Without "original sin" all of Christianity collapses

[Sky Dancer]

Suffering is life, emptiness is the lack of suffering, therefore emptiness is death. Call that not nihilism if you want, but it will only make sense if you can think in circles and end up somewhere you aren't going.

No, that's not what it means. You've mixed up the Four Noble Truths with nihilism.

I refer you to the Heart Sutra, also known as the Prajnaparamita. The Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom sutra. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.... Primarily, it points to a mistake all beings make in perception of self and others as separate and of our world as permanent, inherently self-existing, solid.

This cannot be understood intellectually. Not fully. It can be approximated, somewhat, through an understanding of quantum physics.

To realize emptiness, you have to contemplate the topic, pray to lineage masters who have gone before you, the victorious ones who have realized the truth of how things abide, meditate and then finally have an experience of rigpa, or non-meditation, pure awareness itself, primoridal, pristine, unborn and unceasing.

Once you have that recognition, then you train in it.

The Buddha did not teach, to start out with, because he wasn't sure it could be conveyed in words. The oral traditon is only one way, teachings on emptiness are conveyed. Symbolism and mind to mind are the two other lineages.

Emptiness is form.

Is that like freedom is slavery and war is peace?

Unless, you contemplate it, meditate on it, and then relax into the nature of mind, all "emptiness" will seem like is a silly riddle.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Suffering is life, emptiness is the lack of suffering, therefore emptiness is death. Call that not nihilism if you want, but it will only make sense if you can think in circles and end up somewhere you aren't going.

No, that's not what it means. You've mixed up the Four Noble Truths with nihilism.

I refer you to the Heart Sutra, also known as the Prajnaparamita. The Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom sutra. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.... Primarily, it points to a mistake all beings make in perception of self and others as separate and of our world as permanent, inherently self-existing, solid.

This cannot be understood intellectually. Not fully. It can be approximated, somewhat, through an understanding of quantum physics.

To realize emptiness, you have to contemplate the topic, pray to lineage masters who have gone before you and realized the truth of how things abide, meditate and then finally have an experience of rigpa, or non-meditation, pure awareness itself, primoridal, pristine, unborn and unceasing.

Once you have that recognition, then you train in it.

The Buddha did not teach, to start out with, because he wasn't sure it could be conveyed in words. The oral traditon is only one way, teachings on emptiness are conveyed. Symbolism and mind to mind are the two other lineages.

Emptiness is form.

Is that like freedom is slavery and war is peace?

No.

 

[JMJames]

Weren't we all born of sin?

No we aren't, and that's the crux of the issue. We are all born clean, tabula rasa. The key thing that religions need to draw members is guilt, and the need to be forgiven for it. What better way to do that than to convince people that they are born sinful?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, that's not what it means. You've mixed up the Four Noble Truths with nihilism.

I refer you to the Heart Sutra, also known as the Prajnaparamita. The Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom sutra. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.... Primarily, it points to a mistake all beings make in perception of self and others as separate and of our world as permanent, inherently self-existing, solid.

This cannot be understood intellectually. Not fully. It can be approximated, somewhat, through an understanding of quantum physics.

To realize emptiness, you have to contemplate the topic, pray to lineage masters who have gone before you, the victorious ones who have realized the truth of how things abide, meditate and then finally have an experience of rigpa, or non-meditation, pure awareness itself, primoridal, pristine, unborn and unceasing.

Once you have that recognition, then you train in it.

The Buddha did not teach, to start out with, because he wasn't sure it could be conveyed in words. The oral traditon is only one way, teachings on emptiness are conveyed. Symbolism and mind to mind are the two other lineages.

Emptiness is form.

Is that like freedom is slavery and war is peace?

Unless, you contemplate it, meditate on it, and then relax into the nature of mind, all "emptiness" will seem like is a silly riddle.

In other words, unless I throw away my brain and just believe it doesn't work. How is that any different than blind faith?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Weren't we all born of sin?

No we aren't, and that's the crux of the issue. We are all born clean, tabula rasa. The key thing that religions need to draw members is guilt, and the need to be forgiven for it. What better way to do that than to convince people that they are born sinful?

Can you explain the religions that don't believe in guilt and original sin as succinctly?

 

[JMJames]

Weren't we all born of sin?

No we aren't, and that's the crux of the issue. We are all born clean, tabula rasa. The key thing that religions need to draw members is guilt, and the need to be forgiven for it. What better way to do that than to convince people that they are born sinful?

Can you explain the religions that don't believe in guilt and original sin as succinctly?

Can you tell me what religion doesn't?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No we aren't, and that's the crux of the issue. We are all born clean, tabula rasa. The key thing that religions need to draw members is guilt, and the need to be forgiven for it. What better way to do that than to convince people that they are born sinful?

Can you explain the religions that don't believe in guilt and original sin as succinctly?

Can you tell me what religion doesn't?

Wouldn't that require you to admit that I know more about religion than you?

I could list all the religions in the world that do not have the concept of original sin, but I would leave something out because I do not know all the religions in the world. It is actually much easier to simply list the only religion in the world that has it. Original sin is a Christian concept, no other religion in the world has it. Even that is too broad as not all Christians believe in the concept. The largest sect of Christians that reject the concept of original sin is the Latter Day Saints.

You have a chance to learn something else today, make it a banner day.

 

[JMJames]

Can you explain the religions that don't believe in guilt and original sin as succinctly?

Can you tell me what religion doesn't?

Wouldn't that require you to admit that I know more about religion than you?

I could list all the religions in the world that do not have the concept of original sin, but I would leave something out because I do not know all the religions in the world. It is actually much easier to simply list the only religion in the world that has it. Original sin is a Christian concept, no other religion in the world has it. Even that is too broad as not all Christians believe in the concept. The largest sect of Christians that reject the concept of original sin is the Latter Day Saints.

You have a chance to learn something else today, make it a banner day.

You seem confused. I'm talking about guilt. Whatever form that takes. All religions reel people in with it. Original sin is just another iteration of it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Can you tell me what religion doesn't?

Wouldn't that require you to admit that I know more about religion than you?

I could list all the religions in the world that do not have the concept of original sin, but I would leave something out because I do not know all the religions in the world. It is actually much easier to simply list the only religion in the world that has it. Original sin is a Christian concept, no other religion in the world has it. Even that is too broad as not all Christians believe in the concept. The largest sect of Christians that reject the concept of original sin is the Latter Day Saints.

You have a chance to learn something else today, make it a banner day.

You seem confused. I'm talking about guilt. Whatever form that takes. All religions reel people in with it. Original sin is just another iteration of it.

I am not the one that is confused.

You said:

No we aren't, and that's the crux of the issue. We are all born clean, tabula rasa. The key thing that religions need to draw members is guilt, and the need to be forgiven for it. What better way to do that than to convince people that they are born sinful?

You might want to change the subject now that I proved that you don't know what the frack you are talking about, but we are talking about original sin, which is a concept that is unique to Christianity.

 

[bayoubill]

Are you trying to argue that, without the Bible, human beings would be perfect?

No, I'm saying that the Bible teaches that human beings are flawed and the Buddha teaches that buddha nature is present in all sentient being. We are all pure in essence.

The dross poisons of the mind can be refined away to reveal buddha nature, rainbow like radiance within.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with the bible. Bible goers think their personality is solid and self-existing and they think the solid mind and body "go" to heaven or hell. As if heaven and hell are "real" places and God is a "real" personality with emotions.

The buhdda is a lying false god who leads people astray. Buhdda means nothing.

Buddha never claimed to be God...

his devotees don't claim him to be God...

anyone who's bothered to read the least little bit about Buddha knows these things...

as such, you should probably avoid discussing Buddha... you only set yourself up to look like a fool otherwise...

 

[Swingline50022]

Buddha and Jesus have a lot in common.

 

[logical4u]

If you don't buy the literal idea of a talking snake and a man created out of dust and a woman created out of man's rib, then how can you possibly believe the concept of original sin?

All of Christianity collapses without this biblical myth. Without "original sin", human beings wouldn't be "sinners" in need of "redemption in the form of a "redeemer or savior", Christ. Until Augustine, Christians regarded freedom, not redemption as the primary message of Genesis.

"...I came to see that for nearly the first four hundred years of our era, Christians regarded "FREEDOM as the primary message of Genesis 1-3. Freedom in its many forms, including free will, freedom from demonic powers, freedom from social and sexual obligations, freedom from tyrannical government and from fate; and self mastery as the source of such freedom. With Augustine, this message changed.

(E. Pagels, ADAM, EVE, AND THE SERPENT, intro p.XXII, 1988, Random House)

Probably had some "liberals" trying to "re-define" freedom..... Redemption is the ultimate "freedom"!

 

[BadJesus]

The Christianized interpretation of Genesis 3 is completely backwards, it is the Serpent who is the noble character of the myth, who brings enlightenment to man through a forbidden fruit, and they become as gods.

Knowledge/Gnosis isn't evil, or the downfall of man, more like lack of gnosis is the real problem, but it's hard for the ignorant to see past the box they're in.

Thou has rejected knowledge and thou rejects thee!

 

[Sky Dancer]

Emptiness is form.

Is that like freedom is slavery and war is peace?

Unless, you contemplate it, meditate on it, and then relax into the nature of mind, all "emptiness" will seem like is a silly riddle.

In other words, unless I throw away my brain and just believe it doesn't work. How is that any different than blind faith?

No, not at all. You don't throw away your brain in Buddhism. You use it. Examine anything in the known Universe and tell me what you've found that is permanent.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Unless, you contemplate it, meditate on it, and then relax into the nature of mind, all "emptiness" will seem like is a silly riddle.

In other words, unless I throw away my brain and just believe it doesn't work. How is that any different than blind faith?

No, not at all. You don't throw away your brain in Buddhism. You use it. Examine anything in the known Universe and tell me what you've found that is permanent.

By contemplating the sound of one hand clapping I am using my brain to examine the known universe?

​

 

[Swingline50022]

The Christianized interpretation of Genesis 3 is completely backwards, it is the Serpent who is the noble character of the myth, who brings enlightenment to man through a forbidden fruit, and they become as gods.

Knowledge/Gnosis isn't evil, or the downfall of man, more like lack of gnosis is the real problem, but it's hard for the ignorant to see past the box they're in.

Thou has rejected knowledge and thou rejects thee!

I see the ban against knowledge as an effort by priests since pre-antiquity to suppress knowledge and learning by their "flocks" as part of a larger effort to preserve their own special status and keep the marks shrouded in darkness. It's good to be the priest, even some of the ancient warrior kings were able to figure out that if they could convince the masses that only a priest (or priest-king) could act as an intermediary between some divine power, real or imagined, and the population, it would only enhance their power, authority, and control, and forestall the day when people would wise up, and stop sacrificing all their grain and animal sacrifice offerings to the gods, insofar as said grain, meat, and treasure offerings were a major means of sustenance and wealth for the leisurely power-bloated elites and aristocratic ruling classes. Without those food and grain offerings, and the mind lock of fear and ignorance they held over the masses, they would have had to get actual real productive jobs and might likely wind up being run out of town on a rail.

 

[Youwerecreated]

If you don't buy the literal idea of a talking snake and a man created out of dust and a woman created out of man's rib, then how can you possibly believe the concept of original sin?

All of Christianity collapses without this biblical myth. Without "original sin", human beings wouldn't be "sinners" in need of "redemption in the form of a "redeemer or savior", Christ. Until Augustine, Christians regarded freedom, not redemption as the primary message of Genesis.

"...I came to see that for nearly the first four hundred years of our era, Christians regarded "FREEDOM as the primary message of Genesis 1-3. Freedom in its many forms, including free will, freedom from demonic powers, freedom from social and sexual obligations, freedom from tyrannical government and from fate; and self mastery as the source of such freedom. With Augustine, this message changed.

(E. Pagels, ADAM, EVE, AND THE SERPENT, intro p.XXII, 1988, Random House)

Without origional sin we would be living in a perfect world not all the different religions one fully united people worshipping the one true God.

 

[Sky Dancer]

If you don't buy the literal idea of a talking snake and a man created out of dust and a woman created out of man's rib, then how can you possibly believe the concept of original sin?

All of Christianity collapses without this biblical myth. Without "original sin", human beings wouldn't be "sinners" in need of "redemption in the form of a "redeemer or savior", Christ. Until Augustine, Christians regarded freedom, not redemption as the primary message of Genesis.

"...I came to see that for nearly the first four hundred years of our era, Christians regarded "FREEDOM as the primary message of Genesis 1-3. Freedom in its many forms, including free will, freedom from demonic powers, freedom from social and sexual obligations, freedom from tyrannical government and from fate; and self mastery as the source of such freedom. With Augustine, this message changed.

(E. Pagels, ADAM, EVE, AND THE SERPENT, intro p.XXII, 1988, Random House)

Without origional sin we would be living in a perfect world not all the different religions one fully united people worshipping the one true God.

Without original sin, we would not have needed a savior. I don't believe in original sin, I have no need of Jesus as savior.

Jesus, as bodhisattva, I respect.

 

[Youwerecreated]

If you don't buy the literal idea of a talking snake and a man created out of dust and a woman created out of man's rib, then how can you possibly believe the concept of original sin?

All of Christianity collapses without this biblical myth. Without "original sin", human beings wouldn't be "sinners" in need of "redemption in the form of a "redeemer or savior", Christ. Until Augustine, Christians regarded freedom, not redemption as the primary message of Genesis.

"...I came to see that for nearly the first four hundred years of our era, Christians regarded "FREEDOM as the primary message of Genesis 1-3. Freedom in its many forms, including free will, freedom from demonic powers, freedom from social and sexual obligations, freedom from tyrannical government and from fate; and self mastery as the source of such freedom. With Augustine, this message changed.

(E. Pagels, ADAM, EVE, AND THE SERPENT, intro p.XXII, 1988, Random House)

Without origional sin we would be living in a perfect world not all the different religions one fully united people worshipping the one true God.

Without original sin, we would not have needed a savior. I don't believe in original sin, I have no need of Jesus as savior.

Jesus, as bodhisattva, I respect.

God has always been our savior from the beginning because that is when origional sin was committed.

 

[BadJesus]

The Christianized interpretation of Genesis 3 is completely backwards, it is the Serpent who is the noble character of the myth, who brings enlightenment to man through a forbidden fruit, and they become as gods.

Knowledge/Gnosis isn't evil, or the downfall of man, more like lack of gnosis is the real problem, but it's hard for the ignorant to see past the box they're in.

Thou has rejected knowledge and thou rejects thee!

I see the ban against knowledge as an effort by priests since pre-antiquity to suppress knowledge and learning by their "flocks" as part of a larger effort to preserve their own special status and keep the marks shrouded in darkness. It's good to be the priest, even some of the ancient warrior kings were able to figure out that if they could convince the masses that only a priest (or priest-king) could act as an intermediary between some divine power, real or imagined, and the population, it would only enhance their power, authority, and control, and forestall the day when people would wise up, and stop sacrificing all their grain and animal sacrifice offerings to the gods, insofar as said grain, meat, and treasure offerings were a major means of sustenance and wealth for the leisurely power-bloated elites and aristocratic ruling classes. Without those food and grain offerings, and the mind lock of fear and ignorance they held over the masses, they would have had to get actual real productive jobs and might likely wind up being run out of town on a rail.

How they've really maintained control then and now though is by forbidding that which can give one their own intermediary power and the divine experience. Thus keeping most people in the dark never realizing their own full potential or having the slightest idea as to who or what they really are. Keeping them trapped in the hell of the material world only to realize the real truth upon their death beds. Kind of similar to the Matrix.