That's funny.

See, I started from where you are now. But I made the conscious decision not to try and base my entire worldview on logical fallacies. So instead of constant appeals to popularity ("millions and millions of people have believed this for years!") or authority ("Dr. Buttkiss, eminent Bible scholar, says this is so, so it must be!") or tradition ("they thought this was great in 1374, so it's good enough for me!") or begging the question ("God exists because it says so in the Bible, which was written by God!"), I have this tendency--it's odd, I know--to read things and figure them out.




COntinuing the theme of your entire post, which is ad hominem, another logical fallacy--"Beavis has no intention of comprehending" = Beavis doesn't agree with me and since I can't counter any of his points with actual logic I'll insult him instead by saying "I have no intention of casting my pearls before you" You, of course being swine, i.e. Beavis is a pig.

So you try and deflect the topic away from your argument, which is ridiculous (q.v. Occam's Razor if you want a purely logical reason why), by claiming that I am just being obstinate, when in fact all I've done is show you you're wrong, over and over and over. The only obstinacy involved here is your clinging to arguments that have already been shot down time and again.



I defy anyone besides you to read that link and say it is a clearer and more straightforward explanation than the one I've offered. The semantic and logical gymnastics involved in the post referenced by your link are so involved as to be just shy of meaningless; it's the Rube Goldberg approach to "proving" a point. "Well, I know we could just turn on the light switch manually, but then we wouldn't be able to involve the bowling ball, the model airplane and the chicken!"

Jesus, your Sermon on the Mount Jesus, tells a parable about that.

I've been where you are now.
I'm at the better destination.

As far as not casting my pearls, I'm following a direct order from Sermon on the Mount Jesus. And you've proven Him right. Jesus said do not give that which is holy (pearls, in this instance God's Word) to those who are unholy (that would be you) because the unholy just trample them and turn and attack you. Ta Da! Jesus is correct!

The link doesn't make sense to you because Sermon on the Mount Jesus said that you, a seed which has fallen by the wayside, will hear and not understand; and see and not perceive. He's right again!

There IS a clear, straight-forward explanation (like the link furnished), Beavis, but you have to be willing to work for it. It's not milk for babies, but it's meat for men. It requires studying the whole Word of God, OT and NT...as well as developing at least some understanding of ANE language and literature; some Greek; and also Jewish mishnah.
It's not for those who'd rather sit around rubbing a buddha's belly.

...back to the ad hominem! "Beavis says Buddhism makes sense, so anything he says about Christ can be discounted."

Circular logic is so 1106. The Middle Ages called--they want their lack of reason back!

By the way, this is also illustrative of the logical fallacy of begging the question.

You are assuming that your tortured interpretation is the only one, therefore this must apply to me...when it could just as easily apply to you.

I know how inconvenient logic is, but it's also inescapable, which is why Buddhism makes sense to me--and why, seen in the light of comparing accounts of Jesus from different cultures, I can say that Jesus was a Buddha too, a man who found his highest inner being and thus provided yet another example of the potential in all of us.

On the other hand, the notion that Jesus was a supernatural being who is also part of three beings who are actually one, who impregnated a human woman so he could commit suicide by cop and thus "save" us from something we had no part in creating to begin with, makes no sense whatsoever. Dancing around a campfire in animal skins and reading the future in the entrails of a goat makes as much sense.

The fact that the actual teachings of Jesus support the former without having to layer massive and intricate semantic architectures on top also shows Jesus' true nature.

Anything that contradicts experience and logic should be abandoned.

Against my better judgment, just chuckling that obstinacy is just another word for stubbornness. I'm just sayin'.

So, um, what did you think of the video/song?

Me? It was OK. I like the message in it.