Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Trinitarian Response to Buddhist Antitheistic Arguments

A Trinitarian Response to Buddhist Antitheistic Arguments to Buddhist Antitheistic Arguments John B. King Jr. Independent Scholar In his battle against theism, Vasubandhu developed three classical arguments that have set the agenda for Buddhist apologetics.1 More recently, Mattieu Ricard has employed these arguments within the field of religion and science.2 Because these arguments make their case from distinct angles of attack, they function as distinct means to a common end. Yet it is precisely this end that is problematic. Because the arguments rebut a bare monotheism, they fail to address the complexity of Trinitarian theism.3 As a result, the Buddhist arguments appear to be strawperson arguments from the Trinitarian side. This failure to establish a point of contact is not an intrinsic failure of Buddhist polemics. Rather it is the result of two historical accidents. First, the Buddhist arguments were originally developed in a non-Christian context where Trinitarian theism was not in play. Second, Christians have often advanced a bare monotheism in their apologetic work because they have failed to grasp the architectonic significance of the Trinity.4 For both of these reasons, Buddhist antitheistic arguments are underdeveloped. Consequently, I cannot claim to refute the Buddhist case against theism by responding to these arguments. Indeed, I http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Buddhist-Christian Studies University of Hawai'I Press

A Trinitarian Response to Buddhist Antitheistic Arguments

Buddhist-Christian Studies , Volume 37 – Oct 28, 2017

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/a-trinitarian-response-to-buddhist-antitheistic-arguments-me9m91g0oZ
Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 The University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1527-9472
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

to Buddhist Antitheistic Arguments John B. King Jr. Independent Scholar In his battle against theism, Vasubandhu developed three classical arguments that have set the agenda for Buddhist apologetics.1 More recently, Mattieu Ricard has employed these arguments within the field of religion and science.2 Because these arguments make their case from distinct angles of attack, they function as distinct means to a common end. Yet it is precisely this end that is problematic. Because the arguments rebut a bare monotheism, they fail to address the complexity of Trinitarian theism.3 As a result, the Buddhist arguments appear to be strawperson arguments from the Trinitarian side. This failure to establish a point of contact is not an intrinsic failure of Buddhist polemics. Rather it is the result of two historical accidents. First, the Buddhist arguments were originally developed in a non-Christian context where Trinitarian theism was not in play. Second, Christians have often advanced a bare monotheism in their apologetic work because they have failed to grasp the architectonic significance of the Trinity.4 For both of these reasons, Buddhist antitheistic arguments are underdeveloped. Consequently, I cannot claim to refute the Buddhist case against theism by responding to these arguments. Indeed, I

Journal

Buddhist-Christian StudiesUniversity of Hawai'I Press

Published: Oct 28, 2017

There are no references for this article.