 |
| |
|
|
aneeshm
|
 |
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 11:07
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Atahualpa
None of the afterlife's I find particularly interesting. In the christian heaven you sing all day with god himself and fly around in cosy clouds. You have wings, but lack the balls. Great.
In the islamic afterlife you get lots of virgins and while this seems good at first (at least for the males among us).. just think of it... a virgin is no longer a virgin if you bang her. That means you get lots of virgins but no sex, you're running around horny every day with no possibility for relief. What more horrible scenario can you think of?
In buddhistic you get born again and again... noooo I don't want again.... SURE!! You'll become a sheep this time! Noooo.... What a pointless life when you get back again, but can't remember anything you've done before... if you could at least build on that, but no... senseless.
The church around utah says you'll be happy in heaven, because you know everything and have the experience from your fleshly life on earth... that's great, you're happy but bored. What more is there when you know EVERYTHING!?!?!! All we'd do, would be to try and drown in alcohol, to at least forget some of it... but then alcohol is not allowed... argh! |
In the Islamic afterlife , the virginal huris somehow get "revirginified" even after you bang them .
In Buddhism , the goal is to get out of the cycle of death and rebirth . And yes , you do build on what you have done - your form in the next life is defined by your conduct in this one .
Just clearing that up .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by aneeshm
Ah , but did we force other people to do so , and kill them if they didn't ?
By the way , I gave no justification for my view whatsoever in the beginning - I asked whether you wanted any . |
At one time Hindus "spread the faith" throughout southeast Asia and what is now Indonesia. There are stories of Hindu settlers fighting the natives. That was a very long time ago - along came the Muslims who proceeded to get in their licks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by aneeshm
As for the original point : I do not generalise abour Christianity , only about the Christians who came here to preach ( and those who were representatives of Christianity at the world parlianment ) - those who are expected to be the concretisation of the ideology they preach .
Of course I do not consider Christianity monolithic - a religion that size will have to have some disagreements . But the ultimate goal of every sect is to convert everyone to their sect - which I find abhorrent ( as I find any religion whose sole aim is world domination to be immoral ) . |
Do you realize that the Brits won India precisely because they promised to NOT proselytize? The night before the battle of Plessy General Cornwallis had a secret meeting with some of the allies of the French. He promised them that if they would desert the French cause that the British East India Company would keep English missionaries out of India. On the day of the battle the French and allied forces outnumbered the British 4 to 1. The French colonial troops led the charge, expecting their Indian allies to move forward after them, covering the flanks. As they approached the British lines they were dismayed to find that their allies had not budged. In a nearly even match the British easily defeated them. The East India Company was true to its word. English missionaries did not appear in India until after Victoria declared it to be her empire.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
our_man
|
 |
Glasgow, Scotland
Oct 2000
time: 05:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by aneeshm
As for the original point : I do not generalise abour Christianity , only about the Christians who came here to preach ( and those who were representatives of Christianity at the world parlianment ) - those who are expected to be the concretisation of the ideology they preach .
Of course I do not consider Christianity monolithic - a religion that size will have to have some disagreements . But the ultimate goal of every sect is to convert everyone to their sect - which I find abhorrent ( as I find any religion whose sole aim is world domination to be immoral ) . |
The examples you've listed previously are not the true spirit of Christianity, and I wonder how anyone could call themselves truly Christian by talking advantage of a human being in need. I'm not saying that after the disaster has passed that they shouldn't preach the message of Christ, but the fact is that article indicates that that was their ulterior motive all along, which is wrong. With regard to the article on subversive conversion, I've no problem with that though. It's our duty as Christians to spread the word of God, and in some countries this is not tolerated (most extreme example - Saudi Arabia). After all, is it fair that Muslims can freely proselytize in the West, yet Christians that attempt to evangelize in some Muslim countries are routinely harassed, making open missionary work impossible?
What exactly is wrong with spreading the word of God? I'm not talking about the abhorrent practices of some of the groups mentioned above, but just in general. All I ask for is the right to express my beliefs and to inform people about them, and the ability to refer them to someone else if they're interested. If they don't want to hear, they don't have to listen. I'll quickly grow bored without an audience.  Because at the end of the day I believe Christianity is about 'choice' rather than 'submission'.
With regard to India, I'm not Indian, so I don't know whether I should accept your interpretation of the caste system or not. Everything I've read in the media suggests that it isn't as you said. But mayber we've all a misunderstanding of it in the West.
I just thought of another thing I don't like about India. The incineration of women that can't pay their dowry is a rather unpleasant custom.
I'm not trying to score points here; I'm just trying to illustrate to you how your opening remark was wrong, and how you are ignorant of the true spirit of Christianity (as I probably am of India). I suggest you read the New Testament so you can appreciate what Jesus really wanted. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by aneeshm
Any proof of that ? |
There is certainly proof that Hinduism spread to Indochina and Indonesia, there is the island of Bali, where a corrupted form of Hinduism is practised, and there are plenty of monuments scattered on other islands and in Cambodia and Thailand. The history of the wars between the Hindus and the non-Hindus in this area of course lived on only in oral legend. If you pick up a text on the history of Indonesia prior to the arrival of Islam you should find something.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
aneeshm
|
|
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 11:07
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by our_man
The examples you've listed previously are not the true spirit of Christianity, and I wonder how anyone could call themselves truly Christian by talking advantage of a human being in need. I'm not saying that after the disaster has passed that they shouldn't preach the message of Christ, but the fact is that article indicates that that was their ulterior motive all along, which is wrong. With regard to the article on subversive conversion, I've no problem with that though. It's our duty as Christians to spread the word of God, and in some countries this is not tolerated (most extreme example - Saudi Arabia). After all, is it fair that Muslims can freely proselytize in the West, yet Christians that attempt to evangelize in some Muslim countries are routinely harassed, making open missionary work impossible?
|
The fact is , they did have an ulterior motive . Did you read the statements ?
Nobody minds you spreading what you consider the word of God - but we do mind the vilification of other Gods . We also think that a religion based on only faith ( with no experience to back it up ) is foolish ( read up about Raja Yoga , which says that you must not believe anything regarding god until you have experienced it yourself - it is better to be a honest atheist than a hypocritical believer ) .
You think subversive conversion is moral - and then are surprised that you are considered barbaric in comaprison to those who always debate first in an open forum , and only then appeal to the masses on the basis of intellectual superiority ?
quote:
What exactly is wrong with spreading the word of God? I'm not talking about the abhorrent practices of some of the groups mentioned above, but just in general. All I ask for is the right to express my beliefs and to inform people about them, and the ability to refer them to someone else if they're interested. If they don't want to hear, they don't have to listen. I'll quickly grow bored without an audience. Because at the end of the day I believe Christianity is about 'choice' rather than 'submission'.
|
I have no problem with giving anyone a choice . But I do dislike ( though refuse to ban ) the vilification of everything not Christian . And I dislike the attitude of "ours is the one true way" . There is an old Hindu saying - "The truth is one , but the wise know it by many names" .
quote:
With regard to India, I'm not Indian, so I don't know whether I should accept your interpretation of the caste system or not. Everything I've read in the media suggests that it isn't as you said. But mayber we've all a misunderstanding of it in the West.
|
I've lived in this place all my life ( short as it is ) . I speak of what I know the situation to be ( at least in the cities ) . If anything , there is ( now ) a growing feeling that affirmative action has gotten out of hand ( when you have 90+ % of seats at governmental institutions reserved for "Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes" , others do feel that this is totally unfair ) . Discrimination against what were thought to be the lower castes in now illegal .
Adi Shankara ( approx. 788 AD to 820 AD ) preached against the stratification of the "jati" ( or caste ) system . If you want a more detailed explanation ( of the caste system ) , I can provide it . For more on Shankara , look here .
quote:
I just thought of another thing I don't like about India. The incineration of women that can't pay their dowry is a rather unpleasant custom.
|
Ummm . . . . WTF ? Where did this idea come from ? Totally false .
quote:
I'm not trying to score points here; I'm just trying to illustrate to you how your opening remark was wrong, and how you are ignorant of the true spirit of Christianity (as I probably am of India). I suggest you read the New Testament so you can appreciate what Jesus really wanted.
|
This is the same thing Communists use as a cop out - "True Communism has never been tried . . . . . . ." .
I look to the original Church for authoritative pronouncements on Christianity , the same way that I ask you to look at the Veds , the Purans , and the Ramayan and Mahabharata ( and Bhagwat Gita ) for authoritative knowledge of Hinduism .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
aneeshm
|
|
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 11:07
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
But that was not much different for Christianity during some time. The Roman church had the ultimate authority to interpret the bible, and everyone who did something different from their interpretation was declared a heretic. You hadn't much room for doubt either in those times, but that obviously has changed. We don't burn people anymore for having differences with the church's POV (with " we" I mean westerners, I'm not even a Christian ).
In fact it is an important question how to modernize Islam in a similar way. I would not rule out the possibility per se just because of writings saying so-and-so. Over centuries what the bible said was the ultimate proof for people, but that has changed as well.. |
You apparently do not grasp the Islamic mindset . They do no look at the Koran and say , "Let us judge this book and its messenger in the modern context" . They say , "Let us judge modernity in the context of the Book and the Prophet" , because to them , the Quran and Prophet's actions are the standard of morality . It is the word of God , so it it eternal and unchanging . The awe that a Muslim feels when reading the Quran is because they are taught that the Quran is the ultimate book , and the Prophet the last messenger .
And another thing - did Jesus explicitly give the Roman Catholic Church the power to interpret the Bible ?
In Islam , the prophet and the book justify each other .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
C0ckney
|
|
Big Up The Macedonian Massive
Apr 2000
time: 05:37
|
|
does anyone else get the feeling that aneeshm is a member of a high caste...?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
 |
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by aneeshm
You apparently do not grasp the Islamic mindset . They do no look at the Koran and say , "Let us judge this book and its messenger in the modern context" . They say , "Let us judge modernity in the context of the Book and the Prophet" , because to them , the Quran and Prophet's actions are the standard of morality . |
Often they do not follow everything the Quran says like slaves either. That's just not true - I've been to some muslim countries, and the people there are a whole lot more different than you paint them here. And we have plenty of muslim people in Europe as well, and often they are quite "westernized", but still muslim - if they can change, why would it be impossible for others? It may be indeed difficult to modernize Islam on a grand scale, but that is not only a question of religion itself, but also of power and politics (something we did not discussed noe here at all).
quote:
It is the word of God , so it it eternal and unchanging . The awe that a Muslim feels when reading the Quran is because they are taught that the Quran is the ultimate book , and the Prophet the last messenger . |
Even if they do so now, I still see do not much of a difference in this views compared to Christian views of God and the bible some hundred years ago. Back then the bible was seen as the ultimate source for truth as well.
quote:
And another thing - did Jesus explicitly give the Roman Catholic Church the power to interpret the Bible ?
In Islam , the prophet and the book justify each other . |
I don't know about Jesus, but I still don't see thas as a core point, more a "technical" thing. The bible was seen as the word of God - and if the church had been given the authority explicitly or not plays only a minor role IMO, because in fact the church had the power to execute this kind of authority, and a vast majority of people believed in it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ogie Oglethorpe
|
 |
Marietta, GA
Dec 1999
time: 05:37
|
|
I half agree with Ted, American Arrogance is rooted in belief of God. How dare we!!! 
quote:
When in the Course of human Events it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth the separate & equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation. We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness: |
Ted Striker, Not even worth a rating. Meh.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
Christians are taught that the Bible is the ultimate book (Except the Mormons..)
what they take ultimate to mean, can vary..
and there might be a few who don't regard it as one
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
Often they do not follow everything the Quran says like slaves either. That's just not true - I've been to some muslim countries, and the people there are a whole lot more different than you paint them here. And we have plenty of muslim people in Europe as well, and often they are quite "westernized", but still muslim - if they can change, why would it be impossible for others? It may be indeed difficult to modernize Islam on a grand scale, but that is not only a question of religion itself, but also of power and politics (something we did not discussed noe here at all).
Even if they do so now, I still see do not much of a difference in this views compared to Christian views of God and the bible some hundred years ago. Back then the bible was seen as the ultimate source for truth as well.
|
Yep, that´s also IMHO the difference.
Nowadays muslims are sometimes like christians some hundred years ago (especially the fundamentalists of course).
And, as the christian society, the muslim society can also evolve to get more secular (and open to other religions).
(AFAIR it was even more open during medieval times as it is (wichin countries ruled by muslim fundamentalists) today)
That we don´t have some kind of influental terrorist network among christian fundamentalists (in contrary to the terrorist network of fundemantalist muslims) might also have something to do with the influence of society.
In western civilizations individual terrorist actions normally aren´t viewed as a legal form of agression (in contrast perhaps to some muslim societies [society != state]). Only actions by the state (for example wars) are considered legal. Perhaps some crusader from the 13th century might have a different view on this.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
aneeshm
|
|
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 11:07
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by C0ckney
it makes it easier to see where you are coming from, and indeed where the stuff you spout is coming from :/
and dr strangelove is right about bali etc. |
Ahhh . . . . . . now I understand . It's and old trick . . . . . the Brits call it "playing the man and not the ball" . You can't refute my arguments , so you try to discredit me .
Also called "Ad homimen" . Unfortunately for you , however , it won't work on me . Also , you use works to evoke an image - by the use of the word spout , for example , you try to lump me in with other people wo "spout" stuff , and whose arguments can be dismissed as "spouting" .
Just in case you were not aware - during Islamic times ( approx. 600 years ) , it was the Brahmins ( my caste ) which were persecuted the most - because they were the intellectual guardians of Hinduism . They also suffered the most vile atrocities , because they refused to convert . Hinduism survived only because of them .
Though I do agree with the point you do not want to state - oppression existed , and still does exist ( in the villages ) . Your attempt to lump me in with oppresors is , however , pathetic and unsportsmanlike in debate .
As for the Bali thing - proof , please ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
this the problem with some religions, mainly themonotheistic ones I think. they view "love" as trying to get everyone to their "truth".
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
of course to them it isnt a "problem".
as long as they adhere to the system of law of the countrry. however i viewed a documentary about the muslim minority in greece and was apauled to see some cases of cruelty. a large deal of it is due to those backward societies they have there. but i think at least a part comes from the religion of islam. thats why secularism, progress, open societies are the only answer to that kind of situation. although i think protestantism will always produce fanatism even in open societies.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
antiamericanism is a mute word.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
aneeshm
|
|
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 11:07
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
Often they do not follow everything the Quran says like slaves either. That's just not true - I've been to some muslim countries, and the people there are a whole lot more different than you paint them here. And we have plenty of muslim people in Europe as well, and often they are quite "westernized", but still muslim - if they can change, why would it be impossible for others? It may be indeed difficult to modernize Islam on a grand scale, but that is not only a question of religion itself, but also of power and politics (something we did not discussed noe here at all).
|
Of course Islamic countries cannot fully implement Islamic law - they could not survive in the modern world if they did . One of my best friends is a Muslim . But I have seen the mental torture he has undergone ( and continues to undergo ) as all the leaders of his community tell him that they live in a kafir land , and that all his non-Muslim friends are going to hell , and that all religions other than Islam are of the devil , and that he should not befriend non-Muslims , and that it is his holy duty to kill them all , while on the other hand , all his non-Muslim friends and his school tells him that all religions are equal , and that he is just like one of us , and that none would hesitate to befriend him just because he was a Muslim . It is horrible , what he undergoes .
quote:
Even if they do so now, I still see do not much of a difference in this views compared to Christian views of God and the bible some hundred years ago. Back then the bible was seen as the ultimate source for truth as well.
I don't know about Jesus, but I still don't see thas as a core point, more a "technical" thing. The bible was seen as the word of God - and if the church had been given the authority explicitly or not plays only a minor role IMO, because in fact the church had the power to execute this kind of authority, and a vast majority of people believed in it.
|
In Islam , this same power is decentralised , and given to the local Imam ( while central power resides with the Ameer-al-Mum`in ( the Commander of the Faithful ) , the Khalifah ) .
As for more examples :
The Shahi Imam of Delhi has declared in a speech that , though Muslims do not , in Arabia , slaughter the cow for sacrificial occasions , they should do so in India , because if they do not , then they may start thinking that the cow is sacred ( due to the influence of Hinduism ) , and thus stray from the path of the Book and the Prophet . In essence , kill it because Hindus consider it sacred ( though let me make clear that I do not , myself , consider it sacred , but I am a vegetarian ) . This man is the chief leader of Islam in India .
The Imam in Egypt has declared a fatwa agiains the practice of yog(a) by Muslims , as it is practised by Hindus as a part of their religion , and has declared any Muslim to be practising it to be a sinner and maybe even a gaddar .
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
C0ckney
|
|
Big Up The Macedonian Massive
Apr 2000
time: 05:37
|
|
what arugments have you made?
that you don't like christians or muslims, wow etc.
that you think they're barbarians, why? because you say so of course!
anything else, ah yes, after you call everyone else 'barbarians' we have your comicial defence of the hindu caste system in india, of course you being a member of a high caste has nothing to do with your rosy view of it...
the hindu caste system
quote:
India’s caste system is perhaps the world’s longest surviving social hierarchy. A defining feature of Hinduism, caste encompasses a complex ordering of social groups on the basis of ritual purity.
A person is considered a member of the caste into which he or she is born and remains within that caste until death, although the particular ranking of that caste may vary among regions and over time. Differences in status are traditionally justified by the religious doctrine of karma, a belief that one’s place in life is determined by one’s deeds in previous lifetimes. Traditionalscholarship has described this more than 2,000-year-old system within the context of the four principal varnas, or large caste categories. In order of precedence these are the Brahmins (priests and teachers), the Ksyatriyas (rulers and soldiers), the Vaisyas (merchants and traders), and the Shudras (laborers and artisans). A fifth category falls outside the varna system and consists of those known as “untouchables” or Dalits; they are often assigned tasks too ritually polluting to merit inclusion within the traditional varna system.
Within the four principal castes, there are thousands of sub-castes, also called jatis, endogamous groups that are further divided along occupational, sectarian, regional and linguistic lines. Collectively all of these are sometimes referred to as “caste Hindus” or those falling within the caste system. The Dalits are described as varna-sankara: they are “outside the system”—so inferior to other castes that they are deemed polluting and therefore “untouchable.” Even as outcasts, they themselves are divided into further sub-castes. Although “untouchability” was abolished under Article 17 of the Indian constitution, the practice continues to determine the socio-economic and religious standing of those at the bottom of the caste hierarchy. Whereas the first four varnas are free to choose and change their occupation, Dalits have generally been confined to the occupational structures into which they are born.
The constitution has merely prescribed, but has not given any description of the ground reality. We can make a dent only if we recognise the fact that the caste system is a major source, indeed an obnoxious one, of human rights violations.
With little land of their own to cultivate, Dalit men, women, and children numbering in the tens of millions work as agricultural laborers for a few kilograms of rice or Rs. 15 to Rs. 35 (US$0.38 to $0.88) a day. Most live on the brink of destitution, barely able to feed their families and unable to send their children to school or break away from cycles of debt bondage that are passed on from generation to generation. At the end of day they return to a hut in their Dalit colony with no electricity, kilometers away from the nearest water source, and segregated from all non-Dalits, known as caste Hindus. They are forbidden by caste Hindus to enter places of worship, to draw water from public wells, or to wear shoes in caste Hindu presence. They are made to dig the village graves, dispose of dead animals, clean human waste with their bare hands, and to wash and use separate tea tumblers at neighborhood tea stalls, all because—due to their caste status—they are deemed polluting and therefore “untouchable.” Any attempt to defy the social order is met with violence or economic retaliation. |
india's hiden apartheid
quote:
For centuries, the untouchables of Paliyad, a nondescript village in western India’s Ahmedabad district, have known their place. Many of them are manual scavengers, cleaning the toilets of upper-caste villagers or toiling the land, sometimes for less than a handful of rice a day. “We’ve known that we must stay away from them [upper-caste people] since the day we were born,” says Rajesh, who is going on 19. “At the tea stalls, we have separate cups to drink from, chipped and caked with dirt, and we’re expected to clean them ourselves. We have to walk for 15 minutes to carry water to our homes, because we’re not allowed to use the taps in the village that the upper castes use. We’re not allowed into temples, and when I attended school, my friends and I were forced to sit just outside the classroom… the upper caste children would not allow us even to touch the football they played with… we played with stones instead.”
More than 160 million people, a sixth of India’s population, continue to bear the burden of a 2,000-year old caste system sanctioned by Hindu theology, which locks people into a rigid role by virtue of their birth.
Codes to suit the upper class. Though the term “untouchables” was abolished in 1950 under India’s constitution, the “oppressed people” or Dalits as they are now referred to, continue to be discriminated against. They are denied access to land, forced to work in humiliating and degrading conditions and are routinely abused by the police and upper-caste groups, which enjoy the state’s protection. |
i've got hundreds more, all you have to do is ask.
as for the bali and hindu expansion, you could try reading a history book, lord knows there are enough that deal with this topic.
angkor wat
quote:
Located in Northwestern Cambodia, Angkor, the Capital of the Ancient Khmer Empire was possibly founded around the Ninth Century AD by King Jayavarman II. However, the city reached its peak glory in the 12th Century under Kings Suryavarman II and Jayavarman VII. The most beautiful and most famous monument in the city, Angkor Wat, lies about one kilometer south of the Royal town of Angkor Thom which was founded by Jayavarman VII.
The Temple of Angkor Wat was dedicated to the Hindu God Vishnu by King Suryavarman II, who reigned between AD 1131 and 1150. The Temple was constructed over a period of 30 years, and illustrates some of the most beautiful examples of Khmer and Hindu art. Covering an area of about 81 hectares, the complex consists of five towers, which are presently shown on the Cambodian national flag. These towers are believed to represent the five peaks of Mount Meru, the Home of Gods and Center of the Hindu Universe. Angkor Wat features the longest continuous bas-relief in the world, which runs along the outer gallery walls, narrating stories from Hindu Mythology |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
C0ckney
|
|
Big Up The Macedonian Massive
Apr 2000
time: 05:37
|
|
and bali of course
quote:
The Balinese religion have strong spiritual roots , their culture is still very much alive. The main religion is Hindu Dharma, which arrived in Bali with the spread of Hinduism through Sumatra and Java during the 11th century. Although originally from India, the Balinese religion is a unique blend of Hindu, Buddhist, Javanese and ancient indigenous beliefs, with customs that are very different from the traditional form of Hinduism practiced in India today. With the arrival of Islam in neighboring Java during the 15th century, a large member of courtiers, artists, musicians and craftsmen fled to Bali, creating an artistic renaissance. |
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-09-2005 17:12
|