Recent content by vajradhara

Namaste Jane, it's been a while since we last exchanged views, i hope you are well. interesting query. on the face of it, i'd say "yes" they can promote peace and tolerance yet they demonstrably do not. so, practically speaking this is a no-go for me. i also think you are right in...

Namaste, curious question and one which i'm sure has been asked by many beings over the course of history. i'd ask you, though, what it means to you when you claim to believe in Jesus yet reject Christianity. do you believe in Jesus in the manner that normative Christian teachings...

Namaste, this is always an interesting question. the short answer to the question 'could' Jesus have done so; yes. did he do so; unclear. *IF* Jesus did encounter any of the Buddhist philosophical traditions (of which there are several extant schools) he chose not to impart that to his...

So... the Marvel Universe has a whole bunch of interesting things in it, about it, concerning it. one of which is the Infinity Gems. for most of the their existence they are understood by those in the universe to be sources of immense power specific to particular aspects of the universe; time...

agreed! the whole point of it fell apart when this one fact was revealed... to whom would this have been compelling and in what manner? metta, ~v

necro thread and thus necro response! he didn't really specify.. he simply proclaimed that nothing could change it. i dunno what that is supposed to demonstrate, actually, other than a singular devotion. in that case, at least, he demonstrated that he's devoted to his belief. metta, ~v

Namaste all, St. Augustine said something not terribly unlike that once upon a time. seemed to be sound advice then and i suspect it is still. metta, ~v

he made the claim during his debate with Ronald Thwaits, for instance, and frequently states that one has to hold to a literal interpretation of Gen 1-11 or they aren't practicing Christianity consistently. being inconsistent in one's faith isn't something to be taken lightly. i pointed out...

i'm sure he believes that he has them as well, however if you credit his argumentation, he cannot know anything about them. he can only make assumptions. the term "scientific materialist" is a meaningless statement given that science and it's methods deal with material. it's akin to...

yes, he referred to them as Christians. given, however, that many of those Christians do NOT support YEC views AND that Ken Ham has made the claim that if you don't hold a YEC view you are not a Christian, THEN one can deduce that Christians who do not identify as YEC are not Christian...

he stated, directly, that we cannot know things about the past that we have not observed. thus, in theory, he cannot know anything about his great-grandparents unless he, himself, saw them. this is clearly false. given that the various methods all use different isotopes and things...

that part of the debate was based around information which Ken Ham had provided. Bill Nye then transformed the numbers into something sensible and he used as an example the number of species that we know exist vs how many kinds were said to be present on the Ark. Ken Ham then, later in the...

sure... HOWEVER, Ham was suggesting that since things have changed in the past, his "rate of change over time", THEN we cannot know anything for certain about the past, we can only make assumptions about it. THIS means that the natural laws, of say gravity or magnetic attraction COULD HAVE...

namaste all, it hasn't been previously and isn't now so i'd answer the question of the OP with a resounding: No. metta, ~v

namaste all, the correct scientific theory that explores the origin of things is called Abiogenesis and has nothing, whatsoever, to do with the arising of life on this planet. that is a process described as biological evolution of which the Modern Synthesis is demonstrably the most accurate in...