Here is an article by__________. Another example of the only argument the ID/Creationists have to support their theories. "ID/Creation is true because so-and-so says it's true". This thread has been one long appeal to authority. Not surprising. The whole business of faith is based on the premise that people will believe what is told to them as opposed to what they can figure out on their own.
"form is emptiness, emptiness is form" was explained eons ago http://www.budtempchi.org/hannyashingyo.html its a long way to the three gates... a longer one to this Tom Armstrong it seems...
So Tom Armstrong is not a Buddhist, but you can copy and past from a website, and therefore have an ability to understand Buddhism completely, and evaluate who is a actually a "true" Buddhist.. LOL! Typical of the "know it all" scientific types, who think that if they read something on the web, something they have no practice in, and then they are suddenly an expert on the subject. Ohhhh, the hubris...
According to you, Buddhists don't believe in your own dogma ' ignorant chance' and they don't believe in an intelligent designer, (the universe being subject to "Karma and the endless cycle of reincarnation."). So in another flurry of flowery wordplay, you have merely managed to demonstrate how all three of these statements are in fact wrong... Since I don't have a dogma which I demand others practice or accept, there is no argument from Buddhists with "my dogma." The Universe (which is a whole, not a partial value) itself is not subject to any Karmas, unless you want to think of Karmas as Newton's third law: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." However, Karmas relates to souls...not the Universe. Souls are partial values, Universe is a whole value. In addition, Karmas are the consequence of action, and since the Universe performs no actions, so there is no Karma for the Universe. Souls act, those actions are Karma. Souls reincarnate, the Universe does reincarnate, the Universe does not take birth in which there is a transmigration of a "Universe" soul, so the Universe is never born nor does it die, it is Eternal, it produces no Karma. What most two dimensional thinkers like yourself struggle with is the conceptual understanding of an Eternal Universe that goes through phases of creation, maintenance, and dissolution, in an eternal cycle. Upon dissolution, the Universe sleeps within God, to awaken after an undetermined time, as when the Universe is in a state of dissolution, there is no time to pass. From the point of view of God there is no creator, no creation process, no birth of the Universe, no death of the Universe, as the Universe is simply one of innumerable powers of God, an eternal power, but from the point of view of a limited material being, there is a Creator. The Universe is no more born than you are when you wake up, nor more more dies when you go to sleep, but again, a limited mind can grasp only material concepts of birth and death, and therefore views the Universe as being "created." ID simply refers to that intelligence that is behind the process that we are able to observe, and that the process is not one of ignorant chance. I mean, it is pretty clear for even a fairly aware child that if the Buddhists are seeking liberation from the endless cycle of birth and death, that there is something other than birth and death for them to seek. You've made it quite clear that in terms of Buddhism alone, ID/Creationism meets none of your claims . But that is what I pointed out to you in the first place. Apparently you prefer to 'disagree to agree'. You have made it clear that you are confused about what I have said, that's about it. However, that is par for the course with you stu...
The trouble with being a closed minded dismissive like yourself, is being stuck with an incapability to realize what would otherwise be so glaringly and unmistakably obvious to anyone not trapped inside that self-inflicted process. You got it wrong with your idea that ID/Creationism is not denominational. Buddhists show your assertion to be wrong. Predictably you then tell Buddhists what it is they believe. You haven't a clue whether the Universe is eternal or not. You have no more than a guess whether there is, can be, or isn't, anything which goes under the general description God or Creator. Boxed in from relying only on assertion, you are stranded with it, incapable of producing anything more. You are shipwrecked by your dogma, which states how things are, without the slightest scrap of practical substantiation. You have no pragmatic workable knowledge based understanding of how the universe works, whether it is eternal, or the earth flat, by only having that dogma for 'ignorant chance', creation and creators. It does not however stop you telling me and now Buddhists, what is and what is not. What suddenly happened to your "Cause and effect, cause and effect, the eternal law" mantra. Where did that go. Right, so now it's back to no cause, returning God's own eternity to your own 'ignorant chance' dogma. So then the same goes for the Universe, with one overwhelmingly enormous difference. We know there is a Universe. Your own assertion for an eternal God, requires no creator. Then an eternal Universe, requires no creator. According to you, those are circumstances which give rise to 'ignorant chance'. Your dogma just bit your ass. It's not me who doesn't understand you. You obviously don't understand yourself. I see your dogma and I understand perfectly well what it is.
Stu says: "The trouble with being a closed minded dismissive like myself, is being stuck with an incapability to realize what would otherwise be so glaringly and unmistakably obvious to anyone not trapped inside that self-inflicted process that I suffer from." So you are having trouble with your own rigid thinking, so sorry stu... Seek some help perhaps with that problem of yours stu... Try and accept alternative points of view without getting so pissy, perhaps... You got it wrong with your idea that ID/Creationism is not denominational. Buddhists show your assertion to be wrong. Predictably you then tell Buddhists what it is they believe. No, you got it wrong...I am not telling Buddhists what it is that they believe. I am telling what I believe, based on my understanding. ID is non denominational as I have defined it, as it is not the belief or practice of any particular religion or faith. Buddhism doesn't denounce the concept of ID as I have defined it, it is supported in their belief of cause and effect, and liberation from the process of cause and effect. You haven't a clue whether the Universe is eternal or not. You have no more than a guess whether there is, can be, or isn't, anything which goes under the general description God or Creator. Boxed in from relying only on assertion, you are stranded with it, incapable of producing anything more. You are shipwrecked by your dogma, which states how things are, without the slightest scrap of practical substantiation. Quite a dramatic you statement... I have a clue, stuey are the clueless one...dogmatically so... You have no pragmatic workable knowledge based understanding of how the universe works, whether it is eternal, or the earth flat, by only having that dogma for 'ignorant chance', creation and creators. Cause and effect is quite pragmatic. t does not however stop you telling me and now Buddhists, what is and what is not. Will the active practicing Buddhists please stand up and complain. Waiting...waiting...waiting... What suddenly happened to your "Cause and effect, cause and effect, the eternal law" mantra. Where did that go. Cause and effect is exactly where it was, is, and will be. Law of Karma is Eternal. Right, so now it's back to no cause, returning God's own eternity to your own 'ignorant chance' dogma. So then the same goes for the Universe, with one overwhelmingly enormous difference. We know there is a Universe. We know there is a universe. Anything else you want to share? LOL! Here is one that will really hurt your noodle as you try with your two dimensional mind to grok: When you go to sleep, and your active conscious mind has turned off, does it die? Is it reborn on waking? Or it is eternal within the span of your human life? When we turn on a computer, and the computer programming is loaded into memory, is this a birth of the computer's actively running the program? When the computer is turned off, does the once active program then die? Or is it just "sleeping" until it wakes again? LOL! The body dies, but the soul does not. The soul takes another body. Why? Because the soul is bound by the Law of Karma to take birth, then bound to live, then bound to die, forever. This bondage can be broken through, and when broken the soul is liberated from the eternal process of birth and death, cause and effect, Karmas. Where does the soul then go upon this liberation, this enlightenment? It goes nowhere that it has not always been. So from one point of view, something changed. Something did change, ignorance was removed, in the same way darkness is removed when the light comes on, but the eternal reality is that the soul itself is exactly the same as it ever was, is, and will be. The soul is now free from the bondage of the cycle of birth and death and the law of Karma. The law of Karma doesn't change, it is eternal, but the soul is now beyond the grip of the law. The enlightened ones speak of the process, which is not fully understood by those yet in darkness and bondage of the cycle of life and death. The soul is eternal, always was, but now the bondage of ignorance is broken and the illusion of darkness and ignornace is gone forever. Your own assertion for an eternal God, requires no creator. Then an eternal Universe, requires no creator. According to you, those are circumstances which give rise to 'ignorant chance'. Your dogma just bit your ass. No...ignorant chance is what the atheists on this thread have suggested, not I. I believe in the opposite of ignorant chance, I believe in Intelligent Design. I am not even saying that those who practice the belief system of ignorant chance, and actively try to promote in a dogmatic manner their belief systems should discontinue their belief systems...to each their own. However, politically propagating their belief systems in the name of "science" and indoctrinating children in the public schools to such belief systems is not fair in my opinion, nor is it right not to teach the children how to think for themselves by offering them an opposing point of view, thereby allowing them to come to their own conclusions. It's not me who doesn't understand you. You obviously don't understand yourself. I see your dogma and I understand perfectly well what it is. Wrong again stu...more confusion on your part. Quite an interesting position that you are taking though when you assert and are referring to me, that you know and understand that "You obviously don't understand yourself." Now that is funny...stuey is now the self appointed expert in my own understanding of myself. ROTFLMAO... Add mind reader to the many talents of stu...or psychic, or logical fallacy practitioner...or megalomaniac, whichever seems more appropriate...
Do you know whether Tom Armstrong is a true Buddhist? How do you know other than copying and pasting from a website? How much do you understand Buddhism other than copying and pasting from a website? You know what? It's easier to prove that something is false than to prove something is true. You don't need to be a chicken to know that a chicken can't swim...
Who can say who is a true Buddhist? LOL!!! Do you think that the current Dali Llama knows who the true Buddhists are, and who are the fake Buddhists? Really funny stuff... This is every bit as ridiculous as the Christians calling other Christians non Christians...
Oh, very nice adult response stu, very nice...you appear to be cracking up again when ideas go over your head. Is a round pencil a circle? Or is it a thick line? Or is it both? Or is it just a pencil? Too funny, you two...no take that back...one dimensional thinkers... This is what happens when someone cannot think in an abstract manner beyond the boundaries a simple mind, they get stuck in deep confusion when someone presents concepts that include seemingly conflicting points of view, as they are not able to understand that the arrived at points of view are relative to the viewer, the viewed, and the process of observation. They think from a partial point of view, and struggle mightily when confronted with ideas that simultaneously take into account multiple points of view. They are like infants who throw tantrums when something is beyond their capacity to understand. Watching them is a bit like watching a computer that locks up when too much multitasking is required. Then, if they are adult children, all they can do it begin tirades and insults, and act put off, insulted and above it all. Such a joke... If I were a troll, and I deny that I am, I would have to be the most successful troll in history to continually sucker you into looking like a fool...