I refuse to believe

Buddhism is not a religion because ‘belief’ in the Buddha’s teachings is not blind belief, blind faith, and far from superstition. Shakyamuni Buddha taught us not to blindly believe what he tells us, he wants us to try the teachings and prove them for ourselves. The Buddha wants us to know, not merely believe.

Chin Kung

The difference between what Christianity teaches and what Buddhism teaches is vast – not only in theology, but also in philosophy. Christianity teaches us to have faith in it’s teachings, and the book that they are based on. It’s like Ice Cream manufactures telling us that Ice Cream is the best food ever, and all we should ever eat is Ice Cream.

If you dare question, you are subject to many punishments. They range from burning at the stake in yesteryear to social and civic penalties today.

You shouldn’t think something just because you believe it. You need reasons. That applies to religion. That applies to politics . . . just because your parents believe something isn’t good enough.

Bart Ehrman

As more and more people start to dig deeply into their Christian Faith, some are seeing that it is a house of cards. There is no historical evidence to support the Bible’s claims. If people want to believe in Christianity, I have no problem with that – however I do have a problem when they tell me that the Bible is The Truth.

There are some 5,700 ancient Greek manuscripts that are the basis of the modern versions of the New Testament, and scholars have uncovered more than 200,000 differences in those texts.

“Put it this way: There are more variances among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament,” Ehrman summarizes.

The Book of Bart, at the Washington Post

Here’s a wake up call – truth is subjective. It depends on the circumstances. There is no universal truth that we have ever found. Your way might be right for you, but that does not give you the mandate to force your way on others! It does not give you the right to kill, imprison, maim, or ostracize those that have a different truth.

Words work – tell others why you believe this way, what evidence you have. Through discourse, ideas spread, and perhaps you will get more and more people to agree with you.

This does not work if you have no reasons to believe what you believe. This tension between a person’s heartfelt belief and their lack of reason for that belief is what fosters radicalism.

“I cannot convince you that I am right because I have no evidence, so I am going to make it a law!” or kill, or whatever.

Well, you know what? If ya’ll don’t get more tolerant, I am going to pass laws to force ya’ll to become good little Buddhists.

7 thoughts on “I refuse to believe”

  1. <blockquote>I don’t know that this statement is necessarily true. Certainly, even if we take the most literal Christians viewpoint, the parables of Christ are not considered 100% fact, but rather stories that illustrate principles.</blockquote>

    I base my view of Christianity off current events and my upbringing in a Lutherian and later a Southern Baptist Church. We were taught that the Bible was 100% fact, written by God through Human Agents.

    I did not even find out that the Gospel was written years and years after Jesus’s death, not by the original apostiles until after I moved away from the Church. We were taught that Peter was Peter in the stories.

    Dave – my reponse was sooo long that it is becoming another article.

    Suffice it to say, I do not bash Christianity – I bash black and white thinking, us vs them mentalities and blind faith.

  2. <blockquote>If it’s not 100% fact, then it’s not the inspired word of God.</blockquote>I don’t know that this statement is necessarily true. Certainly, even if we take the most literal Christians viewpoint, the parables of Christ are not considered 100% fact, but rather stories that illustrate principles.

    Beyond that, I don’t see why something cannot be ispired by a supreme being, but still contain imperfections introduced by men. That wouldn’t mean it still wasn’t inspired by God.

  3. I’m not going to take time debating these issues; they have been debated for millenia by greater minds than you or I. I could whip-out my apologetics texts and we could have a relatively meaningless debate about interpretation. I’m not asking you to take anyone’s word for anything, but apparently you are taking somebody’s word for something because you are stating facts about which you have no personal, direct knowledge…you have read these things somewhere, too. (Do you know Greek?)

    I simply wanted to offer a book that gives an alternative point-of-view with documentable evidence. The percentage of your posts that deal with bashing the Christian religious world view is rather high. It sometimes disturbs me.

  4. So, you believe that there is only one truth?

    Also – Who’s word am I taking?

    Let’s look at the evidence.

    1) The gospel was written years after Jesus’s life – not by the actual apostles.

    2) There are not any historical references to Jesus, other then the bible

    3) The gospel was translated many times, and re-scribed many times. We do not have originals.

    4) There are lots of problems with translating from Greek (which the gospels were written in, not in Jesus’s native tongue), and ambiguities exist.

    Leaving out faith, with these facts, we can easily draw the conclusion that the bible might not in fact be 100% fact. If it’s not 100% fact, then it’s not the inspired word of God. If it’s not the inspired word of God, then it’s mythology.

    I have no problems with people believing in mythology. However, their faith should be grounded in the realization that other faiths are just as valid.

    Just because some one else says this, and I quote them I am taking their word for it? I have felt this way for many years.

Comments are closed.