Buddha, Hinduism, Mithraism, Baha'i, & etc.Well, love me all to hell...Actually, the "perfection" in Buddhism is nothing more than self-negation. Their liberated state consists of the eradication of individuality. Beside this, there is no "perfect life", what to speak of Buddhists "presupposing a person's ability to live a perfect life"? Their sense of "perfect" is not the same as yours. What constitutes "Hinduism" is rather broad. Their are certain sects that follow a philosophy very akin to the Buddhists, for example. These sects aren't ones to follow what the Vedic Scripture actually states, but rather, they form their own impersonal interpretation. Anyway, I won't get into their conception of "perfect" or of how to attain it, for obvious reasons. Nevertheless, the authorized Bhakti Sampradayas of the Vedic tradition teach that perfection simply means surrendering and devoting oneself to God. God gives His mercy to His devotees and in that way they attain salvation. So it is not a matter of "working" to attain perfection, as some Christians argue, although it is certainly taught that we should work to increase our devotion to God; not for the purpose of getting some benefit in return, but simply to please the Lord. This is called a 'straw man' argument. A straw man argument is when you argue against a point that the opposite party is not making. In this case, I am not arguing who is to blame since I agree with you that I would be to blame for living in sin. I have never denied being to blame. The argument concerns God's supposedly conditioned sense of love. You say that God only loves for the duration of a single material body. In this way, God's love is conditioned under finite time. It is not logically possible to accept a transcendental God who is also conditioned under finite time. These things are mutually exclusive. If God is transcendental, then His love is transcendental. Period. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame