Thanks for the enlightenment.
My question should perhaps be rephrased so I can get a clearer understanding of the differences. Christianity says quite a bit about the overall universe, the past, the present, and the future. These are quite specific claims, and hence they are open to refutation by evidence. The are about history, geology, astronomy, biology, etc. Well within the domain of science.
From my limited knowledge of Buddhism, it seems to avoid making specific claims about the universe, at least as far as being testable by science. For example, in Christianity, the concept of a soul is not within the domain of science (IMO). Buddhism seems to be full of such concepts, but these don't posse a problem for a Buddhist in pursuing scientific knowledge. How can science argue with the Four Noble Truths or the Eightfold Path? These are metaphysical concepts, not science. Anyone can come along and claim that Three Noble Truths or Five Noble Truths would be better, (they might even be correct) but so what? It is not science.
Am I off base here? |
