Hi
PostmodernProph I don't disagree with you at all - what you are saying does
NOT conflict with the patterns I am showing all lead to the same stages at the end:
2. Of course -- Jesus is the Unique Connection and there is no other substitute for the Culmination at the end that is the sole role of Christ Jesus.
1. What I am SAYING is the common pattern is the PROGRESSION
from when laws are first given, to when ALL laws culminate in Christ Jesus at the end.
The Joining and fulfillment step is unique in Christ while the Pattern and Process to get to the point of reception is universal to all paths whether by church law or by secular laws. People use their native or cultural laws to understand and agree on the process, people establish truth with fellow members using the cultural laws common to them.
The spirit of restorative justice and truth that fulfills all these laws comes from God through Christ regardless which laws or language they use to connect culturally.
Is this more clear?
Yes I am agreeing to what you say at the end. What I am saying is the Process from start to progression to the end is following the same pattern of human development in stages.
0. SO YES I ALSO agree that neither the laws given by Moses
NOR the laws given by Buddha teach the final fulfillment process in Christ.
They "lay the foundation or path" that is LATER fulfilled with the teachings in Christianity.
I AGREE with all that you posted which is NOT against what I am saying, too!
That Buddhism, developed completely independently of Christian Trinity
also has the THREE Refuges, and all it takes to be Buddhist is to
take Refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha.
the problem with your argument (and the problem with universalism) is that just because Buddhism has three things 1) doesn't mean that one of them is the Christ that died on the cross to save your sins and 2) doesn't mean that someone who believes in Buddhism's second thing also believes in the Trinity's second thing.....believing in someone else's second thing is not salvific.......
Hi
PostmodernProph
No, agreed, because that's not the point.
Neither did Moses Ten Commandments explain all this when those laws were first given.
The pattern is to give the laws in writing first, then go through a process of trials and errors,
tribulations etc. and reach the end stage where these laws are Fulfilled in Christ as the mature development stage of humanity.
So Buddha was like an Eastern Moses or prophet for natural laws for the gentiles who hear that path,
and the fulfillment in the end times is still taught in Christianity through Jesus and the salvation steps.
The way Jews have received Jesus is learning that the NT FULFILLS and completes the law given at the beginning.
So we can follow this same pattern with
fulfilling the spirit of the
teachings in Buddhism
and the laws in Constitutionalism, etc.
but it isn't a common pattern....because Buddhism does NOT teach that salvation is available for those who accept the grace available from Jesus Christ, thus following the teachings of Buddhist law does not result in salvation, nor does following the teachings of Moses' law......
P.S. does this help:
You are saying just teaching "Algebraic patterns" is NOT teaching Calculus and how change is measured and taught.
I am saying Algebra patterns are the PRECURSOR BEFORE you teach Calculus.
These are NOT the Calculus itself but teach relationships between variables.
The purpose of the Algebra is to show that
RELATIONSHIPS between X Y Z
are parallel to RELATIONSHIPS between A B C
if these are the CENTRAL coordinates.
So to answer your other post, NO
you cannot stick in RANDOM sets of three values.
It has to be the PARALLEL relations for these to work in PARALLEL.
judge
jury
executioner
Is NOT EXACTLY the SAME as
judicial
legislative
executive
But they are parallels and can be used to COMPARE AND CONTRAST
differences and similarities (both, not just trying to find commonality)
so you can work with both systems by seeing how they are the same or different.
(in the case above, legislature is formally elected reps and jury is chosen citizens,
but you can see the PARALLEL and then compare/contrast what is same/different)
Maybe you need this to be more specific, like INTERNAL trinities vs EXTERNAL ones:
External structures that are superficial:
local
state
federal
is more like:
individual
relationships/institutions in society
collective humanity
While INTERNAL trinities that get to the CORE of the laws and
CONNECTION with the PROCESS of truth/justice/peace:
executive
legislative
judicial
Would it help to make THAT distinction between superficial
structures and INTERNAL workings/process WITHIN these structures?
