The Buddha Was Wrong, a Skeptical Buddhist Site

[Dancing David]

Here you are Dustin, I will try to spell check.

Now Mr. D. Bluffenthunder,

you are a twit.

What excuse do you have for not pointing out my contradictions?

Because you can't?
Because you won't?
Because you are a weak stick who makes claims and doesn't back them with the evidence.

So where do I contradict myself?

Please be lame, prove your lamenss by not pointing out where I contradict myself.

Corrected for five spelling errors

So? as you sated repeatedly and most foolishly?

Is that an argument, does that demonstrate what? that you can think for yourself?
Or when asked to confirm that Xians fought over the issue of jesus and the possession of a purse, you ask to be spoon fed. Or when someone asks how you would determine what might be the look of an original source from separate sources two thousand years later and you ask to be spoon fed, that demonstrates what?

I'm afraid I don't understand a single thing you've just said. But I don't believe you ever answered my question.

That you can't think for yourself? that you are lazy? that you have no ability to frame a coherent argument other than one of doubt?

[poor attempt at humor]

I am King Dustin! I say that you must use words the way that i say they must be used. Otherwise I shall smite thee with the Sword of Unmeaning and I shall defend myself with the Shield of Circular Logic. I shall not create my own coherent arguments nor shall I defend my statements with evidence, nor shall I respond to direct questions.

I give unto you the word of my followers and it is BAA, you must be sheep and you must conform to all that I say. I need not explain myself , nor shall I defend my arguments. Thou shalt obey King Dustin because I am King and I have told you BAA.
[/poor attempt at humor]

Some words have more than one meaning dude, language is a fluid set of self referencing symbols. You need to ponder more deeply upon the nature of words and social interaction.
Xians and Muslims are dogmatic, not all 'religions' are. Some are rather disorganized in fact.

You are small minded because you insist that that people conform to your preconceived notions. I am not sure why you are bigot. maybe you are, maybe you aren't.

When you can answer a direct question then I will believe you.

especially when you are so clueless as to respond So? to a statement of fact.

What is the eightfold path?

If I state a historical fact of history it will contradict itself.

Show where I contradicted myself, show me my errors and I shall learn.

Point out the flaws that i may learn, show me where it is incoherent. Or is it your false expectation that people will fall into a neat little box at your convenience? I stated what the different views are on the teachings of the buddha, get over it.


Right back at ya, with a big

 

[Tanstaafl]

Oh no, you guys summoned Yrreg!

So, who won the pool on when Yrreg would show up?

Or did no one think it would be past the first page?

 

[Dancing David]

English is your first language (I'm assuming) and since that's the case then the so called "Goofy archaic nature" of the english language shouldn't be a problem.

ever the assertion without evidence. You might be surprised to learn that there are french people who can't spell french either.

try orthographic reform, can you say that, I knew you could..

When English is all you grew up knowing then you should be used to it. You just need to work on your spelling or get a spell-checker and spend more time overlooking what you type before posting it. I don't usually comment on spelling since my spelling isn't the best but yours is so bad it's nearly incomprehensible.

You still can't point out where I contradict myself , oh Master of the Groundless Assertion.

Your ability to spell is not excuse for your inability to think critically.


Want to say "So?" again and prove the caliber of your thoughts?

How about showing me the errors of my thinking and my contradictions.

I bet you are incapable because you are just all Bluff and Thunder, no substance.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Oh no, you guys summoned Yrreg!

*Attempts to stand in front of Pentagram* Ahem... It wasn't me. Um... It was the gays! Get 'em!

 

[Dancing David]

You're confusing "God" with "god". The first starting with a capital "G" the latter not. "God" with a capital "G" is the monotheistic God of Abraham. "god" with a lower case "g" is any number of male deities.

Ah, you are the master of logic!

ROTFLMAO!

Dude you are so, sheepish.

How do you know that Frey worshipers don't call their deity "God" or "Lord".

 

[Dancing David]

For the dolid gold, pure, unadulterated, free from all kinds of woo, Buddhism, as intended by Gautama himself except that he accommodated his true, real, inerrant, timeless Buddhism to suit the times and climes of his contemporary followers, there is nothing wrong.

Who know the true, real, genuine, authentic Buddhism as intended by Gautama, but for his condescending adaptations to the infantilistic minds of his original followers?

Ask the Buddhists here like Ryokan and Dancing David and others, who are purebred skeptics and at the same time proud to wear the registered trademark of Buddhism, they are the ones who know the eternally valid teachings of Buddha and his precepts, minus his adjustments to his contemporaries who were not possessed of skeptical ideology founded upon critical thinking and empirical evidence.


Yrreg

Hiya Yrreg!

Long time no read!


Dustin has replaced you as the Master of the Groundless Assertion.

 

[Solus]

I'm done responding to you until you either learn English or get a spell checker and spend more time thinking about what you're going to type and copy editing it before you post it. I can't spend the time deciphering your gibberish just to encounter your blatant contradictions and inconsistencies.

Dustin you push too far, insulting someone who has actually CLAIMED they are dyslexic. David may be annoying but you’re just being cruel here. Try living with a disability for a while Dustin and lets see how you handle it...

 

[Solus]

So, who won the pool on when Yrreg would show up?

Or did no one think it would be past the first page?

I knew it was going to happen but I should have typed it. What does the winner get?

 

[Dancing David]

Let's see...




Firstly, You claim that it would be impossible to find the original teachings of the Buddha yet "we"(whoever 'we' is) considers all of the gospels to be the teachings of Buddha? Ok. Who is "We" and why do "we" consider all of the gospels to be the teachings of Buddha when they can't be proven to be?

There is no "Official Buddhist's Guide to the Scriptures", as you responded to with the resounding "So?", I believe that we can look to the commonalities of the texts to get as close as we can to the "alleged original teachings of the alleged historical buddha". i think the Pali canon is very close but heavily edited.

You will hate this one:

It is a personal choice, the student should use their own skills to decide which texts agree with their thinking.

Secondly, You claim that one can be a "Buddhist" if they follow the 4 truths and 8fold path? What about other teachings including the 10 unwholesome actions, Prajñā and Śīla or possibly including Patimokkha or 10 precepts?

Different traditions follow different paths, there is no "Official Buddhist Doctrine" as there is in the Roman catholic church or the Orthodox church.

As you ignored earlier the Ten Unwholesome Acts are part of a particular tradition.

The ten precepts are post AHB, I believe.

Some people like to have the eight fold path spelled out. I suppose we can find them in the Pali canon, I will check.

 

[Dancing David]

So why not the Prajñā, Śīla or Patimokkha? Why not include them as well? Are these the teachings of Buddha? If not, what worth are they in Buddhism apart from any odd teachings? If they are then shouldn't they be followed just as anything else the Buddha taught?


Here's another question that hasn't been answered. Why follow the teachings of Buddha at all? What makes you think he was right about anything? What was he right about? Assuming you can even identify his teachings, it would have amounted to a lot more than the Four Truths and Eightfold Path.

The Pali canon is rather extensive.

Uh, it is up to the person to look at the damma, decide if it has merit and choose of their own free will to be a buddhist.

The AHB advised people to only follow the path if they thought it had merit.

 

[Dancing David]

Exactly, known by all as a semi retarded hypocrite.

I thought this was a skeptic site, whats with all the friggin buddhists?

You guys have swallowed a bronze age superstition hook line and sinker.

Believe and call yourselves what you like.

Proof , evidence?

More baseless assertion.

You will find that sceptics have been called cafeteria buddhists by one wit.

But please show your lack of knowledge and make baseless accusations.

You ain't no scpetic.

 

[Loss Leader]

Oh, I so have to come back and read this thread.

 

[Dancing David]

*Attempts to stand in front of Pentagram* Ahem... It wasn't me. Um... It was the gays! Get 'em!

Constrain him to the Triangle of Evokation!

We must writre the Mighty Words of Power

Pes Oir Amsus!

Order!

Common Sense!

Because I Say So!

The Real World!

 

[Dancing David]

Dustin you push too far, insulting someone who has actually CLAIMED they are dyslexic. David may be annoying but you’re just being cruel here. Try living with a disability for a while Dustin and lets see how you handle it...

I have dysphonia and I was lazy, I shall use the spell check. It is a learning disability. Fortunately my other issues are well treated.

Thanks for the support!

 

[Dancing David]

Oh yea. I just saw and you're being flooded! I wonder where all those "Buddhists" came from?

We are the Vast Buddhist Conspiracy!


There are T-shirts and bumper stickers. We worship Lisa Simpson as the Green Tara.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Their definition has different meanings to different people.

Or are you claiming to be the only one who knows the 'true' definition?

I'm trying to be consistent to have a discussion. If you want to claim that Buddhism means 'anything and everything' and anyone who says they are a buddhist is a buddhist then we can't have any sort of meaningful discourse.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Wow that's the most simplistic, ignorant, definition I have ever seen. Go spout that to a believer and see what they say.

I guess the folks over at Princeton are simplistic and ignorant...

 

[onemind]

Proof , evidence?

More baseless assertion.

You will find that sceptics have been called cafeteria buddhists by one wit.

But please show your lack of knowledge and make baseless accusations.

You ain't no scpetic.

Yes, you are right, there is much more proof of rebirth, nibbana and karma.

I am not interested in arguing semantics and lame definitions on who gets to label themselves what.

My site is based on debunking the 3 core teachings that lie at the center of mainstream buddhism.

Like i said, label yourself what you like. I couldnt care less.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Argument by spelling? "You can't spell, so your argument is clearly false"?

It's not an argument. It's a matter of fact. I can't understand what he is saying therefore I can't respond to what he's saying. I'm not saying he's necessarily wrong I'm simply saying I can't respond to him unless he brushes up on his English.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Okay... You don't consider the gospels to include the teachings of Christ?

Much of what is in the gospels is from the authors and isn't even claimed to be directly from Jesus.

Yes, those are also teachings of Buddha. However the are not as wide spread, especially not Patimokkha. The four truths and eightfold path are simply the most basic of the basics, and pertain most to daily life (One might also include the five precepts).

So why not follow them? Are them on a level of "less holiness" from the other teachings? Are they less right? Or do you just like to pick and choose like most Christians?

Because when you know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' you enter on and abide in them.

Let's dissect this bit by bit...

Because when you know: 'These things are good;

Questionable. See bottom for further criticism.

these things are not blamable;

Blamable?

these things are praised by the wise;

Who? What "Wise"? Also, this is an appeal to authority.

undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,'

Assuming this is true, This isn't an argument for their validity or reliability. Many Christians lead happy lives because of their religion however this in no way attests to it's legitimacy.

If you follow what Mill said you are utilitarian (I think).

No. Mill taught a lot more than utilitarianism.

If you follow what Sagan said you are probably a Skeptic or Rationalist.

Why not a "Saganist"?

Remember, the root word of Buddhism is not Buddha. It is 'budh', meaning 'to know or to awaken'. And that is just the name that Westerners decided to give it.

However "Buddhism" in the English language means someone who is a Buddhist which is someone who follows the teachings of Buddha including the rituals of the organized religion. You're not a Buddhist if you simply agree with a few things Guatama said. In that case you're simply "A guy who agrees with a few things Guatama said", Not necessarily a "Buddhist".