Calm rational discussion regarding Hinduism and Abrahamic religions

Spirituality Religion
#198

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;35897]Namaste,

I think you have a losing battle for sure now. You now admit the bible does indeed contain these really violent and barbaric things, but you are too politically correct to call it primitive, barbaric and stupid.

However, as I have no such hang up, I can clearly see it for what it is. Anything which commands mass murder, infanticide and raping of women is abominable. Thus I have proven my point that the Abrahamic religions are primitive, barbaric and stupid and Hinduism is a superior religion.

The Abrahamic religions are not the religions of a noble or enlightened people like the dharmic religions, but religions founded by savages that say savage things.[/QUOTE]

This has nothing to do with political correctness. If some one is stupid I would call them as such. Rather this is about honestly living the faith you believe with full understanding of what that means. Reading the Bible without proper context does not lend a correct interpretation. You have stated the same about reading Hindu texts. I would never assume to be an authority on anything unless I had spent countless ( more than 30)years studying, practicing and observing it. Can you say you have done that with Christianity as a practicing Hindu?
The odd thing is there is no battle here with me, and the only battle here is the one in your mind. (you of course may state that this is a debate and that that I should defend my point. or even that I should not assume that this is the case, but I really don’t care)
As for proving my point. Nope! Don’t need to. My goal here is not to convert, rather to point out that your over-generalized statements about all Christians are wrong. Not to prove a point but to inform others that not all Christians are as violent and evil as you make them out to be.
So since there is no arguement/battle no one can lose. My life and the life of those within the community of believers in which I live and practice with are living and definate proof of non-violence and tolerance within the Christian family. That is the proof. Not historical texts, not overly dramatized you tube videos or your interpretation of both (as stated above you have no standing since you have not lived it)
Never in any post have I been intolerant of another persons belief or stated their religions are barbaric or stupid. As stated in a previous post, it is not I/you who determines who is right or wrong in what they believe. Only God/ higher being/ those fully enlightened can determine that. (you are none of these) I am human with flaws just like you.
I challange you to seek out Christians (not those of a very conservative stance as they will feed your appetite for debate/argument and not allow you true growth) but those who are of a more liberal stance. You may be surprised at their tolerance, love and acceptance of those from other religions.
Namaste

#199

Namaste TeeA,

You see I don’t really understand what you think constitutes a definition of a religion. Is it defined by its current adherants or by its scriptures and history? Yes, sure there are many tolerant, loving and liberal Christians, but does take away from the fact that they accept scriptures like the OT that contains unmitigated evil and scriptures like the NT which glorifies poverty, weakness, naivity and contains exclusivist doctrines which condemn everybody but the chosen ones. It is easy to see from the history of Christianity that it has indeed been responsible for terrible and endless violence and oppression.

This is why I reject this religion. Not simply because I am Hindu, but as an intelligent and sensible person. I can clearly see this is a religion of a primitive man. Then when I look at my religion I see it is a religion is enlightened sages. I thus can clearly see my religion is superior.

This debate was triggered by statements that said all religions were equal, and this is why I have aggressively opposed this statement and showed why they are not equal and why some are more superior to others.

#200

What you are doing here is using ‘short term thinking’ to predict a future outcome. So you are saying, Abrahamic religions have used violence in the past. Therefore, they will continue to use violence. Logically, your argument doesn’t hold. Another example: I rode the roller coaster yesterday and it was great. I rode it again today and it was great. When I ride it tomorrow, can I assume it will be great? There are too many factors that play into how you will enjoy the ride tomorrow. There might be a screaming child next to you, crying, and you did not have a great time, the 3rd time, because of that. So there is a logical gap.

I think this goes to your style of argument. You are using short term logic to prove a point that cannot be predicted.

Namaste,

The fact remains that the doctrines that produced the violence are still present, and they still continue to produce violence. In India, there is a terrorist attack everyday and innocent Indian people, mainly Hindu, die. These attacks are done by largely Muslim terrorists, who are merely following what their Quran itself says, “Kill the infidels” There is massive Christian fundamentalist activity that goes on where Christian missionaries go around Indian villages telling them they are sinners, and must save themselves by converting to Christianity.

Is it only in India? No, it is in most parts of the world that this is still going on. The examples of peaceful, compassionate and tolerant Muslims and Christians you give are only a small minority. The majority are not tolerant, peaceful and compassionate.

As long as those doctrines remain in the religions this situation will not change. I think we need to stop pretending they are peaceful religions, when the facts cry out otherwise. Now either these religions reform or we reject them enmasse. But I have a logical problem with how they can reform at all, because they are simply doing what their religious scripture tells them to. If you get rid of the religious scripture, what remains?

#201

I thought I would put this in the relevant thread.

I spent an entire day today reading the Gospel of Matthew and my respect for Jesus has really plummeted. I have read the stories of many great Yogis, masters, and if Jesus is going to be counted amongst them, then I have never come across as one as arrogant as Jesus. He constantly proclaims that he is the ONE, goes around place to place collecting people to worship him, to abandon all their possessions and to renounce their family and friends, so they can worship him alone, and all they get in return is nothing more than faith and cryptic parables. He appoints himself as the right-hand man of god and even arrogantly declares that he will be judging people. To his disciples he gives a special concession of having their own thrones so they can judge the 12 tribes of Israel. He declares that he will return and by then he wants his name to be spread all over the Earth. He shows his disciples the great miracles he can do and even shows them a vision where god confirms he is the ONE.

If this really is not a fictional storyand Jesus really did all these things, then he was a man who had developed siddhis, went astray and started to gather personal fame for himself by showing people his siddhis and then developed these delusions of granduer that he is the ONE. There are countless of such tantriks in India who after developing some powers go out of control. This is one of the reasons why the Yogasutras says that one should not be tempted by the lure of siddhis.

#202

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;36666]I thought I would put this in the relevant thread.

I spent an entire day today reading the Gospel of Matthew and my respect for Jesus has really plummeted. I have read the stories of many great Yogis, masters, and if Jesus is going to be counted amongst them, then I have never come across as one as arrogant as Jesus. He constantly proclaims that he is the ONE, goes around place to place collecting people to worship him, to abandon all their possessions and to renounce their family and friends, so they can worship him alone, and all they get in return is nothing more than faith and cryptic parables. He appoints himself as the right-hand man of god and even arrogantly declares that he will be judging people. To his disciples he gives a special concession of having their own thrones so they can judge the 12 tribes of Israel. He declares that he will return and by then he wants his name to be spread all over the Earth. He shows his disciples the great miracles he can do and even shows them a vision where god confirms he is the ONE.

If this really is not a fictional storyand Jesus really did all these things, then he was a man who had developed siddhis, went astray and started to gather personal fame for himself by showing people his siddhis and then developed these delusions of granduer that he is the ONE. There are countless of such tantriks in India who after developing some powers go out of control. This is one of the reasons why the Yogasutras says that one should not be tempted by the lure of siddhis.[/QUOTE]

Let us take Padre Pio and his miracles:

http://www.padrepio.catholicwebservices.com/ENGLISH/Miracles.htm

Padre Pio prayed Lord Jesus Christ. Among other things, he had the stigmata
for decades. Stigmata are the signs of the wounds of Jesus Christ.

Another Christian saint practised the Jesus Prayer. Actually there were many
Christian saints practising Jesus prayer.

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/ignaty_jesus.aspx

Incorruptible bodies of the Christian saints, already posted before:

There are literally thousands and thousands of examples of Christiian saints or Christian healers. Have you ever heard of John of God from Brazil ?

Babaji sent Yogananda to the West to preach the unity of all religions.
Yogananda wrote a monumental opera about Jesus Christ.

Mahataam Gandhi wrote about the unity of all religions (posted before).

Actually who are you :

  1. to negate the existence and divinity of Jesus Christ

2 to negate the Christian saints. They prayed and followed the teachings
of Jesus Christ, that is why they became saints.

  1. to negate the Indian saint Babaji, who preaches the unity of all religions,
    beyond dogmas.

  2. to negate Yogananda, who preaches the teachings of Babaji.

  3. to negate Mahatma Gandhi, a great Indian soul, the founder of the great
    country named India.

etc etc etc

I remember a poem about evil by Lermontov, a great Russian poet:

“I am the spirit who negates everything.”

#203

Namaste,

I have already told you Yoganandaji was a Hindu missionary. He used Christ in order to convert people to Hinduism. I have nothing but love and respect for this great man, but I cannot negate what I myself have read in the gospels. Unless you can justify Jesus’s arrogant behaviour as portrayed in the Gospels. Certainly Yogananda ji did not go around telling everybody he was the “Son of man” and ask everybody to give up everything they had and worship him, so he can guarantee them a place in the kingdom of god. Certainly Yogananda did not say to his disciples he wants them to spread his name everywhere in the world. Certainly Yogananda ji did not go about claiming he was the right-hand man of god and he would be sitting in heaven alongside god judging people.

Buddha did not say that either. Nor did Lao Tzu. Nor did the hundreds of Risis of the Vedas. In fact no enlightened master has ever made such grandiose and narcissistic claims as Jesus has. If they have quote me anywhere Buddha has said, “I am the only way, throw everything away, and get behind me and worship me as the lord”

#204

Surya,

If you have really read the Bible then you know Jesus was not the ‘son of man’ as you said above. He stated he was the son of God. The son of God who was sent here in a mortal body to save us from our sins. God knew the only way we could be saved, see the light, etc was to send his only son, in a human body so we could understand.

You cannot make assumptions on things you don’t know. You read the Bible through narrow, bigoted eyes. There is so much more that you don’t see or want to see. You take things literally that were not meant to be taken that way, or you read only a small portion of a story and misunderstand the true meaning behind it.

People on this forum that have responded to you have done so with the knowledge they have of their religion. Many went through long hours of religious training, sunday school, etc. They know what they were taught. You do not. They understand their religion. You do not.

What we should be doing here is celebrating our diversity in our religious upbringings and values we hold. He are all good people regardless of whether we are Hindu, Buddhist, Jew, Christian, agnostic or atheist. Let us take the time to understand and celebrate how very special that is. We don’t need to tear it down.

#205

Jesus both describes himself as the Son of God and Son of Man.

You are the one making an assumption here that I have misunderstood the bible. If I have misunderstand you need to show why your interpretation is correct, and not automatically take it for granted yours is correct, because it feels good :smiley:

#206

You have misunderstood because the way I, and others have interpreted it, is how we were taught. You were not taught. It is their religion. (use to be mine) They certainly know their religion better than you do. I went through Catholic grade school and high school. We are talking 12 years of religion class, studying and interpreting the bible. While I am not a scholar on the subject, I know my fair share and what I was taught.

Surya, my friend, you just won’t ever see will you?

#207

It does not take 12 years to read the bible. I read the Gospel of Matthew in a day, and I am reading the Gospel of John currently :smiley:

If you can speak the English language you can read an English version of the bible lol

#208

Now wait a minute! 12 years of STUDYING the bible, my friend. It didn’t take 12 years to read it.

#209

I don’t need to study the bible to know what Jesus said, taught and did. Just reading it once or maybe twice(I am a close reader) is enough :smiley:

#210

Oh yes you do. Don’t be silly!

#211

[QUOTE=lotusgirl;36737]Surya,

If you have really read the Bible then you know Jesus was not the ‘son of man’ as you said above. He stated he was the son of God. The son of God who was sent here in a mortal body to save us from our sins. God knew the only way we could be saved, see the light, etc was to send his only son, in a human body so we could understand.

.[/QUOTE]

I generally agree with you. Probably it is useful to clarify in more depth this point.

I quote here from the book “Yoga of Jesus” by Yogannada:

Quote.

The confusion between “Son of man” and "only begotten Son of God"
has created much bigotry in the community of churchianity, which does not understand or acknowledge the human element in Jesus-that he was a man, born in a mortal body, who had evolved his consciousness to become one with
God Himself. Not the body of Jesus but the consciousness within it was one with the only begotten Son, the Christ Consciousness, the only reflection of God the Father in creation.

End of quote.

#212

[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;35630]"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth.
Niels Bohr

/QUOTE]

So true.

A simple example: the mechanics of Newton was s profound truth.
But quantum mechanics is still a more profound truth, of which the
mechanics of Newton is only a gross approximation.

#213

[QUOTE=oak333;36766]I generally agree with you. Probably it is useful to clarify in more depth this point.

I quote here from the book “Yoga of Jesus” by Yogannada:

Quote.

The confusion between “Son of man” and "only begotten Son of God"
has created much bigotry in the community of churchianity, which does not understand or acknowledge the human element in Jesus-that he was a man, born in a mortal body, who had evolved his consciousness to become one with
God Himself. Not the body of Jesus but the consciousness within it was one with the only begotten Son, the Christ Consciousness, the only reflection of God the Father in creation.

End of quote.[/QUOTE]

I think this is an extremely important point and should be elaborated.

“The comforter,which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance,
whatsoever I have said to you.” John, 14:26

These Biblical words refer to the threefold nature of God as Father, Son, Holy Ghost (Sat, Tat, Aum in Hindu scriptures)

God the Father is the Absolute, Unmanifested, existing BEYOND vibratory creation.

God the Son is the Christ Consciousness existing WITHIN vibratory creation;
this Christ Consciousness is the “only begotten” or sole reflection of the Uncreated Infinite.

The outward manifestation of the omnipresent Christ Consciousness is Aum (Om). the Word or Holy Ghost: invisible divine power, the only doer, the sole causative and activating force that upholds all creation through vibration.

AUM the blissful Comforter is heard in meditation and reveals to the devotee the ultimate Truth, bringing all things to your remembrance.

             Paramahansa Yogananda
#214

Further elaboratoin on this.

Jesus mentioned “the Son of man which is in heaven.” What does this mean ?

Ordinary souls behold their bodies (“Son of man”) are roaming only on earth.

Free souls like Jesus dwell simultaneously in the physical, astral, and causal heavenly kingdoms.

This is ecstasy of God-cosciousness, defined by yogis as Nirvikalpa Samadhi.

Paramahansa Yogananda

#215

These Biblical words refer to the threefold nature of God as Father, Son, Holy Ghost (Sat, Tat, Aum in Hindu scriptures)

Sat, Tat and Aum means Truth, That and the cosmic sound. What does that have to do with the Father, Son and Holy Ghost?

The Hindu trinity is: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Brahma is the creative principle, Vishnu is the preserving principle and Shiva is the destructive principle. How does this tally up with the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost?

#216

Reading the Gospel of John has made give Jesus some benefit of the doubt. I think Jesus is making rather bold and declarative statements, and his manner of teaching with cryptic parables and ambigious statements I find to be somewhat irresponsible, but perhaps Jesus felt this was the only way to communicate with the people at that time.
It is obvious he did not condone the old Mosaic religion, otherwise he would not have reinterpreted the old commandments. When the woman who commited adultery was getting stoned, Jesus said, “Let any man here who has not sinned, pick up the first stone” when it was clear that Mosaic law demanded that she be stoned to death. So in many ways we can Jesus was bringing a radically new teaching opposed to the Mosaic religion.

I do find hints of Advaita philosophy in some of the things Jesus is saying. That by knowing him you can know god. That he and his father are one and that the father dwells within him. At this moment the Jews are about to stone him, to which he rebukes, “Does it not say, “Ye are gods” in your scriptures” So in a sense Jesus is saying that we are all gods, but he has been able to realise this truth. Unfortunately, what I do not like is that Jesus never makes this clear enough. It often sounds like he is saying only he exclusively is the “Son of god” and he tells his disciples to spread his name. Why would he teach this? Should he not reach them all that they are gods just like him, and teach a way to become like gods?

The biggest problem I have with Jesus is how ambigious he makes everything he says and his tendency to glorify himself so much as if he is god or the right hand man of god.

#217

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;36836]Sat, Tat and Aum means Truth, That and the cosmic sound. What does that have to do with the Father, Son and Holy Ghost?

The Hindu trinity is: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Brahma is the creative principle, Vishnu is the preserving principle and Shiva is the destructive principle. How does this tally up with the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost?[/QUOTE]

Sat=God beyond creation

Tat=God within creation

Aum= cosmic vibration, the doer

http://www.ananda.org/meditation/support/techniques/aum-technique.html

This is exactly the correspondent of the threefold Christian nature of God:
God the Father, God the Son, and the Holuy Ghost (the Word or AUM)

Note: My mother language is not Indian and it looks surprising that I have
to show the meaning of Indian words to an Indian.