Are Buddhist and Hindu Scriptures Inaccurate?

[Secret Chief]

The Tipitaka wasn't written by 66 different authors many years apart who didn't know each other with the consistent theme of God's love for his creation, redemption, and the sinful nature of human beings. I take the Bible seriously because it has prophecies that came true, like Israel becoming a nation again.

Yes, they are entirely different.

 

[Skywalker]

Yes, they are entirely different.

The Tipitaka doesn't have the theme of God's love for his creation. That's why I believe it's different from the Bible.

 

[Skywalker]

You didn't answer my question, but then I didn't expect you to.

Bible prophecies coming true is why the Bible is different from the Tipitaka.

 

[metis]

Bible prophecies coming true is why the Bible is different from the Tipitaka.

That all depends on interpretation.

On top of that, there are literally thousands of what theologians call "variations". One example I've used here to demonstrate that are the four variable women at the tomb Gospel narratives whereas no two are an exact match.

Note that a "variation" is not synonymous with the word "contradiction", as with some it's at least hypothetically possible that there might not be an actual contradiction.

If you have a good and honest Biblical commentary, it will note these variations. Also, some are honest enough to note when a narrative doesn't match the actual history.

BTW, it's "Tripitaka", not "Tipitaka".

 

[Skywalker]

That all depends on interpretation.

On top of that, there are literally thousands of what theologians call "variations". One example I've used here to demonstrate that are the four variable women at the tomb Gospel narratives whereas no two are an exact match.

Note that a "variation" is not synonymous with the word "contradiction", as with some it's at least hypothetically possible that there might not be an actual contradiction.

If you have a good and honest Biblical commentary, it will note these variations. Also, some are honest enough to note when a narrative doesn't match the actual history.

BTW, it's "Tripitaka", not "Tipitaka".

There were detail variations regarding the amount of women who were at the tomb of Jesus, but the essence of those details was the same. How Many Women Visited the Tomb of Jesus? | Cold Case Christianity

Differentiate Between Complimentary and Conflicting Accounts
When comparing two eyewitness accounts, I am more concerned about unresolvable contradictions than complimentary details. In fact, I have come to expect some degree of resolvable variation in true, reliable eyewitness accounts. When examining the number of women present at the tomb of Jesus, the four accounts could all be seen as accurate representations of what really happened if the group of women included the following people: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary the Mother of James (and Joseph), Salome, and Joanna. This group would account for the women mentioned by all four authors. All the authors speak of a group and some authors identify specific members of this group based on their personal perspective, purposes and audience.

 

[metis]

There were detail variations regarding the amount of women who were at the tomb of Jesus, but the essence of those details was the same. How Many Women Visited the Tomb of Jesus? | Cold Case Christianity

Exactly, but my point was that scriptural inerrancy is simply not feasible.

On top of this, the scriptures really should not be viewed as being objective evidence since they clearly take only pro-Jewish and/or pro-Christian positions, as they are at the center of both Testaments.

 

[Skywalker]

Exactly, but my point was that scriptural inerrancy is simply not feasible.

On top of this, the scriptures really should not be viewed as being objective evidence since they clearly take only pro-Jewish and/or pro-Christian positions, as they are at the center of both Testaments.

Detail variations don't show that the Scriptures are errant. The message matters, not the details. All belief systems take pro what their beliefs are.

 

[metis]

Detail variations don't show that the Scriptures are errant. The message matters, not the details.

That's been my position all along, but there are many here who do believe the scriptures are inerrant, which is their right to believe of course. There are myriads of variations found in the Bible, but not all of them should probably be regarded as only dealing with details.

But the main teachings at least are quite consistent within their own, as obviously there are some major differences between Judaism and Christianity, especially in regards to the Abrahamic Covenant and the Law.

 

[Skywalker]

That's been my position all along, but there are many here who do believe the scriptures are inerrant, which is their right to believe of course. There are myriads of variations found in the Bible, but not all of them should probably be regarded as only dealing with details.

But the main teachings at least are quite consistent within their own, as obviously there are some major differences between Judaism and Christianity, especially in regards to the Abrahamic Covenant and the Law.

How do the detail variations regarding the amount of women who were at the tomb of Jesus have a different essence? How Many Women Visited the Tomb of Jesus? | Cold Case Christianity

Differentiate Between Complimentary and Conflicting Accounts
When comparing two eyewitness accounts, I am more concerned about unresolvable contradictions than complimentary details. In fact, I have come to expect some degree of resolvable variation in true, reliable eyewitness accounts. When examining the number of women present at the tomb of Jesus, the four accounts could all be seen as accurate representations of what really happened if the group of women included the following people: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary the Mother of James (and Joseph), Salome, and Joanna. This group would account for the women mentioned by all four authors. All the authors speak of a group and some authors identify specific members of this group based on their personal perspective, purposes and audience.

 

[Skywalker]

We are never separated from God. Never were, never will be. Lying and being impolite have karmic consequences but karmic consequences don’t separate us from God.

Romans 3:23 says that all have sinned and fall short of the glory (perfect holiness/standard) of God. In other words, because of our sin, we are unable to reach the standard needed for us to live in the presence of a perfect God. Our sin has separated us from God, and because God is perfect in holiness, he cannot dwell in the presence of sin, because he is righteous and full of justice.

 

[metis]

How do the detail variations regarding the amount of women who were at the tomb of Jesus have a different essence? How Many Women Visited the Tomb of Jesus? | Cold Case Christianity

My point was that literalism simply is a false approach when studying the theology of scripture. We don't have any of the original manuscripts, plus there's no way to check out the accuracy of most of the scriptures dealing with even that occurred thousands of years ago.

Thus, one who studies objectively simply cannot logically conclude that one religion is more accurate than another, plus one should also be aware of the role of subjectivity and also allegory found in all religious beliefs.

However, this is not to imply that it would be ignorant to have one's own religious beliefs one way or the other. It's rather obvious to one that studies that no religion has a monopoly on Truth. This is also the reason why there are thousands of Christian denominations with probably most believing that they possess the Truth.

 

[Skywalker]

My point was that literalism simply is a false approach when studying the theology of scripture. We don't have any of the original manuscripts, plus there's no way to check out the accuracy of most of the scriptures dealing with even that occurred thousands of years ago.

Thus, one who studies objectively simply cannot logically conclude that one religion is more accurate than another, plus one should also be aware of the role of subjectivity and also allegory found in all religious beliefs.

However, this is not to imply that it would be ignorant to have one's own religious beliefs one way or the other. It's rather obvious to one that studies that no religion has a monopoly on Truth. This is also the reason why there are thousands of Christian denominations with probably most believing that they possess the Truth.

People invent religions because they need guidance. Except this time it's a self imposed guidance. They are disobedient against God, his guidance, rebel against Him, they do not want to follow his Son, but somehow amazingly they still want to invent religion, make up rules, and create their own false prophets and false teachings, so that they convince themselves that there is some level of standard to follow, and therefore, they feel good about it. We know we are sinners. That's why we invent religions. That way we come up with rules and fabricated laws, in order for us just to feel good.

 

[metis]

People invent religions because they need guidance.

I see, so supposedly all other religions are "invented" but Christianity is not. Try to sell that to any serious theologian, including probably most Christian theologians.

What you are doing is conflating [your] "beliefs" with "facts".

 

[Skywalker]

I see, so supposedly all other religions are "invented" but Christianity is not. Try to sell that to any serious theologian, including probably most Christian theologians.

What you are doing is conflating [your] "beliefs" with "facts".

Christianity isn't primarily about subscribing to a set of doctrines. Christianity is focused on the person of Christ. We're called into a relationship, not simply to believe a set of doctrines.

 

[metis]

Christianity isn't primarily about subscribing to a set of doctrines. Christianity is focused on the person of Christ. We're called into a relationship, not simply to believe a set of doctrines.

Jesus taught "doctrines"-- his.

Probably the least doctrinal religion is Buddhism because their teachings are considered less important than one's own observations and experiences.

 

[Skywalker]

Jesus taught "doctrines"-- his.

Probably the least doctrinal religion is Buddhism because their teachings are considered less important than one's own observations and experiences.

I believe that trusting God gives us wisdom, not relying on our observations and experiences.

 

[Secret Chief]

BTW, it's "Tripitaka", not "Tipitaka".

I hope you're not trying to out-pedant me!

Tripitaka is the Sanskrit transliteration, Tipitaka the Pali.

 

[metis]

I believe that trusting God gives us wisdom, not relying on our observations and experiences.

As a scientist, I soundly disagree with the latter part of your statement. Matter of fact, Jesus said he would provide us with the Holy Spirit, and it was this Holy Spirit who led me back into the Church through a lengthy series of experiences, which I call "premonitions" and "spiritual connections".

 

[Skywalker]

As a scientist, I soundly disagree with the latter part of your statement. Matter of fact, Jesus said he would provide us with the Holy Spirit, and it was this Holy Spirit who led me back into the Church through a lengthy series of experiences, which I call "premonitions" and "spiritual connections".

The Holy Spirit is God.

 

[metis]

The Holy Spirit is God.

How you repeatedly manage to miss the point is beyond me, so I'm done trying.