The problem is that you have not seen many Catholics.
I suspect you have only been around “fundies,” and that is your main experience with Christians. They mean well, but they can be obnoxious and kooky.
But Catholics are cool–even the white ones. 8)
[QUOTE=thomas;51462]The problem is that you have not seen many Catholics.
I suspect you have only been around “fundies,” and that is your main experience with Christians. They mean well, but they can be obnoxious and kooky.
But Catholics are cool–even the white ones. 8)[/QUOTE]
You know whats shocking? I have never met a fundie. The Christians I have met are all “liberal.” HAH!
Fundies don’t mean well. Their beliefs are a curse, a disease, and a pestilence that must be eradicated.
Hmm…HMMMM…HMMMMMMMMMM…
If I can take a quick aside - Hinduism has a pantheon of dieties, right? Now I’m not completely up on Hindu religiosity, but are the ideas of Hindu gods concrete, or theoretical? Because I’ve got a problem with someone saying their gods are REAL and others AREN’T, if you’re trying to say that somewhere in space there is a physical Ganesh, Shiva, Vishnu. This turns me off in the same way that the Christian argument does - “You KNOW my God’s real, it says it right here in my BIBLE - and it also says that if you don’t believe what I believe, you’ll spend eternity in hell.”
On the other hand, if you’re saying that divinity lives within us, that an idea of a god that puts obstacles in our ways to foster growth seems likely, then I welcome Hindu spiritual beliefs.
[QUOTE=AthMJ;51488]If I can take a quick aside - Hinduism has a pantheon of dieties, right? Now I’m not completely up on Hindu religiosity, but are the ideas of Hindu gods concrete, or theoretical? Because I’ve got a problem with someone saying their gods are REAL and others AREN’T, if you’re trying to say that somewhere in space there is a physical Ganesh, Shiva, Vishnu. This turns me off in the same way that the Christian argument does - “You KNOW my God’s real, it says it right here in my BIBLE - and it also says that if you don’t believe what I believe, you’ll spend eternity in hell.”
On the other hand, if you’re saying that divinity lives within us, that an idea of a god that puts obstacles in our ways to foster growth seems likely, then I welcome Hindu spiritual beliefs.[/QUOTE]
Yes we have a pantheon of gods. However we also acknowledge that those are merely human representations of the abstract, the Divine/God. We believe that there are multiple ways to worship the Divine/God and if, for example, some sect wants to interpret a god as having multiple arms, then that is fine with us. We also acknowledge all our “gods” are simply manifestations of God/Divine, so you are not obligated to focus on one deity. The fact that most Hindus do this is simply out of family tradition and the influence of Bhakti Hinduism. You do not even have to go to a temple and worship an idol if you do not wish to.
Your supposition is correct. You can talk to some of the more Hinduism-educated people on this forum for more information, such as Surya Deva, reaswaran, Suhas Thambe, and etc.
Additionally, I suggest you take a look at the philosophical sects of Hinduism (Hinduism is divided into religious and philosophical sects of which the most prevalent one is Bhakti, with its many gods and idol-worship), particularly Advaita Vedanta. I believe it is most suited to your ideas.
Of course, there isn’t any sort of “conversion rite” or like. Simply start believing…
I am not trying to say that “my gods are real and your god is not.” I am merely pointing out the fact that Christianity and Islam have far too many problems, such as institutionalized intolerance. Therefore, I say that all other religions are superior to those two and not because one’s teachings are inherently superior to the other but because of the other’s flaws. I am pointing out the fact that if only Christians and Muslims could reform their religions much of the suffering, ignorance, and intolerance within this world would be eradicated. Unfortunately for the rest of the sane world, those 2 religions also have safeguards against any reforms, considering the B.S that circulates about their religion being “the word of God” and “perfect.”
The reason you find me so outspoken against Islam and Christianity is not because my religion says so but because of my pragmatic, philosophical, realist, and not PC, outlook.
[QUOTE=AthMJ;51488]If I can take a quick aside - Hinduism has a pantheon of dieties, right? Now I’m not completely up on Hindu religiosity, but are the ideas of Hindu gods concrete, or theoretical? Because I’ve got a problem with someone saying their gods are REAL and others AREN’T, if you’re trying to say that somewhere in space there is a physical Ganesh, Shiva, Vishnu. This turns me off in the same way that the Christian argument does - “You KNOW my God’s real, it says it right here in my BIBLE - and it also says that if you don’t believe what I believe, you’ll spend eternity in hell.”
On the other hand, if you’re saying that divinity lives within us, that an idea of a god that puts obstacles in our ways to foster growth seems likely, then I welcome Hindu spiritual beliefs.[/QUOTE]
Wow, what a colossal strawman. Where is this “Christian argument”?
On the other hand, the Christian says that the Holy Spirit dwells within us, that we are temples of God. We also say that God permits evil and suffering for our benefit, and for a greater good–so you should welcome Christian spiritual beliefs, and possibly consider shedding your misunderstandings and false presumptions about Christianity.
[QUOTE=thomas;51510]Wow, what a colossal strawman. Where is this “Christian argument”?
On the other hand, the Christian says that the Holy Spirit dwells within us, that we are temples of God. We also say that God permits evil and suffering for our benefit, and for a greater good–so you should welcome Christian spiritual beliefs, and possibly consider shedding your misunderstandings and false presumptions about Christianity.[/QUOTE]
It is there for any rational human to see.
Christian spiritual beliefs? HA! What has that brought the world besides misery and suffering and intolerance and hatred and war mongering and chauvinism? Christian spirituality is a redundant joke; rituals with no substance and ideas which no Christian believes holds true for non-Christians.
And there is one big difference. No religions except Christianity and Islam and Judaism directly state that they are superior in every way. That alone is why he should reject these demonic ideologies.
Shall I enter this thread and eviscerate everyone?
nah…
But Check it! Just 3 more posts and I bring forth SATAN!!!
Once the Dark one is Released in this thread I shall leave it be . . . to roam free - for a while.
Watch Out THomas! Here comes the Boogey man.
Christian spirituality is a redundant joke; rituals with no substance and ideas which no Christian believes holds true for non-Christians.
I used to think the rituals had no substance, until I experienced them for myself, and now I know better, and would not make such an ignorant statment.
But I do believe that those outside of the faith can find the same salvation that Christians do, so long as they, as St. Thomas says, “walk in the light they’ve been given.”
[QUOTE=thomas;51510]Wow, what a colossal strawman. Where is this “Christian argument”?
On the other hand, the Christian says that the Holy Spirit dwells within us, that we are temples of God. We also say that God permits evil and suffering for our benefit, and for a greater good–so you should welcome Christian spiritual beliefs, and possibly consider shedding your misunderstandings and false presumptions about Christianity.[/QUOTE]
I was actually more or less trying to defend your position, mostly from Surya Deva who I was perceiving was making the same claims as Christians. But if you’d like for me to give you my opinion on Christianity too, let’s call a spade a spade. Yours is a religion founded on the beliefs of “Saint” Paul - a wretched man that hated himself deeply. And why not - he had a complete identify/spirituality crisis and turned a 180. Lord I really am trying not to talk about his love (eros) for Timothy either which presents even greater evidence of his self-hatred. Your religion is fundamentally flawed because you think that you are fundamentally flawed because Paul thought that he was fundamentally flawed.
As far as shedding my misunderstandings and false presumptions of Christianity, that’s a fairly presumptuous statement. I went to church from an early age and was so active in high school that I had a key to the church. I lived and breathed my faith, meditated on God’s Will for my life constantly. Needless to say, after some thinking and digging, I gave the key back. If that’s the key to your kingdom, you can have it.
I’ll worship the Divinity within me - it’s all I need. And I’ll practice compassion and I’ll give of myself until it hurts. That was Jesus’ message to me, and I’m really not fond of the church for the poor job of the game of Telephone that it’s played throughout the centuries. In fact, I don’t even think that the Church (yes - THAT the Church) believes what it preaches. It’s a way to have power over the masses - plain and simple and a shame.
And please don’t act like the majority of Christians - the VAST majority - don’t use the Bible in a self-affirming fashion. I know the Roman Road - I know how to “convert the unsaved.” I know how to throw The Book.
I am not a sinner saved by the Grace of God. I am the Grace of God.
And Thomas, despite this post, I really love you. What’s the saying - “Love the sinner, hate the sin?” Then how about here “Love the spirit, hate the spirituality”. And you know what - if you believe that and it works for you - that’s awesome. I do appreciate at least that the Catholic church isn’t ecclesiastical like the Southern Baptists. It sucks to live in the Bible belt where I can’t even enjoy a drink downtown without getting told that I’m going to burn for all eternity.
[QUOTE=thomas;51519]I used to think the rituals had no substance, until I experienced them for myself, and now I know better, and would not make such an ignorant statment.
But I do believe that those outside of the faith can find the same salvation that Christians do, so long as they, as St. Thomas says, “walk in the light they’ve been given.”[/QUOTE]
See, interpretations and usage of the Bible like this - I can get behind this.
Really - no hard feelings Thomas. I’d edit my last post, but instead… I won’t. Still have nothing but love for you though.
As far as shedding my misunderstandings and false presumptions of Christianity, that’s a fairly presumptuous statement. I went to church from an early age and was so active in high school that I had a key to the church. I lived and breathed my faith, meditated on God’s Will for my life constantly. Needless to say, after some thinking and digging, I gave the key back. If that’s the key to your kingdom, you can have it.
It is sad there was such a schism after the Reformation. The result is that there are many denomnations, each with their own spin, and each with their own errors and corruptions. I would not embrace a Protestant faith, either, and would reject them all, though some are much closer to the truth than others.
And please don’t act like the majority of Christians - the VAST majority - don’t use the Bible in a self-affirming fashion. I know the Roman Road - I know how to “convert the unsaved.” I know how to throw The Book.
“Bible only” or “sola scriptura” Christians are quite irritating, thought they believe as they do in good faith. I don’t know if they are the “vast majority” however. But the way to convert the unsaved is not to “throw the Book” but by example, and by sharing in ways that are not offensive and appropriate.
But the Catholic understands that salvation of one’s own soul comes first, and that it is an ongoing process, and not one moment of “I accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior,” as if that’s the end of it, though I don’t fault those who take that first step. The sins that I as a Catholic am most concerned about are not yours, but my own.
And though I rarely drink, I don’t see anything wrong with drinking in moderation, and would be happy to have a beer with you some day, even though I don’t like it that much.
Ok Thomas. If I ever get a say in the next Pope, I’m nominating you. And I really truly mean that - not being sarcastic one bit. Of course I won’t, but it’s the sentiment that counts, right?
Thanks! I would appreciate if you put a good word in for me when there is an opening, though I am not wishing for one any time soon.
Actually, it is possible–extremely unlikely–but possible for a man in the laity to become a pope.
I’m sorry that you had bad experiences with Christianity. Before you entirely give up on the idea forever, I would hope some day you would at least check out the Catholic Church. It might surprise you–as it did me. I’m a convert, and I thought the worst of Catholicism at one time.
Otherwise, we at least have yoga–or some aspects of yoga–in common, right? I mean, you can do sirsasana, can’t you? If not…well, maybe I should pretend I don’t know you…
[QUOTE=thomas;51523]It is sad there was such a schism after the Reformation. The result is that there are many denomnations, each with their own spin, and each with their own errors and corruptions. I would not embrace a Protestant faith, either, and would reject them all, though some are much closer to the truth than others.
“Bible only” or “sola scriptura” Christians are quite irritating, thought they believe as they do in good faith. I don’t know if they are the “vast majority” however. B[B]ut the way to convert the unsaved is not to “throw the Book” but by example, and by sharing in ways that are not offensive and appropriate.
[/B]
But the Catholic understands that salvation of one’s own soul comes first, and that it is an ongoing process, and not one moment of “I accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior,” as if that’s the end of it, though I don’t fault those who take that first step. The sins that I as a Catholic am most concerned about are not yours, but my own.
And though I rarely drink, I don’t see anything wrong with drinking in moderation, and would be happy to have a beer with you some day, even though I don’t like it that much.[/QUOTE]
It is far more sad that the Church, in order to raise money, stated that whoever bought their “notes” (so to speak) would be absolved of sin. I do not blame Martin Luther for starting the chain reaction he did.
There is no “saved” (Christians) and “unsaved” (rest of the world). This is precisely why I have no love Christianity; such ignorant thinking has caused brought about much harm upon the world. Any religion who believes that of any person is no religion at all.
As for Thomas Aquinas, so what? It is obvious that Christianity, according to people like him, is the best religion and therefore, others MUST convert to it. I take any such statements made by any Christians lightly. Sure, people of other faiths may walk “the path,” but none walk the path like Christianity. I wouldn’t be surprised if Aquinas said it to grab a few more heathens.
Besides, I have a hard time believing that Thomas, who said “Such a thing is as absurd as claiming Jesus was not born of a virgin” (referring to heliocentrism), could even force his mouth to say something so wholly contrary to his “religion’s” teachings.
It is far more sad that the Church, in order to raise money, stated that whoever bought their “notes” (so to speak) would be absolved of sin. I do not blame Martin Luther for starting the chain reaction he did.
It was an abuse, but Martin Luther should have helped reform from within, and not split the church in pieces.
It was “indugences” which were sold, which do not absolve sin.
[QUOTE=thomas;51601]It was an abuse, but Martin Luther should have helped reform from within, and not split the church in pieces.
It was “indugences” which were sold, which do not absolve sin.[/QUOTE]
THAT was the word. I forgot the word since the AP World History exam. :D. But I do remember that indulgences were either for absolving sin or guaranteeing salvation.
Not really. What is the point of “reforming” the Church when it was just as corrupt and fundamentalist for 1000+ years prior? I can see the angle he came at.
Indulgences are for removing the punishment due to sin.
Catholics believe even those who are saved will be punished for their (forgiven) sins to a degree, in the same way a father might forgive his son for throwing a rock through a window, but still require him to pay for it. An indulgence removes the punishment or part of it. It does not forgive the sin, and it is of no use for a sin that is not repented of.
[QUOTE=thomas;51603]Indulgences are for removing the punishment due to sin.
Catholics believe even those who are saved will be punished for their (forgiven) sins to a degree, in the same way a father might forgive his son for throwing a rock through a window, but still require him to pay for it. An indulgence removes the punishment or part of it. It does not forgive the sin, and it is of no use for a sin that is not repented of.[/QUOTE]
Nevertheless, indulgences are the very epitome of the corruption of the Church. The fact that you can simply buy a piece paper that dictates your outcome in the afterlife is absurd and the height of hypocrisy and foolishness.
You can’t buy a piece of paper to do that. That was an abuse.
There cannot be a any conversion to Hinduism, since hinduism is not a religion according to some 