Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

glorfindel · Jul 26, 2002, 07:35 PM

The basic premise of Hinduism is that there are many Gods and many Devils. The Gods are characterized by selflessness and unity, the devils by egoism and division.

Now the Hindu sacred texts maintain that a Supreme Being or Spirit became the universe, that there is nothing outside of the Supreme Being, all is in It.

And therefore, any being who claims to be the only God, as Jehovah did, is really a devil because the ambition of those beings is to aggrandize their own egos. This would seem to explain why the Old Testament God, Jehovah, in fact appears so evil because according to the Hindu sacred texts, the "god" of the old testament is really a devil.

Of course, that is if you believe in such things as gods or devils.

But still, it is an interesting perspective, and I post it because it gives a valuable viewpoint that fanatics conviently ignore, smug in their mental and cultural provincialism.

[ 07-26-2002, 07:38 PM: Message edited by: glorfindel ]

roger_ramjet · Jul 26, 2002, 07:49 PM

If someone is culturally provincial how can they ignore that which they didn't even know? Your post was interesting and informative but the barb at the end was gratuitous and smug.

glorfindel · Jul 26, 2002, 07:55 PM

It might have been smug, but was it gratuitous? If people are going to prostelytize and convert which is one basis of fanaticism, then don't they have an obligation to inform themselves of what they're doing?

If the Hindu texts are correct -- and let's remember that they are the world's oldest -- then all of the Christian and Muslims are preaching the word of a devil, and if you are going to do that, then itsn't it your obligation to the best of your abilities figure out what you are doing?

Still your point is taken.

glorfindel · Jul 26, 2002, 08:10 PM

The Hindus (a catch all word...) believe that the human mind functions as a link to the gods and Supreme Being, and that this link is effectuated through a process called yoga, which means union or joining.

According to basic yoga, the mind is the link to effectuate this ascent. Now, according to the Old Testament, Jehovah forbid man to eat of the Knowlege of Good and Evil, which is the symbol of the mind. In other words, Jehovah -- a devil -- wanted to prevent man from evolving in order to maintain control by attempting to keep man from becoming a mental being, as opposed to a purely animal being.

An interesting perspective in my opinion.

daimoni · 06:29 PM

.

driven · Jul 26, 2002, 09:38 PM

Hinduism is a collection of many religions.

It's both monotheisitc and polytheisic. There are many gods ... there is one god.

It's really quite complex.

Lerkfish · Jul 26, 2002, 09:44 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by driven:
Hinduism is a collection of many religions.

It's both monotheisitc and polytheisic. There are many gods ... there is one god.

It's really quite complex.<hr /></blockquote>and yet, if we are to judge from the originator of this thread, it suffers the failing of all religions, in that adherents tend to think they are the smug owners of the only truth, and that other religions run a distant second.
<img border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" title="" src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" />

Captain Big Trousers · Jul 26, 2002, 09:57 PM

I like this glorfindel. Can we keep him?

glorfindel · Jul 26, 2002, 10:02 PM

Hinduism actually isn't very complex -- it only seems so because we here in the West have grown up with monotheistic religions that skew our perspectives.

In Hinduism, God is called the parabrahman, or purusottama, which means that "God" is everything -- ever person, every idea, every animal, all matter, mountains, lakes, rivers, every galaxy and universe. God is the Absolute, and as Absolute he is All.

When any being, such as Jehovah, claims to be the only God, he is substituting himself for the the Infinite and Absolute Spirit. The beings that do this are called Asuras, or devils.

By the way, Lerkfish, I am not a Hindu -- I don't have any religion -- so your comment leaves one wondering. I think Hinduism presents an interesting viewpoint, and since I read all of these posts about religion here, I thought I would share what I know of it.

By the way, the notion that all religions must be equal because those who advance a particular religious cause are usually zealots is a non sequitor.

Raman · Jul 26, 2002, 10:14 PM

What exactly are you trying to say about my religion?

Lerkfish · Jul 26, 2002, 10:14 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by glorfindel:
By the way, Lerkfish, I am not a Hindu -- I don't have any religion -- so your comment leaves one wondering. I think Hinduism presents an interesting viewpoint, and since I read all of these posts about religion here, I thought I would share what I know of it.<hr /></blockquote>you got me there, point for you.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by glorfindel:
By the way, the notion that all religions must be equal because those who advance a particular religious cause are usually zealots is a non sequitor.<hr /></blockquote>you misunderstood me, point for me.

examine more closely what I said. I said: "...in that adherents tend to think they are the smug owners of the only truth, and that other religions run a distant second."
I said it suffers the same failing, and that adherents tend to think they have divined the one truth. In no way did I state this made all religions equal, but that they all have this tendency, which is a human failing, because all adherents are human.

not sure if I explained the difference adequately, but there you go.

lastly, you seem to characterize (correct me if I'm wrong here) anyone on this board who discusses religion as a fanatic. If that is your aim, I'd disagree in total, even though that is true in part.

argod · Jul 26, 2002, 10:18 PM

troll away.

[ 07-29-2002, 10:41 PM: Message edited by: argod ]

glorfindel · Jul 26, 2002, 10:28 PM

LFish, I see what you are saying and do agree with it, except that historically (as opposed to the last 50 years) India has been not only tolerant but welcoming of all religions, perhaps even to its own political detriment.

And no I am certainly not saying that people who discuss religion are fanatics. I meant that people who adhere to a religion that condemns others are fanatics. Basic Christian doctrine places non-Christians in Hell. Basic Muslin doctrine does te same for polytheists; hence in general some of the followers of those religions tend to fanaticism expressing in the form of conversion movements and missionary work, and that historically there has been no coordinate movement on the part of Buddhists or Hindus because they do not believe in exclusivism.

The basic difference between the two camps, as I see it, is that Hinduism accepts the truth of all religions -- such as Christiniaty and Islam -- whereas Christianity and Islam tend to believe only in their own truth.

It is not uncommon in India for preachers to preach from the Gospels or Koran. Where are the Christian preachers quoting the Upanishads? The Muslim clerics quoting the Vedas?

Millennium · Jul 26, 2002, 11:56 PM

Unfortunately, glorfindel, your viewpoint cuts both ways.

People worship many things, and any of them could be called a deity simply by virtue of that fact. If I were to worship my stereo system, it would be a god because it had a worshipper.

But Christianity teaches that only one of these beings is actually worthy of worship, by virtue of being the Creator (by whatever means) of all things, including -directly or indirectly- those other gods. Whether this God is a single being, some sort of composite, or some other nature entirely is somewhat up to debate among the different Christian sects, but the idea of a single original Creator holds for pretty much all of them.

So, then, what are these other beings? Some are just arrogant people, or beings made up by them. Others are supernatural beings (commonly called "demons" in Christian terminology) pretending to be otherwise, to draw people away from the truth.

So goes Christianity's point of view, anyway. And who is to say which, yours or mine or some other that hasn't been brought up here yet, is correct? Not you, not me, and not anyone else. Not any human, at any rate. All we have to go on is what we've experienced.

Lerkfish · Jul 27, 2002, 12:08 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by argod:
P.S. next time exclude christianity from the subject line. otherwise
Lerkfish and others will be obligated to defend its honor.
Don't take my word on it, just search the forum.<hr /></blockquote>oh, absolutely kell...er...argod. isn't it annoying when just ANYONE can tune into a thread and give their opinion? Especially those nasty-wasty christians, eh? Then we can continue to claim their ignorance because we just wont talk to them so they can hear our views! brilliant, eh?
Let's just exclude as many people who dont think like US. Then we can prove how open minded we really are instead of those close-minded christians who insist on rationally debating various topics, listening to every post. Who needs THAT???

Isn't it better to just prejudge every christian on this board? Doesn't that just show our tolerance? Aren't we pious?

well, kelly...er...argod, have fun in your ivory tower.

[ 07-27-2002, 12:09 AM: Message edited by: Lerkfish ]

argod · Jul 27, 2002, 12:40 AM

troll away.

[ 07-29-2002, 10:42 PM: Message edited by: argod ]

glorfindel · Jul 27, 2002, 01:14 AM

Millenium, I think you raised a very interesting point about Christianity, which is actually explained by Hinduism.

In Hinduism, there is the concept of ista-devata, or personal godhead. In other words, whataver form of divinity one chooses to worship symbolizes God. However, in Hinduism, this idea of ista-devata is widely understood and recognized; for this reason, people are free to worship Shiva, Vishnu, Christ, Buddha, Krisha, Ganesha, Jehovah, etc.

Conversely, in Christinaity and Islam there is no coresponding understanding of ista-devata. There is only one form of godhead. Everyone must worship someone called Christ or else go to Hell, idem for Muslims and Allah.

Obviously, there are individuals who would term themselves Christians and don't believe in that, but they constitute an exception to dogma and generally accepted teachings. The general thrust of many Christian sects, such as Baptists, Catholics, and Evangelicals, as well as of Islam is to force people to accept their ista-devata.

And this is one of the reasons, in my opinion, that the whole world is the way it is today -- bloody and hateful.

I was not trying to polemicize with this thread, although those who are not open to a free play of speculative intelligence might take offence. I was merely pointing out that we in the West have a very narrow view oftentimes of spiritual and religious matters.

wataru · Jul 27, 2002, 01:34 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by glorfindel:
... a process called yoga, which means union or joining.

According to basic yoga, the mind is the link to effectuate this ascent.<hr /></blockquote>Really? I thought yoga was really just something for affluent white Americans to do between sipping Starbucks lattes, driving their massive SUV's, and talking on their cell phones.

It's funny how America just hoovers up all sorts of random pieces of other cultures and bastardizes them beyond all recognition.

argod · Jul 27, 2002, 01:40 AM

troll away.

[ 07-29-2002, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: argod ]

argod · Jul 27, 2002, 01:43 AM

troll away.

[ 07-29-2002, 10:44 PM: Message edited by: argod ]

glorfindel · Jul 27, 2002, 01:54 AM

thank you for that link argod. a marvelous website.

BlackGriffen · Jul 27, 2002, 02:33 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by glorfindel:
thank you for that link argod. a marvelous website.<hr /></blockquote>Yes, very interesting site, I just wish that they would write coherent articles instead of stringing quote after quote together.

BlackGriffen

Shame · Jul 27, 2002, 02:42 AM

You're confusing mythology and philosophy. And also confusing Judaism with Christianity (Jehovah, more correctly Yahu, is not a Christian god (it was at first)).

I personally see no difference between ANY religion if you look at certain things, the myths for example. You'll find the same stories in all of them going back to the early days of writing.

When it comes to the actual theologies and philosophies, well, the Bible gets confusing because it isn't written by one person and the people who wrote all the different parts don't seem to have shared the same ideas all the time.

Read the Upanishads and the Kabbalah. It allows you to get to the nitty gritty without the myths and the 'prophets' standing in the way.

glorfindel · Jul 27, 2002, 03:37 AM

Am I confusing Judaism with Christianity or has society already confused the two?

I agree it is a confusing fusion of two distinct religions, but it seems to have been done by Christianity not by me.

roger_ramjet · Jul 27, 2002, 06:22 AM

Not sure what you guys are driving at. Christianity started as a Jewish cult. So how can the Old Testament God - Jehovah - not be a part of the Christian understanding of who God is?

Lerkfish · Jul 27, 2002, 09:01 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by argod:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Lerkfish:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by argod:
P.S. next time exclude christianity from the subject line. otherwise
Lerkfish and others will be obligated to defend its honor.
Don't take my word on it, just search the forum.<hr /></blockquote>oh, absolutely kell...er...argod. isn't it annoying when just ANYONE can tune into a thread and give their opinion? Especially those nasty-wasty christians, eh? Then we can continue to claim their ignorance because we just wont talk to them so they can hear our views! brilliant, eh?
Let's just exclude as many people who dont think like US. Then we can prove how open minded we really are instead of those close-minded christians who insist on rationally debating various topics, listening to every post. Who needs THAT???

Isn't it better to just prejudge every christian on this board? Doesn't that just show our tolerance? Aren't we pious?

well, kelly...er...argod, have fun in your ivory tower.

<hr /></blockquote>Was I talking to you?
I was giving the new guy some advice to not waist his time on the likes of you. and it holds true even with this thread. I would not have a problem
if you actually contribute to the debate. I for one am glad you stick to your white ivory tower. Why do you need to learn about hinduism. Since, your religion is the best. Just wait for Jesus to show up. Like always
you jump the gun then have to go re-read what was said, is this not getting old yet.

Oh, you don't want to go down the path of equating me with kelly.
I gave you warning last time. Let the sleeping dogs rest.<hr /></blockquote>I was contributing until you came along. What are you threatening me with? I'm curious...you keep threatening me, but nothing ever happens. AND you keep trying to prevent me from posting in certain threads......

Not that it matters to you, but You completely misunderstand my personal faith and how open I am to other religions because you have a block of wood between your ears that only allows you stereotype christians monolithically.

daimoni · 06:32 PM

.

Timo · Jul 27, 2002, 01:53 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by argod:

P.S. next time exclude christianity from the subject line. otherwise
Lerkfish and others will be obligated to defend its honor.
Don't take my word on it, just search the forum.<hr /></blockquote>Nice personal attack. Tell me, are attacks ad hominem scripture for you, or dogma?

PS. in the possible event you prove too lazy to type "dictionary.com" into your browser and find out what "ad hominem" means, I'll fill in the blank for you:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Ad hominem attacks on one's opponent are a tried-and-true strategy for people who have a case that is weak.<hr /></blockquote>

[ 07-27-2002, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: Timo ]

argod · Jul 27, 2002, 03:02 PM

troll away.

[ 07-29-2002, 10:45 PM: Message edited by: argod ]

Timo · Jul 27, 2002, 03:09 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by argod:
By definition, christian cannot learn about other religion for intellectual curiosity. It is always to put the other religion down, to convert. All answers can be found in the bible why would you need to read other text.<hr /></blockquote><img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
Same can be argued about your idea of liberalism. but we have already argued that one.
<hr /></blockquote><img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" />

Oops. I thought you were merely foolish. Instead, I see you're ill-informed, to put it mildly. Perhaps you should get your own house in order before slinging the mud around.

argod · Jul 27, 2002, 03:10 PM

troll away.

[ 07-29-2002, 10:47 PM: Message edited by: argod ]

Timo · Jul 27, 2002, 03:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by argod:
So are you defending the honor of Lerkfish or others.
<hr /></blockquote>I would never dream of doing something so presumptuous, since
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Lerkfish is defending him self just fine.<hr /></blockquote>Eh. Maybe. Who knows? I don't think he needs to do much "defending" here.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Since I don't remember debating with you in this kind of subject
in the past I will let questioning my intelligence go this time.<hr /></blockquote>I'm not questioning your intelligence. I'm pointing out that you prefer personal attacks to factual debate. I have no opinion about your intelligence.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Next time display some knowledge on the subject then I can include you in put down personally.<hr /></blockquote>

I think you've left out some words...are you trying to say that the next time I post something substantial you'll repay the effort with another ad hominem attack?

argod · Jul 27, 2002, 03:21 PM

troll away.

[ 07-29-2002, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: argod ]

Timo · Jul 27, 2002, 03:26 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by argod:
So when is presenting dictionary definition not questioning ones
intelligence.<hr /></blockquote>Actually I presented a dictionary usage note. If I were to question your intelligence, I'd say, "Hey, I question your intelligence." Instead, I pointed out that you prefer slander to debate. That's independent of intelligence.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I don't consider that a service.<hr /></blockquote>I'm not here to serve you.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />If you are not
to going to answer the main question of the thread. you know what to do.<hr /></blockquote>First, I don't have any idea of what you're talking about. Second, I may answer any and all parts of any thread as I please.

argod · Jul 27, 2002, 03:34 PM

troll away.

[ 07-29-2002, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: argod ]

Timo · Jul 27, 2002, 03:39 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by argod:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Timo:

First, I don't have any idea of what you're talking about. Second, I may answer any and all parts of any thread as I please.<hr /></blockquote>I just did a search on the archive for "religion" and your login
number. It only brought this thread.
So go ahead troll away.<hr /></blockquote>Wow. You're super-good at name calling. Why don't you do a search for a clue?

glorfindel · Jul 27, 2002, 07:18 PM

For the love of Christ!

Moderators, please delete this thread!!!

Lerkfish · Jul 27, 2002, 08:31 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by glorfindel:
For the love of Christ!

Moderators, please delete this thread!!!<hr /></blockquote>oh, no...you started this mudslinging...

for example, I'm trying to reconcile your preliminary statements:

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> The basic premise of Hinduism is that there are many Gods and many Devils. The Gods are characterized by selflessness and unity, the devils by egoism and division.
Now the Hindu sacred texts maintain that a Supreme Being or Spirit became the universe, that there is nothing outside of the Supreme Being, all is in It.
And therefore, any being who claims to be the only God, as Jehovah did, is really a devil because the ambition of those beings is to aggrandize their own egos. This would seem to explain why the Old Testament God, Jehovah, in fact appears so evil because according to the Hindu sacred texts, the "god" of the old testament is really a devil. <hr /></blockquote>and this one:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />If the Hindu texts are correct -- and let's remember that they are the world's oldest -- then all of the Christian and Muslims are preaching the word of a devil, and if you are going to do that, then itsn't it your obligation to the best of your abilities figure out what you are doing? <hr /></blockquote>and this one:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />When any being, such as Jehovah, claims to be the only God, he is substituting himself for the the Infinite and Absolute Spirit. The beings that do this are called Asuras, or devils. <hr /></blockquote>with the then ludicrous statement:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />The basic difference between the two camps, as I see it, is that Hinduism accepts the truth of all religions -- such as Christiniaty and Islam -- whereas Christianity and Islam tend to believe only in their own truth. <hr /></blockquote>So....Hinduism accepts the truth of Christianity...but whose "truth"...the hindu belief that Jehovah is a devil, or the christian belief that he is god?

Doesn't sound very tolerant or accepting to me to call the god of another person's religion a devil of your own....that's not tolerance, that's condemnation of the worst sort.

so....how do you reconcile those two distinctly contradictory statements? hm?

like I said, hinduism falls prey to the fallibility of all religions, in that it thinks it holds the only truth, and all others an inferior position. I'd consider considering Jehovah to be a devil certainly is an inferior position.

And, FURTHER, (argod) this is the same point I made earlier, and it is EXTREMELY on topic, goes directly to glorfindel's description of the Hindu hypocrisy.

amsalpemkcus · Jul 28, 2002, 12:31 AM

There is a single sound at the heart of hinduism and it is: "AUM" just the way it is written. Its original typography looks like this:
<img src="http://www.yrec.org/images/om.jpg" alt=" - " />
This has a beautiful meaning. I understand it but the world in which I live does not allow me much time to reflect on it eveyday. Anyway, here is about.com's take on what I can only "feel" however only fleetingly mostly...

<a href="http://hinduism.about.com/library/weekly/aa022200.htm" target="_blank">http://hinduism.about.com/library/weekly/aa022200.htm</a>

"The goal which all the Vedas declare, which all austerities aim at, and which men desire when they lead the life of continence … is OM. This syllable OM is indeed Brahman. Whosoever knows this syllable obtains all that he desires. This is the best support; this is the highest support. Whosoever knows this support is adored in the world of Brahma."
~ Katha Upanishad I

Om or Aum is of paramount importance in Hinduism. This symbol (as seen in the image on the right) is a sacred syllable representing Brahman, the impersonal Absolute — omnipotent, omnipresent, and the source of all manifest existence. Brahman, in itself, is incomprehensible; so a symbol becomes mandatory to help us realize the Unknowable. Om, therefore, represents both the unmanifest (nirguna) and manifest (saguna) aspects of God. That is why it is called Pranava, to mean that it pervades life and runs through our prana or breath.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
As glorfindel has pointed out very succinctly so far. And as I understand it, Hinduism is full of attempts to teach us "UNITY". There is no outside/inside, here/out-there kinda perceptions, which are innate to humans. It is really a hard thing to grasp but sometimes I feel it. Also the difference between Hinduism and other popular religions is its flexibility to allow practising saints etc. to add to its philosophy through their own interpretations that comes out of devotion to its gods and sacrifice. This flexibility could be taken as the reason why you can understand how even concepts like <a href="http://healing.about.com/cs/tantra/" target="_blank">Tantra</a> and Kama Sutra could have evolved to act as a means to push the envelope. I think this world could use a lot of understanding about "UNITY" that will surely bring in "PEACE". Just my .02$ as usual. I am sure at some level all religions do identify this but perhaps is lost in the way it is delivered to its masses.

PS: as an afterthought I dont think the central philosophy of Hinduism should take a hit just because the interpretations based on Hindu ideas are contrary to ideas in other belief systems. I think all religions do evolve with respect to our ever changing perspective (read science and technology) about this world. Some evolve faster than others.

EDIT: added more clarity to what I tried to say without changing it all too much.

[ 07-28-2002, 01:01 AM: Message edited by: amsalpemkcus ]

Lerkfish · Jul 28, 2002, 12:59 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by amsalpemkcus:
[QB]PS: as an afterthought I dont think the central philosophy of Hinduism should take a hit just because the interpretations based on Hindu ideas are contrary to ideas in other belief systems. I think all religions do evolve with respect to our ever changing perspective (read science and technology) about this world. Some evolve faster than others. <hr /></blockquote>But, day after day in this forum chrisitianity takes major hits constantly. It's nice for some other religion to take a few well-deserved ones. Why should hinduism be exempt, and why should christianity be the favorite whipping boy around here?
Why is it ok to attack christians and say all manner of vile things about them and their religion, and that is acceptable, but if someone just asks questions about another religion...oh no, that shouldn't happen.

answer my questions in the post before yours. If hindus prefer to think they are supremely tolerant and open-minded, and accept the truth of other religions, yet they say Jehovah is a demon....whose "truth" is really being accepted?

amsalpemkcus · Jul 28, 2002, 01:19 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Lerkfish:
But, day after day in this forum chrisitianity takes major hits constantly. It's nice for some other religion to take a few well-deserved ones. Why should hinduism be exempt, and why should christianity be the favorite whipping boy around here?
Why is it ok to attack christians and say all manner of vile things about them and their religion, and that is acceptable, but if someone just asks questions about another religion...oh no, that shouldn't happen.

answer my questions in the post before yours. If hindus prefer to think they are supremely tolerant and open-minded, and accept the truth of other religions, yet they say Jehovah is a demon....whose "truth" is really being accepted?<hr /></blockquote>I dont know how it is with you but I find the spiritual concepts embedded in major religions pretty solid. I dont think there is a cause in many discussions that warrants a response in terms of defence. I keep spirituality and the religion that I like most completely separate. You can attack Buddism and Hinduism (I like them the most) however much you want and I wont be affected because I know what they really are all about in the end.

[ 07-28-2002, 01:19 AM: Message edited by: amsalpemkcus ]

Lerkfish · Jul 28, 2002, 01:21 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by amsalpemkcus:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Lerkfish:
But, day after day in this forum chrisitianity takes major hits constantly. It's nice for some other religion to take a few well-deserved ones. Why should hinduism be exempt, and why should christianity be the favorite whipping boy around here?
Why is it ok to attack christians and say all manner of vile things about them and their religion, and that is acceptable, but if someone just asks questions about another religion...oh no, that shouldn't happen.

answer my questions in the post before yours. If hindus prefer to think they are supremely tolerant and open-minded, and accept the truth of other religions, yet they say Jehovah is a demon....whose "truth" is really being accepted?<hr /></blockquote>I dont know how it is with you but I find the spiritual concepts embedded in major religions pretty solid. I dont think there is a cause in many discussions that warrants a response in terms of defence. I keep spirituality and the religion that I like most completely separate. You can attack Buddism and Hinduism (I like them the most) however much you want and I wont be affected because I know what they really are all about in the end.<hr /></blockquote>you just don't get it? I'm not attacking, I'm asking a question for clarification. Read this thread again and ask yourself which religion is being attacked!

the nerve of some people....

amsalpemkcus · Jul 28, 2002, 01:30 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Lerkfish:
you just don't get it? I'm not attacking, I'm asking a question for clarification. Read this thread again and ask yourself which religion is being attacked!
the nerve of some people....<hr /></blockquote>BTW, I was being hypothetical when I said - "You can attack Buddism and Hinduism (I like them the most) however much you want and I wont be affected because I know what they really are all about in the end." Sorry, I guess that was not too clear. Anyway, I would just not defend anything point after point if I were you, after all there are too many to defend in pretty much all religious texts. I would instead focus on more precious meaningfulness of it all, if I were you that is. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Edit: Man! I just cant edit out the quotes properly. :o

[ 07-28-2002, 01:31 AM: Message edited by: amsalpemkcus ]

Shame · Jul 28, 2002, 03:00 AM

Though no current religion or cult can be called perfect (from a scientific viewpoint) it is a bit hard to attack religions that didn't take part in the Crusades, didn't oppress humans for centuries and didn't travel around the world forcing people to convert. In that, Christianity and Islam are the two viruses which have sickened the world because they claim to be THE truth and ask followers to expand its messages.

Millennium · Jul 28, 2002, 10:06 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Shame:
Though no current religion or cult can be called perfect (from a scientific viewpoint) it is a bit hard to attack religions that didn't take part in the Crusades, didn't oppress humans for centuries and didn't travel around the world forcing people to convert. In that, Christianity and Islam are the two viruses which have sickened the world because they claim to be THE truth and ask followers to expand its messages.<hr /></blockquote>You know, for someone who claims to be all global in viewpoint, you're awfully Eurocentric. Perhaps you should look into some of the things done in the names of most Asian religions sometime. You hate two particular religions and project that hatred onto all other religion. I also find it particularly interesting that while you hate two particular religions, you conveniently ignore the misdeeds of their common ancestor, which are farther back in history but just as bad. The apple doesn't fall very far from the tree, you know.

Shame · Jul 28, 2002, 10:23 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Millennium:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Shame:
Though no current religion or cult can be called perfect (from a scientific viewpoint) it is a bit hard to attack religions that didn't take part in the Crusades, didn't oppress humans for centuries and didn't travel around the world forcing people to convert. In that, Christianity and Islam are the two viruses which have sickened the world because they claim to be THE truth and ask followers to expand its messages.<hr /></blockquote>You know, for someone who claims to be all global in viewpoint, you're awfully Eurocentric. Perhaps you should look into some of the things done in the names of most Asian religions sometime.<hr /></blockquote>Would you like to make a list of these things done in the name of 'Asian religions'? As for 'Eurocentric' someone need reminding that Judaism, Christianity and Islam ARE Asian religions.

It's remarkable how often I keep seeing westerners who think they invented monotheism. It's the usual blond Jesus thing. The West created 'nothing' apart from massive exploitation, junkfood and racism and continues to paint the brown man with a white brush.

What do I expect when a half white actress wins an Oscar and says she has opened the door for black women?

[ 07-28-2002, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: Shame ]

Millennium · Jul 28, 2002, 10:59 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Shame:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Millennium:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Shame:
Though no current religion or cult can be called perfect (from a scientific viewpoint) it is a bit hard to attack religions that didn't take part in the Crusades, didn't oppress humans for centuries and didn't travel around the world forcing people to convert. In that, Christianity and Islam are the two viruses which have sickened the world because they claim to be THE truth and ask followers to expand its messages.<hr /></blockquote>You know, for someone who claims to be all global in viewpoint, you're awfully Eurocentric. Perhaps you should look into some of the things done in the names of most Asian religions sometime.<hr /></blockquote>Would you like to make a list of these things done in the name of 'Asian religions'? As for 'Eurocentric' someone need reminding that Judaism, Christianity and Islam ARE Asian religions.<hr /></blockquote>You want a list? I'm not going to give it to you this time. I'm going to make you do some research and footwork for yourself, since you seem to do so little of it. I will, however, give you a search term to start you off: sohei. That particular one delves into Japanese history, but from there I think you'll be well on your way. If you want others, I can show you histories of abuses that would make the Catholic Church look like the Easter Bunny by comparison.

All the same, forgive my poor word choice on the "Asian religions" bit. Perhaps "Eastern religions" would have been batter? I doubt it; no doubt you'd ask me where I was stating "Eastern" to be relative to. I was talking about Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism, all of which have had some pretty darn militaristic periods, all of which -just as with your oh-so-hated Christianity and Islam- went against the teachings of their creators. Likewise with Shinto, and once again, that goes against the actual teachings of the religion.

Stop calling the kettle black. Corrupt people have abused all religions in the past. Christianity and Islam have no monopoly on that.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />It's remarkable how often I keep seeing westerners who think they invented monotheism. It's the usual blond Jesus thing.<hr /></blockquote>I've seen many depictions of Jesus in my time, but never one with blond hair. Not that the accuracy of any of them can really be vouched for, seeing as we don't even have a physical description to go by, much less a paragraph.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />The West created 'nothing' apart from massive exploitation, junkfood and racism...<hr /></blockquote>There you go again. You're wonderful at lauding all cultures except one, and you attribute the achievements of that culture to others for no better reason than your own hate.

I'll be frank, Kelly. A lot of the things you've said in the past have disgusted me, not for their content but their intellectual dishonesty. I still remember that time when you said that "you didn't have to think" about political matters because you had your self-styled "experts" to do your thinking for you. And here we see it again. You're not even being rational anymore; you're just projecting your hate outwards, with no justification, with the fervor of... well... far be it from me to trip Godwin's Law. And yes, I know the implications of what I just said; I wholeheartedly intend them. In your hatred of that enemy, you have become him. In your desire to slay monsters, you have become a monster yourself. And you don't even see it; that's the real tragedy.

I pity you. I really do. Because someday you're going to realize just what you've become. And as someone who's been there, I know what that's like, to look in the mirror and see for the first time everything you've professed to hate all this time, and it's staring right back at you, wearing your face. I offer you my condolences in advance, but I doubt you'll accept them. Not until it's too late.
<blockquote>quote:<hr />...and continues to paint the brown man with a white brush.<hr /></blockquote>I take it you don't just mean the literal case of your "blond jesus" example. But I don't quite understand your metaphor. Are you saying that "the West" doesn't see others as any different from them?
<blockquote>quote:<hr />What do I expect when a half white actress wins an Oscar and says she has opened the door for black women?<hr /></blockquote>Interesting. I don't follow the Oscars much; who would you be referring to?

I'm not going to post in this thread anymore. I'll hang around to read Kelly's reply to this, but this is getting far too inflammatory for even my taste.

Shame · Jul 28, 2002, 11:13 AM

Millennium,

Nice load of rubbish you posted.

Please post a list of 'religion' based atrocities commited by South and Far Eastern religion and Judaism. You can't can you? As you have stated, if you could then it would 'go against the religion'. Fine.

But Islam teaches militancy. If you don't know that then you've read one or two sentences of the Koran, none of the Hadiths and believe whatever the politically correct media says (Once upon a time Muhammed was in a cave, lalala-la).

Same goes with Christianity. The Messiah was never supposed to be a Powder Puff Fairy espousing love and fraternity to all mankind. Jesus doesn't do that either (it would go against his claim). Remember? 'Go not onto the Gentiles but only to the lost sheep of Israel'. He preaches fraternity amongst Jews and other occupied people AGAINST the Romans. The Messianic movement was always a militant one. The Messiah is supposed to kick out foreign forces and become supreme king. The whole idea of such a king was forged out of the oppression of Judeo-Palestine under the occupation of the surrounding kingdoms throughout ancient history.

Certainly there is nothing wrong with that (fighting oppression). But it isn't democratic and neither is it secular. And since that movement failed in the first century it turned its frustration to the rest of the world and transformed itself into a cult of personality that claims to be 'the one and only truth'. This shows little respect to other religion and culture.

Therefore Islam and Christianity still have to go through huge transformation to this very day. Whether they can is something I don't think we'll ever see. Religion compatible with a secular and democratic world can only be those which have a pantheon of deities or have no need of a deity. Just take a look at how mainstream Judaism evolved under the influence of secular humanism. There's no more need for the stoning, the theocracies or cutting babie's foreskins. Yahu's covenant is recognised by most Jews as simply the words written by thieving priests. Just as it says in Jeremiah 8:8.

[ 07-28-2002, 11:15 AM: Message edited by: Shame ]

amsalpemkcus · Jul 28, 2002, 11:24 AM

I always wonder why discussions on religion mostly is about the past. The origins and the progession seems to pretty much dictate how we view the future trajectory. I dont think that should be the case. The past practices for various religions rarely carry any weight than they used to even say 50 years ago. What will probably remain intact through time will probably be the essential spiritual principles. I think we contribute to the present understanding and course of various religions (whether you are a follower or not) a whole lot more than we can imagine. So I ask, why not let the past be and perhaps see how the major religions are going to shape up tomorrow. A tomorrow that is going to be full of ideological conflicts that include cloning humans to perhaps a complete integration of human brains to that of silicon based information systems. (may be thats an exaggeration but may be not..). I also wonder how powerful religious institutions are to be able to have a say in shaping such a techno driven world society.

BlackGriffen · Jul 28, 2002, 01:25 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Shame:
Would you like to make a list of these things done in the name of 'Asian religions'? As for 'Eurocentric' someone need reminding that Judaism, Christianity and Islam ARE Asian religions.

It's remarkable how often I keep seeing westerners who think they invented monotheism. It's the usual blond Jesus thing. The West created 'nothing' apart from massive exploitation, junkfood and racism and continues to paint the brown man with a white brush.<hr /></blockquote>Haven't we covered this ground already? Kami-sama, you do fit the stereo-type of the stone deaf poster. Learn from your freaking conversations, or quit wasting our time by posting the same wrong $hit over and over again.

I agree with you on one thing, the wavy haired Jesus with dishwater blonde/brown hair is a manufactured image, like the shroud of turin (is that it's name?). In all likelihood, he looked just like any Palestinian or other Arab, since that's the region he was from.

The rest is crap. Let's take it point by point. "Massive exploitation": see Egypt, China (the great wall constructed by the first emperor of China), and the Aztecs (being a human sacrifice if you're captured in war can't be fun).

"junkfood" side effect of the industrial revolution that, why I'll be, started in the West with things like the steam engine.

"racism" Some examples that stick out in my mind: China, Japan, Korea. Do you even know anything about that region, gaijin? The only reason racism seems to be more prominent in the West is because it is the first permanently world traveling civilization. The West simply came in to contact with these other peoples, and had the strength to make sure they won. Granted, not all peoples encountered were racist, but none of them were perfect angels, either.

BlackGriffen