Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
@Shoshin said:
If you’re Buddhist and ‘believe' in a creator god who set the ball rolling but does not intervene in worldly affairs then it's quite possible you are a Deist Buddhist (But I could be wrong) Deism
Personally, if my mind could stretch far enough for a need to 'believe' in a creator god (sans tangible "convincing" proof) then it would settle on the deist's wind up clockwork version of evolution...
Are you a Deist (clockwork) Buddhist ? (This is not a wind up )
I'm not sure. I've definitely come to appreciate the idea of God in ways I haven't before. I've also come to the opinion that all religious language is better viewed as symbolic language rather than presenting a literal, objective picture of reality and the absolute. They're fingers pointing to the moon, not the moon itself.
As for God, I see in that word a combination of what Buddhists use many words to point to — i.e., the Dhamma, kamma, nibbana, emptiness, dependent co-arising, etc. — and I no longer see as much of conflict between these symbols as I once did. The more literally they're grasped, the more I think they fail to point us in the right direction.
Comments
And then usually a mod reminds people to get back on track....
...Or closes the thread....
Fine, there are too many threads about God here anyway.
And we could hold it at the Nag's Head
Nuffink like a good moan over a pint of mild...
Or an authentic and original Guiness.
(D'you think it's time for a thread-merge?!
)
No... just to stop nagging
I will if you will...
Perhaps if @vinlyn had said "hag" instead...
No, no, no. Hag is definitely affiliated with females.
Ah, good. All that education didn't go to waste then....
I'm not sure. I've definitely come to appreciate the idea of God in ways I haven't before. I've also come to the opinion that all religious language is better viewed as symbolic language rather than presenting a literal, objective picture of reality and the absolute. They're fingers pointing to the moon, not the moon itself.
As for God, I see in that word a combination of what Buddhists use many words to point to — i.e., the Dhamma, kamma, nibbana, emptiness, dependent co-arising, etc. — and I no longer see as much of conflict between these symbols as I once did. The more literally they're grasped, the more I think they fail to point us in the right direction.
Two books that have helped me see things in this way are Karen Armstrong's A History of God and Paul Knitter's Without Buddha I Could not be a Christian. Both are enjoyable reads.
LOL! DON'T PANIC.....
Or forget your towel.....