Re: A profound disturbance found in Yak butter.

Glenn wrote, replying to me:

>>>A negative after image is strictly confined to the experiencing
individual but only a fool will claim that there is no such thing because
I can't show you mine and you can't show me yours. So I contend that the
work of the Spirit IS evidence. J. B. Phillips noted that, as he was
translating the scriptures, he sometimes had the feeling that he was
working on the wiring with the mains still on. I have the testimony of
others whose lives changed through their trust in Christ. I know that
those who do not want to recognize the deity can find a nonreligious
explanation--only the religious one has so much greater effect. Coulson's
work in prisons has less recidivism than other types of programs.”<<<<<
 
His example isn’t the same as the above. Yes, I can have experiences
you can also have, but how does one compare the claims of Mohammed or a
Buddhist with those we have? How do we tell which are false and which
are true. Methodology please. You claim your experience is real; they
claim theirs is real. How does the outsider tell?
 
DS
There is a dual approach because of differences, specifically that Islam
has shari'ah law and Buddhism does not demand conformity. By your own
claim, in a part of your response to David O., Buddhist scriptures may be
corrected, including messages that contradict the originals. Indeed, the
Hinayana and Mahayana do not agree on all points. You claim that
scripture must be true throughout. So this, on your claim, excludes
Buddhism.

Islam will be a little harder to challenge, because all but the "correct"
text were destroyed, though I suspect that a few problems remain. But
part of Islamic law makes conversion to any other faith a capital
offense. I submit that any faith that must enforce conformity by killing
the nonconformist is damnable. I recognize that this was also the
situation for a while with Catholicism: heretics were burnt for a few
centuries. This was not the case during the times when Christianity was
closer to its Founder. It was Constantine who banished those not
orthodox. Things became worse when the Pope claimed sovereignty over the
state. For a while after the Reformation, banishment was practiced as a
confusion of church and state. But the notion of conscience introduced by
the Anabaptists has prevailed broadly. Exceptions were with the Christian
heresy, Marxism, and where Islam has shaken off the restrictions of
colonial governments.

In brief, truth demands consistency. Truth demands freedom: it cannot be
legislated. These seem to me to be pretty effective tests.
Dave
Received on Sun May 28 18:58:08 2006