Posted: Feb 28, 2012 9:58 pm
by CdesignProponentsist
paarsurrey wrote:
CdesignProponentsist wrote:
paarsurrey wrote:
CdesignProponentsist wrote:

So you are attempting, by proxy, to detach those who commit violent or evil acts in the name of religion from the religious doctrine used to justify it.

The problem with this strategy is that those who commit violent or evil acts in the name of religion are usually interpreting the doctrine correctly. There isn't much in Buddhism that justifies this sort of behavior and any Buddhist acting in such a way is usually acting contrary to the doctrine.

Yet it is the correct strategy; it is not a good strategy to blame innocent person like Buddha or Jesus for the wrongs the Buddhists or Christians have inflicted on the people against the teachings of Buddha and or Jesus.

Detachment or separation of the wrong-doers and the innocents is essentially to be made; otherwise it will be cruelty and injustice to those who are not present and have died and cannot come to defend themselves.

I don't think anyone who is dead can experience cruelty. Besides, as I said, Buddhist doctrine does not include genocide, slaves, child abuse and an almighty God who should be feared and obeyed. Judeo Christian and Islamic doctrine is founded on such inhumanities.

Buddhism also does not claim to speak for God. If you claim to speak for God, then anyone who disagrees with you is wrong and counter to God; a position that has been the justification of most of the genocidal wars of the past, many of them between Muslims and your friends the Christians and Jews.

I was speaking of Buddha and defending him; not the Buddhists or Buddhism.

Defending dead people is a lost cause.