the Father is truly God. A subtle distinction that takes time to get used to, I understand if you don't agree right away.

[Song You Shen]

I think I understand where you're coming from Nippoman. That is the difficulty in the trinity. 3 are 1, yet each have their distinct personality. I am not unaware of the conflicts people have trying to understanding this. The Bible says in 1 Corinthians, "But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him"... Jesus also says, "I in the Father, and He in me." The concept of 3 in 1 is beyond our concept. It is the same way with God being omnipresent (i.e. everywhere-present). How is it that God could be everywhere present? It is impossible to fathom.

The reason why the Jesus says things like "Why callest thou me good", etc. is because in the decision to come to earth He embodied himself as man (can't remember which scripture it is off the top of my head). Jesus Christ became a man and stripped himself of his deity - in this sense, He disconnected himself from Heaven and the Father (God) was His connection. God the Father, Jesus Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit are all 1, but each has their own personality and distinctions. Hope that clears up where I'm coming from.

Youshen

[nipponman]

I understand where you're coming from. But a few points:

The reason why the Jesus says things like "Why callest thou me good", etc. is because in the decision to come to earth He embodied himself as man (can't remember which scripture it is off the top of my head). Jesus Christ became a man and stripped himself of his deity - in this sense, He disconnected himself from Heaven and the Father (God) was His connection. God the Father, Jesus Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit are all 1, but each has their own personality and distinctions. Hope that clears up where I'm coming from.

Yes, Jesus did humble himself, but yours is an inferential conclusion it would seem. Because there is no place to my knowledge in the Bible where it states that this is why Jesus says this. Because of tradition, people explain it that way, but it is not necesarilly correct. Just like you say God is omnipresent. I actually don't believe he is omnipresent. The Bible doesn't say that He is, tradition does. Unless you can show me otherwise.