Religion Thread 3

AshokS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 29 Jan 2007 08:57

Post by AshokS »

ramana wrote:AshokS, I think you are exceeding the bounds of propriety. Please delete your posts or be ready to leave.
Ramana -

The question was not posed to be offensive (only the second line was meant to tweak TSJ, given his antics on this thread - will delete anyway).

I am not sure which part of the question is offensive?

- Asking an Indian origin Christian about their viewpoints on a contentious topic (building a church at a sacred Hindu site)?

This is a religious thread isn't it? We are trying to discuss the dynamics of inter-religious issues in the Indian context and specifically the impact of foreign religious-political machinations on India's traditional culture and ethos?

Its ok for someone to say they believe Mahatma Gandhi will go to hell due to a myopic value system, but asking the above is out of bounds?

I am sorry you feel that it was not proper, however there are bound to be "sensitive" questions either way, but I don't think we need to throttle a valuable topic due to misplaced feelings of impropriety.
Raj
BRFite
Posts: 328
Joined: 16 May 1999 11:31

Post by Raj »

[]
Last edited by Raj on 23 Mar 2007 06:46, edited 1 time in total.
Sadler
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 30 Oct 2005 10:26
Location: USA-ISRAEL

Post by Sadler »

Vishy_mulay wrote:
Sadler, I heard that Pius XII actually saved 1000 Jews in world war II to make sure that Bibles prophecy of presence of Jews for the second coming of Christ comes true. They were called Pope's Jew. Is it a true story? or just a rumor without any substance.
Its a vicious rumor that was probably started by the vatican itself. in all my readings about the vatican, never have i come across a credible assertion of any pope saving any , even a single, jew.

IMO, vatican news dissemination should be given the same credibility as TASS and PRAVDA in the FSU.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

TSJones wrote:
SDRE = short-dark-rice-eating


Oh Good Grief! :roll: I've met plenty of yindoos about as tall as I am. Yeah they were raised in the US and probably ate pizza and drank milkshakes and a few of them were bigger than I am. :D
Don't take this SDRE business too seriously - it was coined in a completely different context on the Pakistan thread to contrast Indians from the Tall, Fair etc (Check TFTA on the acronyms thread) Pakistanis
Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by Vick »

Sadler wrote:Its a short hop to a very slippery slope from YOU believing that a hindu will automatically go to hell to believing therefore that the hindu is untermenschen (look up the meaning).
Totally bogus!

That's like saying that it's a slippery slope to believe that someone will be reincarnated again. Why not kill someone? They'll be reborn again, no harm, no foul. Heck, let's go out and kill some dalits, it's actually good for them because they may be reborn as an upper caste in the next life.

If Hindus get insulted because a Christian believes that only through Christ can one reach heaven, then should I be equally offended if a Hindu expresses his belief that I have no way to reach heaven unless I live multiple lifetimes?

What makes the Christian's belief insulting to a Hindu but not vice versa?
Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Post by Jagan »

Sadler wrote:
Vishy_mulay wrote:
Sadler, I heard that Pius XII actually saved 1000 Jews in world war II to make sure that Bibles prophecy of presence of Jews for the second coming of Christ comes true. They were called Pope's Jew. Is it a true story? or just a rumor without any substance.
Its a vicious rumor that was probably started by the vatican itself. in all my readings about the vatican, never have i come across a credible assertion of any pope saving any , even a single, jew.

IMO, vatican news dissemination should be given the same credibility as TASS and PRAVDA in the FSU.
I hope you use the word 'Pope' and 'Vatican' interchangeabley - because it is true that a priest in the vatican saved several jews. (I know because i saw the movie :D)

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/03/15/073134.php
The Scarlet and The Black tells the true story of Irish priest Monsignor Hugh O'Flaherty, who helped to save thousands of Allied POWs and Jews during the German occupation of Rome in 1943-44.

Monsignor O’Flaherty got to know British servicemen by visiting Italian POW camps. When Italy switched sides in 1943, many Allied servicemen fled to Rome, where they sought the help of O’Flaherty in the Vatican. The Gestapo learned that there was a network dedicated to hiding Allied prisoners and sought to break the network. In particular the Gestapo chief Kappler becomes obsessed with finding and capturing the priest at the centre of the huge operation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_O'Flaherty
Of the 9,700 Jews in Rome, 1,007 were shipped to Auschwitz. The rest were hidden, 5,000 of them by the official Church--3,000 in Castel Gandolfo, 200 or 400 (estimates vary) as "members" of the Palatine Guard and some 1,500 in monasteries, convents and colleges. The remaining 3,700 were hidden in private homes.[4]
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

Vick wrote:
Sadler wrote:Its a short hop to a very slippery slope from YOU believing that a hindu will automatically go to hell to believing therefore that the hindu is untermenschen (look up the meaning).
Totally bogus!

That's like saying that it's a slippery slope to believe that someone will be reincarnated again. Why not kill someone? They'll be reborn again, no harm, no foul. Heck, let's go out and kill some dalits, it's actually good for them because they may be reborn as an upper caste in the next life.

If Hindus get insulted because a Christian believes that only through Christ can one reach heaven, then should I be equally offended if a Hindu expresses his belief that I have no way to reach heaven unless I live multiple lifetimes?

What makes the Christian's belief insulting to a Hindu but not vice versa?
Hindus have no problem in what you believe. it is the pimping of beliefs by EJ using fradulent means with the patronage of foreign political enetities which is disliked . Keep your beliefs to your self and do not grant yourself the right to intrude upon us . By insisiting upon the right of insult you must heap upon us heathens in our own land is rightfully seen as a form of aggression. This is not much hard to understand.
Last edited by Prem on 23 Mar 2007 09:30, edited 1 time in total.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

Vick wrote:
Sadler wrote:Its a short hop to a very slippery slope from YOU believing that a hindu will automatically go to hell to believing therefore that the hindu is untermenschen (look up the meaning).
Totally bogus!

That's like saying that it's a slippery slope to believe that someone will be reincarnated again. Why not kill someone? They'll be reborn again, no harm, no foul. Heck, let's go out and kill some dalits, it's actually good for them because they may be reborn as an upper caste in the next life.

If Hindus get insulted because a Christian believes that only through Christ can one reach heaven, then should I be equally offended if a Hindu expresses his belief that I have no way to reach heaven unless I live multiple lifetimes?

What makes the Christian's belief insulting to a Hindu but not vice versa?
bogus over bogus..

heaven and hell is an alien concept that crept into everywhere.. its all earth, and we shall remain. the bogus over bogus is these concept that believes there is something after death that could be realized.

if people have visited hell and heaven, then it should be here.. not in the sky or underground. and if you don't believe hell and heaven, why take christ or any religion for that matter and sabre rattle.

fundamentally, these believes are wrong and flawed. its only for social to keep them away from comiting crimes.

and now you are suggesting more crime over it! :eek:
G Subramaniam
BRFite
Posts: 405
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 17:58

Djinns vs Demons

Post by G Subramaniam »

Djinns are mentioned in the koran and every believing muslim has to believe in Djinns
I remember a few years ago, about Pakistani nuclear scientists trying to 'harness' Djinn energy
This does not surprise me in any way, since it re-inforced what I knew about islam

The west has stood for science and rationality, and yet, most mainstream Xtian websites seem to have a firm belief in Demons

In what way is belief in Demons any different from belief in Djinns ?
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Post by ldev »

Inspite of the alarmist cries raised by some on this forum about Hindusism being under threat in India and the supposed agenda of the EJs (with Rajshekhar Reddy supposedly their tool :) ), the Christian population in India from the 1961 census through the 2001 census has remained stuck at between 2.3% and 2.4% - in fact has declined by 0.1%. So is this alarmism justified or is it fear mongering by individuals?

As far as support for overseas EJs by mainstream Christian and Christian institutions in India, as long ago as the late 1970s (long before mass media and even the Hindutva politicians became aware of this issue), the mainstream non Catholic Indian churches such as the Church of North India, the Church of South India or the Methodist Church did not participate in EJ activities. And that is because the mainstream Indian churches and their affiliated organizations whether they be schools, colleges or hospitals have as one of their primary objectives, to be integrated in the society in which they are e.g. in the Order of Service of the Church of North India, every Sunday, there is a regular prayer for the President of India, the Prime Minister of India and the Chief Minister of the state in which an individual church is located. When overseas EJ's did visit, they were therefore forced to seek Christian individuals on the fringes who could guide and advise them on local logistics etc.

The Catholic church and organizations tend to operate a little differently. A good illustration would be to compare and contrast the Protestant Leprosy Mission organization with Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charities, both of which helped to treat people suffering from leprosy. The Missionaries of Charity believed in providing a safe haven to those shunned from their villages because they suffered from leprosy and provide them a place where they could spend the remaining years of their lives. In contrast the Leprosy Mission believed that since leprosy was non contagious and its effects could be treated via drugs and physiotherapy, that they would take in patients, treat them and then take them back to their villages to be integrated back into society. This integration necessarily involved education about the disease and the fact that it was not contagious to other people in say the village from where the patient was.

IMO, the biggest problem that the BJP types have not addressed about the vulnerability of Hindus being targetted by EJ types is the non inclusiveness of Hindu society. Its kind of sad in a way. Hindusim IMO is a very passive faith which allows minorities from other religions to be comfortable and secure. However, the inability of the Hindu elite (Brahmins etc.) to bring about inclusiveness among those dispossessed Hindus who feel that they do not belong, makes them vulnerable to messages from EJs and others. AFTER conversion, the biggest plus point of Islam is the feeling Muslims have of belonging to a larger Islamic community. Unless the elite Hindus bring about that feeling of inclusiveness among the downtrodden Hindus, they will be vulnerable to other messages. Globally and even in India IMO Christianity is static. The EJs who make the most noise and hog all the headlines are a miniscule minority. Mainstream churches are loosing membership as more and more Christians become non practising Christians or Christians in name only or Christians who attend Church probably only on Christismas Day.

The answer as Johann pointed out in one of his posts is not to out jehadize the Islamists as Sawarkar tried to do, but to build a strategy on the tolerant tradition of Hinduism which IMO is its strongest attribute.
Last edited by ldev on 23 Mar 2007 07:30, edited 3 times in total.
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

Vick wrote: That's like saying that it's a slippery slope to believe that someone will be reincarnated again. Why not kill someone? They'll be reborn again, no harm, no foul. Heck, let's go out and kill some dalits, it's actually good for them because they may be reborn as an upper caste in the next life.
The killed person may get born in a better condition, since he had to suffer pain and injury. But the killer will have to face a tough music. Karma is not simplistic. Kill someone, sure... your choice, "rewards" of that choice will also be yours to "enjoy".
If Hindus get insulted because a Christian believes that only through Christ can one reach heaven, then should I be equally offended if a Hindu expresses his belief that I have no way to reach heaven unless I live multiple lifetimes?
There is no such belief in Hinduism. Doctrine of karma doesn't say that it is necessary to take multiplr births. One's individual actions or karma, determine his status. If you are virtuous and spiritually pure, you can reach even better places than heaven in a single lifetime and even before death. And hinduism doesn't say that only "believers" in hindu gods will get such high states or heaven. Anyone who is vituous whether he is devotee of Vishnu or Jesus will get his rewards based on his actions, not just on which religious tags he happens to wear.

Krishna says in Gita that he is present in the heart of all people. Not just hindus. The literal meaning of "Narayana", a name for Vishnu is "one whose abode is in all the people" (nara+ayana).

Key point is that God of the universe can't be so partial or little minded as to restrict salvation to chosen few based on merely their faith, and not their virtue. In hinduism virtue reins supreme, whether one believes in Shiva or Jehova or Allah is immaterial.

You are comparing an exclusivist religion with an inclusive one and not even realizing it.
Last edited by Kumar on 23 Mar 2007 07:29, edited 1 time in total.
Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by Vick »

Prem wrote: Hindus have no problem in what you believe, it is the pimping of your beliefs by using fradulent means which is disliked .
What fraudulent means are you talking about? And why do I have keep my beliefs to myself? If anyone can express any belief they have, in a liberal and democratic society, then why can't I express mine?
Prem wrote:Keep your beliefs to your self and do not grant yourself the right to intrude upon us . By insisiting upon the right of insult you must heap upon us heathens in our own land is rightfully seen as a form of aggression. This is not hard to understand.
Is this the Hindu version of Wahhabism?
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

kudos kumar! well said.
saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 377
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Post by saumitra_j »

Vick wrote:should I be equally offended if a Hindu expresses his belief that I have no way to reach heaven unless I live multiple lifetimes?

What makes the Christian's belief insulting to a Hindu but not vice versa?
You should if Hinduism had said so and Hindu's would have said so as it was a matter of belief - but as you can see it is not so. You may or may not believe in multiple lives, the law of karma etc - no Hindu (text/belief/person) would force that upon you even if you are hungry, uneducated and need help - I am sorry but the EJs don't see it that way.

In Bastar for eg, one of the tricks employed by the EJs on the tribals works something like this: A Tribal tells an EJ that he has a headache. The EJ dissolves some Aspirin in water, uses a wooden cross to do whatever and tells the poor old tribal (who doesn't know what's going on anyway, has never heard of Asprin) that this water is blessed by the Lord blah blag - the tribal drinks it feels great and starts believing in Salvation throug Jesus :)

How do I know about this modus operandi? Well I know it because somebody close to my family works in Bastar and he's been there, done that, seen it.

Take another example: My first cousin's wife is a Christian - her brother is a hard core EJ and he tries his "stunts" in the villages, North of Mumbai in tribal areas. I know how much he knows since I know hime personally (technically he is part of the family et al), but he does have a large following of poor tribals. Now he is the same bloke who had left his wife dying when she was pregnant because he believed in faith healing and Jesus would do it right - we had to take some darstic actions in the last minute to get medical treatment and save the woman.

I have seen some of these EJs at work from close quarters - take my story for FWIW but please understand the reason for opposition.
Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by Vick »

Kumar wrote:And hinduism doesn't say that only "believers" in hindu gods will get such high states or heaven. Anyone who is vituous whether he is devotee of Vishnu or Jesus will get his rewards based on his actions, not just on which religious tags he happens to wear.

Krishna says in Gita that he is present in the heart of all people. Not just hindus. The literal meaning of "Narayana", a name for Vishnu is "one whose abode is in all the people" (nara+ayana).

Key point is that God of the universe can't be so partial or little minded as to restrict salvation to chosen few based on merely their faith, and not their virtue. In hinduism virtue reins supreme, whether one believes in Shiva or Jehova or Allah is immaterial.

You are comparing an exclusivist religion with an inclusive one and not even realizing it.
If Hinduism is as inclusive as you state, why so much angst about Hindus converting to Christianity? By accepting Christ, does the Hindu give up his nara+ayanna in the eyes of other Hindus? Or does being a believer in Christ make him less of an Indian?

You don't realize that Hindus and Hinduism aren't as inclusive as you think they are.
saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 377
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Post by saumitra_j »

Oh by the way - by and large most Hindus are bothered about what happens to them before they are six foot deep (or rather - become one with earth, water and fire in cremation) rather than what happens on the other side - and this certainly leads to a fundamental disconnect with those longing for 72 virgins blah blah :lol:
Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by Vick »

Kumar wrote:The killed person may get born in a better condition, since he had to suffer pain and injury. But the killer will have to face a tough music. Karma is not simplistic. Kill someone, sure... your choice, "rewards" of that choice will also be yours to "enjoy".
If killing someone actually betters their condition, shouldn't it be good karma for the killer?
saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 377
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Post by saumitra_j »

Vick wrote:\If Hinduism is as inclusive as you state, why so much angst about Hindus converting to Christianity?
Because the newly converted are taught that Hindu Gods are devils, pagans blah blah.
By accepting Christ, does the Hindu give up his nara+ayanna in the eyes of other Hindus? Or does being a believer in Christ make him less of an Indian?
You don't realize that Hindus and Hinduism aren't as inclusive as you think they are.
I am not qualified enough to explain Hinduism in great detail but I can certainly tell you that you need to enhance your knowledge \about Hinduism before you make statements such as above.

"Vasudeva Kutumbakam" - all the world's one large family is given by Hinduism and it DOES NOT distinguish between believers and non believers, (or kaafirs and the faithful if you please) - neither does it talk about having crusades or jihaads againts those who don't follow it.
saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 377
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Post by saumitra_j »

Vick wrote:If killing someone actually betters their condition, shouldn't it be good karma for the killer?
If the "someone" happens to be a piglet coming into India to do damage then yes it certainly will be good karma for the killer and almost his divine duty. :twisted:
Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by Vick »

saumitra_j wrote: In Bastar for eg, one of the tricks employed by the EJs on the tribals works something like this: A Tribal tells an EJ that he has a headache. The EJ dissolves some Aspirin in water, uses a wooden cross to do whatever and tells the poor old tribal (who doesn't know what's going on anyway, has never heard of Asprin) that this water is blessed by the Lord blah blag - the tribal drinks it feels great and starts believing in Salvation throug Jesus :)
Then they are doing evil in the eyes of God and their punishment is reserved.

I'm not qualified to comment on your family member without knowing more about the person(s) involved. But clearly, if what you have said is the whole story, then your brother in law has not loved his wife the way a Christian is commanded to love his wife.
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by Johann »

Sadler wrote:
Vishy_mulay wrote:
Sadler, I heard that Pius XII actually saved 1000 Jews in world war II to make sure that Bibles prophecy of presence of Jews for the second coming of Christ comes true. They were called Pope's Jew. Is it a true story? or just a rumor without any substance.
Its a vicious rumor that was probably started by the vatican itself. in all my readings about the vatican, never have i come across a credible assertion of any pope saving any , even a single, jew.

IMO, vatican news dissemination should be given the same credibility as TASS and PRAVDA in the FSU.
The excessive praise for Pius XII as a saviour of Jews unfortunately came from from Jews in the years after WWII - people like Albert Einstein, Golda Meir, etc. Israeli diplomat Pinhas Lapide wrote the most energetic defences, claiming Pius XII saved 750,000 Jewish lives.

A lot of that hyperbole was about Israel's need for Vatican support in the difficult early years.

Today there are still a small number of Jews who continue to write strong defences of Pius XII - particularly Rabbi David Dalin.

In my opinion Pius XII unlike Pius XI was a shamefully amoral diplomat who placed the Vatican's survival above the moral imperative of openly condemning Nazi behaviour. However he probably deserves some limited credit for supporting Italian resistance against German demands to deport the Jews, both Italian and refugees who escaped to Italy.
Last edited by Johann on 23 Mar 2007 07:47, edited 1 time in total.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

->You are comparing an exclusivist religion with an inclusive one and not even realizing it.
-->>If Hinduism is as inclusive as you state, why so much angst about Hindus converting to Christianity?
Cause, ...
You are comparing an exclusivist religion with an inclusive one and not even realizing it.
:wink:
Raju

Post by Raju »

saumitra_j wrote:
If the "someone" happens to be a piglet coming into India to do damage then yes it certainly will be good karma for the killer and almost his divine duty. :twisted:
I oppose this demonization of pigs, pigs are smart, pigs are cool. I once had a dwarf pig as a pet, they were much smarter than dogs.
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

Vick wrote: If Hinduism is as inclusive as you state, why so much angst about Hindus converting to Christianity?
Angst is because the conversion is often done by foul means such as "hate mongering", monetray incentives or plain fraud. If a person truly feels in his heart that Jesus is his way, hindus wouldn't have any problems with that. But a bulk of proselytization efforts are driven by "wrong means" and as a Hindu I don't think a "wrong mean" can lead to a "right result".

In this vein let me mention that the same Swami Viveknanda who strongly denounced missionaries' fradulent techniques and tranishing of hinduism by foul means, also spoke & wrote eloquently about Jesus Christ as a great spiritual teacher. He was the one who started a day of remembrance of Jesus Christ on Christmas in all Ramakrishna mission centers. Go to one of those centers and see for yourself the meaning of "inclusivity".
By accepting Christ, does the Hindu give up his nara+ayanna in the eyes of other Hindus? Or does being a believer in Christ make him less of an Indian?
No objections to a true conversion if a person "really" knows what he/she is doing. You have forgotten that this talk has been about evanjihadism, which uses foul means to convert a person for political influence and social subversion. Foul means also include denigrating a religion about which one doesn't know anything. You don't seem to realize this simple fact yet that denigrating someone else's religion without knowing anything about it is hate-mongering. If you hide behind your faith and say my faith demands me to do this hate-mongering, then I am sorry, but your faith has a problem.

I believe hindus have no objection to a true conversion.
Last edited by Kumar on 23 Mar 2007 07:54, edited 1 time in total.
Vishy_mulay
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 09 Feb 2007 09:21
Location: Melbourne

Post by Vishy_mulay »

Interesting read
http://www.dalitchristians.com/Html/CasteChurch.htm

Vick have you ever heard a concept called Euthanasia? FYI Church believe that suffering is a will of God. Don't you think that's cruel? Doesn't God has compassion? I was vehemently against to the concept of Euthanasia but some personal experience and watching someone very close suffering till last breath made me change my mind. Sometimes killing someone as a last resort to relieve misery and suffering which has no other remedy is a good karma. Just my thought.
By the way the Judeo-christian commandment of "Thy shall not kill" is misinterpretation it should read "Thy shall not murder". The Christian God has vengeance (lots of Biblical references) and he does kill people. Doesn't that make him hypocrite? His rules don't apply to him? or there are justification for his vengeance? At least we SDF accept that sometimes killing someone is Good Karma and have learned to live with it. The whole Gita started with the same question by Arjuna.
Last edited by Vishy_mulay on 23 Mar 2007 08:30, edited 1 time in total.
saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 377
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Post by saumitra_j »

Raju wrote: I oppose this demonization of pigs, pigs are smart, pigs are cool. I once had a dwarf pig as a pet, they were much smarter than dogs.
Well "piglet" as per the BRF definition, not the animal - I hope this clears the confusion :)
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

Kumar wrote:
Vick wrote: If Hinduism is as inclusive as you state, why so much angst about Hindus converting to Christianity?
Angst is because the conversion is often done by foul means such as "hate mongering", monetray incentives or plain fraud. If a person truly feels in his heart that Jesus is his way, hindus wouldn't have any problems with that. But a bulk of proselytization efforts are driven by "wrong means" and as a Hindu I don't think a "wrong mean" can lead to a "right result".
We are missing the point. It is the political nature of the foreign missionary groups which is the problem. They want to create a political force with number and it is not about any real changes.
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

Vick wrote:
Kumar wrote:The killed person may get born in a better condition, since he had to suffer pain and injury. But the killer will have to face a tough music. Karma is not simplistic. Kill someone, sure... your choice, "rewards" of that choice will also be yours to "enjoy".
If killing someone actually betters their condition, shouldn't it be good karma for the killer?
It is a simplistic argument. Your actions, especially violent actions like killing someone, have manifold effects. You will have to face the music for the combined effect of all those, not just one part. A person takes a birth to fulfil some of his past karmas and learn new lessons, and improve spiritually. Then is the issue of his family members and near and dear ones. By shortenting his life you would be creating a wasteful excess, as his purpose for present birth won't be fulfilled and his family members will suffer his loss. He may get reborn in a better condition. But for causing pain to him and his family and causing a waste of a lifetime, your good-karma of causing a possibly better next life will most likely be negated hugely by all the negative karma.

My advice, don't do it! :)
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Prem wrote:
Vick wrote: it's a slippery slope
Hindus have no problem in what you believe, it is the pimping of your beliefs by using fradulent means which is disliked . Keep your beliefs to your self and do not grant yourself the right to intrude upon us
Prem I compliment you upon your robust defence of vulnerable Hindus - but kindly edit your message and I will remove this message.

Your words actually accuse forum member Vick of "pimping" his beliefs.

Please do not get personal. Your comments are by no means general and do not indicate that you are speaking of anyone else.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9263
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Amber G. »

ts a vicious rumor that was probably started by the vatican itself. in all my readings about the vatican, never have i come across a credible assertion of any pope saving any , even a single, jew.

IMO, vatican news dissemination should be given the same credibility as TASS and PRAVDA in the FSU.
Can't comment about "O" in your IMO, but there are credible sources, not the least from Jews in Rome and many other very well respected Jewish historians don't draw that conclusion. No doubt, with his (pope's) influence he could have done much more but at times when he helped Jews, he was quite successful (these successes only highlight the amount of influence he might have had, if he not chosen to remain silent on so many other occasions)

By the way after the war the Chief Rabbi of Israel thanked Pius XII for what he had done. So did Chief Rabbi of Rome. (Saving lives of thousands of lives in Rome - Also Hungary and (other Eastern Europe countries) tens (or hundreds) of thousands of baptismal certificates were issued by Church authorities to Jews. ..The support for of Pius XII, from what I have read also come from Jewish writers and Israeli archives
Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by Vick »

Kumar wrote:Angst is because the conversion is often done by foul means such as "hate mongering", monetray incentives or plain fraud. If a person truly feels in his heart that Jesus is his way, hindus wouldn't have any problems with that. But a bulk of proselytization efforts are driven by "wrong means" and as a Hindu I don't think a "wrong mean" can lead to a "right result".
As a Christian, I vehemently denounce and oppose fraudulent methods of proslytization. I assure you that my anger at these false Christians is as much as yours, if not more.

But what do you consider fraudulent? Is giving out pamplets stating who Jesus is and what it means to have salvation, without demonizing Hindus or anyone or any other religion, fraudulent?
Kumar wrote:In this vein let me mention that the same Swami Viveknanda who strongly denounced missionaries' fradulent techniques and tranishing of hinduism by foul means, also spoke & wrote eloquently about Jesus Christ as a great spiritual teacher. He was the one who started a day of remembrance of Jesus Christ on Christmas in all Ramakrishna mission centers. Go to one of those centers and see for yourself the meaning of "inclusivity".
Vivekananda was wrong about Christ. Christ can't be a great spiritual teacher and proclaim himself to be the son of God who will carry the sins of the world and will be raised and then will sit at the right hand of God. And those who believe in Him will spend eternity in heaven in full communion with God. Either Christ is who He says He is or He was a lunatic who was cursed, scourged, and hung on a cross for nothing.
Kumar wrote:No objections to a true conversion if a person "really" knows what he/she is doing. You have forgotten that this talk has been about evanjihadism, which uses foul means to convert a person for political influence and social subversion. Foul means also include denigrating a religion about which one doesn't know anything. You don't seem to realize this simple fact yet that denigrating someone else's religion without knowing anything about it is hate-mongering. If you hide behind your faith and say my faith demands me to do this hate-mongering, then I am sorry, but your faith has a problem.

I believe hindus have no objection to a true conversion.
The way this thread was/is going, it appeared that anyone who is a Christian was considered a EJ or a possible EJ.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Vick wrote: The way this thread was/is going, it appeared that anyone who is a Christian was considered a EJ or a possible EJ.
The intention of the thread is not that. However - the intention of some people who post messages may be exactly that.
Vishy_mulay
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 09 Feb 2007 09:21
Location: Melbourne

Post by Vishy_mulay »

Christ can't be a great spiritual teacher and proclaim himself to be the son of God who will carry the sins of the world and will be raised and then will sit at the right hand of God. And those who believe in Him will spend eternity in heaven in full communion with God.
Did Christ said that? OR is it Pauline version endorsed by Pope Leo? Can you give me the verse from which this came. Thanks.
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

Vick wrote:But what do you consider fraudulent? Is giving out pamplets stating who Jesus is and what it means to have salvation, without demonizing Hindus or anyone or any other religion, fraudulent?
No, that is fine.
Vivekananda was wrong about Christ. Christ can't be a great spiritual teacher and proclaim himself to be the son of God who will carry the sins of the world and will be raised and then will sit at the right hand of God. And those who believe in Him will spend eternity in heaven in full communion with God. Either Christ is who He says He is or He was a lunatic who was cursed, scourged, and hung on a cross for nothing.
Well, he wasn't a Christian after all! :) He might have been wrong in Christian eyes, but he was civil, decent and good about an icon of a faith whose missionaries were often hostile to his own religious icons. He was being a true hindu and gave respect to virtue wherever he saw it. From a hindu perspective Christian portrayal of their gods are wrong too. But unfortunately none of them are wrong in such a nice way as Swami Vivekananda's. Would it hurt to be nice, for God's sake? If I have to guess from previous responses, I would guess that a likely response is "yes, it is not allowed to be nice to false gods". :) If that be the attitude, then yes, there will be long time of friction between christianity and hinduism, despite the inclusivity of "nice" Swamis like Sw. Vivekananda.
Raju

Post by Raju »

Vick wrote:The way this thread was/is going, it appeared that anyone who is a Christian was considered a EJ or a possible EJ.
You need to tread on this thread carefully, some people are baiting so do not indulge them.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9263
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Amber G. »

The west has stood for science and rationality, and yet, most mainstream Xtian websites seem to have a firm belief in Demons

In what way is belief in Demons any different from belief in Djinns ?
Well as Alok_N will say - West's science , the second law of thermodynamics is based on Maxwell's demon.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

Vick you know the admins have a 24/7 watch on this thread and have warned people as needed. And you have been with us from a long time.
Vishy_mulay
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 09 Feb 2007 09:21
Location: Melbourne

Post by Vishy_mulay »

Guys, it appears that this thread has become mostly SDF and Christian discussion thread. Is there anyone who can post how Islam views SD? Do SDF qualify as the people of book? Role of Sufis in subcontinent Islam. Threat of Wahhabi's to India and SDFs. Effect of Wahhabism on subcontinent Islam. We are fortunate to have many forum members who can separate EJ agenda from true Faith. Is there anyone on forum who can post moderate Islamic view point.
Added later: I am aware of the Islamist thread and I dont want this thread to become another Islamist thread. 15% Indians follow Islam and just want to know more about it.
Last edited by Vishy_mulay on 23 Mar 2007 09:11, edited 1 time in total.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Vishy_mulay wrote:Guys, it appears that this thread has become mostly SDF and Christian discussion thread. Is there anyone who can post how Islam views SD? Do SDF qualify as the people of book? Role of Sufis in subcontinent Islam. Threat of Wahhabi's to India and SDFs. Effect of Wahhabism on subcontinent Islam. We are fortunate to have many forum members who can separate EJ agenda from true Faith. Is there anyone on forum who can post moderate Islamic view point.
Well I had initially locked the Islamism thread hoping to move all that here and allow discussion in a different context - such as you have suggested.

But people need to do that first - I mean move the Islamism stuff here.
Vishy_mulay
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 09 Feb 2007 09:21
Location: Melbourne

Post by Vishy_mulay »

Thanks Shiv, ignore later addition to my previous post.
Locked