Sheepy

.

I understand religion is meant to be more of the 'why' than the what.

For example this question: 'why is there something rather than nothing if nothing is easier than something?

And then there is the question about how why and what way we should behave towards other people that you can't get from science.

For example there is the five pillars of Islam: (1) the shahada (creed), (2) daily prayers (salat), (3) fasting during Ramadan (sawm), (4) almsgiving (zakat), and (5) the pilgrimage to Mecca (hajj) and this gives a lot of satisfaction to people as people like having certain goals and instructions for everyday life. ( i'm not defending it, but just stating the way it is.)

With Buddhism though... there are some SERIOUS problems when it comes to dealing with ethics. You can't argue with Buddhism why certain tyrants should be taken out of power. It states life is all round a painful experience and only escapable through enlightenment And enlightenment has the idea of un realness, seeing ourselves outside our bodies. Yet to someone who sees himself and others as unreal, human suffering and death may appear laughably trivial. Also in some ways it justifies poverty. We are all born into our positions due to previous life - so there fore it is acceptable to be alright with why children are born into starving and sick families. Wasn't Buddha's first step toward enlightenment was his abandonment of his wife and child? That certainly will make for happiness for all around the world.

ect ect ect. * But if you could defend all these statements Baraka reasonably then i think Buddhism would be great!

( Personally i find Presbyterianism a very satisfying denomination of Christianity )

"Presbyterians generally exhibit their faith in action as well as words, by generosity, hospitality, and the constant pursuit of social justice and reform, as well as proclaiming the gospel of Christ." Wooh! GO JESUS~