Safety Month Summer Reading Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it Eli Paperboy The best from Bose just got wireless Fire TV Stick Sun Care Patriotic Picks STEM Amazon Cash Back Offer AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis Best Camping & Hiking Gear in Outdoors STEM
Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

Has anyone in the Christian Community said or is saying something like this...


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 150 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Oct 15, 2012 9:39:29 AM PDT
"If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims."

― Dalai Lama XIV, The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality

Has something similar been said by anyone, prominent or not, in the Christian community, and, if so, how were their words received?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 15, 2012 9:50:45 AM PDT
The central tenets of Buddhism, which have to do with the problem of human suffering and its relief, are not in the realm of science.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 15, 2012 12:11:47 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 15, 2012 12:14:15 PM PDT
"The central tenets of Buddhism, which have to do with the problem of human suffering and its relief, are not in the realm of science."

Do you have an answer to the question I actually asked?

[On Edit]:

I see you answered my question in another forum:

"Pope Benedict XVI said the debate raging in some countries - particularly the United States and his native Germany - between creationism and evolution was an "absurdity," saying that evolution can coexist with faith.
The pontiff, speaking as he was concluding his holiday in northern Italy, also said that while there is much scientific proof to support evolution, the theory could not exclude a role by God.
"They are presented as alternatives that exclude each other," the pope said. "This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/ns/world_news-europe/t/pope-creation-vs-evolution-clash-absurdity/#.UHw9n2_7KQ0"

Posted on Oct 17, 2012 4:17:00 AM PDT
I guess the (relative) silence is my answer.

OK, then *should* people in the Christian community be saying something like what the Dalai Lama said of Buddhism, and, if not, why not?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2012 1:14:55 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 17, 2012 1:34:00 PM PDT
Amon says:
I started a thread a while ago with a similar quote from the Dalai Lama and it went nowhere. The Abrahamic religions are...rigid and not as flexible as other religions/philosophies.

Posted on Oct 18, 2012 4:28:31 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
The only way to embrace new knowledge is to reject blind faith, which is a very unpopular stance in mainstream Christianity these days.

Fortunately, many Christians have gotten quite skilled at ignoring certain aspects of their faith that they find inconvenient, so there may yet be hope that they will accept science and reason... when it serves their interests.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 5:36:46 AM PDT
Like other religions, the Abrahamic religions can be interpreted in rigid, inflexible (fundamentalist) ways, or in flexible, reasonable, moderate ways. There are extremist Christians and moderate Christians, extremist Jews and moderate Jews, extremist Muslims and moderate Muslims, extremist Hindus and moderate Hindus, etc.

Posted on Oct 18, 2012 3:40:15 PM PDT
G. J. Stein says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 4:12:27 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 18, 2012 4:13:10 PM PDT
"It's a no-brainer for those who honor the Creator."

Your words are more true than perhaps you intended. I've run into too many theists who suspend their reasoning faculties when they produce conclusions which contradict literalist dogma.

It is an unfortunate reality that, at least amongst some theists, their version of the Dalai Lama quote would go something like this:

"If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims of my religion to be false, then we must reject the findings of science and abandon those claims."

IMO, these theists stand in the way of the advancement of our species.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 4:15:50 PM PDT
Amon says:
I have never encountered a Christian who has said anything even remotely resembling the quotes of the Dalai Lama.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 5:23:56 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 18, 2012 5:43:57 PM PDT
G. J. Stein says:
"IMO, these theists stand in the way of the advancement of our species"

With all do respect, this is the kind of statement that makes me wonder why you can't see its not true.
For decades Mao, Marx, Li, Castro wanted to rid the populace of religion but had to concede it was better to let them keep it.
Their agendas still seem to succeed in spite of religion so how would it be different in the free world if we rid it of religion?

By the way, did you know the Christian religion teaches, the leader of the coming world government will declare himself to be god, contrary to the denial of one; he's not going to be pro-atheist. If the religions of the world are coerced to converge into one, and worship the anti-Christ himself, looks like you "might" have another dilemma on your hands since, scientist or creationist, he will kill those who don't.

Hail Caesar

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 5:47:45 PM PDT
Amon says:
First off, atheism and anti-theism are not the same thing. So, please, learn the difference between to the two. Next, telling a person who doesn't believe in what you do about what your beliefs predict is pointless.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 5:54:46 PM PDT
G. J. Stein says:
Again, with all do respect Mr. Amon, it would be pointless if you were 100% correct, but you're not, so we could both appreciate the clarity of each others position. Otherwise we're just biased fools.

Please take a moment to let that sink in.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 6:14:51 PM PDT
"With all do respect, this is the kind of statement that makes me wonder why you can't see its not true."

Individuals who not only desire to replace reason with dogma in their own lives, but demand that others do likewise, do, IMO, stand in the way of the advancement of our species. They stand in the way of the progress we make in replacing myth and ignorance with knowledge and reason.

If you disagree with this assessment, I'd like to see your argument / reasoning supporting your position.

"For decades Mao, Marx, Li, Castro wanted to rid the populace of religion but had to concede it was better to let them keep it.
Their agendas still seem to succeed in spite of religion so how would it be different in the free world if we rid it of religion?"

Please note that I have not called for the elimination of reason... so I don't see how the above is relevant to what I have said.

Also, the fact that totalitarians conclude that religion is best kept is, if you think about it, not a line of argument that will take you to somewhere you want to be.

Think about it...

"By the way, did you know the Christian religion teaches, the leader of the coming world government will declare himself to be god, contrary to the denial of one; he's not going to be pro-atheist."

I have no interest in Millennialist fantasies.

"If the religions of the world are coerced to converge into one,..."

Which no one is calling for, least of all me...

"... and worship the anti-Christ himself, looks like you "might" have another dilemma on your hands since, scientist or creationist, he will kill those who don't."

Again, I am talking about reality, not myth or fantasy.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 6:21:55 PM PDT
Michael Altarriba said: Should people in the Christian community be saying something like what the Dalai Lama said of Buddhism, and, if not, why not? [The Dalai Lama said, ""If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims."]

Michael,
I know you well enough to know that you will probably not agree with what I am about to tell you. Nevertheless, it is knowing what I am going to tell you that allowed the Dalai Lama to make his claim: the more we try to objectively observe others, the more difficult it is to know ourselves; conversely, the more we accept our subjectivity by noting the same subjectivity in others, the more we are able to objectively orient ourselves. It is not science which we should accept, but acceptance which is true science.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 6:42:04 PM PDT
G. J. Stein says:
"Individuals who not only desire to replace reason with dogma in their own lives, but demand that others do likewise, do, IMO, stand in the way of the advancement of our species. They stand in the way of the progress we make in replacing myth and ignorance with knowledge and reason."

I don't demand anything from you. Who does?

I'll drop the fantasy stuff, but since the top two belief systems in the world follow that scenario I just thought you may find it interesting, not that you had to agree.

When you say "they stand in the way of the progress" I have to wonder what that could be in light of the goal of most religions who hold to love and charity.
Seriously Michael, is there a place on earth were this progress has been achieved as an example you could show us?

To rid the world of religion with its totality of good and bad would be like trying to rid the world of love, with its totality of good and bad!!!
We are all imperfect lovers, but we try to be the best; to our spouses, children, family and friends. This is the reality we work with, what could take it's place in the name of progress?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 8:06:29 PM PDT
Amon says:
It would be pointless if I were correct? How so? You are comparing anti-theism to atheism and they are not the same thing. People do not act in accordance with what they don't believe but in what they do believe.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 8:17:17 PM PDT
We each have our subjective experiences... and, we also appear to co-habit a universe which objectively exists, and which we perceive, however imperfectly, via our subjective senses.

It is true that we need to recognize our subjectivity, and the subjectivity of others... so that we can allow for that subjectivity as we seek an accurate understanding of how our universe works.

"It is not science which we should accept, but acceptance which is true science."

And that, that sentence is without any merit I can see. "Acceptance" won't take us to the moon, cure polio, or develop the internet.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 8:24:20 PM PDT
"I don't demand anything from you. Who does?"

Those who demand that we teach the Earth is 6,000 years old, that the Adam & Eve or Noah myths were real, etc.

"When you say "they stand in the way of the progress" I have to wonder what that could be in light of the goal of most religions who hold to love and charity."

I won't debate whether or not this is "the goal of most religions"... but the actual *actions* of *some* theists match my description.

"Seriously Michael, is there a place on earth were this progress has been achieved as an example you could show us?"

You need only consult a newspaper... Also, google "cdesign proponentsists" for an example, as well as "Wedge Strategy."

"To rid the world of religion with its totality of good and bad would be like trying to rid the world of love, with its totality of good and bad!!!"

And, again, no one is talking about ridding the world of religion... so why do you keep mentioning this?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 8:41:56 PM PDT
Michael,
No one said acceptance is easy. The moon, polio, the internet--on the contrary, they are a recipe for the science of acceptance. Science is part hanging around (the moon), part going viral (polio), and part wasting your time on a Friday night (the internet). Like they say on TV, "Accept the rainbow. Taste the rainbow."

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 8:42:47 PM PDT
You're making less and less sense.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 8:45:55 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 18, 2012 8:46:09 PM PDT
Isah Paethos says:
Michael, that's because you don't speak the language.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2012 9:54:52 PM PDT
"Michael, that's because you don't speak the language."

Let's say that's true... then what actual *valid content* is it that I'm missing?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 19, 2012 5:00:05 AM PDT
Isah Paethos says:
"Valid" is such a relative term. You would be better off just trying to understand what is being said for its own sake, whether you agree with it or not. There is nothing wrong with being exposed to, and thinking about, the different ideas that people have about the nature of reality.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 19, 2012 5:27:59 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
"For atheists it's a conundrum."

Not really. The creator you describe is an omnipotent deceiver, the type of god that can never be disproven (and therefore can never explain anything).

Of course, why anyone would -worship- a deceiver is another question. All hail the Lord of Lies!
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Christianity forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Amazon Discussions Feedback Forum
1052 4 days ago
Last Day Biblical Prophecy is in the process of being fulfilled, the stage is being set, are you ready? 9773 2 minutes ago
Catholic-Protestant Discussion Part XXXV 5871 6 minutes ago
Part 2- the Newer Thread 9914 38 minutes ago
Eternal life is obtained through faith in the atonement Jesus made. 4828 3 hours ago
Jesus never "died for our sins" 1488 4 hours ago
My Mob's pub and coffee shop. Part the Eleventh 7211 4 hours ago
Outside of the your feelings, do any of you fundamentalist atheists have personal that atheism is true? 89 5 hours ago
The Christ Myth: is it possible Jesus never existed? 523 5 hours ago
What do "born agains" actually believe about Jesus? I am confused. Want to discuss. 8248 5 hours ago
Transgender Individuals 5511 7 hours ago
Harvard University test results show that homosexuality is indeed caused by parental neglect --that is from Harvard mind you! 2977 7 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  25
Total posts:  150
Initial post:  Oct 15, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 25, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions