Faith Well Grounded

I was over at a sport's forum, where I sometimes go and check up on my favorite team news. When I logged in recently I had a private message awaiting me from someone I do not know, and with whom I have never had interaction. As far as I can tell, the private message was nothing more than a Buddhist apologetic, via an Einstein quote (which is Ok by me for what it's worth). Since I enjoy any opportunity to set Christianity on the "truth-scale" against any worldview, I responded and invited a dialogue.

I'm posting it here because I think the quote and response is a good vehicle to start another dialogue on the historicity of Christianity, and also its internal integrity-- i.e. that it answers the questions that it claims to answer. I found good use in posting on Einstien's quotes at another blog, so I thought it may be beneficial to post my disection of this one here.

You will find the initial message below, followed by my response. I will post follow-ups if the dialogue continues. (Please keep in mind that I usually try to keep the responses on a more conversational tone, as in, I'd liked to have responded to the "How's it going?" comment. But the forum software in use had a PM character limit. Since I figured the main purpose of the message was to get the weblink out, and to inform me about Buddhism, and since I was on a lean character budget to form the response, I got right to the particulars. I hope that Jessie and my readers will forgive the lack of pleasantries.)

____________________________________________________________

[quote=Jessie]Hi,
I'm new here, how's it going?

"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things as a meaningful unity" - Albert Einstein

Jessie
[/quote]

(My response follows)

Hi Jessie,

Note that I publish a Christian apologetics website and will most likely publish this exchange, of course keeping places and names private. You can view it at www.faithwellgrounded.org/apologetics .

Also please allow me to point out that I use a lot of rhetorical comment. Please don’t mistake this as my being condescending.

I find it odd that the issue of "truth" never comes up in Einstein’s description of Buddhism...

"...transcends a personal God..."

(I'm not sure just how that is possible... I mean, transcending the Ultimate Transcendent. Sure, you can deny a personal God, and we could debate that, but... How could Buddhism transcend Him?)

"...avoids dogmas and theology..."

(Except for the dogmatic, theological statement that there is no personal God? We all have dogmatic beliefs; else none of us would claim to be correct in our beliefs. As a matter of fact, I get the impression that you are seeking to convince me of your beliefs? As mentioned above, are you doing so based on the truth of your statement? If you are claiming to have the truth, wouldn't that make your statement a bit of a dogma?

"it covers both the natural and the spiritual"

(No it doesn't. As I understand Buddhism-- and the other major forms of Eastern Monism-- all is One. Anything that isn't in Unity with the One is Illusion. There is no distinction between "natural" and "spiritual". There is only One and Illusion. Since "One" is not personal, and achieving "Oneness" is the loss of the personal identity, then there is actually only personal extinction and "illusion". So, without the personal spirit, I would ask how you could offer Buddhism as a spiritual religion?)

"...it is based on a religious sense..."

(And what does that buy me? Christianity is based on (to name just one line of evidences) historical claims and events from a distinct time and place, which were witnessed and attested to by hundreds of people, and documented by both the adherents and critics. Buddha claimed to show the (a?) way, then died and decayed. Jesus Christ claimed to BE the way, predicted His death in detail, died, and proved His claims by rising from the dead and appearing to hundreds of people. This transcends a "religious sense".)

"...aspiring from the experience of all things..."

(I'll need some clarification on this one, and I apologize for missing the point. But, what experience does Buddhism aspire from? Because, again, as I understand it, everything falls into one of two classifications-- either "One" or "illusion". If you have reached "Oneness", then you have lost your personality and become personally extinct, thus you have no experience. If you have not achieved "Oneness", then you are illusion, and thus how can you or anyone else trust your experience?

Christianity, on the other hand, is established via personal experiences. To name but a few-- the experiences of those whom the Savior healed, those who touched His wounds after He arose from the grave, those who ate with Him days after His death, the hundreds who saw His once-dead body walking the streets, those who over the past 2000 years have met Him and seen their lives changed forever...)

"...as a meaningful unity."

(As I've alluded to, I have trouble understanding how the "unity" offered by Buddhism can be meaningful at all. Since this Unity is actually the extinction of the person, then please help me understand what gives it meaning.

As a matter of fact, since we only have illusion and extinction to choose from, please let me know on what authority the Buddhist gets their information. The Buddhist is an illusion in personal conversation with the non-personal? Or, at its root, is the Buddhist one person trying to convince another person that there are no persons?)

I look forward to our dialogue. Please respond here, or at faithwellgrounded.org—whichever you find most convenient.

God bless you!

Technorati Tags: Philosophy Reasons to believe Theology Buddhism Religion

• ‹ previous
• 54 of 56
• next ›