Eutychus, of course hinduism had been used as a cover for people in power to retain their hold. But the point is it is not claimed as the exclusive path to truth. since it says that your god is actually my god by another name, religious conflict is automatically avoided. There had been minor brawls over which god is more powerful, but they never lasted long and both sides then retired to carry out their war through books, not the sword. It is very different from saying that my god is the only god and everyone else is going to hell.

Karma actually came into being first to explain evil, since original sin is not in hinduism. It was also supposed to be a goad to make us live rightoeusly, since we would reap what we sow.

I think the there is little discussion here because only a worldview like Christianity can produce atheist. Look at who has built the hospitals and the schools. Who has trained the scientist and the classicist.

Both atheist and theist believe in logic. There would be no discussion if we both believed that we are both right. Atheist better hope that Christianity remains the dominate view in Western Civilization (over say pantheism) or they will soon find their numbers dwindling. (unless of course atheism is the dominate world view)

Duh!! Obviously, non-Abrahamic religions are no challenge because God would never let some other bull---- religion get so much influence. That's why Christianity is the only Real challenge to you atheists therefore situation on your boards is obviously a blatant sign from God. Wake up!

*
I, for one, only just noticed this forum a minute ago. But I will probably not contribute to it again because I don't see where other people's beliefs, per se, are all that debatable. I would be interested in developing my understanding of panentheism, but its not critical that I do so. The only kind of religious debate that would excite me would be one concerned with demonstrating the connection between religious philosophy and its socio-economic, i.e., political, expression in various societies. Maybe I'm one of a kind, or maybe most people feel like I do.

mturner

I speak as a Buddhist..............After running away from Christian fundamentalism I found what I thought was a "safe haven" within the Buddhist faith........yet have had my eyes opened gradually to the fact that what I would understand as "fundamentalism" exists in all "faiths" (and even in those of no faith at all)...... The inability to truly hear the voice of "the other", the inability to truly step out of our own particular brand of conditioning and open our mind to those who think differently.......as well as the clinging to the finger that points at the moon, rather than seeing the moon for oneself.


To truly try to understand another makes us vulnerable, and it can become a very rocky ride!

Buddhism says "Ehipassiko"..........."come and see". The Dharma, the Buddhist teachings, "invite inspection". To examine for oneself. If we do attempt to understand for ourselves and in the light of this, to understand others, things are never quite the same again......

This may be a natural progression. Anyone felt threatened by Pantheism simply does not understand it. There isn't anything to be frightened of. When Christianity finally rolls over and expires it will be mysticism/paganism/pantheism that fills the void.

Speak for yourself. I am not a Buddhist. I stumbled across the moon while looking for something else.

To give up trying to truly understand is to spiritually die.

As education spreads atheism is also bound to apread

I know a lot of people who totally reject Christianity, but would not describe themselves as 'atheists'. They usually say 'Well...I believe in something', and give you some esoteric description that corresponds to Gaia theory or paganism or various forms of 'spiritualism'. I think Christianity is far more vulnerable to the advance of scientific eduction because the way it insists on disputing scientific facts.

It would be more like theism looses its static foundations and will mutate into something the educated "masses" can live with in the information age