Your changing the topic because you were called out for being wrong. I'm a Buddhist, I think all gods are bastards and choose to not worship any of them, the Bible's ripoff of Sumer's Enlil included.
Many religious have sacred animals, the Romans had sacred geese, Hindus have cows, etc. I could do more research, but you get the point.
The Bible is a lot of things, and some part even share commonality with other Middle Eastern mythology, but what it is not, is a "ripoff".
Enjoy your Buddhism, because however far you are down that path, you have some serious attachment issues showing up in your anger here. You're as far away from Nirvana as a fat guy at a buffet is from fitness.
Sacred animals are not gods. Again, have knowledge before you speak. As far as my anger, excuse me if i didn't take your opinion over my teachers' and my own. Amituofo.
If you trample a American flag, or slaughter a sacred cow, what does that act represent? Same with sacrificing a bull, which the Israealites did, and a bull was the sacred animal of moloch. He's even depicted as a bull headed god.
Have knowledge before you speak.
Interesting to see you pretend to have some sort of zen calm right now, but it's to late here, I saw through you on this topic like a window pane.
Follow your teacher, please, yes. Buddha came to at least a partial truth about suffering and attachment.
You're still changing the goal posts. You said gods were depicted as animals. The only source of moloch as a bull is a roval warring tribe, one of the least historically valuable testimonies in that they have great reason to lie and distort.
Your changing the topic because you were called out for being wrong. I'm a Buddhist, I think all gods are bastards and choose to not worship any of them, the Bible's ripoff of Sumer's Enlil included.
Many religious have sacred animals, the Romans had sacred geese, Hindus have cows, etc. I could do more research, but you get the point.
The Bible is a lot of things, and some part even share commonality with other Middle Eastern mythology, but what it is not, is a "ripoff".
Enjoy your Buddhism, because however far you are down that path, you have some serious attachment issues showing up in your anger here. You're as far away from Nirvana as a fat guy at a buffet is from fitness.
Sacred animals are not gods. Again, have knowledge before you speak. As far as my anger, excuse me if i didn't take your opinion over my teachers' and my own. Amituofo.
If you trample a American flag, or slaughter a sacred cow, what does that act represent? Same with sacrificing a bull, which the Israealites did, and a bull was the sacred animal of moloch. He's even depicted as a bull headed god.
Have knowledge before you speak.
Interesting to see you pretend to have some sort of zen calm right now, but it's to late here, I saw through you on this topic like a window pane.
Follow your teacher, please, yes. Buddha came to at least a partial truth about suffering and attachment.
You're still changing the goal posts. You said gods were depicted as animals. The only source of moloch as a bull is a roval warring tribe, one of the least historically valuable testimonies in that they have great reason to lie and distort.