I have a few questions..
Please answer both
1. I read the Dalai Lama, The Role of Religion in Modern Society. One of the Dalai Lama's answers to the question of whether one religion is "better" than another is that "The important thing is surely its effectiveness in individual cases." Shouldn't a religion be equally effective for all of its followers though? I wondering how you think would he answer this?
2. I'm curious.. If you wanted to convince someone that God exists, where would you start? What objections would you expect them to raise and how would you even answer those objections?
Hi! I hope you're having an enjoyable weekend, and that this response meaningfully helps you.
As for the first question:
What the Dalai Lama seems to be arguing is not whether a religion should be effective for all its members, but rather that all people deserve to have a religion that is effective for them on an individual basis. To go further, the question his statement addresses is not "What SHOULD a religion do or accomplish?", but rather "What should an individual person expect or deserve out of any given religion?"
Keep in mind that the original topic stated in the question is one of "better-ness." To that end, the Dalai Lama believes that a religion is "better" than another based on each individual's experience of that religion. To put it another way, this is akin somewhat to cultural relativism; a religion may be more consistent in and of itself as a social concept or institution, but that does not ...
This solution of 631 words explains what the cultural relativism approach to religion is, and that of approaches to religious discussion and/or debate.