Shopping for Religion

[Bhaal-Zebub]

Basing something off of a dictionary definition can be perilous sometimes. Here is why:

From dictionary.com

religion [ri-lij-uhn]  
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

None of those focus on a god as the qualifying factor, and one even uses Buddhism as an example. Now its just a matter of which definition you will accept or reject, and that is a matter of opinion.

So, unless you can make a reasonable argument why buddhism shouldnt be considered a religion that isnt based on one version of a definition, Im certainly all ears, and I would hope everyone else here is too. But until then, your argument is not exactly convincing.

And while jesus was supposedly jewish, his alleged teachings were different from the jewish doctorine. and there is also a lot of stuff surrounding christianity that doesnt really have much to do with jesus. I mean, one could argue that paul was just as responsible for christianity as jesus.

If you want to use a substanded source to prop up your arguments, then be my guest, but it holds no weight with me.

[truthreality]

Yes I do but for me atleast it doesn't alter his message

Of course not. You are a member of the cult of Christianity and Jesus Christ is your leader. Just like any cult member you will die for your cult and your cult leader regardless of how ridiculous your beliefs are. There is nothing special or unique about Jesus Christ or his message. Jesus and his message are just a hybrid and rip off of other "Gods" and their message before him. Anyways the point was that Judaism and Christianity are not the same religion.

I left that out because its an individual point of view meaning about religion, for example, football is a sport, just because someone follows a sport, or anyother movement religiously, doesn't automaticaly make it a religion, just like Buddism and Scientology are not religions.One is a ethical movement, the other is a scientific movement.

I see you have completely disregarded the definition I provided from the Merriam Webster Dictionary that both implicitly and explicitly states that Buddhism is a religion. You are just picking and choosing definitions to fit your position. Your opinion that Buddhism is not a religion is completely arbitrary and subjective. A core tenant of religion is spirituality and morality. In this sense Buddhism is a far superior religion to the Abrahamic religions.

If Mahayana Buddism worship Buddha as a god, then where in their major scripture text, (Lotus Sutra) does it refer to Buddha as a god? Keep in mind Buddha is not his full name it's only a title which means the enlightened and wise one.

There is not a single unequivocal statement in the entire Bible where Jesus calls himself God or asks to be worshiped yet still Christians and Catholics worship him as God. Christ is a title that means anointed one. What's your point?

[xx_mortekai_xx]

If you want to use a substanded source to prop up your arguments, then be my guest, but it holds no weight with me.

Right, because your dictionary is somehow more valid than any other, huh?

Are you seriously going to argue based on a single dictionary's definition? If so, let me know now so I can disregard the bullshit to follow, since it will clearly be based on a presupposition on your part.

[Bhaal-Zebub]

Of course not. You are a member of the cult of Christianity and Jesus Christ is your leader. Just like any cult member you will die for your cult and your cult leader regardless of how ridiculous your beliefs are. There is nothing special or unique about Jesus Christ or his message. Jesus and his message are just a hybrid and rip off of other "Gods" and their message before him. Anyways the point was that Judaism and Christianity are not the same religion.

Wow I have never read so much drivel, in such few sentences. "Jesus Christ is your leader" no hes not The Pope in Rome is. "you will die for your cult and your cult leader regardless of how ridiculous your beliefs are." Modern Catholics do not subscribe to this out dated mindset. "nothing special or unique about Jesus Christ" I'ed say that just being the son of God is quite unique. "or his message" and without his message, with the creation of the Bible which was carryed through decades by the Catholic church and if it wasn't you would think that professor J.R.R Tolkin's book The Lord of the Rings where facts. "his message are just a hybrid and rip off of other "Gods" and their message." Interesting, I wonder, do you think he said something along the lines of "well baal said this so we must do what baal says in this situation." "Judaism and Christianity are not the same religion" I never said they were I only said that it is where Christianity came out of.

I see you have completely disregarded the definition I provided from the Merriam Webster Dictionary that both implicitly and explicitly states that Buddhism is a religion. You are just picking and choosing definitions to fit your position. Your opinion that Buddhism is not a religion is completely arbitrary and subjective. A core tenant of religion is spirituality and morality. In this sense Buddhism is a far superior religion to the Abrahamic religions.

As I said to mortekai "If you want to use a substanded source to prop up your arguments, then be my guest, but it holds no weight with me." Seeing as Oxford and The Britannica are one of, if not the, leaders in knowledge and understanding I'm happy to refer to them, rather then what I like to call "a Micky Mouse referance source" like Wikipedia, Merriam Webster Dictionary and Dictionary.com to name a few.

There is not a single unequivocal statement in the entire Bible where Jesus calls himself God or asks to be worshiped yet still Christians and Catholics worship him as God. Christ is a title that means anointed one. What's your point?

Clearly you are unable to answer my question that you quoted, seeing as you gave me an accurate answer of what Catholics worship, which you clearly lack any understanding of. My best guess is that you haven't read the text I suggested, while basing you arguments on false assumptions. You assert that Catholics worship Jesus as a god, which we do not, nor do we his mother Marry. We only worship God as a god, and nowhere does it even imply, that Jesus wanted to be worshiped as a god. He wanted people to worship his father the God in Heaven as a god not himself or anyone else for that matter. We only give respect for Marry and Jesus, not worship them like a god.

[Bhaal-Zebub]

Right, because your dictionary is somehow more valid than any other, huh?

Are you seriously going to argue based on a single dictionary's definition? If so, let me know now so I can disregard the bullshit to follow, since it will clearly be based on a presupposition on your part.

Yes, seeing as it is the most respected referance source out there and is used in academia above all else I will.

[arX]

Yes, seeing as it is the most respected referance source out there and is used in academia above all else I will.

Great because your one preferred source defines Buddhism as a religion.

[truthreality]

Wow I have never read so much drivel, in such few sentences. "Jesus Christ is your leader" no hes not The Pope in Rome is. "you will die for your cult and your cult leader regardless of how ridiculous your beliefs are." Modern Catholics do not subscribe to this out dated mindset. "nothing special or unique about Jesus Christ" I'ed say that just being the son of God is quite unique. "or his message" and without his message, with the creation of the Bible which was carryed through decades by the Catholic church and if it wasn't you would think that professor J.R.R Tolkin's book The Lord of the Rings where facts. "his message are just a hybrid and rip off of other "Gods" and their message." Interesting, I wonder, do you think he said something along the lines of "well baal said this so we must do what baal says in this situation." "Judaism and Christianity are not the same religion" I never said they were I only said that it is where Christianity came out of.

The concept and title of the "son of God" is not unique to Jesus in any sense. Such a concept existed well before Jesus. There is nothing special about the message of Jesus. The concept of the "son of God" has just been borrowed by the Christian faith. I don't think it is necessary to get into semantics about who is the leader of your cult whether he be Jesus, Paul or the Pope. In some sense they are all leaders. Currently the leader is the Pope but at one time Jesus and Paul were the leaders. Modern Catholics have given up many ridiculous practices in thanks to secularism.

As I said to mortekai "If you want to use a substanded source to prop up your arguments, then be my guest, but it holds no weight with me." Seeing as Oxford and The Britannica are one of, if not the, leaders in knowledge and understanding I'm happy to refer to them, rather then what I like to call "a Micky Mouse referance source" like Wikipedia, Merriam Webster Dictionary and Dictionary.com to name a few.

Good because your Britannica clearly deems Buddhism a religion.

According to Slate magazine Merriam Webster is a better dictionary then Oxford.

It doesn't matter though since the third definition that Oxford presents under religion would include Buddhism but you reject such a definition because of your bias. Technically Buddhism is a religion under Oxford dictionary.

Clearly you are unable to answer my question that you quoted, seeing as you gave me an accurate answer of what Catholics worship, which you clearly lack any understanding of. My best guess is that you haven't read the text I suggested, while basing you arguments on false assumptions. You assert that Catholics worship Jesus as a god, which we do not, nor do we his mother Marry. We only worship God as a god, and nowhere does it even imply, that Jesus wanted to be worshiped as a god. He wanted people to worship his father the God in Heaven as a god not himself or anyone else for that matter. We only give respect for Marry and Jesus, not worship them like a god.

I answered your question. Please no straw man's arguments. The discussion was not about whether Buddha is really God or not. I never made the argument that Buddha was God. The discussion was about whether Buddhism worships Buddha as God or not. I have pointed out a denomination of Buddhism that does worship Buddha as God. Catholics view the Old and New Testaments as the word of God and hold the belief in a trinity even though such a concept is blatantly rejected in the Old Testament so I see no problem in Buddhists worshipping Buddha as God even if such a practice is not specifically advocated in Buddhist scriptures.


I disagree that Catholics do not worship Jesus as God. Maybe you don't but Catholicism advocates God as a trinity so the worship of God includes Jesus and on top of this Catholics consider Jesus divine and God incarnate in flesh.

According to catholic.org not only is Jesus God who possesses divine nature he has also been anointed by God to be the saviour of mankind. The issue is not that I am wrong the issue is that followers of Jesus can't make up their mind on who this guy is. You would think that God would make it easier for the world to understand who his son is but the more then 3800 denominations in Christianity and the multiple religions based on his life teaching attest to my opinion that Jesus is an incredibly ambiguous figure. You can really make Jesus whoever you want him to be as the authors of the New Testament did and the countless of followers after him.

[xx_mortekai_xx]

I disagree that Catholics do not worship Jesus as God. Maybe you don't but Catholicism advocates God as a trinity so the worship of God includes Jesus and on top of this Catholics consider Jesus divine and God incarnate in flesh.

According to catholic.org not only is Jesus God who possesses divine nature he has also been anointed by God to be the saviour of mankind. The issue is not that I am wrong the issue is that followers of Jesus can't make up their mind on who this guy is. You would think that God would make it easier for the world to understand who his son is but the more then 3800 denominations in Christianity and the multiple religions based on his life teaching attest to my opinion that Jesus is an incredibly ambiguous figure. You can really make Jesus whoever you want him to be as the authors of the New Testament did and the countless of followers after him.

Ive been to quite a few catholic masses, as my wife's entire family is catholic, and every time we visit, we make it a point to go with them (I actually somewhat enjoy attending church from time to time, as it keeps me current with the thinking of christians of all types. and yes, they know I am atheist).

They not only worship jesus as a god, they also revere mary as if she were a god. And their reverence of the saints also borders on deific worship.

[xx_mortekai_xx]

Yes, seeing as it is the most respected referance source out there and is used in academia above all else I will.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/religion

religion

noun

[mass noun]
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods:
ideas about the relationship between science and religion

[count noun] a particular system of faith and worship:
the world’s great religions

[count noun] a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion:
consumerism is the new religion

OOPS. oxford defines religion in such a way to include buddhism.

And, as truthreality points out, Britannica specifically refers to buddhism as a religion.

Thanks for playing, though.

[Bhaal-Zebub]

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/religion

religion

noun

[mass noun]
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods:
ideas about the relationship between science and religion

[count noun] a particular system of faith and worship:
the world’s great religions

[count noun] a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion:
consumerism is the new religion

OOPS. oxford defines religion in such a way to include buddhism.

If you want to use a child's version of the Oxford Dictionary's then be my guest, but I'm useing the Advanced version which is for adults. Truthreality has been the only one to link my hard copy, despite his lack of understanding of what he linked. If you can't keep, then up don't step up. Furthermore please learn to read the dictionary correctly the 1st definition is a [U] uncountable noun which is the most relevant meaning in this case. The 2nd definition is a [C] countable which is only remotly relevant, in which I was only throughing you a bone. The 3rd definition is a [S] singular which is not relevent in this case. If it was then why isn't football a religion? It's because it's a sport and just because some people follow sport (or anyother group that doesn't worship a god or gods) religiously, doesn't automaticly make it a religion. So, again, I will say to you and to everyone else, Baddhism is not a religion (which I will add) by defanition.

[truthreality]

If you want to use a child's version of the Oxford Dictionary's then be my guest, but I'm useing the Advanced version which is for adults. Truthreality has been the only one to link my hard copy, despite his lack of understanding of what he linked. If you can't keep, then up don't step up. Furthermore please learn to read the dictionary correctly the 1st definition is a [U] uncountable noun which is the most relevant meaning in this case. The 2nd definition is a [C] countable which is only remotly relevant, in which I was only throughing you a bone. The 3rd definition is a [S] singular which is not relevent in this case. If it was then why isn't football a religion? It's because it's a sport and just because some people follow sport (or anyother group that doesn't worship a god or gods) religiously, doesn't automaticly make it a religion. So, again, I will say to you and to everyone else, Baddhism is not a religion (which I will add) by defanition.

Lol. Cherry picking and repeating the same argument is not going to win you a debate. At this point your opinion that Buddhism is not a religion means nothing as it has been shown through multiple sources, including two that you have approved, that Buddhism is a religion.

To affirm to this fact I will point to The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. Now you cannot refute that Buddhism is not a religion as it has been explicitly labeled so by your favorite source:

Amazon.com:



Isn't it funny that the cover picture for the Oxford Dictionary of World Regions is a Buddhist meditating?

"Abridged from the acclaimed Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, this Concise version is written by an expert team of 80 international and multi-faith contributors.
It contains entries on all the major and many minor religions, including Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Shinto, Sikhism, and Taoism."

[xx_mortekai_xx]

If you want to use a child's version of the Oxford Dictionary's then be my guest, but I'm useing the Advanced version which is for adults. Truthreality has been the only one to link my hard copy, despite his lack of understanding of what he linked. If you can't keep, then up don't step up. Furthermore please learn to read the dictionary correctly the 1st definition is a [U] uncountable noun which is the most relevant meaning in this case. The 2nd definition is a [C] countable which is only remotly relevant, in which I was only throughing you a bone. The 3rd definition is a [S] singular which is not relevent in this case. If it was then why isn't football a religion? It's because it's a sport and just because some people follow sport (or anyother group that doesn't worship a god or gods) religiously, doesn't automaticly make it a religion. So, again, I will say to you and to everyone else, Baddhism is not a religion (which I will add) by defanition.

sure. by your narrow ass definition, its not.

but your ridiculous assertion that the first definition is the only one that matters is fucking laughable. If that were the case, why arent you running around barking at people for not using the word 'run' correctly? Oh, right, because first definitions arent the only ones that matter. Words have multiple definitions. deal with it.

also, i find it funny that you reference the oxford dictionary as your gold standard, and when I show you using your gold standard where the definition applies, you dont want to use it.

EDIT: Thats fucking AWESOME, truthreality!