Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Share |
Old 03-31-2009, 12:18 PM
krahmaan krahmaan is offline
Join Date: 08-24-07
Location: LA County, California
Posts: 1,987
iTrader: 0 / 0%

Thank you Muddy. Although we too don't always agree, I appreciate your last post. I can clarify for chaka42 about what I meant. This is not too hard to understand, but I do believe that it still may not be easy to keep an open mind in this arena.

What many people don't know is that the scriptures that usually come after a Saints departure is written by His followers and not actually Him (the Saint). So the religion that follows is actually written by the disciples and not the actual Holy One. And while disciples are not One with the Father themselves, there is the high possibility of errors to His teachings. Or more so than errors -misinterpretation.

Let me take an example I just learned. As I could never proclaim to know-it-all as for I am still learning to perfect my own studies and practices. Buddhism is a religion that is basically classified as a form of Atheist belief. Because according to it's Scriptures, Buddha never taught the existence of a One God or a God for that matter. This is another misinterpretation IMO.


Proponents of the view that Buddhism is a philosophy argue (a) that Buddhism is non-theistic, having no particular use for the existence or non-existence of a god or gods; and (b) that religion entails theism. However, both prongs of this argument are contested by proponents of the alternative view, that Buddhism is a religion. Another argument for Buddhism qua philosophy is that Buddhism does not have doctrines in the same sense as other religions; instead, Buddhism offers specific methods for applying its philosophical principles.
I bring this up to show that not always are the philosophies, doctrines, or scriptures written after a Saint has departed are 100% correct teachings of that Saint. I've found that Buddha actually did teach a concept of God. Found here:


If you read the context here you will find that the "Buddha-principle" IS His concept of God. But he taught it from the standpoint that without realization of this 'Supreme Self', that it would only truly exist for those who've experienced it. Meaning that only those 'One' with that 'Supreme Self (God)' had true knowledge of it. So people like us, not so in-tuned could not proclaim it (Him).

This is the same teaching of all Saints. Even though they might have relayed it differently. When Christ said: "Me and the Father are One, and no one shall come to Him, but only through Me." Is just like saying the same thing. He can say this, because the Father exists for Him because only He at that time could commune with the Father. We, or Jesus's disciples can't (couldn't).

That is why I stated that both Christians and Muslims carry distorted concepts of what both Christ and Muhammad really taught. E.g. Buddha, Moses, Nanak, and Zoroaster (and even other not so popularized Saints) also taught the same things.

I hope this helps to clarify.
Reply With Quote



Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:07 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2018 VIX-WomensForum LLC