A while back I came across a Dalai Lama statement where he said that when science and religion are in contradiction that religion must give way to science.

Yet what if we only have partial scientific knowledge?

Also if he accepts abortion on scientific principles didn't he accept the interruption of the reincarnation of human souls?

Where does Buddhism stand on abortion?

Whenever I have heard the DL discuss science he has said that people must be open to examining scientific findings. Everyone's perception of this statement will vary but I found it to be that his faith must be supple enough to accomodate direct observation.

The Buddhism ideal of knowledge and the empirical approach is fairly similar (exceptions apply in some branches of buddhism) so his quote is perfectly understandable.

Most Buddhism encourages a rational and neutral stance on advancing knowledge, and your "where scientific knowledge is only partial" makes no sense...Buddhism has to my knowledge always operated with the assumption that all knowledge is only partial, the same principle that guides the philosophy of science. Science also tells us that all knowledge is only partial. This is one of the things that often attracts academics to buddhism.

As for re-incarnation, there should be no need to say that science isn't buddhism and that buddhism isn't science.

I believe Buddhism isn't too hard-lined on abortion, as a result of the long-term karmic view of rebirth, as in the particulars of what happens to an incarnated soul include everything that happens to it, including being aborted, hence no "interruption".

I'm not saying this is my view. I'm pro-choice, but agree that an abortion is still surely in most cases a tragedy, perhaps sometimes the best of a bad set of options, debatably.

But whether or not this is the case, it's all part of the karmic wheel, including our debate about it, and the progress of scientific understanding.

Isn't the Dalai Lama a Buddha, anyway?

SoB

Well if this is what he means I think I agree with him. A lot of Christians tend to be afraid of contradicting the scriptures with science but many times when science contradicts scripture later scientific knowledge is revealed that confirm the scriptures were accurate. The amount of time the correction takes is variable of course but if you take a look at this link for example you'll see science overturning itelf frequently and confirming the original bible account:
http://creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge

I keep having a picture of that Brad Pitt movie "Seven Years in Tibet" with the scene of those Buddhist monks picking earthworms out of the soil before they can break ground and build a new temple for fear of killing lesser creatures.

So when Dalai Lama says that your religious belief should be open to scientific inquiry (and ofcourse that scientific inquiry most open to scrutiny), then you agree with him on the grounds that when scientific inquiry does not agree with your religion it will undoubtedly at some later point come to see the truth?

I hate to break it to you, but you don't agree with him at all. Actually, you are hardliner religious dogmatic with that view - and the least you could do is to be honest about it.

Well I could be a hard liner or I could just be considering from one fixed angle until all the pieces fall accurately into place.

Some people can't even examine the pieces like the crazy video posted the other day of the woman bashing gays. She obviously hasn't done any deep thinking about her religion because if she had read the scriptures as closely as she quotes them she'd know that she will be held responsible for every word coming out of her mouth and she'd know that Christ eschewed politics. Christ could have led a political revolution in his day against Roman tyranny but he didn't. Take a look at Chilton's book "Rabbi Jesus".

I think the point is that as long as you don't know where the pieces are going to fall (or even if they have fallen correctly), this makes you a hardliner by implication.

I don't know what you mean.

I had a big piece of the puzzle built before ever posting on 2+2.

I've just been adding pieces. Of course sometimes I have to take the pieces out and put another one in its place that is a better fit. Just like a jigsaw puzzle filling in. A lot of pieces look like they could fit but sometimes there's a better piece.

What you want me to do is wipe out my current pic and rebuild from scratch but for me to be able to do that I'd have to demolish a mountain of evidence and I see no reason for that.

I don't want you to do anything but realize that what you have written in this thread pegs you squarely as a religious dogmatic.

If what you have written in this thread accurately describes you, what your beliefs actually consist of and how much they would have to change if you opened them for inquiry is not something I have commented on. I can only relate to what you write here, nothing more and nothing less.

Nah.

I had my "open stage" pre-2+2. My life experience didn't start when I started posting on here.

I will admit that my religious ideas and positions have shifted considerably and mainly for the better.

I'm currently considering that Resurrection and Reincarnation fit together like halves of a whole. I particularly like that fit because reincarnation answers a lot of the more difficult theological questions. Guess that makes me a heretic...oh well...Christ was considered a heretic by the masses in his day, too.

Btw its easy to use the term "religious dogmatic" in a perjorative sense when you take a person out of context. Posters are mostly out of context in internet forums.

I also find myself in agreement with Martin Luther who say's Assert.

I know asserting runs contrary to the philosophical inclinations of most forum posters here, however, only a true authority can assert. Its the common man who has to prove claims.

Bible scientific foreknowledge is a load of crap. It takes an idea from science, and looks for a few vague verses from the bible, and goes SEE SEE I TOLD YOU.

I see your creation wiki, and raise you my rational wiki

http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Eternal..._Foreknowledge

I have responded to what you have written in this thread and this context. I'm not a psychic.

I am, here are a few of my visions,

In 2011 a great leader will fall.
Danger lurks under us and will strike with no warning.
2 stars will become 1 and then become 2 again.