What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Research Paper Help

S

sk8rpinoi32

Guest
I have to do a research paper on Buddhism, and it's been about a month and I have done a lot of research on the case. However if I had to explore this properly I need some refutations to go along with it. And so far I have found 0, a lot of it has been misconceptions about the religion. I have spoken with Pastors, members of Christian Fellowship clubs, people brought up in Hindu cultures, and Buddhist monks and so far none has been able to help me. And I ask the people of this forum because I have gotten the most responsive answers from the highly faithful of monotheistic religions. Please do not ban me because of this topic, I am only seeking help for a college paper, not to badger people into leaving their faith.

On a personal note, because of the lack of problems as well as controversy in the Buddhist religion it has become appealing to me; so much that it's scary.

Thank you
 
ok, here is one you have probably tackled with. In the Bible, God says that he created the Earth in 6 days and on the 7th he rested. He created man on the 6th day. However according to evolution that is not possible. That is a refutation. There are tons of refutations on Christianity, you have probably seen more than I have, in fact the History Channels do a bunch of them. In fact even the so called Gospel of Judas would be a form of refutation.
 
No, that is not a refutation on Christianity. There are Christian evolutionists.

It is evidence that the particular book is not literal.

But what I was asking, what type of refutation are you looking for? Scientific? If so, you will be out of luck. Science doesn't refute the metaphysical.
 
VaultZero4Me said:
No, that is not a refutation on Christianity. There are Christian evolutionists.

It is evidence that the particular book is not literal.

But what I was asking, what type of refutation are you looking for? Scientific? If so, you will be out of luck. Science doesn't refute the metaphysical.
Click to expand...

Vault, This is a Christian forum. If you feel the book is not literal that is your right to have such an opinion. However attacking the integrity of scripture by claiming an unproven theory is evidence proving the Bible is not literal is a stretch and will not be tolerated. Consider this an informal warning.

I'm going to move this thread to Christianity and other religions where you may get more answer.
 
Blazin Bones said:
VaultZero4Me said:
No, that is not a refutation on Christianity. There are Christian evolutionists.

It is evidence that the particular book is not literal.

But what I was asking, what type of refutation are you looking for? Scientific? If so, you will be out of luck. Science doesn't refute the metaphysical.
Click to expand...

Vault, This is a Christian forum. If you feel the book is not literal that is your right to have such an opinion. However attacking the integrity of scripture by claiming an unproven theory is evidence proving the Bible is not literal is a stretch and will not be tolerated. Consider this an informal warning.

I'm going to move this thread to Christianity and other religions where you may get more answer.
Click to expand...

By book I mean Genesis. The book of Genesis, which deals with creation.

And I do understand that there are many Christians on this site who do believe that Genesis is not literal, and follow the theory of evolution.

Do they get such warnings? There are a ton of posts by many Christians on here who state what I stated above. They believe Genesis is not literal, and believe evolution...

Also, I did not question anythings integrity. Saying something is not literal is not questioning its integrity. It is a form of literature.......

In context, I am unsure how you could see my post as doing what you say. Maybe you read it hastily. I answered his post about evolution refuting the whole of Christianity, and said it does not. Obviously, if I do not believe evolution refutes the entirety of Christianity, I do not believe that evolution makes the whole Bible one big allegory.

My point was evolution just means Genesis is not literal. If one accepts evolution is up to them. That wasn't the point.
 
Wasn't Buddha a Hindu?

The little I can recall about Buddhism seems to be that Buddha never claimed to be THE God, or even A God, and has never offered eternal salvation to anyone, just a nice, pleasant way to go through one's life.

Does your research bear this out?

Wouldn't this be akin to Christian's turning away from Christ, and devoting themselves to one of Christ's followers, such as a Billy Graham type, for example?

And, if so, what exactly is it that you find appealing about this deviation?

Did Buddha challenge, refute, and prove as fallacies, the concepts of heaven and hell?

If not, then how are Buddhists planning to navigate themselves out of a fiery eternity in hell?

In Christ,

Pogo
 
Hello sk8rpinoi32~

Another question if you don't mind. Since your paper is about Buddism why are you searching for refutations regarding a completely separate religion, ie - Christianity? :gah

If I were writing about Buddism and had done the research you have described, I would be looking for refutations on Buddism. Of course, this assumes that you want and your Professor wants a BALANCED paper. Most students are aware that a proper argument must include both the pro and con of any topic to be respectable. Although, many professors today (sad to say it) will welcome any refutation of the Christian faith, even if it is shoddily founded, and purposeless.

May I ask are you seeking to prove Buddist evolutionary teachings through refuting the biblical account of creation? How can diassembling our reasonable yet subjective theology regarding the origins of the universe as laid out in scripture--- possibly prove the metaphysical ideology of Buddism?

If you truly are looking for contrasts between these two faiths I can offer one that I would tackle.

Buddism, Islam, or any other metaphysical religion would thrive without Budda or Mohammad~ even if these Prophets had never lived the writings of these men were initiated in them by the human race in paganism long before they were born. If they had not re-written these fables some other men would, ther are always newly packaged lies sown for each generation. Besides, these men died... never to be seen of heard from again, yet their rituals and exacted lifestyles are rehearsed in the culture of the societies where they are taught. These are what I would call dead religions, because their saviors are dead, and only the supposed "goodness" of man ( :crying, sorry, very sad lie ) saves an individual who follows them.

However, with Christainity~ if Christ had never lived, there would be no Christainity. He is the center of all its teachings. Without Christ there is no salvation for the Christian. Without His ressurection from the dead there is no hope for the Christian of ever attaining the promises of salvation, and no victory in daily life over the evil nature in us all is possible. Also, no culture has grasped Jesus Christ and embodied Him, though men and women from every culture have adored Him, as He has embraced them. No set of rituals can define Him, though many religions have tried to link Him to their incessant rituals to make His personal nature and living reality dim. There would be no faith in Christ without Jesus The Christ. :shades

Hope this helps. bonnie
 
Pogo said:
Wasn't Buddha a Hindu?

The little I can recall about Buddhism seems to be that Buddha never claimed to be THE God, or even A God, and has never offered eternal salvation to anyone, just a nice, pleasant way to go through one's life.

Does your research bear this out?

Wouldn't this be akin to Christian's turning away from Christ, and devoting themselves to one of Christ's followers, such as a Billy Graham type, for example?

And, if so, what exactly is it that you find appealing about this deviation?

Did Buddha challenge, refute, and prove as fallacies, the concepts of heaven and hell?

If not, then how are Buddhists planning to navigate themselves out of a fiery eternity in hell?

In Christ,

Pogo
Click to expand...

Clarify, this is an argumentative writing class. We have to pick a topic that we are unfamiliar with so we can actually argue it. I picked Buddhism for both my lack of knowledge and forcuriosity.

So answer your questions in order.

Yes, Buddha belonged to a Hindu sect. Proof is the term Buddha, that is a Hindu recognition.

Buddha recognized the fact that in order to attain a pleasant rebirth and/or reach Nirvana you would have to leave a life of profoundness. Just as Christ as said. Buddha did offer salvation, he offered something like 3,600 ways to combat suffering. His teachings are surprisingly like a manual, there are ways to deal with a murderer, someone who lies and such. And it's understood that if you combat these in a positive manner, you will be "saved".

I don't understand you're Billy Graham question.

Buddhist have concepts of Heaven and Hell, more so than Abrahamic religions. We live in the Samsara, that is our realm. In total there is 6 Realms, Heaven and Hell being the ends. However keep in mind that each Realm has suffering, even Heaven, however the suffering within Heaven is one that is forgetful, it is the belief that no one is eternal so Angels and Deities and the Saved are believed that they will enjoy that life forever. * Nirvana is the freedom of the wheel, and more so eternal, or can be.

the 6 realms: One is Heaven where the good resides. The second is where Holy Warriors reside. Third is our realm, where we exhibit both good and bad, however we feel all forms of suffering. The forth is the realm of Animals, who also suffer, but they do not have virtue to change their karma. The fifth is the Warrior demons. The last is Hell.

Also, in Hell, there are 8 dieties that punish man. They are not held in regards of Satan who is a foe of man, they are like the police, or even correctional officers, in a way they do right but are notorious for harming people.
 
sheshisown said:
Hello sk8rpinoi32~

Another question if you don't mind. Since your paper is about Buddism why are you searching for refutations regarding a completely separate religion, ie - Christianity? :gah
Click to expand...
I wasn't looking for refutations for Christianity, someone wanted an example, that was just one I thought up because I'm watching Chuck Missler talk about evolution and Louis Passuer. I'm sorry for refutations. But I am taking note of all these refutations. But so far to me it just feels as if it's information that can easily be answered by reading.
 
sk8rpinoi32~

I hope you have made yourself aware of the Terms of Service rules that you agreed to when you signed on as a member of CFnet? You may not promote- nor may you teach- any doctrine other than Christianity on this site. This truly IS a Christian website, for the edification and witness of Christianity. :yes

That was why I was specifically asking you to look at the following fallacies with Buddism or other non-Christian religions. Once again I list for your possible use with your paper a good argument against Buddist ideology below:

Buddism, Islam, or any other metaphysical religion would thrive without Budda or Mohammad~ even if these Prophets had never lived the writings of these men were initiated in them by the human race in paganism long before they were born. If they had not re-written these fables some other men would, ther are always newly packaged lies sown for each generation. Besides, these men died... never to be seen of heard from again, yet their rituals and exacted lifestyles are rehearsed in the culture of the societies where they are taught. These are what I would call dead religions, because their saviors are dead, and only the supposed "goodness" of man ( , sorry, very sad lie ) saves an individual who follows them.

However, with Christainity~ if Christ had never lived, there would be no Christainity. He is the center of all its teachings. Without Christ there is no salvation for the Christian. Without His ressurection from the dead there is no hope for the Christian of ever attaining the promises of salvation, and no victory in daily life over the evil nature in us all is possible. Also, no culture has grasped Jesus Christ and embodied Him, though men and women from every culture have adored Him, as He has embraced them. No set of rituals can define Him, though many religions have tried to link Him to their incessant rituals to make His personal nature and living reality dim. There would be no faith in Christ without Jesus The Christ.

BTW~ IF you have truly accepted Jesus as your Lord and your Savior, why would you want to WORK your way to heaven, without assurance of getting there? When (with Christ) you get heaven and salvation from all sinful behaviors for free!

Paul said some things to the Galatians who after salvation had decided to work for their redmption:

(Galatians 1:6-8 NKJV) I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. ... (1:11+12) But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ. ... (4:4+5) But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.

Would you lose your sonship in the family of God with all its wonderful blessings... for this empty philosophy made up by men? Oh brother consider your steps...and ... Above all else, guard your heart, for it affects everything you do. (Proverbs 4:23 NLT)

your moderator, sheshisown
 
By book I mean Genesis. The book of Genesis, which deals with creation.

And I do understand that there are many Christians on this site who do believe that Genesis is not literal, and follow the theory of evolution.

Do they get such warnings? There are a ton of posts by many Christians on here who state what I stated above. They believe Genesis is not literal, and believe evolution...

Also, I did not question anythings integrity. Saying something is not literal is not questioning its integrity. It is a form of literature.......

In context, I am unsure how you could see my post as doing what you say. Maybe you read it hastily. I answered his post about evolution refuting the whole of Christianity, and said it does not. Obviously, if I do not believe evolution refutes the entirety of Christianity, I do not believe that evolution makes the whole Bible one big allegory.

My point was evolution just means Genesis is not literal. If one accepts evolution is up to them. That wasn't the point.
Click to expand...

I believe the Genesis is literal and true but Vault is right, i do not think the warning whether official or informal should have been administered.
 
JohnMuise,

It is not your place to say whether or not a warning should have been given. If you have a problem with that, deal with it through pm, not in the public forum. That is a violation of the TOS.

Thank you.
 
Well could I please get a pm then in light of my clarification to Blazingbones?

I honestly do go through some effort to abide and respect the forum rules (though I did violate them recently with stating my opinion on a warning).

I understand my opinion is different on many things, and if I posted on them, I would violate the TOS.

I generally stay out of those posts out of respect for the board, rather than try to make it a sounding board for my beliefs.

Honestly, I would prefer that I be pm'd in the future if someone feels I may have crossed the ToS.

In this situation, I could have clarified it to BB, and then edited my post to be a little more concise (this is assuming that my clarification does put my post back within the ToS), without the need for a public scolding.
 
sk8rpinoi32,

How about this: if there are any Buddhist teachings and beliefs in particular that you want a refutation for, post them and see what answers you get.
 
Here is one I came across and is an excellent one. It's about the fact that most monks present are male monks, very few females around. I actually found out that it is harder for a woman to be a monk than it is for a man, but there are some female monks, just hard to come by. And where there are maybe hundreds of male monasteries, there is only one of any significance for women.
 
Another I have found watching "The Seven Deadly Sins" was about evny. The fact that Buddhist live their life far from attachment means that there is very little progress to be made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top