Buddhism and Christianity are two of major religions. They both have great and wise scriptures, which teach our earthly people many lessons. However, there has only been one universe, who created it?
I am not quite sure that I can ask this question, but I am always curious how religious people would answer it.(I believe in science, by the way.)
I think Jesus and Buddha did not create this universe. It is the Creator-God Allah YHWH who created the universe and Jesus and Buddha.
Just remind me please, who made god again?
Maybe if you understood who He was you wouldn't have to ask that.
Oh! Please enlighten us, who or what is it? I've never seen or heard from this fellow. All i got is some inconsistent, irrational and contradictory books,with outrageous morals and ethics, purported to be inspired by god.
Maybe if you understood a god is a logical impossibility you would stop saying things like this.
This world is made up of more than just the logical.
No. It is not. Reality is logical. It makes sense. Your garbage is just that - garbage. You must be very angry that logic proves your god is impossible.
I think it depends on your form of logic. I think it is quite logical to believe our universe and life was a creation and not that it "majikally" appeared from no where. And it doesn't bother me in the least if there is no "proof" because I love God and it would not matter if I was the last person on earth who did. He has done so much for me so what you believe doesn't matter to me. The fact that you call it garbage and all that only shows who is the angry one. I'm sorry you are so mad at this "being that doesn't exist. I can only imagine how angry you would be if He did".
In other words, you are gleefully pursuing a life into the abyss of delusion.
Apparently, nothing matters accept your religious fix.
If a being like the psychopathic God in the bible existed, you would want IT destroyed, immediatedly. Because of indoctrination, you just can't see how unbearable this being would be. What you would need is salvation from this God.
I think this is where the misunderstanding occurs. The God of the bible is not neccesarily the God I know. It is many experiences in a man made book. And society's views of God have changed over our history to the point now where alot of people see God much differently than the traditional bible God. Religion and God are two different things.
You clearly do not understand the rules of logic. I am not angry. "Garbage" is an appropriate word. Nonsense? Less angry?
I am not angry at this Invisible, Illogical, Impossible Super Being. I just told you that your belief in it is nonsensical.
If you understood the rules of logic, you would realize that this god is not possible.
I don't believe the Universe came from nothing. That is what you believe. You just believe it took an impossible god to make it.
I've seen many of your posts EG. For you to come on a religious thread is not logical...so I understand logic. But if there are some specific guidelines as to how a person should view logic than I'd like to hear it. Maybe I'll learn something. But remember that we are talking about who created the universe and whether we use logic or some other insight to come to our conclusion is not important. So logically how did this universe and life come into existance. Lets hear some of your logic.
It is perfectly logical. I despise religion and the problems religionists cause. As I said - you seem to have made up your own version of logic that has no basis in actual reasoning.
OK - Logic. The existence of the Universe and the existence of life are two separate events. Lets keep it simple shall we. Lets start with the Universe.
You state that there was a point in time when the Universe did not exist. How did you reach this conclusion?
I don't recall exactly saying the universe did not exist only that God created it. Maybe God and the universe have existed for infinitey, who knows. Now what about life. My beliefs are that a natural progression has occured but it is God who has put those laws of nature and the physics and biology in place for it all to happen. So you see evolution and God can co-exist for some of us believers.
But to despise religion is like saying you despise marriage. Both are just institutions. It is the people themselves who are part of those institutions.
You mean, Maybe God and the universe have existed eternally, who knows.
Then You will have to say what do you mean by "god".
No - I despise religion and what it does to people. Like you. I guess you could logically conclude that I despise religionists as well. At the root of religion is the nonsensical belief you hold.
This is not logic you are using. Maybe god and the Universe have always existed? In that case - god did not create the Universe - did it?
Try some logic instead. Lets get back to the question you just dodged.
If the Universe already existed, it would not have needed to be created. Therefore you believe there was a time when it did not exist.
Or did you just want to argue semantics and defend your irrational beliefs? In which case - I can go back to making fun of you.
I see EG you now have to put words in my mouth and generalize. Not too good. I have heard the expression "Out of God's thoughts the universe was created". And of course I can only say what I believe because after all no one knows, not even you EG. And at some point this all goes beyond our thinking. We cannot really understand how this God came into existance but once He was I believe He created the universe.
And I could find many reasons to "make fun of you". First is the fact that you don't know. There "could" be this God and you have no way of knowing, but you argue like He isn't there. Not a very intelligent view. To be agnostic makes sense. To say I don't know but I'll wait for proof. To be atheist, believing there is no God at all makes no sense because no one knows for sure and anyone who claims that is delusional to say the least and be polite. All anyone can say is I believe or not believe but they cannot say a person is "stupid" because no one knows. So lets hear your logic of how this all can into existance...I'm still waiting. What are your non-beliefs on the issue. Or does the cat got your tongue because you really don't have an answer.
Seriously? Back to spouting gibberish I see. We cannot really understand?
Come on - at least try and make an attempt at rational discussion. I never said your were stupid. You are the one putting words in my mouth.
If the Universe was created - surely there must have been a time when it did not exist? Otherwise it was not created. This is simple logic.
Come on - one last chance. Instead of attacking my lack of belief in impossible gods, or I go back to making fun of you. You are the one making the claim that the Universe was not here once upon a time. Argue your case instead of attacking me for not believing the nonsense you believe. The burden of proof is yours.
You see for you to say that it must have been created shows that you are restricting your thoughts or that the concept is too difficult to understand. I believe that because God understands all the mathematical principles He can create it all. Just as E=mc2 there are many formulas that tie all of this together. God knows and created them perfectly which is how He was the one to create the universe and life. It's that simple at least in my human terms. From all the EM waves we know about to the "dark matter" and what-not that we do not He does. Scientists claim the known universe is 13 billion years old. Maybe that number will change as they find more proof so it is not absolute either. Maybe there are universe's 100's of billions of light years away we don't know about. So my claim is that God knows it and understands its structure, that is how He created it. Now let me hear yours.
You are the one saying it was created, not me. I pointed out that if it was created - there must have been a time when it did not exist. Please explain to me how you came to this conclusion instead of spouting nonsense at me. Thank you.
"God knows and created them perfectly which is how He was the one to create the universe and life." means nothing at all.
Surely you can come up with some sort of rationale that does not rely on circular reasoning?
I have given you my thoughts on the topic, it is now your turn. Unless you don't have any.
Your thoughts are nonsense. You have made no attempt to craft a logical argument. You have completely avoided everything I said and spouted some religious circular nonsense.
I tried to keep it simple and on one single point and you went off on a religious tangent.
This is the point we need to discuss:
If the Universe was created - there must have been a point in time in which it did not exist - correct?
Of our known universe I would think it had a beginning. What now. Let me hear what you got.
We are not done yet. So - you think there was a time when there was nothing? Is that correct?
Yes; the Creator-God created the Universe from nothing.
God is by definition the being on his own.
If there was anything existing before creation of universe from nothing; I think it was the Creator-God Allah YHWH.
Am I right?
We don't know. It is an assumption. But if you want me to go along I could agree that there could have been a point where the physical universe did not exist...go on.
You are the one making the assumption. The logical deduction that if the Universe was created there must have been a time when it did not exist is what I am asking you to explain.
Please answer the question instead of speaking nonsense. If the assumption you have made that the Universe was created is correct - then there must have been a time when it did not exist. Yes?
And if there is something, it stands to reason that there was always something as nothing can come from nothing.
Matter can neither be created or destroyed, it can only change form.
Yesterday's nothing can become today's something.
LMAO, who's side are you on? I'm just poking people...
This is how I see it going...
If there was always something, then God didn't create it
Well who created the something that was there in the first place
No one did, it was always there. God can't create anything.
God can do anything and make anything!
He can't make a boulder he cannot lift.
Your an egotistical ass that is going to burn in hell!
You are an illogical loon that deserves to be in a mental hospital.
It degrades into repeative name calling of the same line after that... with EG typing at least once about Majik.
I'm right with you on most of this, even all of it!
No god, no heaven, no hell.
What I meant to say is that we keep finding stuff where we thought there was nothing.
I am a non believer who happens to believe that if their were a supernatural invisible entity, it would not be the psychotic one of the bible or quoran, and the myth looks sillier the more we discover.
With the mass of new scientific discoveries fuelled by the money available for documentaries that retrace history with science, the bible and quoran are looking sillier by the hour.
LMAO, actually I'm a christian. I just dislike my militant brothers more than the non-believers most of the time.
I agree about the finding stuff though... I am amazed at what we find in the cosmos AND what we find in the remote areas of our own planet.
And I still don't care how we got here or how here got here. I certainly don't see any reason to fight over it.
So I guess I'm trolling a little. Probably because I've heard the whole argument so many times that I've got it memorized... isn't there a cliff note somewhere?
Oh, ok... So today I'll be playing the part of the sacrificial Christian...
Well who created the something that was there in the first place?
(If the conversation isn't completed than you'll develop ego constipation and well... someone has to be cursed to hell and let me tell you buddy, it ain't gonna be me)
True it can change form but it can also change density
We absolutly know the universe is expanding BUT what we dont know is if the universe is expandin at a rate that will break gravitational pull- Therefore if the universal expansion is not greater than gravitational escape velocity- then the universe will collapse in on itself into a singularity- then it wil explode - in theory aain- expand stop contract explode again and again but why what has set this in motion? or Who? A physicist once said the probability of the " Big Bang "just creating life"- is like taking a pocet watch apart throwing it in a bucket shaking the bucket and pulling out a working time piece- I'll take my odds on a divine force guiding its design...
Of course you will. What did the religionist sez the probability of choosing the correct Invisible Super Being was? A divine force huh?
Infinite number of possible "divine forces" I guess so - you have infinity:one chance of getting it right.
The likelihood of your "divine force" being a psychopathic nutcase is quite low. But - I understand your fear would drive you to believe just in case. I can smell your fear.
There is more to this world than pure logic. God gave us emotions and common sense to make decisions. If we only used logic we are only using a portion of our potential. I think people try to rationalize things by avoiding their emotions. The amount of faith it takes to believe that all of this just appeared is astronomical. It is so complex it is more logical to believe it was created. Now try using all of your resourses to make decisions...don't be afraid God, He's not what you think. It's not the fire and brimstone appraoch.
Show us why your believing that there was a creation, is more logical.
You could say intelligent design. The sheer complexity of life and the universe, which I'll point out we do not fully understand and probably never will, is very strong evidence that it was puposely put together. It would be like saying the dictionary just put itself together all in alphabetical order by throwing these letters up in the air and they just fell together that way. And of course the universe and life is so much more complicated than that that we don't even know. I'd say that is logically strong evidence. Plus there is no logical proof that God could not exist. It is, from a logical point of view, quite possible. If you say that the universe and life just is then it doesn't make sense. And the big bang theory is also evidence of the universe coming from a single source. Again that points to God creating it. From Him it all began. There really is no logical statement that denies the existance of God. So logic has little to do with it.
This is not logic. This is incomprehension and belief. Logically strong evidence? Not really. All this shows is a lack of understanding of physics. Come on - make an argument that there was nothing once. Show me your logic.
But there is no sign of a creator.
So just because you don't understand something, the default is GODDUNNIT! That is NOT logical.
What a desperate move. Time and time again, believers resort to this desperate move to convince themselves that they are not delusional. To which it is repeated that: BY THIS LOGIC, AN INFINITE NUMBER OF IMAGINARY BEINGS, OBJECT, AND PLACES CAN BE PRESUMED TO EXIST. Is this the way you live your life on a daily basis? Do you walk around, assuming every nonsensical thing that can be imagined, does, in fact, exists? If not, then, stop using this argument.
But you have presented no creator, and no creator has made Himself known. Why are we to assume?
What God? The one that has not made Himself known. The one for which there is no evidence. Get real. This only points to your imagination.
And there is really no logical statement that denies the existence of the JuJu God, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, etc.
HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN HOW THESE CHARACTERS ARE NOT REAL, WHILE USING THIS SAME ARGUMENT TO SUPPORT YOUR IMAGINARY GOD?
Because God speaks to His people.
The fact that you are spiritually blind and deaf makes no difference, we feel sorry for you, we understand that you are spiritually impaired, but as you will not believe in miracles, we cannot help you out of your confinement.
There is nothing logical about it. Come on - make a reasonable argument and use some logic instead of repeating the same thing over and over.
Yes - you think there was a time when there was nothing - how is this logical? Make a logical, reasonable explanation. You are making a strong assertion with no argument behind it other than "I believe god dunnit, therefore god dunnit."
You are the one trying to rationalize things to avoid what your logical mind is telling you. This is why you cannot put a reasonable argument together and keep saying "god dunnit," over and over.
My heart opened first and then I knew to believe. Based on all the evidence and that includes logic and emotions, which is common sense to me. If you were not afraid to open your heart you might also see. But you try to justify your point of view by restricting how you make a decision. Just because you believe does not mean you have to live a religious life. God's purpose for all of us is different or we would all be priests.
So why the BS about trying to use logic and reason? You believe because you believe - no reason or logic involved. I am not afraid. Please stop telling me I am scared because I do not believe garbage as you do. This is why your religion causes so many wars.
Are you sure about that?
Why do you get so offended when the Christianists tell you you're going to burn in hell?
It is a meaningless concept to me so I don't get offended when they say that to me. It's just a person who has ill will towards me, but no power to do anything about it.
You make me laugh. You always mention religion even though I have stated I'm not religious. You say "it's not logic". Is that your best reply? I can see you have nothing to contribute. I raise points and you avoid them or come back with the same answers. Have a nice day.
OK. This is why people who believe nonsense such as yourself have caused so many conflicts. That better?
You are not using logic when you say "god dunnit," over and over. I have repeatedly asked you to offer some reason or rationale and all you say is - "it is logical to believe this nonsense because it is."
Come on - at least try to use logic an reason instead of accusing me of having nothing to offer because I do not accept your nonsense.
Do you not understand that claiming your heart is open is not the same as logic and reason?
If you are truly as logical as you think you would not make it illogical. A logical person truly cannot accept both. You cannot say there is God, because logically a God is not there. You cannot say God is not there, because logically Science (including evolution) never proved there is not God. You have to understand that most of so called scientific evidences for the creation of the universe are theories...just theories. A theory is never an evidence.
Well I don't believe in him anymore, and apparently he won't tell me, so you tell me.
I think it is something we all have to discover on our own. I think He may have always existed. God is so complex for our human minds that we all have to see Him slightly differently because we will never be able to know Him exactly. A being who can create this vast universe and life is unfathomable to us. I'm sorry to hear you lost your faith.
Don't be sorry, I am much better off without it in every way.
I don't find the god concept in any way difficult to understand these days, I understand the psychology behind the belief.
It's more than a psychology for me, it's a feeling as well as a belief. I was agnostic for most of my life. And I not only understand all the "arguements" but said them myself too. Of course I feel much different about it all now. Kind of how once you have a kid you feel different about so many things too. Maybe not the best analagy.
It is not really much of a point is it? It doesn't actually make any sense to say this Invisible Super Being is unfathomable and then start claiming to understand what it wants you to do. His Invisible Super Being is going to burn you for all eternity.
I think it is one's wrong perception. The Creator-God has set a system; one who does not follow it has to suffer for ones own wrongs, not that one has been forced to suffering.
One who jumps from a multi-storey building will die of one's own doing; one has not been forced to jump by the Creator-God Allah YHWH.
Ah - so it is not unfathomable then? You know what this god will do.
I think you are talking nonsense again. Which is it? Is it unfathomable - or do you know what it will do? LOL
Huh? Your point is unfathomable. If there is one.
Eye Int blame yer - Wot is is innit. Kunt Like wot u sed iz prolly troo innint I get it like wot god sed - u int got no sponsibility ter prooob anyfing.
This is - of course - the reason your religion has caused millions of deaths and 2,000 years of wars. People like YOU!
And I understand. It must be extremely frustrating for you to be faced with reasonable and rational questions. No doubt this is annoying. Fancy being asked to justify your ridiculous beliefs?
Speak english. And it is not my religion. Once again you generalize to be dramatic but it is of no merrit. I find you are incapable of addressing the real things that are brought in front of you and always revert back to this religion has killed people point of view. I have got news for you I have not waged any wars...surprise. Do you have anything to contribute by the way or just hypothetical criticism?
As I stated - if you keep avoiding the questions - I will revert to making fun of your ridiculous beliefs.
As you have carried on avoiding the question and are clearly not interested in anything other than saying "god dunnit," over and over - what other choice do I have?
Seriously - make an argument instead of repeating nonsense. This is what causes the conflicts. Always has done. Make an argument that at some point - there was nothing. How do you reach this conclusion?
Still - now you know what you sound like.
He is so complex, because he created lots and lots of cruel, bloody and ugly things on this planet alongside he "created the vast universe and life". Do you think he is a good father or not? Don't you think he is watching his loved children getting into bloody fight with a big sweet smile or maybe laugh on his "kind" face from the harmonious Heaven.
What cruel things? And no I do not think He is happy to see us humans fight and wage war. We (I) try to understand Him as best I can, but I know there are things that I wont be able to. Maybe it is faith and trust after that, knowing that a being capable of creating this enormous universe and life is doing things for a purpose.
Earnest, that's a powerful question ("Just remind me please, who made god again?"), but it's a bit non sequitur. Let me explain.
You can ask a drawing, "who drew you?" Fat chance getting an answer, but as a rhetorical question perhaps said to oneself, it makes a certain amount of sense. To ask the artist, "who drew you?" would make far less sense, because the drawing is "effect" and the artist is "cause." One is the end-product of the act of "drawing" and the other is the source.
Similarly, asking who or what created God is nonsense, because God is source not end-product; He is cause, not effect.
And thanks for asking such a powerful question. I hadn't looked at this from quite that perspective, before. Your question helped.
"He" is also an uncaused cause. And we both know that is not possible without some powerful Juju. Which is the point Earnest made and you ignored. I wonder why.....?
Just popping in to say that it is quite possible, scientifically, to accept a reason without knowing the cause of the reason. Theories do it all the time.
So the "who made God" argument, while interesting, doesn't necessarily eliminate the "God made the universe" argument. They are two independent questions.
With that I still neither know nor care.
The universe is not created it just is.....
There are "other" Universe but they are neither separate nor distinct from the One.....So they all are ONE.
Creation is that which in within the Universe..
Maybe you should be seeking the cause of its existence.
Buddha (aka Siddhartha, Gautama) was originally a Hindu human being. He was the son of King Suddhodana. People should know how Buddhism originated and then seek the answer to the original question posted here. Let me help you.
Buddha's name became famous all over India and Suddhodana, his father, sent word to him saying: "I am growing old and wish to see my son before I die. Others have had the benefit of his doctrine, but not his father nor his relatives." And the messenger said: "O world-honored Tathagata, thy father looks for thy coming as the lily longs for the rising of the sun."
The Blessed One consented to the request of his father and set out on his journey to Kapilavatthu. Soon the tidings spread in the native country of the Buddha: "Prince Siddhartha, who wandered forth from home into homelessness to obtain enlightenment, having attained his purpose, is coming back."
Suddhodana went out with his relatives and ministers to meet the prince. When the king saw Siddhartha, his son, he was struck with his beauty and dignity, and he rejoiced in his heart, but his mouth found no words to utter. This, indeed, was his son; these were the features of Siddhartha. How near was the great samana to his heart, and yet what a distance lay between them! That noble muni was no longer Siddhartha, his son; he was the Buddha, the Blessed One, the Holy One, Lord of truth, and teacher of mankind. Suddhodana the king, considering the religious dignity of his son, descended from his chariot and after saluting his son said: "It is now seven years since I have seen thee. How I have longed for this moment!"
Then the Sakyamuni took a seat opposite his father, and the king gazed eagerly at his son. He longed to call him by his name, but he dared not. "Siddhartha," he exclaimed silently in his heart, "Siddhartha, come back to thine aged father and be his son again!" But seeing the determination of his son, he suppressed his sentiments, and, desolation overcame him. Thus the king sat face to face with his son, rejoicing in his sadness and sad in his rejoicing. Well might he be proud of his son, but his pride broke down at the idea that his great son would never be his heir.
"I would offer thee my kingdom," said, the king, "but if I did, thou wouldst account it but as ashes."
And the Buddha said: "I know that the king's heart is full of love and that for his son's sake he feels deep grief. But let the ties of love that bind him to the son whom he lost embrace with equal kindness all his fellow-beings, and he will receive in his place a greater one than Siddhartha; he will receive the Buddha, the teacher of truth, the preacher of righteousness, and the peace of Nirvana will enter into his heart."
Suddhodana trembled with joy when he heard the melodious words of his son, the Buddha, and clasping his hands, exclaimed with tears in his eyes: "Wonderful in this change! The overwhelming sorrow has passed away. At first my sorrowing heart was heavy, but now I reap the fruit of thy great renunciation. It was right that, moved by thy mighty sympathy, thou shouldst reject the pleasures of royal power and achieve thy noble purpose in religious devotion. Now that thou hast found the path, thou canst preach the law of immortality to all the world that yearns for deliverance." The king returned to the palace, while the Buddha remained in the grove before the city.
Buddhism originated from Hinduism and became popular since common people are more comfortable in the "made easy" form of religion.
According to Hinduism God created the universe.*
*The aforesaid statement is not my personal opinion.
Right, you reminded me of something I knew. The Buddha was originally a prince of Kapilavastu, which is in nowadays Nipel. His earthly name was Qiaodamo Shida (no definite record about his birth and death year), and married his cousin, Yasodhara, who later became Bhikhuni. They had a son, Rahula, who lived in Gayā city, one of the four Saint places of the Buddha.
The prince, Qiaodamo Shida, became the Buddha called Sakyamuni under the tree of linden at his age of 35. He has ( I think it should be present tense here because all gods should never die) Elysian Fields, Saha lands, and the most severe Ultimate Bliss-Pure Land. Believe me, it is not controversial that the Buddha controls everything, including reincarnation.
And for my knowledge, the Buddhism and the Christanity are not compatible. Do you ever hear that a real Buddhist is also a loyal Christian? Then, I am wondering who can control whom, the Buddha and the God? Do not say they are good friends having dinner and conversations together in a world beyond.
Qiaodamo Shida... do you mean Gautama Buddha? There was no Qiaodamo Shida ever in India!
Qiaodamo Shida was the name of the prince, who became Gautama Buddha. So, you do not know this.
Qiaodamo Shida was not Buddhas name. There was no Qiaodamo Shida during Buddha's time. That name originated later when Buddhism spread outside India.
I also forgot to tell you that Gautama Buddha has a buddha name, Sakyamuni.
Same about Christ. Jesus originated from Judaism. He became popular because common people are more comfortable in the "made easy" form of religion. This is true with all religion. Who seeks God? Nobody. All those who seek God, they seek something else. People say "I love Jesus". Did Jesus ever ask anyone to love him? He said LOVE THY NEIGHBORS which means love others first. Everybody loves Jesus, why? because it so so easy. Loving Jesus or Buddha or Krishna..it is very easy because they not alive here. Who cant love dead people? The problem is you cannot love someone who is sitting right next to you. That is why Jesus said LOVE THY NEIGHBORS.
I think you have got a point.
It is the people who carved god from Buddh, Jesus and Krishna; they were not; in my opinion. None of them created anything; everything remained the same as before their birth; each one of them.
John 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keeps them, he it is that loves me: and he that loves me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
John 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Yes.. budha religion originated from India. The one who created God is God himself and they created Universe also. Now it up to you how do you believe in God.
Its just a trust and your own believe... Like there is air everywhere but you need to switch on fan to make air feel. Similarly you need to go to temple or churches or Budha to make that feel..
Who says science cannot be correct as well as the religeons. Creation stories sound alot like the big bang to me- god created the universe in 6 days- how long is gods day?
s for some details there are many differences but I feel they are somewhat compatable- the teachings of Jesus and Buddha. Both peaceful wise men both talk about the afterlife and how to reach a happier world.
Meditation is a quiet form of prayer.
The body is a temple that needs to be kept up.
Spiritual community is important.
Karma- its good to be good - do unto others as you would do unto the Lord-
Buddha says enlightenment can happen at anytime- Christianity- all you have to do is believe ask for forgivness and be saved..I could go on but - I shall end it here...
I can say only this. Diffidently Buddha not created the Universe because he was a man born in India 2600 year ago.
The only real answer is: we don't know. No one can explain how something can come from nothing. Our current scientific knowledge isn't enough to explain this.
Of course many of us have our beliefs and opinions, but they are just that.
Why cant Jesus and Buddha be the same? They both came for similar purpose!
Jesus came to correct disorientation in Judaism, rather than focusing on truth and love, Judaism at that time was involved in ritualism. Same was true with Hinduism, caste and animal sacrifice was rampant. Followers of both these great religions began to deviate from the true purpose..Buddha came to remind people in the Indian subcontinent to keep away from rituals and focus on the real path. Jesus also had a similar role. This will go forever. Even Krishna said whenever there is a need God will keep on coming in multiple forms. They are all the same. Those who are genuine will find the truth in all. If one is struck with stories, then there is no end.
In actuality, Buddhism is 5th on the list of major theologies, with a thorough belief in a 'no god' concept. Unlike atheism that protests against the Judaic or Christian beliefs as a 'non god' concept, Buddhism considers every one god, an by many perspectives borders/resembles pantheism.
The proverbs of Judaism and Buddhism tend to line up well on many points.
Now, here is the real interest, at least to me. "there has only been one universe..." This is a very odd question of consideration. Should you really believe according to the religion of science, than the very idea of just one universe only is understandable. But, to broaden your thinking, who said, according to the Judaic (and now Christian), that Creator only made one universe? In addition, if you read the Judaic correctly, the text tells you that the one who made this universe did so by his words. Now, that would mean this universe is merely a breath of his mouth. How many breaths do you take. How many words do you speak. How many universes and realities do you create? Now look at the massiveness of this present observed universe and ask that question again. It cannot be answered by reason, by science -ever. If fact no 'religion' can answer it, ever, even with a blip of text describing certain events regarding the formation of it...
A Rant: The problem with science is its limited thinking and blatant lack of understanding/logic. Science can only believe what it can observe. Talk about contradiction. Science is perhaps the most contradicting application of humanism ever formed by man. By admission, 95% of the present universe cannot be observed, yet science believes in it and calls it many names. Seems science has many gods too, like Hindi beliefs. The second issue is science using the fundamentals of Theos to bind technology to that observation, whereby forcing humanity to nod in agreement and worse, postulate base on very limited understanding even of the observed, and the massacred --err-- dissected relics of human, animal and plant, in a very feeble minded attempt to explain what does not require explanation. Why do you need to know if another exists? Science claims you will never live to see it, ever! Science says after 250,000 years of human existence, we are not even a single step closer to understanding this universe.
To put it softly, science is very much like Buddhism, very defiant of Judaism and has nothing to do with Christianity. A good place to begin is to read Fritjof Capra's Tao of Physics. In it, he proves beyond belief, that science is Eastern Mysticism -with the addition of mechanics.
Science has no heart, only metallic and graphite 'evidence' of a world it can never understand using those mechanisms. It is a religion and no religion is of any good. No religion has a pure heart. Not one.
But the breath that creates must be determined to do so before being drawn, random breaths will not create universes.
Hope all is well with you.
I am inclined to agree, nothing is random, even if reason says nothing is randomness. Every ohm-amp, alef-tov is precisely and rhythmic. Interesting enough are how meditation exercises and breathing are emphatic with many Eastern philosophies and match the electrical/circuit models within the mechanics of science.
Hi James, I am delighted to report that all is fine with me, glad to see you back again!
I think all we can honestly state is that we perceive very little about the true nature of things, and that the more we understand, the less we project our understanding as knowledge.
There seems to be a tipping point on 'enlightenment' where upon with a sudden rush clarity floods into our being and we understand that we are just a speck in the pathway of understanding.
That understanding may be greater than we could ever have envisaged reaching, but it shows us clearly that we are imbeciles in the overall nature of things.
Well, it's nice to see a variety of gods to choose from for a change even though the choice is limited. Still, can't seem to decide.
Can we see their resumes and sat scores? What have those gods done recently?
If you didn't believe in science, would you still ask the same question?
Who ever did it ; I want to be on that team.
He hasn't personally told me what his name is, so I wouldn't wnt to bet my life on it.
But who ever did do it ? That is my man, or vice versa I hope.
two of the same thing, amongst a trillion others
Scientists believe that the universe and all the matter in it, including that which makes up the planets, was created in the big bang. Scientists still observe planets and other matter moving away from what was considered the source of the bang. Space and time was created with the bang too.
Whether your questions are science questions or theological ones depends on your point of view. Many people believe that the big bang isn't a plausible theory so they believe God created the universe, planets, time and space.
Who made God?
Many Christians believe that God always existed. He is eternal. So there is no time at which he came into existence or was born. He has always existed and always will. So no creating is needed. No one created God.
If you believe in evolution and God, then God created the conditions for a micro-organism and later a frog-like thing to crawl out of the ocean. All life, including trees, algae, bees, etc. are related by common ancestry.
By definition the Creator God is on its own; not created by anyone else.So, it is not a valid question to ask " who created God?".
I agree with you that He is Eternal.
So when it is said matter is eternal, isn't it just as invalid, to ask, who created matter?
It is not; time and space is His creation.
What is this time and space you claim to be created?
The way I see it, God is God but who is to say that God did not ask Buddah to be a spiritual guide for those who would listen and follow. All humans are God`s children regardless of what ``ISM`` one might belong to.
Buddha, never claimed diety, but claimed to be a teacher to help others reach Nirvana.
Christ on the other hand claimed diety when He said " I Am that I Am". He also claimed diety many other times.
According to John 1:1 The Word ( Jesus ) was with God and the Word was God.
I always thought this, however on my recent trip to Thailand I witnessed that my Thai girlfriend seems to regard Buddha in a similar way, she call him god who watches over and they also say prayers(she said she ask for foreign husband)
Much as many faiths do to saints, prophets, and so on.
I've always found Catholicism odd it this regard... for a tradition born of Mosaic roots, it seems actually more polytheistic in it's focus than Hinduism once you get to the core of each.
Having friends in each faith and having seen and participated in both, the parallels are actually quite striking although neither side would admit to it.
No, Buddha quite definitely never claimed to BE God, or to have created anything. His life is fairly well documented.
Jesus also created nothing; the universe remained the same as before him.
Hinduism is not polytheistic. There is only one God according to Hinduism. But that God exists in multiple forms and can be accessed through multiple forms
Buddha is a state of consciousness and exists within everone. Buddha in sanskrit means awake or awakened.
If I might be so bold, what was your research? You obviously weren't there to record the event and the only other way I can conceive of to reach that result is to read the words written thousands of years ago by some else that also wasn't there and provides us with no other evidence than his word that it happened that way.
Why do you think the world is created any way?
If you go back in time will all the atoms in the world suddenly cease to exist(especially, considering the fact there is nothing called time in the universe)?
Over the years I've developed a very strong view point on the issue: Don't know, Don't care. I don't need to know who build a house to live in it.
according the m.i.b movies some slug type creatures created the universe so maybe they created god.
I suggest to you that the belief precedes the feeling.
God and Buddah is like an apple and an orange. Siddhārtha Gautama was an Eastern Indian spiritual teacher. God is a figment of ancient man's imagination to help explain their sourroundings when they didn't know any better. Who or what created the universe? A couple of things called gravity and physics. No need for a creator.
And where did gravity come from? Or the effects and laws of physics?
For that matter, where did matter come from, or energy, or time, or even space? Each of these created constructs had a source. I agree that gravity likely came before the coalescence of matter, but there is a whole lot there that had a source, and guys like Hawking aren't talking about it. They're only stopping halfway.
I suppose one could build a house and say, "No need for a builder." I suppose it's entirely possible that such things could accidentally fall into place. (... not!)
Hui, from all I've studied of Buddhism (and I'm no expert), I have never heard of Buddha "creating the universe."
I'm glad you believe in science. So do I. I've studied science my entire life. Graduated with a major in mathematics in the top 10% of my high school class in Montgomery County, Maryland (3rd highest scholastically rated school district in USA at the time). Then graduated summa cum laude in computer science. Astronomy is perhaps my favorite science (including astrophysics and planetology), but I've also held a great fondness for geology, physics, chemistry, and several others.
From my understanding (and I've studied with a few Tibetan Buddhist monks in Los Angeles), Gautama Siddhartha, who is frequently referred to as "the Buddha" is really only one of many. He was a spiritual teacher who had thrown off the shackles of "samsara" (the suffering of this world). He was an "Enlightened One," what might be comparable in Christianity to someone born again (one with "everlasting life").
This state of existence is a return to one's spiritual nature, separate from the physical body.
Buddhism talks of the "non-self" which is the end product of one's meditation. This is the "self" which exists after getting rid of ego -- the center of selfishness.
This spiritual "self" is a source of creation. This is what in the Judeo-Christian world might be called a "child of God" -- made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26).
And what is God? No one really knows for certain. Beyond the beginning of this universe, perhaps, there is a source which set everything in motion. I say "perhaps," because the universe may not have had a "beginning" in the sense of time. But outside of space-time, there is a source, and things like space, time, energy, matter, gravity, electromagnetism, strong and weak nuclear binding forces, and the like all originate from this source.
From my own experience with creational mechanics (causing "miracles"), I suspect that God may be the aggregate combination of all the children of God.
If this were true, then not only did Gautama Siddhartha create the universe, but you and I did, too. Perhaps one day we will remember.
But the quest for such knowledge and memory requires humility -- the same brand of restraint a good scientist uses in researching their part of that creation.
Buddhism and Christianity are two of major religions. They both have great and wise scriptures, which teach our earthly people many lessons. However, there has only been one universe, who created it?
I am not quite sure that I can ask this question, but I am always curious how religious people would answer it.(I believe in science, by the way.)
So, you mean everything is from the source beyond. Then, why did "the aggregate combination", the God, our Father in Heaven, create lots and lots of cruel and ugly things on this planet? Please do not say that the father watches his loved children getting into bloody fight from the Heaven and with a big sweet smile on face!
I once carefully observed those so-called christians making donation in church. They act selfish and funny. What is Christinianity?
You are right on "the Buddha did not create the universe". I made a mistake, and you can see my answer to andycool above. But still the Buddha, Sakyamuni, can control everything living in the land of Saha, and the God can also control everything. Are they good friends in a spiritual world?
We all have material body, all need material things to live, which is the firstmost thing in the material universe. Then we have spiritual life and spiritual joy, and have conversations in material virtual space, like Hubpages.
Hui, some important questions you've asked. I will attempt to answer them from my current, imperfect understanding. Perhaps they will elicit some degree of progress toward enlightenment.
Things and events are "cruel" and "ugly" from who's viewpoint? From that of mortal human? And who actually did the creation of "evil" things? Could it instead be the product of ego? Ego is that pseudo-self which thrives on being right and being seen as good or powerful by others. But ego is also responsible for the suicide perpetrator stepping off a bridge and falling to their death. Ego is responsible for the public donations of Christians so that others will feel admiration for them. Ego is responsible for the acts of rage when someone else disagrees with their viewpoint.
Each of these "evil" things may serve some larger purpose for which we cannot even guess. From the perspective of that larger purpose, such things would not be evil, but would serve that more perfect purpose. This is only a speculation, but it is also a statement of humility and not knowing.
In the Judeo-Christian Bible, there is the story of Noah and the Flood. Was it a literal, real event and worldwide inundation? We don't know for sure. Certainly it did not happen at the date found from a literal reading of Genesis -- 2348 BC. Too much was happening in human history at that time! My own research finds the date to be 27,970 BC, calculated from Genesis. If God indeed destroyed all life on Earth, could it have been for the purpose of rescuing his children (not the bodies, but the spiritual children)? Such apparent cruelty would then prove to be a blessing, for the bodies are inconsequential and the real children are the ones being rescued.
Concerning ego, there is an old story about a monk and a samurai. The warrior asks the monk to describe heaven and hell. The monk then berates the warrior, calling him lazy and worthless. The samurai warrior raises his sword in rage to strike down the impudent, old man. The monk merely looks up, points and says, "That is hell." Stunned into humility, the warrior lowers his sword and bows his head. The monk nods and tells the warrior, "And that is heaven."
For me, what the monk was talking about was the difference between ego and egolessness or humility. Ego is a sense of entitlement and separateness. Ego claims things for itself to the exclusion of others. Egolessness allows spiritual awakening. This includes humility, confidence, responsibility and love.
That some so-called Christians act selfish and "funny" is not news to me. I've seen it all too often. Any Christian who is living for ego is not following Christ. I struggle with this myself. I know better, but the habit is hard to break. One day, I hope to win over that worst of habits.
There is one Asian-American hubber who became an atheist partly because his "Christian" father regularly beat him as a child. Were the beatings "Christian" or merely the legacy of an Asian patriarchal upbringing? Based on the teachings of the founder of Christianity, I'd opt for the latter.
As for Gautama Siddhartha Sakyamuni walking with God, I'm not surprised. Even though Buddhism does not profess to believing in God, the state of Enlightenment or Nirvana could be said to be equivalent to that of the Judeo-Christian "walking with God" or "being one with God." When Gautama made his breakthrough under the Bodhi tree he may have done the same thing that Yehoshua of Nazareth asked of his followers -- love one another and give up the false self (master of this world).
The surmon without the foundation of material facts is just imagination and excuse. A real Christian never has "the Buddha" or any other gods in mind, and a real Buddhist never thinks of "the Jesus", which is called "belief".
A real Christian will firmly answer "the God created the universe", and so will a real Buddhist. However, in this forum, all so-called Christians (obviously not Buddhists) have compromised answers. SAD!!!
Interesting "opinion." Your use of "material facts" tells me a great deal. Your judgement of others also tells me something troubling.
Is your interpretation of the ancient wisdom equivalent to that of Buddha or Yehoshua or even God? Mine certainly isn't. In the realm of spirit, it takes humility to be able to see beyond the literal writing to what is true. There is no adequate language for the realm of creation or even the miracle in which I participated on Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, 1977 (Anatomy of a Miracle).
Who are you to say who is a "real" Christian or "real" Buddhist? Asking questions is one thing, but making bold statements based on your limited interpretation is quite something else. I still have ego, and perhaps for that reason I am not yet a "real" anything -- a Pinocchio hoping to be real.
And if Truth is Truth, no matter who has seen it, then couldn't Gautama Siddhartha Sakyamuni and Yehoshua of Nazareth have been talking about the same thing, but from different perspectives and through the lenses of different cultural biases? The audience in India 2500 years ago was quite different from that in the Levant 2000 years ago.
To be clearly, I did not make any "bold statement". I just stated some facts, maybe sarcasticly a little bit . I do not believe in Buddha, either. Please do not understand words narrowly.
In my question, "the Buddha and the God" are just represents of all gods in humans' stories. I tried to give information that gods are logical impossibilities. But, that does not mean that having "belief" is wrong. Still, a real Christian only believes in God; a real Buddhaist only knows Buddha. How can be "on the fence"? If so, it is logical impossibility.
All scientific discoveries of Newton are side products in the process that he had served for the God. He was actually a real theologist, and a loyal disciple of the God. He had been drunk with the perfect of the universe that the God created. When he saw comets flying about, he petitioned God to clean them out.
There are many natural phenomena that humans have not understood yet, but I won't turn to any one god for an explaination, because I believe in science evidenced on material facts. I believe in highly developed pre-historic civilizations and alien intelligence, but no gods beyond at all. They are all spiritual products, symbols that science has not fully developed to explain all natural phenomena.
Ego is somehow dangerous, by the way. It would close your mind.
There is an important thing Buddha and many other eastern masters said. YOU ARE WHAT YOU THINK YOU ARE. I think all answers end there.
I think by definition God is the being who has never been created by any person or given birth by any person; He is on His own.
Buddha and Jesus were born so they were not god.
I think the Creator God created the Universe; Buddha was not a god.
You should talk this to a Buddhist, who will answer you.
I though you are a Buddhist; any this is what I believe.
Unfortunately, I am not. I clearly claimed that I believe in science, which means that I am an antheist.
Well believing in science does not mean that one should have no religion.
One could believe in a religion and science at one time; they don't have any contradiction, necessarily.
What does "believe in" mean?
I believe in science, and also read bible stories, cite those stories in articles, go to church to pray. However, "like" is here absolutely not "believe in", which is a principle, because it is the science not religions to promote human progress.
By contrast, in different historic periods, religions greatly impeded and even percecuted human development. "Is the Earth the center of the universe?" Therefore, those meaningful words are good teaching in spirit and behavior, but the story is just a story not fact worth to believe in.
Didn't science impede human progress with the invention of all manner of weapons of war? I think it did.
Didn't religion promote human progress with the teachings of Yehoshua and Gautama Sakyamuni? Forgiveness, for instance, may seem quite counterintuitive, but it benefits everyone in a blood feud when used properly.
Could it be you've been pointing at the wrong culprit?
Could it be that the real enemy is ego and not some group or ideology?
The selfishness of the inventors of weapons of destruction is quite similar to that of the wagers of "holy" war and inquisition.
Could it be that ego is the source of samsara and also is the "self" which needs to die before one may gain everlasting life?
I was married to a Buddhist for 12 years, studied with Rinpoche Gyaltsen and meditated many hours on the 12 perfections. I learned a great deal there. I see no contradiction between Buddhism and Christianity. I see no contradiction between science and spirituality, either.
One key thing that I've learned this lifetime (and hopefully a lesson I'll take with me to the next) is that humility is key to learning anything. I wouldn't have survived in calculus class without it. It also didn't hurt that I had the 1910 best seller, "Calculus Made Easy," by Sylvanus P. Thompson. Love that book!
The problem with most religious folk is that they follow ego. And could it be that ego is the same monster behind all wars. When they say that their interpretation is the only way to interpret, or that their religion is the only way to Nirvana/Enlightenment/Heaven/Everlasting Life, then they are showing their ego... not their faith.
There could be people who claim to be religious but on a little perusal one finds they are not representitives of religion; so whatever they say or do has nothing to do with religion. Such persons could be irreligious in the guise of a religious one.
Like one could speak of science or eulogize it while one does not in fact represent science.
The real representitives of religion are the messengers prophets of the Creator-God who received Word of revelation from Him; none of them opposed science.
I think there is no contradiction in science and religion.
Religion isn't the main cause of wars, it is men who pretend to be spiritual to gain the public's support and in fact it is material possessions they are fighting over.
It may be material things that were fought for, but the reason used was religion, the forces that rallied did so in the name of religion. Whether it was the will of a god, or not, doesn't matter in the end. The damage is done either way.
Why does the God not stop them, in the case that he has the power.
Really? Science is pretty clear. No god is necessary. None.
I like the peaceful atmosphere in church. Just like.
In current major peaceful world, some religious scriptures may on some level hold people together. Am I right?
So do I. Was it worth the hundreds of thousands of murders to build most of them? You tell me.
Very funny, E.G. I agree. No God is necessary so long as you follow ego. And could it be that ego is the source of all war?
No - no god is necessary. Period. Sorry you don't understand science - oh well. Your ego says you know something I don't know, perhaps?
LOLOLOL That you think your nonsense is not ego-driven.
How little you know yourself. Always the cause of wars - lack of internal understanding.
Being honest and stating what I see is egotistical? OK then. LOLO I was not claiming anything - unlike yourself. Make sure you make the right choice - otherwise you will be burned for eternity.
What is that I smell? Oh yes - fear.
Notice that you failed to respond to my earlier post, running short of witty repartee?
Or afraid to answer?
Mark, why do you keep up the charade, your written words are so predictable and form the same patterns no matter who you pretend to be....
Is that so Aguasilver? LOLOLO You keep threatening me with eternal damnation - I keep telling you I am not scared of the Super Daddy like you are. Fear the Super Daddy. He will burn you if you make the wrong believing choice.
E.G., Aguasilver was not threatening you with anything. Such a fate is a matter of your choice. Analogously, you can chose to step off a building or to keep your precious human life. Or you can chose ego and suffer the consequences or chose humility and not suffer. I don't like to see my fellow beings suffer.
But it's your choice.
Dear me. What nonsense. You have no authority to warn me on any such thing. If I say - I will kill you if you do not do what I say - how is that "your choice"? And presumably - "your fault" if I have to kill you because you dint do wot I sed. You are speaking nonsense and there is no danger.
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts. Religionists like yourself with no personal power attempting to gain some with threats. You honestly think I would take anything people like you and aguasilver said as anything other than self-serving egotistical garbage?
Ask yourself what you really get out of threatening people with eternal damnation. Try a little introspection.
John, where can I get me one of those cups?
This is no subject of science; so science should not discuss it. It does not come in the purview of science, in my opinion.
I have to make this clearly clear. I do not have any religion in mind. All those scriptures are stories made up by human with material bodies consisted of cells and particles.
Hui, do you speak from omniscience?
Do you know for certain that spirit was not involved in the inspiration of any religious wisdom?
The aims of both Buddhism and Christianity point to a non-physical self (or "non-self") -- beyond ego and all those cells and particles.
Hui, have you ever experienced being outside of your physical body? I have (1971). There may have been other times, but only once did I have the ability to see clearly everything around me without the aid of Homo sapiens eyeballs. In those moments, I was not a material body consisting of cells and particles. In those moments, I was the true self, the awakening of which is the aim of all great religions.
The Judeo-Christian Bible talks of this in numerous places. It talks of man being created twice -- Genesis 1:26 (spirit) and Genesis 2:7 (flesh), and even Genesis 6:3, where it says that man is "also" flesh. The word "also" is key, here. It means that man is something else besides flesh (cells,... electrons, protons, neutrons with their electromagnetic plus strong and weak nuclear binding forces).
If you have studied medical science, at least neurology, you wouldn't wonder about out of body experience. At the minimum, let it be known that, there are even drugs that can cause this effect. There is no mystery there, only a matter me perception. Stimulate different areas of brain, you can get any experience you want, including oneness with the universe.
This is totally true. If one takes MDMA for example the fear of death diminishes and the self is experienced as empathetic and confident.
LSD causes more than an out of body experience, it can even result in a no body at all experience! Colours can be smelled, solid objects melt, smells can be seem, sounds become colours, colours become sounds.
These differences in experience are all caused by small changes in the chemicals that cross the BBB.
I have personally even seen a religious believer who took MDMA who appears to be permanent cued of his religiosity, (9 years now so far.)
He described it as losing the fear he did not realise he had until it lifted 20 minutes after ingestion.
All experiences are the product of synapses firing, including the process that creates religious belief in the mind.
With a galvanic probe applied, a human can lose psychosis altogether.
i hear a lobotomy will also cure atheism.
Cmon what are ya talkin about here.. live your life drunk and no need for a god? Do mdma (which i have done, but we just called it mda) and no need for God.. what was the euphanism of the 60's .. do drugs and see God, man.
Titus 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
By atheisn I guess you mean not believing in the god thing, so yes a lobotomy could cure atheism and turn them into religionists I suppose.
MDA and MMDA are to different drugs!
Read PIHKAL? There are many many psychoactives in this group. I only know about 20 of them.
Jomine / Earnest,
No drugs involved. No trauma-induced hallucination. No surgery in progress. Merely a conversation with a spiritual counselor.
And a friend of my father's did one better. Not only did he see without his body, but related details like titles of books on a filing cabinet. Even though he had never been in that room and the door was closed to that room, he could see the details that clearly.
Nope! I don't think any drug could do that.
And I don't think a drug is going to give someone the ability to walk on water or to part a sea of cars on Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles. Hmmm-m-m... Nope. Don't think so.
I only said drugs are usually the easiest one. I have seen so many patients who could do all these during my medical student periods.(No I don't mean you are psychotic). Brain can be stimulated by so many ways. It may even be stimulated spontaneously, in times of epilepsy. there are micro seizures occurring in a good number of people without any external manifestations(It might be interesting to you, to know that the highly religious people have more micro-seizures in there temporal lobe than the normal people. Buddhists monks are able to get this with meditations. All the feelings, out of body experiences, oneness with the universe, all the phenomenon the common people think as mysteries are not mysteries, but just a matter of perception. There is a pocket book of neurology by Adam and Victor, which may give you some idea regarding the various diseases that affect the brain and the working of brain, but its a book for neurologists, may be difficult for you to understand.
Nobody has walked on water?
See Chris the mind freak in AXN.....
I hung around glue sniffers who claimed out of body experiences. One was quite amazing... she came out of the bag, looked at my friend said there's a female in a red coat walking up the hill... he says there was.
Still not proof against God.
Lone, I may not quite understand your spiritual experience, and all your talking about spirit beyond that can create things. If did that experience make you obsessed with Genesis, which I think of as just interesting story made up by somebody? Were you trying to say that people without material bodies are still alive in space. If so, the universe would be both horrible and ridiculous.
No omniscience at all. Scientific knowledge is from the understanding of the great nature. The universe is endless, so the understanding will only be endlessly developed, but never be ended. Only God could be omniscience, because it is just an immagination. Anything can be omniscience in immagination!
I don't like your options, so I choose neither. I prefer to think that if there is a God, he is the universe. We're simply tiny disconnected pieces of the consciousness that permeates all things.
As my meager mind understands it - there is no answer to this question, and there is no need for an answer. The gods man has created include "God" and "Buddha" - who embody philosophies that mankind feels are necessary to live well. As for the creation - Buddhism teaches that it all is and always has been - accept that and get on with your life (in a nutshell) Christianity and other creator-based religions teach that there is this creator who made everything - as for who made the creator, they're not saying - except that maybe he always has been there - which brings us to the Buddhist philosophy of "is-ness"
I always feel that people who like to defend and discuss and argue about their religious beliefs have some hole inside they're trying to fill with "righteousness" - I believe in doing my best to get beyond that - allow things to be and accept the world in all its weird beauty. People who have to have an answer for everything are boring, to me.
I'm Hindu and I think, neither God nor the Buddha but Brahma created the universe( ha-ha-ha)
Why cant all these names be one? I dont understand why people should go on fighting over names
Due to different languages people have different names for the same Creator God; it is from the attributes of Him that we recognize Him.
What attributes are these exactly? I understood that your Invisible Super Being existed outside our ability to comprehend it.
The Creator God created me from nothing; Creating from nothing is one of His attributes.
No - it is not. You obviously do not know the meaning of the word "attribute." I suggest you go buy yourself a decent dictionary.
Your parents created you from a sperm and an egg. Do you know any biology?
I get one of the the meaning "distinguished character; reputation".
Man existed even before the "biology" was known; the parents are responsible for our birth; they don't create us.
You described an activity - not an attribute. Saying "god dunnit with majik therefore goddunit with majik is the attribute that proves god dunnit," does not make any sense at all. This is circular reasoning and basically meaningless nonsense.
Biology has existed since life began. Whether we know about it is moot. The way life operates and reproduces does not change because we don't know about it. Man only evolved some 200,000 years ago and became self aware some 30-35,000 years ago.
Of course your parents created you. Take one of them away and you would not exist.
How do you know there was a time when nothing existed?
Are you for real EG? Your parents "created" you. Now that is funny.
actually its WHAT created the universe ? and that super force is believed to be God !
Buddhist don’t actually consider Buddha to be the creator.
God. Buddha was a man who meditated under a tree for 9 years and found enlightenment.
God created the heavens and the earth for us who do believe. But there are so many theories, it appears to be to complex to figure out.
Not really. Just because you are not capable of grasping the theories - that does not mean they are too complex to figure out. It means something else entirely.
Stick with "god dunnit," that is nice and easy to figure out.
Still have not had a clear answer as to how you guys reached the conclusion that at some point in time there was nothing. Perhaps - as you have figured that out - you could explain it to me?
There is no explaining to someone who doesn't want to listen.
I love to listen. I have listened. You speak nonsense. Utter nonsense.
Tell me how you reached the conclusion that there was a time when nothing existed.
You don't listen because I've never said that. No one can know the beginning of time. We all theorize. And how did you logically determaine there is no God when there is no way of proving He doesn't exist? From a logical point of view it is 100% possible that He does.
For it to have been created, there must have been a time when it did not exist. See how using the word "beginning" means something. Before the beginning - it could not have been there, or it would not have had a beginning. See how you are the one making the assumption? See how you are talking nonsense? i.e. not making any sense.
How did you come to this conclusion exactly?
Logically a god is not possible. Even your majik book agrees this Invisible Super Being of yours exists outside of logic and reason. You are the one making the claims. The burden of proof is yours. You need to prove logically how a god is possible.
So if it had a beginning before God created it what is wrong with that. And your logic makes no sense. Plus I don't care to proove anything. I only say what I feel. I don't care what you believe or to convince you my beliefs. And you say logically a God is not possible but we all know logically many things are possible that we would not think are logical. I think you choose not to even consider it's possible. Somehow even the possibility bothers you. Your logic is certainly not logical.
LOLO Course u dont innit. U int got no sponsibiloiyty wot proob u sez.
Of course you don't care. Why would you? You are a Kristian.
This is why your religion is responsible for so many wars.
Sorry you are incapable of understanding logic. This may have some bearing on your religious beliefs.
I really think you like to revert to the propagana talk when someone presents a valid point and you cannot answer. I am not religious...and I've said that to you already. And your war comment is getting old too. I think you are very threatened and cannot hold an open discussion. Your brand of logic is a one of a kind. Enjoy it my friend because I think it's a convenience way to keep your heart closed and mouth open.
Dear me. You religious peopel sure do talk a lot of nonsense.
Open discussion? You ahve studiously avoided answering my questions. Well done. This would be why your religion causes so many conflicts.
My religious people? Go talk to them then. My religion causing conflicts? I'm not religious. Get it straight will you. You sound like a broken record.
I did not ask you to prove anything.
You at least now admit that you are making the assumption that there was a point where nothing existed. Or you seem to be admitting it, but your English is atrocious, so it is rather difficult to understand what you said. All I asked was how you reached this conclusion.
How did you reach this conclusion?
Because your entire belief system hinges on this. This is using logic.
I agree with you and appreciate your viewpoint.
AEvans, do you mean God is easily figured out. That's because he is just a character in a story. Legendary stories are always figured out most easily.
The thousands of planets,air,fire and water are the forming parts of the universe.The universe is a self created power.The one part of this power governs the human being.This part.which governs the
human being appeared on our planet in different faces at different places as he felt priority need where to appear.This part power is called GOD.Here is a burning question arises that why we call it part of the power,it is so that till date livinghood is seen only on our planet i.e.earth.Sometime this power is seen as a IsaMasih,sometime as mohd.pagamber,sometime as LordBuddha,&so many as LordRam,LordKrishna etc. The power which commands the universe is universalpower i.e.NATURE.The violation of natures law is a unavoidable punishmentThus we have to follow natures law & path shown by God to make our life healthy and smooth .
The Universe existed before the birth of Buddha so Buddha did not create it. The Universe is the creation of the Creator God.
The guy who created everything was Fred Flintstone wasn't it?
It is as wrong as saying Jesus or Krishna created the Universes; they never created the Universe; they themslves were created by the Creator God.
Evolution Guy wrote
How do you know there was a time when nothing existed?
me .. can't stay long but wanted to ask ..
How do you know that time hasn't been traveling in more than one direction ever sense its beginning ?
Jesus did not get resurrected and ascended to skies; he did not die on the Cross; that makes him a truthful existing person; otherwise he become mythical and myths don't exist.
Buddha, Krishna and Jesus; none of them created the Universe; it existed before them created by the Creator God.
how does jesus dying as the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the world make him a myth? Was he supposed to live forever or just appear to get older and die in a grave like all the other people before him.
the death of jesus and his resurrection is what sets the Son apart from everybody else who has ever lived and clearly defines his deity.
Hebrews 2:14 For as much then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death.
Buddha, Jesus and Krishna; none of them created the universe. It is the creation of ONE-true Ceartor God.
Where is the ONE-true Creator God from? All the gods have strong power, can do anything that they want, then who is whose supervisor?
The supervisor was packaged out in the last reorganization due to cutbacks and now all the gods report directly to me.
The Universe exhibits the same natural laws in every part of it; so there are not many gods; there is only ONE true Creator God.
So you have been to all the parts of the universe to verify?
We know, but where is the ONE true Creator God from? That is the most important and most meaningful puzzle that you religious experts are responsible for solving. ibneahmad
It was me, the one true god wot dunnit.
It's all in my new book wot I wrote as positive proof.
I left out 14 chapters I wrote where I didn't agree with myself, and replaced it with lots of other goddunnits though as even more proof.
So, throw away your old goddunnit book and buy mine instead with the newer fresher god.
Hi, friends, we have another half year past. At the time of Chinese Lunar New Year of Dragon, Please permit me to make a little summary with some questions. Meantime, wish you all and all your families a happy and prosperous new year, or a dragon year, if you'd like to say.
Sometimes, I pray on Buddha, but just a pure move for a peaceful mind and a moment. Hornestly, I never believe in any gods and any supernatural power, which are simply imagined stories by people thousands of years ago. The current humans were so weak facing up to the wild nature that they turned to supernatural power behind and beyond to explain those mysterious and horrible phenomena, based on which the theory of destiny was born. Their imaginations and tales were handed down from generations to generations, were contantly complemented and perfected, and finally became fixed and clear doctrines to be followed by people who had already developed to some extent but still in a weak state, such as people in middle age. This is "religion".
Because different people live in different parts of the Earth, they have developed their respect religions, and have their own origins and ancestors and the biggest heros. Are all kinds of religions compatible?
With time, humans become stronger and stronger. They overcome and rebuild the nature by their wisdom and strength, and of course they get punished by the nature due to excess exploitation and use. With the growth of selves, humans become more and more fearless to the nature, and many phenomena that used to be mysterious and horrible become clear without any surprise. Therefore, the essential position of religions in societies or in the whole world had been denied, while religious believes have become folk activities. Although most ordinary publics keep their religious believes, humans cannot obtain any development and progress based on those doctrines. Undoubtedly, many religious doctrines are insightful and enlightful, but it is because they are from the intelligence of our ancestors. Why do we have to deny the wisdom of our human ancestors themselves but turn to those so-called gods that don't actually exist for protection? If people today still stick to those supernatural power, they would be so so stupid because they are living in a condition that is a million times better than that in which their ancestors lived, but they have not got any change and growth in thinking way compared with their ancestors. Sorry about this!
Indeed, there still exist many unexplainable phenomena on Earth, but I prefer to believe in highly developed pre-historic civilizations (the Earth is already 5 billion years old, but only has 5 thousand years human history, and only about 2 thousand years with written words. Can we rule out that possiblity that one or more civilizations used to show up and then disappeared due to some material reasons, such as earthquake, or just moved to another plannet?). I also believe in allien intelligence. Why not? After all, the universe is considered limitless?
To be clear and fair, I don't refute that other people believe in gods. I just spoke out my own real ideas, but I want to remind people that it is ourselves, humans, who create and decide our lives, and pinning our hope on gods that only reside in minds of humans is just wasting time.
Good luck for a new year!
The Buddha was a man, Siddhartha Gautama, whom the Buddhists believe reached enlightenment. As initially a man, I would find it hard to believe that Buddhists think he created the world. I don't claim to be an expert on Buddhism, however.
Regardless of your belief system or lack thereof, the name given to the "creator of the universe" are but differing names for the same concept. There is also confusion between the concept of a master creator of the universe, and highly spiritual people who actually existed here on Earth.
The question, as it is phrased, is more akin to asking, "Who created the universe, god or Mother Theresa?" It's apples and oranges.
There is but one creator, who ever or whatever this creator is; and 1000's of mis-(?)conceptions , as to this creator's place in his/its creation.
No matter who we are; No matter what we believe the creator to be, We know very little of that which is outside of our understanding.
We can only attempt to describe that which we have seen and how it affects us. I think all religions are doing that.? In fact; ....
All groups of people, (and small families) are doing that.
Chairman Mao created the universe through an executive order.
After which, he turned himself into a cat, and renamed himself Chairman Meow
by Mahaveer Sanglikar4 years ago
In a forum, I asked a question: Why God created atheists? Now I ask, why man created God?
by LewSethics5 years ago
This god so many people insist is real sounds like a complex thing. Complex things don't just spring out of nowhere or assemble themselves, so it was probably created by a higher form, because nothing complex can...
by paarsurrey5 years ago
Human ignorance in physical matters is removed when confirmed/verified by the Work of the Creator-God, commonly known as nature; it is useful in worldly matters. Human ignorance in ethical, moral and physical is removed...
by Davidsonofjesie5 years ago
If you believe in your heart there is no God,there is no right or wrong,there is no creator,no absolute truth,no moral authority,then you must believe that nothing turns into chemicals,and chemicals turn into...
by Bibowen6 years ago
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) looked for a reasonable explanation for why anything exists at all. He said that God was that reasonable explanation. W.L Craig has formulated the Leibnizian argument this way:P(1)...
by janesix3 years ago
Whether your view is religious or scientific. And if you think the Universe is a steady state(as in, has no beginning or end),then try to explain that instead. Thank you.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.