Buddha is not an icon of atheism

Buddha is not an icon of atheism

Posted in the Atheism Forum

Since: May 10

Maple, Canada

#1 Apr 29, 2012
Buddha is not an icon of atheism. He did not deny in the Creator God.”

Christopher Hitchens in his book “God is not great” says in Chapter Fourteen:

“There Is No “Eastern Solution”, meaning thereby that there is no solution in Buddha’s religion; hence it is evident that atheists/agnostics/skeptics don’t believe that he was an agnostic/atheist or skeptic.

Buddha had a religion, rather he was a founder of a religion, while agnostics/atheists and skeptics pronounce they have no religion.

Am I right?

EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#2 Apr 29, 2012
paarsurrey wrote:
...Am I right?
No, wrong.

The Buddhist religion was founded in spite of his teachings as well as because of them. That is what religionists do - make stuff up. One should only believe anything as far as it can be justified by reason and evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#3 Apr 29, 2012
Atheist means lack of belief in god. Buddhist can be atheist and still spiritual. They still believe that scriptures are sacred.

Since: May 10

Maple, Canada

#4 Apr 29, 2012
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>No, wrong.
The Buddhist religion was founded in spite of his teachings as well as because of them. That is what religionists do - make stuff up. One should only believe anything as far as it can be justified by reason and evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha
Yet the Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics have no strong reason and or evidence that the Creator God does not exist.

This is their contradiction they demand from others that they themselves don't have.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#5 Apr 29, 2012
paarsurrey wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet the Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics have no strong reason and or evidence that the Creator God does not exist.
This is their contradiction they demand from others that they themselves don't have.
Not at all. I don't believe in god for the same reason I don't believe in Pixies - such belief would be stupid as it is entirely unsubstantiated. One cannot disprove god or pixies. That is no excuse for belief in them.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#6 Apr 29, 2012
“We must conduct research and then accept the results. If they don't stand up to experimentation, Buddha's own words must be rejected.”~ Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama, 1988

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#7 May 6, 2012
paarsurrey wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet the Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics have no strong reason and or evidence that the Creator God does not exist.
This is their contradiction they demand from others that they themselves don't have.
If you invent god, its your job to prove it. Do your job before blaming other people for your lack of evidence.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#8 May 6, 2012
paarsurrey wrote:
Buddha is not an icon of atheism. He did not deny in the Creator God.”
Christopher Hitchens in his book “God is not great” says in Chapter Fourteen:
“There Is No “Eastern Solution”, meaning thereby that there is no solution in Buddha’s religion; hence it is evident that atheists/agnostics/skeptics don’t believe that he was an agnostic/atheist or skeptic.
Buddha had a religion, rather he was a founder of a religion, while agnostics/atheists and skeptics pronounce they have no religion.
Am I right?
No, you're wrong. Atheist means lack of belief in god. Some buddists don't believe in a creator, so that makes them atheists.

It doesn't mean that they are rational, scientific or logical with regard to their other beliefs, just about god.

Since: May 10

Maple, Canada

#9 May 6, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you're wrong. Atheist means lack of belief in god. Some buddists don't believe in a creator, so that makes them atheists.
It doesn't mean that they are rational, scientific or logical with regard to their other beliefs, just about god.
If the atheists cannot prove with sure evidence that no Creator God exists; how can they claim to be rational, scientific or reasonable even?

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#10 May 6, 2012
paarsurrey wrote:
<quoted text>
If the atheists cannot prove with sure evidence that no Creator God exists; how can they claim to be rational, scientific or reasonable even?
If we were to claim that something did exist, would we not have to prove it?

Let's say I tell you, that I personally know, that there be tiny impish people of a rare blue color, who live in a state of near invisibility, amongst us, and frequently one of us inadvertently kills one of these tiny beings, called npitanin*.
Their retribution extracted from us comes in a very strange form. They make us host to a infinitesimally small, but virulent specie of, considering the lack of a better descriptor, we will call it, an aquatic worm. It is injected into the tear duct, of the human who caused the death of the npitanin. This worm is the most prevalent cause of migraine headaches. It will not be found by any medical exam. It's is simply not something we have the technology to find.

* best translation of the sound that they make in reference to themselves.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>

Now would you expect me to prove these statements, before you would give them any credibility? Or should, I stand back, fold my arms and wait for you to prove that the npitanin do not exist?

Do you claim that there be gods? Can you prove it, or do you really expect us to prove that what you claim does not exist?

Since: May 10

Maple, Canada

#11 May 7, 2012
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>If we were to claim that something did exist, would we not have to prove it?
Let's say I tell you, that I personally know, that there be tiny impish people of a rare blue color, who live in a state of near invisibility, amongst us, and frequently one of us inadvertently kills one of these tiny beings, called npitanin*.
Their retribution extracted from us comes in a very strange form. They make us host to a infinitesimally small, but virulent specie of, considering the lack of a better descriptor, we will call it, an aquatic worm. It is injected into the tear duct, of the human who caused the death of the npitanin. This worm is the most prevalent cause of migraine headaches. It will not be found by any medical exam. It's is simply not something we have the technology to find.
* best translation of the sound that they make in reference to themselves.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>
Now would you expect me to prove these statements, before you would give them any credibility? Or should, I stand back, fold my arms and wait for you to prove that the npitanin do not exist?
Do you claim that there be gods? Can you prove it, or do you really expect us to prove that what you claim does not exist?
Then by their own standards the atheists should not claim to be rational, scientific or reasonable even.

Since: May 10

Maple, Canada

#12 May 7, 2012
The atheists assert their view point without an evidence

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
&#8213; Christopher Hitchens

It is a good quotable quote from Hitchens; which proves hollowness of their claims.
Amused

Lowell, MA

#13 May 7, 2012
Of course Buddhism is not atheism. Whether you call it a philosophy or a religion, Buddhism makes claims without evidence, including claims about reincarnation, nirvana and karma. Atheists reject all religious claims unsupported by evidence, not just christian and muslim claims.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#14 May 7, 2012
paarsurrey wrote:
<quoted text>
Then by their own standards the atheists should not claim to be rational, scientific or reasonable even.
Your response in no way, addressed the post. Is that your way of establishing that you can not comphrend the point being made? The standards by which an atheist lives were not addressed. There are no atheist standards. Being atheist simply means, not being theist.

Let's get even simpler.

If you claim it, you have to prove it.

We do not claim a god, either does or does not exist, we claim only to have seen no hint of evidence proving the same.

When you declare what the atheist does or does not claim to be, it is advisable to get some input from .......... wait for it ..........an actual atheist.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#15 May 7, 2012
paarsurrey wrote:
The atheists assert their view point without an evidence
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
&#8213; Christopher Hitchens
It is a good quotable quote from Hitchens; which proves hollowness of their claims.
That means, if you claim a god, then you must prove that god. If you can't, your claim has no merit and can be dismissed as unsubstantiated foderol.

The atheist makes no claims, but we do ask that you prove yours.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 14 min dollarsbill 12,557
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 19 min dollarsbill 247,311
News Si Robertson, 'Duck Dynasty' Star, Says Atheist... 1 hr thetruth 59
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 2 hr thetruth 47,778
Proof of God for the Atheist 5 hr Amused 101
News Atheism, the Bible and sexual orientation 10 hr Amused 5
News As an atheist, how do I maintain my relationshi... Sat thetruth 19
More from around the web