Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Casual discussion amongst spiritual friends.

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:09 pm

christopher::: wrote:Hi Tilt. Such certainty you have in your views and perceptions! If you were to insert a few "imo" "the Buddhist view" "i believe" or "from a Theravadan Buddhist perspective" into your comments there would be nothing for us to argue about.

:namaste:


You should talk. Shall I play back some of your comments?

Of course, anything I say is my opinion, and I stand to be corrected on anything I say, provided the correction is based upon reasoned and exampled argument.

So far you position carries no weight, given that you refuse to engage the criticisms of your position.

You are essentially trying to sell brackish water next to a sweet-water spring. Good luck with that.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18372
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby Hoja » Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:16 pm

clw_uk wrote:If there is a God that is the "source" or "ground of being" etc then on some level it "designed" or created the universe and if its all knowing it knew how it would end up


But why we supose it has to be all knowing? It could be like the Force concept in Star Wars.
User avatar
Hoja
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 1:08 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby christopher::: » Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:29 pm

Hoja wrote:
clw_uk wrote:If there is a God that is the "source" or "ground of being" etc then on some level it "designed" or created the universe and if its all knowing it knew how it would end up


But why we supose it has to be all knowing? It could be like the Force concept in Star Wars.


Exactly. Or like the Tao in Taoism, the Dharmakaya in Buddhism, Ayin in Kabbalah.

tiltbillings wrote:
You should talk. Shall I play back some of your comments?

Of course, anything I say is my opinion, and I stand to be corrected on anything I say, provided the correction is based upon reasoned and exampled argument.

So far you position carries no weight, given that you refuse to engage the criticisms of your position.

You are essentially trying to sell brackish water next to a sweet-water spring. Good luck with that.


I have made an effort to present my views as views. If i failed to do so at times i stand corrected. Anything that comes out of our minds (imo) is by nature a belief, a view, a perspective.

As for responding to your criticisms there are many things we simply seem to disagree on. I don't respond to you sometimes because of the insults you throw out constantly (e.g., god-thingy, brackish water), the aggressive way (imo) in which you challenge and criticize. If i were to agree to respond to every point or criticism you raise we'd be here for weeks, for months-- our minds spinning in dukkha circles. I would become (and have become) contentious and aggressive too, and our conversations/battles would be endless.

Our views are simply too far apart, it seems to me. Best (in my view) to simply try to understand the other person's perspective as best as possible and then give them some space. You call that "refusing to engage criticisms." We see this differently as well.

I've mentioned several times that this approach (of disengagement from arguements concerning views) is actively encouraged in Zen Buddhism, but that answer has not satisfied you.

What more can I do?
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
christopher:::
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:02 pm

christopher::: wrote:
Hoja wrote:
clw_uk wrote:If there is a God that is the "source" or "ground of being" etc then on some level it "designed" or created the universe and if its all knowing it knew how it would end up


But why we supose it has to be all knowing? It could be like the Force concept in Star Wars.


Exactly. Or like the Tao in Taoism, the Dharmakaya in Buddhism, Ayin in Kabbalah.


You are prepared to show us that Tao, Dharmakaya and Ayin are referring to the same thing and are like the "Force", which is a tangible power, that can be used for evil as well as good purposes. Show us that that is so of the Dharmakaya.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18372
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:24 pm

christopher::: wrote:As for responding to your criticisms there are many things we simply seem to disagree on. I don't respond to you sometimes because of the insults you throw out constantly (e.g., god-thingy, brackish water),the aggressive way (imo) in which you challenge and criticize.


That reads as an excuse not to respond to the criticism of your views. You do not respond to Craig, either. You have repeatedly, no matter what language has been used, avoided responding to any criticism of your point of view.

If i were to agree to respond to every point or criticism you raise we'd be here for weeks, for months-- our minds spinning in dukkha circles. I would become (and have become) contentious and aggressive too, and our conversations/battles would be endless.


So, your views should not be questioned?

Our views are simply too far apart, it seems to me.


Not at all, and even so, by not responding, you make my point that your views carry no weight. By not engaging, it looks like a lack of interest in dialogue, a lack of interest in anything but your own point of view.

I've mentioned several times that this approach (of disengagement from arguements concerning views) is actively encouraged in Zen Buddhism, but that answer has not satisfied you.


Of course having seen how Zen Buddhists argue, at length and in detail, on ZFI and elsewhere, what you have just said is hardly convincing. Also, you again are making an excuse for you trying to present your point of view and not having to respond to any criticism of it.

What more can I do?


Actually, all you need to do is to try to engage in a dialogue; otherwise you look like you here are to preach.

Now, I'll clean up my language, and since you are a bit sensitive, I'll be less "aggressive" in my response. All of that will take away your above excuse not to respond to criticisms of your presentations here. Also, I have yet to see that you are trying to tie any of what you say to Theravada. And given that is is a Theravadin forum, that is kind of important. You do not have to be Theravadin or agree with the Theravada to participate here, but it would go a long way if you were actually try to show that you are interested in learning about the Theravada and showing that your point of has some relevance for Theravadins, something you simply have not done at all to date.

One thing you also have not shown here is an an actual, active interest in learning about the Theravada. What I have seen here is that you are promoting your particular take on the efficacy of a non-Buddhist god/godhead point of view. Okay, you believe that, but what does it have to do with the Theravada? Why should we care? You have not shown any attempt to engage Theravadins from a place of attempted understanding and dialogue. If you do not do that, you are here to preach, and the response to that will be a bit negative.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18372
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby christopher::: » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:29 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
You are prepared to show us that Tao, Dharmakaya and Ayin are referring to the same thing and are like the "Force", which is a tangible power, that can be used for evil as well as good purposes. Show us that that is so of the Dharmakaya.


Like the force, or like the Tao, or like the Dharmakaya, or like the concept of Ayin....
They are all different from one another in various ways...
Similar only in that none refer to All knowing beings watching over us like the biblical God does.
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
christopher:::
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby christopher::: » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:34 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
christopher::: wrote:As for responding to your criticisms there are many things we simply seem to disagree on. I don't respond to you sometimes because of the insults you throw out constantly (e.g., god-thingy, brackish water),the aggressive way (imo) in which you challenge and criticize.


That reads as an excuse not to respond to the criticism of your views. You do not respond to Craig, either. You have repeatedly, no matter what language has been used, avoided responding to any criticism of your point of view.


Recently- especially while on vacation- i have not responded, that is true, but we've had various discussions going for months now, both here and over at ZFI. I have tried to explain my perspective on this, Tilt.

Plus, we are off topic here.

I hope you will drop by this discussion if you would like to discuss this issue further...

Differences in Views, Engage or Disengage from Discussions?

:group:
Last edited by christopher::: on Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
christopher:::
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:38 pm

christopher::: wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
You are prepared to show us that Tao, Dharmakaya and Ayin are referring to the same thing and are like the "Force", which is a tangible power, that can be used for evil as well as good purposes. Show us that that is so of the Dharmakaya.


Like the force, or like the Tao, or like the Dharmakaya, or like the concept of Ayin....
They are all different from one another in various ways...
Similar only in that none refer to All knowing beings watching over us like the biblical God does.


Neither my dog, nor my cat nor my gecko watches over us like a biblical god. So, since "[t]hey are all different from one another in various ways," there is no reason to lump these things together other than they are not referring "to All knowing beings watching over us like the biblical God does." Simply trying to make sense of what you are saying. Please clarify.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18372
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:42 pm

christopher::: wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
christopher::: wrote:As for responding to your criticisms there are many things we simply seem to disagree on. I don't respond to you sometimes because of the insults you throw out constantly (e.g., god-thingy, brackish water),the aggressive way (imo) in which you challenge and criticize.


That reads as an excuse not to respond to the criticism of your views. You do not respond to Craig, either. You have repeatedly, no matter what language has been used, avoided responding to any criticism of your point of view.


Recently i have not responded, that is true, but we've had discussions going for months now. I have tried to explain my perspective on this, Tilt.

Plus, we are off topic here.

I hope you will drop by this discussion if you would like to discuss this issue further...

Differences in Views, Engage or Disengage from Discussions?


We are not so off-topic here. For months you have presented your point of view, I have raised questions about it and you have avoided directly responding. To get back on topic, simply try to engage in a dialogue, to points raised in response to you godhead position, and let us see what this all might have to do with the Theravada.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18372
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby christopher::: » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:49 pm

Seems we disagree again, as usual.

Concerning your dog, cat and gecko- they are different from one another in countless ways. They are similar in that all have skeletal systems, all are sentient, and are nothing like rocks.

The ideas of Tao, Dharmakaya, Force and Ayin are similar in that a) they all point towards some cosmic principle, power, law or source that is involved with the way things work in our Universe, and that b) none refer to a man in a white beard (or with blue skin) who created the Universe and is watching over everything.

Other then those similarities, they are also different in countless ways.

You may disagree. And yes, if we explore this politely i'd be willing to discuss, though not now, as i have a plane taking off for Japan tomorrow and need to get back to my packing.

:namaste:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
christopher:::
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:04 pm

christopher::: wrote:Seems we disagree again, as usual.

Concerning your dog, cat and gecko- they are different from one another in countless ways. They are similar in that all have skeletal systems, all are sentient, and are nothing like rocks.


Given what you said above, I could have added rocks and fairy dust to the list.

The ideas of Tao, Dharmakaya, Force and Ayin are similar in that a) they all point towards some cosmic principle, power, law or source that is involved with the way things work in our Universe, and that b) none refer to a man in a white beard (or with blue skin) who created the Universe and is watching over everything.


You complain about me being disrespectful towards other religions, and you are here showing a massive disrespect to towards the highly sophisticated notions of god that are readily available in Christianity or Hinduism, assuming blue skin is a reference to Krishna. Have actually ever read the Bhagavad Gita?

As for being similar, what you are saying here is very vague. It does not yet tell us anything meaningful, or show that you have good grasp of the concepts involved in a way that warrants them being clumped together.

Other then those similarities, they are also different in countless ways.


Kinda different, enough so that it is maybe not quite so reasonable to clump these things together.

You may disagree. And yes, if we explore this politely i'd be willing to discuss, though not now, as i have a plane taking off for Japan tomorrow and need to get back to my packing.


We’ll see.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18372
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby appicchato » Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:56 pm

christopher::: wrote:Religions exist because people seek understanding, inspiration, freedom from fear and suffering, a sense of connectedness to the world and deeper meaning. These are very important human needs.
[/i]

We 'need' food, water, rest, and to evacuate...period...all physical...the states mentioned are all mental...sources of trouble...'when chopping wood, just chop wood'...
User avatar
appicchato
 
Posts: 1512
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design/Creationism

Postby christopher::: » Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:19 pm

appicchato wrote:
We 'need' food, water, rest, and to evacuate...period... all physical... the states mentioned are all mental...sources of trouble...'when chopping wood, just chop wood'...


Yes! (and air)... beyond that, "seek" would have been a better word choice.

Thank you, bhante.

:namaste:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
christopher:::
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Previous

Return to Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Edith Clampton, palchi, purple planet and 3 guests