|
作者
|
內容
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2006/9/13 下午 09:48:10
|
|
|
kp，
我不是要和你鬥嘴。我的角色是一個「理性慕道者」，你嘗試用理性的方法去說明天主是至善。
我正是要說，用理性的方法可以說明宇宙有一個創造者，是自有的（不一定是永有），但不能說明這個創造者是「至善」。
你說：
宇宙中有至善，
所以宇宙中有天主，
天主的本質是至善呀!
我（理性慕道者）正是要問：
宇宙有天主，我可接受。
但天主沒有必要是「至善」，真實的天主若是情場騙子，造個世界和人類出來玩弄一番，我們也沒辦法呀！
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2006/9/13 下午 09:52:22
|
|
|
kp說：「而『至善』是不包含罪的。」
我原來問：「聖母包含了罪嗎？如果不包含，聖母是天主嗎？」
現改為：
聖母包含了罪嗎？如果不包含，聖母算不算「至善」？
如果聖母不算至善，那麼至善除了「不包含罪」外，還要有甚麼特質？
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/9/14 下午 05:03:34
|
|
|
Fr. Romano Guardini, in his classic work The Lord, stated his belief that Buddha would be the greatest challenge to Christ in the modern age. Such an assertion may appear somewhat exaggerated in our age, but Buddhist teachings seriously threaten Christianity’s central doctrines. Because it appears to be peaceful, non-judgmental, and inclusive, its appeal undoubtedly will continue to grow. Buddhism’s refusal to articulate dharma in logical ways and its comfortable insistence on a relativistic approach to knowledge and truth makes dialogue quite difficult. Because it offers a spirituality that is ostensibly free of doctrine and authority, it will attract hungry souls looking for fulfillment and meaning. "For this reason," the Holy Father states, "it is not inappropriate to caution those Christians who enthusiastically welcome certain ideas originating in the religious traditions of the Far East."
Vatican II’s Nostra Aetate (Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions) says, "Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination." It continues, noting that "the Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions" and believes that other religions, in certain ways, "often reflect a ray of that Truth that enlightens all men."
But the document also insists that the Church "proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ ‘the way, the truth, and the life’ (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to himself" (NA 2). While the Council noted that Buddhism may contain a "ray of Truth," it did not endorse appropriation of Buddhist beliefs into Christian practice. Rather, the Council insisted that non-Catholic religions can be fulfilled only through the truths held exclusively by the Catholic faith.
The perennial teachings of the Catholic Church and the Buddhist sangha are inherently incompatible. Whereas God remains completely other, distinct from his creation, higher Buddhist discourse rejects the possibility of any such duality. There can be no Creator/creature distinction in Buddhism.
From an apologetic perspective, dialogue with a Buddhist is hindered almost from the start, as the two great philosophical tools of Christianity—ontology and epistemology—are discarded in Buddhist discourse. That is, if existence itself is untenable, how can creation be proven? If creation is untenable, how can God be proven to exist? So it is vital when entering into dialogue with a Buddhist to understand Buddhist objections to Christian beliefs. In the end, we should remember that the Council of Nicaea taught that men must have one thing before truly becoming a member of the body of Christ: faith.
Shortly before the Holy Father’s visit to St. Patrick’s Cathedral in 1979, the Dalai Lama was greeted there. A monsignor in the receiving line recalls his encounter with the Buddhist patriarch: The Dalai Lama approached him, gazed into his eyes, and queried, "Father, do you know the difference between you and me?"
"No, Your Holiness," replied the monsignor.
"You believe in a personal God," the Dalai Lama observed, "and I do not."
This, above all, marks the difference between Christians and Buddhists. Beyond the rhetoric of "peace," "compatibility," and "the way," there remains one profound difference between Buddha and Jesus: Jesus is God; Buddha is not.
< a href="http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0505fea1.asp"> Are Jesus and buddha brothers </a>
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0505fea1.asp
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/9/14 下午 05:09:07
|
|
|
Sorry. 貼錯 title, 請不要理會
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/9/14 下午 05:09:10
|
|
|
Sorry. 貼錯 title, 請不要理會
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/9/14 下午 06:35:56
|
|
|
Simon
至善和任何罪惡不能共存於一體.
但沒有罪並不等於是至善. ( reverse induction. wrong in logic )
啊當夏娃未吃掉善惡樹的果實之前也沒有犯罪, 但啊當夏娃也不是至善. 所以啊當夏娃也就不是天主.
我們尊敬聖母為最完美的信徙, 聖母沒有犯罪, 也是 All-holy Panagia. 但沒有罪並不等於至善. 聖母也不是神.
聖母是 partaker of divine nature.
所以, 誰是至善, 誰便是天主依然成立
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2006/9/14 下午 10:58:42
|
|
|
kp，
你說：「宇宙中有至善，所以宇宙中有天主。」然後說，只有天主才是至善。
我不能說你講錯，但你講的很「無謂」。
你等於說：「因為A，所以A，只有A才是A。」
這種論據，不能說明天主一定是至善。
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/9/15 下午 02:56:45
|
|
|
Simon,
你有 ：「因為A，所以A，只有A才是A。」這個想法是因為你有天主是至善的信仰.
當慕道者提出: "如何知道天主對人的愛是出自真心真意" 的問題時, 慕道者是認為天主並不是至善的.
而kp要向慕道者指出的是: 天主(A) 是完全等於 ( is a complete equivalent to ) 至善(B), 所以天主的愛是不會假情假意 (C)
因為 A=B (天主 完全等於 至善) ,
所以 C ( B 的相反, a complete oppisite to B ) 不能發生.
而如果慕道者要尋找誰是天主(A) , 只要找到至善(B) 便可以, 因為只有B才是A.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/9/17 上午 07:34:25
|
|
|
教宗最近在探訪德國時，所發表的一篇演講，似乎對「天主是否真誠」的探討有幫助：
Papal Address At University Of Regensburg
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2006/9/17 下午 09:59:36
|
|
|
kp 說：「如果慕道者要尋找誰是天主(A) , 只要找到至善(B) 便可以, 因為只有B才是A. 」
慕道者就會問：「宇宙中為甚麼一定有『至善』？」
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/9/18 下午 04:33:01
|
|
|
Edward 兄,
你所引用的文章應是近日弄得滿城風雨的文章啊!
kp因為聽到新聞的原故, 所以亦因好奇而找這編文章看.
看了之後, 和兄有一樣同感, 覺得教宗的這編講話和我們在這個論壇的討論竟然出奇地接近.
教宗的講話是圍繞信仰與理性的探討. 以天主是一個永守諾言, 不會講大話, 的至善造物主來說明傳揚信仰是需要理性而不能使用暴力的.
可悲的是雖然這講話是教導人以理性對侍信仰, 部分回教徒卻不能接受講話引用拜占庭國王與波斯學者的對話.
聽新聞說一名修女懷疑因這講話的原故而被殺.
聽到這新聞後, kp實在感到非常心痛, 亦更警醒為主傳揚福音的難處.
作為教徒, 一方面我們要代表基督和平之子向世界傳達和平和至善, 但另一方面亦不能忘記向世界傳達正義和真理.
我們真的是瑪竇福音10章說的生存在狼群中的羊啊!
教宗即將出訪土以其, 真為教宗的安全擔心......
而活在全球各回教國家的神父,修士,修女及教友們......唉.......
Edward 兄, kp 在此誠懇請你, 也懇請讀到這文章的各位兄弟姊妹一齊為這事向天主祈禱, 求上主保護教宗和各位神父,修士,修女及教友們的安全. 特別為已去世的那位修女, 求上主接納她返回天家, 使她不再受苦. 也請求上主賜給我們教會的各位神長智慧去解决這次的風波.
謝謝Edward 兄, 也謝謝各位兄弟姊妹.
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/9/18 下午 04:44:36
|
|
|
Simon 兄 role play 慕道者再問 ：「宇宙中為甚麼一定有『至善』？」
kp 試答: 因為只有至善的天主才會創造出一個會出賣天主祂自已的天地.
天主就算自已被傷害, 就算明知自已會被出賣, 依然甘心情願創造宇宙萬物. 為的只是希望受造物能成為如天主自已般的"真善美".
這份恩情足以證明天主的『至善』.
宇宙的存在本身就是至善的証明.
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2006/9/19 下午 11:30:12
|
|
|
kp，
我很佩服你，居然想出這個答案。
你說：「因為只有至善的天主才會創造出一個會出賣天主祂自已的天地。」
我以為只有「至蠢」，才會故意做一種東西來傷害自己。
好了，慕道者又問：「天主若是至善，為甚麼不造到個個都好似聖母那麼美善服從？反而造出像Simon那麼麻煩的人來？」
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2006/9/23 下午 03:47:12
|
|
|
morrie 和 kp，
對於天主是否真心真意愛我們，還是假情假意，我想，不能用理性的言語去解釋或證明。
我們有很多事例去感受天主是真心真意，但這些事例都不能「證明」天主是真心真意，因為這些事例不能絕對否定「假情假意」這個可能性。
這個情況，就像我感受到父母是真心真意愛我，但我不能向你「證明」他們是真心真意，而不是為了其他（例如為了我每月給他們的家用）。
或許愛的存在，根本就是超越了理性層面。
|
|
