jake said; "In my book Budhism is still a religion as they believe in irrational concepts without basis like the soul and reincarnation"
Is the implication here that is is solely through, what you consider to be 'irrational concepts', that Buddhism may qualify as a religion?
page 4.. how do we know the colour of the underpants?
page 5...Logic failure, no point in reading further
Try to be more objective keyplus, I detect a slight bias in your reasoning.
"I am pretty sure you are not going to like this..................
And few posts have proved that right.
Thanks to all of you who decided to start reading it and then stopped immediately. even that was as expected. And I have nothing more to say. about other posts and ideas here as they have been dealt with many times before.
Hold on Keyplus! I've not stopped reading it. I've been rather busy lately and currently I'm not at home - but with highlighter pen in hand, and several areas of the author's wonky logic already marked, I am ploughing through it. I have to say the Hunger Games trilogy is grabbing my attention rather more than your man's deliberations - far more believable - but I shall read your offering to the end.
The logic doesn't improve, Naomi, and it repeats some of the well-known lies about the accuracy of the Koran's description of embryology, adding a few sillier "proofs" of its divine inspiration. The author's (another Mossad invention) explanation of why the transcendental creator wants his creatures grovelling on their bellies five times a day is particularly amusing.