Religulous Clip (Second Coming of Jesus)

Vagabond

Embedding was disabled, so I gotta have the URL up here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwyFvIsoAnw

Just somethin' entertainin' is all

Brandon

my fav. movie

zombiegirl

i loved that movie. another of my favorite segments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjQlh52Em3o

Vagabond

I love the little clips they put in the middle of the scenes haha

Brandon

lol the jewish wheelchair. ahahaha

BaileyD

I hated that movie and have lost most of the little respect I had for Bill Maher because of that movie. That movie was nothing more than him mocking and making fun of people that don't believe like he does.

Vagabond

I'm sure you noticed he didn't say anything about Buddhism. What do you think he thinks about it?

Simonthepilgrim

Vagabond wrote: »

I'm sure you noticed he didn't say anything about Buddhism. What do you think he thinks about it?

I'm not sure he 'thinks' but here, in comments about Tiger Woods:

" Buddhism is for actors.

And it really is outdated in some ways - the "Life sucks, and then you die" philosophy was useful when Buddha came up with it around 500 B.C., because back then life pretty much sucked, and then you died - but now we have medicine, and plenty of food, and iPhones, and James Cameron movies - our life isn't all about suffering anymore. And when we do suffer, instead of accepting it we try to alleviate it.
Tiger said, "Buddhism teaches that a craving for things outside ourselves" makes us unhappy, which confirms something I've long suspected about Eastern religions: they're a crock, too.


Craving for things outside ourselves is what makes life life - I don't want to learn to not want, that's what people in prison have to do. Buddhism teaches suffering is inevitable. The only thing that's inevitable is that if you have fake boobs and hair extensions, Tiger Woods will try to fuck you.
And reincarnation? Really? If that were real, wouldn't there be some proof by now? A raccoon spelling out in acorns, "My name is Herb Zoller and I'm an accountant." ...something?


People are always debating, is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy: it's a religion. You're a religion if you do something as weird as when the Buddhist monks scrutinize two-year-olds to find the reincarnation of the dude who just died, and then choose one of the toddlers as the sacred Lama: "His poop is royal!" Sorry, but thinking you can look at a babbling, barely-housebroken, uneducated being and say, "That's our leader" doesn't make you enlightened. It makes you a Sarah Palin supporter."


from: Huffington Post

LesC

Thank you all for the really good chuckle this morning... despite it all, isn't Bill Maher just saying what the Buddha said?... Do your own investigation... Hold it up to the light! He does it with humour... one of the best investigative vehicles we have!!

This is my favourite clip...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPYj4HPudCk&NR=1

thesadclown

Man, those are really painful. But I really don't think Maher is doing justice to anyone, at least not in those clips. I mean, clearly he has way more knowledge, at least on the history, than any of the people he's talking to. He might as well debate religion with 6th graders. Of course, you wouldn't get the same laughs if he picked people who could intelligently and articulately communicate their beliefs on the same level as he is arguing, if not better.

Simonthepilgrim

If the film portrays other religions as accurately as this person's knowledge and understanding of Buddhism that I cited above, I shall certainly watch it!

justme

I'm not a big Bill Maher fan. I've written him off as just another holier-than-thou political pundit. But I've gotta admit, he can usually get me to laugh.

username_5

Simonthepilgrim wrote: »

People are always debating, is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy: it's a religion. You're a religion if you do something as weird as when the Buddhist monks scrutinize two-year-olds to find the reincarnation of the dude who just died, and then choose one of the toddlers as the sacred Lama: "His poop is royal!" Sorry, but thinking you can look at a babbling, barely-housebroken, uneducated being and say, "That's our leader" doesn't make you enlightened. It makes you a Sarah Palin supporter."

I think Maher has it dead on correct here. Those who believe it is possible to ID a reincarnation from a 2 year old are seriously deluding themselves and others.

If such a thing is possible, how do these wise ones make such a determination? Why are their methods not published?

Why the lack of transparency and thus the necessity of [blind] faith?

I like a lot about Buddhism and am not about to give up my meditative practice, but I suspect Buddhism meeting the west after the age of science and reason will more or less kill it. It won't die completely as it's already being taught in secular terms by nurses dealing with patients with pain, psychologists and psychotherapists and in other fields in various ways, but this absolute crap about reincarnation, psychic powers, old farts having magical divine powers etc. is just beyond silly.

The claims of some Buddhist elders makes the pope look sane. The claims would be fine if they were backed by something that even looked halfway like a reasonable explanation, but they never are. Instead it's 'we determined this child was the 14th reincarnation of whomever' and the faithful have to accept it on faith. Give me a break. HOW DID YOU MAKE THIS DETERMINATION? WHAT METHODOLOGY WAS USED? What teaching of the Buddha qualified you for this?

It's just as much a crock of crap as the pope being infallible speaking in cathedra is.

The 'wise' old farts quietly promoting this mythology who are today looked at by many as saints are killing Buddhism among those with a brain that functions according to reason and logic.

4 noble truths and 8 fold path? Good to go. People with brains not checked out can ascertain that. The rest? Who knows.

Simonthepilgrim

username_5 wrote: »

I think Maher has it dead on correct here. Those who believe it is possible to ID a reincarnation from a 2 year old are seriously deluding themselves and others.

If such a thing is possible, how do these wise ones make such a determination? Why are their methods not published?

Why the lack of transparency and thus the necessity of [blind] faith?

I like a lot about Buddhism and am not about to give up my meditative practice, but I suspect Buddhism meeting the west after the age of science and reason will more or less kill it. It won't die completely as it's already being taught in secular terms by nurses dealing with patients with pain, psychologists and psychotherapists and in other fields in various ways, but this absolute crap about reincarnation, psychic powers, old farts having magical divine powers etc. is just beyond silly.

The claims of some Buddhist elders makes the pope look sane. The claims would be fine if they were backed by something that even looked halfway like a reasonable explanation, but they never are. Instead it's 'we determined this child was the 14th reincarnation of whomever' and the faithful have to accept it on faith. Give me a break. HOW DID YOU MAKE THIS DETERMINATION? WHAT METHODOLOGY WAS USED? What teaching of the Buddha qualified you for this?

It's just as much a crock of crap as the pope being infallible speaking in cathedra is.

The 'wise' old farts quietly promoting this mythology who are today looked at by many as saints are killing Buddhism among those with a brain that functions according to reason and logic.

4 noble truths and 8 fold path? Good to go. People with brains not checked out can ascertain that. The rest? Who knows.

"Demythologise" Christianity or Judaism and you get much the same thing: there will be suffering; we cause much of our own suffering; we can alleviate that suffering by living a moral life of service to others and stilling the mind.

Why call it Buddhism if you chuck out the Buddha, and all the Buddhist writers and traditions? Call it philosophy if you like but, without the Buddha, Buddhism it ain't.