Buddhism (Pro) or Christianity (Con)

I assert that the Holy Trinity is Creator of all matter because this is a scientifically backed up and most logical claim; this makes Christianity quite feasible. Because Christianity states solidly and allows only one pure explanation for the beginning of time/matter, it is different than the many non-established Buddhism statements therefore Christianity is more probable and valid. Rebuttal 1 Pro says: ". .. science states that mankind evolved from primates, thus giving rise to the theory of evolution. Now, many Christians debate this theory, all on the basis of the Bible. It is fine to question theories, but not due to some zealous preconceived notion that is held from a religious standpoint. " First off, there are two types of science. There is mainstream science, which is the stuff that is taught in most public schools and which is the lessons you learn on discovery channel and what they show on the media. Then there is the pure science--artifacts, chemistry, philosophy/history, astronomy, earth and environmental sciences, and life sciences. These are found and figured, discovered and recorded straight onto documents that we can assert claims and create new statements/facts/truths with. The difference is that mainstream science has a process that the facts go through, and they do not show the original statements to the public, while "pure" science is simply everything that is found and stays the way it was observed. Now, would you agree that The Theory of Evolution is considered mainstream science? There have been countless textbooks that "explain" the Evolutionary system/cycle over many decades. The flaw is that the textbooks are different, and the so-called facts that are explained in the text books CHANGE over years due to new discoveries that disprove what was previously taught/written in the textbooks. This is not a Creationism vs. Evolutionism debate, but let me tell you that "facts of science" is not ONLY evolution. That is what the media makes it out to be, but this is false, because there are two sides to the coin: evolution AND the creation story which also has many abiding facts of science to hold it valid. The Bible has been interpreted many ways, but when you look at it purely and you look at the science/nature straight out, you'll notice that they, too, abide and agree. Pro says "Christianity cannot offer a scientific worldview," I have disproved that by the above. ". .. but can offer a spiritual worldview (which every religion offers)" Yes. Now lets compare Christianity to Buddhism. Buddhism is so flexible and non-strict about it's belief system that there is nothing to really say definitely "oh, Buddhism is the truth in every way. " Christianity, however, has a firm belief system (the Bible) and it does not contradict itself in any way. Yes, they are both spiritual, but Christianity offers stringent truth and a practicable salvation story (the salvation is what it's all focused around). Rebuttal 2 Buddhism MAYBE has a set of books that explain the religion's basis. IN A SENSE there are books that entail the words of Buddha. But the problemo is that the followers choose sects in order to know which ones to read, and there is not a resolute set of beliefs. Christianity has one book and one book only. It includes all the details a Christian (or anybody) needs to know about life, God, the world and Evil, reality, and religion; it is the root to all truth, whereas Buddhism doesn't have that. Rebuttal 3 "For Con, if anything in Buddhism contradicts Christianity, it is not a viable worldview. I would like to remind Con that not everybody is a Christian. " Well, I hope I don't sound that one-sided, but if I do I would like to remind Pro that I am arguing FOR and on the same side as Christianity. Sometimes, in order to sound convincing, I have to brag about it and preach, and I don't believe that is wrong or bad. However, I see why that may be annoying. Remember, I am simply evaluating the two religions and comparing them in order to present my case as to why Christianity is better. Rebuttal 4 Pro says "the divinity of Jesus is asserted only in the Bible, and it is a supernatural claim. " He quotes that like it's a bad thing, while in fact it was earlier where he said that Christianity achieves spirituality. Is not spirituality equal, in a way, to being supernatural? And is that not what every religion should be focused on? Perhaps this is where we disagree, because Pro then said "But, while Buddhism asserts that the Buddha was an enlightened being, it is not central to its core tenets. Buddhism's aim is the aim to end suffering, and anyone can experiment with its "prescriptions" to see for themselves. " Here's why Christianity is altogether more fulfilling. The Bible NOT ONLY teaches that we should aim to end suffering (through salvation from Jesus Christ), but it also talks about many other virtues and satisfactions for our lives. More importantly, it explains the reality, how we are completely sinful beings and that there is no way to completely end all the pain and emptiness in our souls without accepting Jesus as our Savior. Buddhism claims that Buddha was "enlightened" but to me this is not enough. He didn't have the salvation, and the things he taught were not always completely true for present day reality. . http://www.slate.com... Pro is correct when saying how Christianity is an 'all-or nothing' religion and Buddhism is not. If a religion only does/preaches what "fits for you," how can it be truthful? This is why Christianity is valid and the only way, truth, and life. Rebuttal 4 (again) Please explain to me the ultimate goal of Buddhism, then, because I am plainly confused at the moment. The way I see it is that to YOU, the goal is nirvana, but there are some different Buddhists who have completely different mind sets. I want to hear the truth, not "whatever works for me" as an individual. Rebuttal 4 (again again) Some Buddhists state that Karma is simple science such as cause and effect, while other claim that it's spiritual. This site interprets 4 types of Karma. . http://omswami.com... This site here shows a different world view on Karma. . https://www.thetreeofawakening.com... There is no SET explanation so it's slightly invalid because of this. Rebuttal 5 "Although I know I have not addressed all of Con's points, Con's main standard of judgement is the Bible, while mine is practicality. " But the Bible is practicality. Have you read it? "The basis of Christianity is supernatural, while the basis of Buddhism are teachings (of how to end suffering). " This is not true. The basis of Christianity is the Bible, and inside it preaches how to be saved from this world of suffering and how to have a relationship with God (who is supernatural). The Bible is more than teachings, it is truth and answers to more than just how to end suffering. If one does not need to believe in the supernatural in Buddhism, so what is the spiritual part of it that entails "all religions" as you (Pro) said earlier? You say Buddhism is more accessible to many people, when actually it has nothing to offer unless you research a whole lot about tenants such as the four seals of dharma, the four noble truths, the eightfold path, and others. The only step to being a Christian is accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior be following the teachings of His Word! Buddhism is too flexible to be the true path to righteousness and satisfaction. A true religion has one way and one way only, and Christianity meets that requirement because the only truth is the Bible, while in Buddhism you do whatever you think is right and whatever fits your preference. That's all for now. Thank you again for your time, Pro!