[Buddha-l] Enlightenment as dogma

[Randall Jones]

At 06:19 AM 10/14/2010, Stefan wrote:
>... Unless we speak of a postmodern, stripped-down version where 
>miracles, belief in angels and Satan is frowned upon or questioned 
>in ideologically pluralistic milieus and therefore dropped, maybe 
>because it's too intellectually demanding to defend them.


I take it what you are saying is that you don't like "postmodern" 
theology. I do. I find it quite demanding intellectually too. Maybe 
we don't read the same writers. Or perhaps I'm just slow.

>When it comes to Christianity, there ARE some basics which are to be 
>believed literally by literally all Christians.

How in the world have you come to think you know what is to be 
believed by all Christians?

>The Resurrection, for instance. Jesus being the literal son of his 
>god. Immaculate conception.

You think, huh?

>The Buddha engaged in plenty of debating with other sects, trashing 
>their theories. I also think of the elaborate and intricate polemics 
>between Madhyamika and Cittamatra-schools. Tsongkhapa's minute 
>analyses of opposing opinions and their subsequent destruction. I 
>don't see much respect there for other peoples' views. It's 
>hypocritical to leave someone in an erroneous view, even if caution 
>is warranted. Today, where we already deal with Islam's en 
>Evangelical Christianity's presence, wanted and unwanted, we should 
>for the sake of our future engage in discussion and not resort to 
>culturally relativist rhetoric, aborting any thorough discussion 
>about beliefs with which people shape their lives, but also the 
>lives of others, and maybe one day yours too. People who say they 
>respect other people's view show cowardice to differ in opinion, 
>don't care about other views or are not sure of the validity of 
>their own views.

Did I say something about not engaging in discussion with those who 
had other views? Or not discussing other views? I certainly hope not. 
However, I do think that meaningful, productive discussion is 
possible only when showing respect. Part of showing respect, I'd 
think, is adhering to the principle of charity whereby, among other 
things, one takes the strongest construction of the other's position 
rather than some weaker construction. After all, one doesn't want to 
spend their time knocking down straw men.

Sorry if I expressed myself poorly on that. I'm all for discussion. 
While maintaining respect for others and their views.

Randall