All gods in this religion are smaller deities to the greater Brahman, making this monotheistic, but then it is also polytheistic because there is truly the supreme belief in one major God. Hinduism only seems hard to understand because it deals more with one’s life then ones actual practice or belief of the religion. In reality, Hindus still believe in Brahman, one Supreme Being. Hinduism affects ones entire life and being. Hinduism is both monotheistic and polytheistic in my opinion.
Although there is no visual proof of a supernatural power such as God, believers are motivated by universal beliefs in things we cannot see. Why would we believe something we can’t prove or see? Also, why do people believe in something that is proven to be wrong? This is because of the willing suspension of disbelief and faith. In general, we don’t know for sure that something as God or any higher power of such has ever lived or existed, but it gives people hope and therefore religious knowledge systems still incorporate and effectively uses suspension of disbelief.
This tries to prove God’s existence by saying that all natural things were created for a purpose by an intelligent designer; this is much like Paley’s Teleological Argument. This argument does not work because it does not prove that the intelligent designer of natural things must be God. Overall, Aquinas’s argument fails to fulfil its only purpose: prove that God exists. If an argument cannot prove that God is all knowing, all good, and all powerful, then it does not prove the existence of a god at all. Another main reason why this argument and many other arguments for God’s existence does not work is because of the problem of evil.
Christianity and Buddhism, two of the world’s most practiced religions, can be seen as both similar and different devotions based on their teachings and beliefs. When you analyze these two doctrines, three of these comparisons stand out. One comparison being their origin, because the start of these religious traditions closely relates to a single philosopher; Buddha and Jesus Christ. These two men taught very similar ideas, but with different comparisons towards the subject of a God. These religions also see differently when it comes to after life, or where or what becomes of a person after their death.
Mavrodes explains that if god is omnipotent, then the stone question is a contradiction in and of itself. His reasoning makes logical sense because if one agrees that god is an all powerful entity, then there is no realm in which god can create something that he cannot lift. As Mavrodes articulates, the crux of the question is its built in attempt to imply that god is not omnipotent. And, if one believes that God is not omnipotent, then it follows that of course god would not be able to lift the stone, or would not be able to create a stone heavy enough to lift thus rendering him non-omnipotent. And, if one believes that god is omnipotent, then this question is irrelevant because this question is a contradiction.
However, I cannot completely agree with either point of view concerning God’s power. According to Hick’s theory God is, was, and always will be all powerful, but the Process-Relational Theory suggests that God though a very powerful being, He is not all powerful. Both suggest that evil exists either because of God’s awesome power or due to the lack of that power. As a Christian it is easy to agree with John Hick’s arguments that God is all knowing and all good but can the belief that God is all powerful hold its own in a world full of evil. If he is all good why would he not use his bounty of power to rid the world of evil?
Buddhism came to be by breaking off of Hinduism and now has their own beliefs. When researching about Buddhism and Hinduism I found that both religions believe in more than one divine. The Buddha did not address that there was a god, though what I found interesting he did not dismiss that there was no god, he believed there were higher beings. These religions, both worshiped numerous divines some were even similar. They both believed in the same divine the Brahma.
The idea that secularism originates from Christianity depends extensively on how secularism is defined. Some define it as a place, conversation or attitude completely lacking in religious elements, or according to William Connolly in part seven of The Myth of Secularism, a separation and restriction of private faith and beliefs from public discussion. Others see it as all faiths and religions having equal status, and everyone is allowed to search out truth in their own way, which is more closely defined as pluralism and heavily embedded in relativism. In terms of no religious implication, Christianity, although not necessarily instituted as a religion, but as a way of life, still demands the constant living out of beliefs about of truth and
Sacred Space There are many skeptics in this world who would argue that mankind’s religious impulses to be religious are solely a product of our natural process. If that is the case then evidence should support the idea that the profane gives birth to the sacred; that the profane is basically incapable of being moved, while the sacred is lacking definite form and not lasting or eternal, but Eliade ideas in The Sacred and the Profane show something different. For example when Eliade mentions sacred space he considers it to be a “really” real part of the universe as a whole, while a space that is not sacred is open to having several possibilities of meaning and having no structure. This is to say that the sacred is the solid which all else
The concept of God in both the religions are different. Christianity preaches that there is one God who is omnipresent and that the only way to the almighty god is through Christ and his teachings, the bible. On the other hand, Buddhism does not believe in any external god. Another difference lies in the concept of soul or self. Buddhism considers the soul to be an illusion while, Christianity says it is eternal and real.
Every religion is looking for peace and kindness, however, Buddhism is different because they look within and not towards God for help. Dave, the owner of Boundless Way Zen, said, “Most Buddhists accept that there is a God but they don 't worship him. Instead, they worship the world God created and God’s design of all living things.” This way