Thousands of Religious Sects - Which one is right?

[lightgigantic]

nds1

One thing we haven't talked about ehich I know LG and Hinduism supports, is the idea of different levels of heaven. or different levels to the afterlife.

So in order to get to the lowest level of heaven, you must serve God and please him minimally, not maximally, or optimally.

However, in order to reach the highest or best level of heaven, one must serve God as optimally as possible and choose beliefs which match the truth the closest.

actually you are misinformed - there is a distinction between th ematerial heavenly planets (svarga) which are the abodes that offer higher grades of material opulence and vaikuntha, the transcendental abode associated with the montheistic concept of god, that bestows actual liberation, eternity etc

svarga is the abode of the pious and vaikuntha is the abode of the transcendental

LG, here's some information I got in 5 minutes from some random websites:

Comparison Christianity and Hinduism - What are the differences?

Hinduism is a religion with many beliefs and practices, so offering a comparison of Christianity and Hinduism is challenging. It would be doing Hinduism an injustice to reduce its theology and philosophies to a scope that would be required to truly offer a comparison with Christianity. However, there are some tenets to Hinduism that are universal to all Hindus.

The first difference between Hinduism and Christianity is that Hinduism embraces Christianity as a valid religion whereas the Bible does not.

maybe he could offer a biblical quote to back up his opinion - that is the general standard for theistic discussion

Hinduism is a religion that advocates tolerance. It teaches that all religions are different paths leading to one goal;

once again, if he could quote something from the vedas that states this it would certainly help his argument. Especially since I can quote passages from the vedas that state otherwise - here's one eg

Iso 12: Those who are engaged in the worship of demigods enter into the darkest region of ignorance, and still more so do the worshipers of the impersonal Absolute.

Iso 13: It is said that one result is obtained by worshiping the supreme cause of all causes and that another result is obtained by worshiping what is not supreme. All this is heard from the undisturbed authorities, who clearly explained it.

and

BG 9.25: Those who worship the demigods will take birth among the demigods; those who worship the ancestors go to the ancestors; those who worship ghosts and spirits will take birth among such beings; and those who worship Me will live with Me.

all religions are different means to one end. Hinduism is not exclusive and accepts all religions as valid. Christianity, however, teaches that Christ is the only way to God. John 14:6 says, "Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'"

the vedas also teach that without a spiritual preceptor, one cannot make any spiritual advancement

"Unto those great souls who have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master, all the imports of Vedic knowledge are automatically revealed." (Svetesvara Upanisad 6.23)

Philosophically, it is impossible for religions with mutually-exclusive doctrines to be equally valid. Where we find contradiction, we must find error. Either Christ was wrong or He was right when He claimed to be the only path to God. It is simple arithmetic, not spiritual elitism.

as I have mentioned many times previously, the "I am the only way" quote commonly attributed to jesus ("John 14:6 Jesus said, "I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.") when examined in the original text from which the english is derived, is spoken in the present text - so in other words it should read "Right here, right now, I am the only way" - given the social climate that jesus was preaching in, it doesn't appear to be a tall claim

A comparison between Christianity and Hinduism reveals ancient practices which appear similar. In all ancient religions, Hinduism included, we find reparation for sins being done through sacrifices to an enraged God. In Hinduism and Judaism, this sacrifice is an animal sacrifice.

once again, a quote would help his cause, particularly when I can bring up eg's such as

BG 9.26: If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I will accept it.

Both theologies preach a divine commandment of righteousness, and failure to comply requires a penalty. This ancient instinct to make reparation for wrong doings suggests that Romans 2:14-15 is true: "Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law. . .they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them."

The culmination of these sacrifices for sin is found in Christianity. We have all done things we know are wrong. Both Hinduism and Christianity preach a divine commandment of perfect righteousness and that we are held accountable for our actions. The difference is that Christianity preaches the penalty for our sin has already been paid by the death of Jesus Christ on the cross. To become a Christian is to accept the ultimate sacrifice to avoid the ultimate penalty

so the next question is, why continue to be sinful?

Peter Kreeft
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are two basic kinds of religions in the world: Eastern and Western.
The main differences between Hinduism and Christianity are typical of the differences between Eastern and Western religions in general. Here are some examples:


1. Hinduism is pantheistic, not theistic.

erm - a quote would be helpful, especially when there are one's like

BG 18.65: Always think of Me, become My devotee, worship Me and offer your homage unto Me. Thus you will come to Me without fail. I promise you this because you are My very dear friend.

BG 18.66: Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear.

and as previously mentioned


Iso 12: Those who are engaged in the worship of demigods enter into the darkest region of ignorance, and still more so do the worshipers of the impersonal Absolute.

Iso 13: It is said that one result is obtained by worshiping the supreme cause of all causes and that another result is obtained by worshiping what is not supreme. All this is heard from the undisturbed authorities, who clearly explained it.

The doctrine that God created the world out of nothing rather than emanating it out of His own substance or merely shaping some pre-existing material is an idea that simply never occurred to anyone but the Jews and those who learned it from them. Everyone else either thought of the gods as part of the world (paganism) or the world as part of God (pantheism).

once again a quote would help him in light of

BG 7.4: Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence and false ego — all together these eight constitute My separated material energies.

BG 7.5: Besides these, O mighty-armed Arjuna, there is another, superior energy of Mine, which comprises the living entities who are exploiting the resources of this material, inferior nature.

BG 7.6: All created beings have their source in these two natures. Of all that is material and all that is spiritual in this world, know for certain that I am both the origin and the dissolution.

2. If God is in everything, God is in both good and evil. But then there is no absolute morality, no divine law, no divine will discriminating good and evil. In Hinduism, morality is practical; its end is to purify the soul from desires so that it can attain mystical consciousness. Again, the Jews are unique in identifying the source of morality with the object of religion. Everyone has two innate senses: the religious sense to worship, and the moral sense of conscience; but only the Jewish God is the focus of both. Only the God of the Bible is absolutely righteous.

not reading anything outside of one's own field of theistic expertise is only a problem when one tries to establish one's own field as superior

BG 5.15: Nor does the Supreme Lord assume anyone's sinful or pious activities. Embodied beings, however, are bewildered because of the ignorance which covers their real knowledge.

BG 5.16: When, however, one is enlightened with the knowledge by which nescience is destroyed, then his knowledge reveals everything, as the sun lights up everything in the daytime.

3. Eastern religions come from private mystical experiences; Western religions come from public revelations recorded in a book and summarized in a creed. In the East, human experience validates the Scriptures; in the West, Scripture judges experience.

given that there is a complete lack on a description of what god looks like in the bible, its not clear what his basis is

4. Eastern religions are esoteric, understandable only from within by the few who share the experience. Western religions are esoteric, public, democratic, open to all. In Hinduism there are many levels of truth: polytheism, sacred cows and reincarnation for the masses; monotheism (or monism) for the mystics, who declare the individual soul one with Brahman (God) and beyond reincarnation (“Brahman is the only reincarnator”). Truth is relative to the level of experience.

anyway I could quote on, but it should be obvious by now how proficient Mr. Kreeft is in his analysis of vedic literature

5. Individuality is illusion according to Eastern mysticism. Not that we're not real, but that we are not distinct from God or each other.

once again a quote would help

BG 2.12: Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.

Christianity tells you to love your neighbors; Hinduism tells you you are your neighbors.

is he joking?

The word spoken by God Himself as His own essential name, the word “I,” is the ultimate illusion, not the ultimate reality, according to the East. There Is no separate ego. All is one.

actually he is only referencing the scriptural commentaries of sankacharya - during the british rule there was a big push in europe to absorb the indian culture into the historical continuum of europe, so they (personalities like max meuller) took the scriptural commentaries of sankacharya to further their aims

"In this context Müller wrote a letter to his wife, in reply to her concerns that he was undermining Christianity:

The translation of the Veda will hereafter tell to a great extent on the fate of India and on the growth of millions of souls in that country. It is the root of their religion, and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last 3000 years.[4]

6. Since individuality is illusion, so is free will. If free will is illusion, so is sin. And if sin is illusion, so is hell. Perhaps the strongest attraction of Eastern religions is in their denial of sin, guilt and hell.

vaisnava's use the same argument in their refutation of the scriptural commentaries of sankacharya - the only difference is that they can quote the vedas to make the argument more cohesive

7. Thus the two essential points of Christianity — sin and salvation — are both missing in the East. If there is no sin, no salvation is needed, only enlightenment. We need not be born again; rather, we must merely wake up to our innate divinity. If I am part of God. I can never really be alienated from God by sin.

given that the vedas advocate that the material world is the abode of separation from god via sin, it seems we are talking about the same ball game

SB 11.20.36: Material piety and sin, which arise from the good and evil of this world, cannot exist within My unalloyed devotees, who, being free from material hankering, maintain steady spiritual consciousness in all circumstances. Indeed, such devotees have achieved Me, the Supreme Lord, who am beyond anything that can be conceived by material intelligence.

8. Body, matter, history and time itself are not independently real, according to Hinduism. Mystical experience lifts the spirit out of time and the world. In contrast, Judaism and Christianity are essentially news, events in time: creation, providence, prophets, Messiah, incarnation, death and, resurrection, ascension, second coming. Incarnation and New Birth are eternity dramatically entering time. Eastern religions are not dramatic.

one difference i would concede is that time is linear in christianity and it is cyclic in the vedas - once again, this is not necessarily a contradiction since if you took a segment of cyclic time for examination it would appear linear

9. The ultimate Hindu ideal is not sanctity but mysticism. Sanctity is fundamentally a matter of the will: willing God's will, loving God and neighbor.

no quotes = no argument

BG 18.62: O scion of Bharata, surrender unto Him utterly. By His grace you will attain transcendental peace and the supreme and eternal abode.

Mysticism is fundamentally a matter of intellect, intuition, consciousness. This fits the Eastern picture of God as consciousness — not will, not lawgiver.

its not how consciousness is disparate from order/function/law

When C.S. Lewis was converted from atheism, he shopped around in the world's religious supermarket and narrowed his choice down to Hinduism or Christianity. Religions are like soups, he said. Some, like consomme, are thin and clear (Unitarianism, Confucianism, modern Judaism); others, like minestrone, are thick and dark (paganism, “mystery religions”). Only Hinduism and Christianity are both “thin” (philosophical) and “thick” (sacramental and mysterious). But Hinduism is really two religions: “thick” for the masses, “thin” for the sages. Only Christianity is both.

either that or his version of Christianity is bereft of a priestly class - it certainly would explain why he doesn't quote scripture in forming his arguments

Hinduism claims that all other religions are yogas: ways, deeds, paths.

actually the root for yoga (yukta) is the same as the root for religion (religare) : connection (the next q being, "connection to what?" ..... -hint- ....god)

Christianity is a form of bhakti yoga (yoga for emotional types and lovers). There is also jnana yoga (yoga for intellectuals), raja yoga (yoga for experimenters), karma yoga (yoga for workers, practical people) and hatha yoga (the physical preliminary to the other four). For Hindus, religions are human roads up the divine mountain to enlightenment — religion is relative to human need; there is no “one way” or single objective truth.

sankacharya stewed on the flame of eurocentric idealism at work

There is, however, a universal subjective truth about human nature: It has “four wants”: pleasure, power, altruism and enlightenment. Hinduism encourages us to try all four paths, confident that only the fourth brings fulfillment. If there is reincarnation and if there is no hell, Hindus can afford to be patient and to learn the long, hard way: by experience rather than by faith and revelation.

pleasure, power, altruism and enlightenment do not play a part in the practical application of christianity? Seems like every atheist with a chip on their shoulder is out to bag them for the first two, give them a concession for the third and highly doubt them for the fourth

Hindus are hard to dialogue with for the opposite reason Moslems are: Moslems are very intolerant, Hindus are very tolerant. Nothing is false; everything is true in a way.

that still doesn't make everything true

The summit of Hinduism is the mystical experience, called mukti, or moksha: “liberation” from the illusion of finitude, realization that tat tvam asi, “thou art That (Brahman].” At the center of your being is not individual ego but Atman, universal self which is identical with Brahman, the All.

actually there is a distinction between the atma of god and the atma of the living entity - see this post

This sounds like the most absurd and blasphemous thing one could say: that I am God.

vaisnavas agree, further more they can quote the vedas to establish it

But it is not that I, John Smith, am God the Father Almighty. Atman is not ego and Brahman is not God the Father.

atma is spirit and brahman is the energetic effulgence of god

Hinduism identifies not the immanent human self with the transcendent divine self but the transcendent human self with the immanent divine self. It is not Christianity. But neither is it idiocy.

this writer has problems with the vedas because he is not familiar with them

Martin Buber, in “I and Thou,” suggests that Hindu mysticism is the profound experience of the “original pre-biographical unity” of the self, beneath all forms and contents brought to it by experience, but confused with God. Even Aristotle said that “the soul is, in a way, all things.” Hinduism construes this “way” as identity, or inclusion, rather than knowing: being all things substantially rather than mentally. The soul is a mirror for the whole world.

Source: http://www.catholiceducation.org/art...cs/ap0008.html

just because one is godly, it doesn't mean they are god

 

[nds1]

Ok, obviously the two people who's articles I used were not that smart. But did you look at my comparision between Muslim and Christianity? It is in post #138.

 

[nds1]

Here is post#138:

Why do people keep denying that A cannot be B?

Our solar system either has one sun or two. The earth is either round or flat.

God is either a Trinity (pluristic) or a singular entity. Jesus either was or was not the Son of God.


The Bible says God is a Trinity.

The Quran says:

"People of the Book (Jews and Christians)! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, and attribute to God nothing except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was only a Messenger of God, and His command that He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in God and in His Messengers, and do not say: ‘God is a Trinity.' Give up this assertion; it would be better for you. God is indeed just One God. Far be it from His glory that He should have a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and in the earth. God is sufficient for a guardian" (Quran 4:171).

The Bible says Jesus is God's only son:

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him (Bible: John 3:16).


The Quran says otherwise:

"Say: "God is Unique! God, the Source [of everything]. He has not fathered anyone nor was He fathered, and there is nothing comparable to Him!" (Quran 112:1-4).

"Such was Jesus, the son of Mary; it is a statement of truth, about which they vainly dispute. It is not befitting to the majesty of God, that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! When He determines a matter, He only says to it, ‘Be' and it is" (Quran 19:34-35).


Hinduism claims that Jesus was just another avatar. Islam says that Jesus was just another messenger.

The Bible paints a picture of Jesus completely opposite to the beliefs of Hinduism and Islam (and all other religions):

Col 1:16-20
16 For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven
KJV

Heb 1:1-4
1:1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
NKJV


Matt 28:16-20
16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. 17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.
NKJV


LG and VitalOne. You are seriously in error if you state that every religion has the exact same beliefs on who Jesus was.

If I told you both that the earth was round, you would say:

No, it is round and flat at the same time. LOL, good one.


If you can't see any contradictions between beliefs of religions which I have presented above, then, well, you cannot grasp the concept of the Law of Idenity and the Law of Contradcition.



Any responses LG?

 

[Prince_James]

Hinduism claims that Jesus was just another avatar.

No it doesn't. This is a common view developing, though.

Also, Jesus is not special. He's a God-man. Been there, done that. Since time immemorial.

Gilgamesh was a God man.

 

[nds1]

No it doesn't. This is a common view developing, though.

It doesn't claim that Jesus is an Avatar, or that Jesus is "just another avatar"?

 

[Ayodhya]

lightgigantic -

Once again, you never stop do you?

 

[nds1]

The Lightgigantic Ultimate Method of Finding a Religion:

On starting the process:

1. start with scripture and venture on to an analysis of the words and actions of a saintly person - that's the first step

Problem: What scripture do you start with? How many scriptures of saintly people do you read? (Clearly LG, you have a very limited scope in this regard)

On comprehending and applying scripture:

1. the ability to apply scripture comes about through associating with someone already fixed in knowledge

Problem: Which person already fixed in knowledge should I associate with? There are millions of them, all with contradicting beliefs.

2. logic applied to scripture - usually religion has some founder that establishes or reforms existing modes of religion - they are often associated with scripture, which aims at capturing their teachings. thus the focus is the words of a teacher

Problem: What teacher's words should I focus on? Mohammad who says Jesus was just a another messenger of God, Christianity which says Jesus was the only Son of God and second to God in power, or some other religous teacher with another contradicting belief?

3. ideally one should follow a religion that one understands with their intelligence and logic, but it is common for people to follow for reasons as you outline

Problem: What if I understand the theological fundamentals of every religion?

4. I mentioned earlier that the comprehension of such things is not so much dependent on reading but on coming in contact with a person established in knowledge by dint of practice

Problem: Again, what are you suggesting, that I interview a practioner from every religion?

On analyzing practioners:

1. careful examination - Just as there are tests one can do to determine the quality of water there are tests one can do to determine the credibility of a theistic practitioner - however part of that testing process involves the seer coming to a degree of purity themselves

Problem: So again, are you suggesting that I should interview a practioner from every religion (which clearly you have not even come close to doing), carefully examine their teachings, and choose the one I logically think is the best or most truthful?


Lightgigantic,

Could you please come up with a sequential process as to figure out what scriptures or religion to follow which is more detailed and organized than the one above? If you could use a bulleted number list, that would be great.

Please be specific. No more vague responses which could mean anything.

 

[visceral_instinct]

None are right, religion is a cancer.

 

[lightgigantic]

lightgigantic -

Once again, you never stop do you?

and you are the better man because you never start?

 

[lightgigantic]

None are right, religion is a cancer.

in the absence of providing reasons for your arguments you provide convenient sound bites that, after a little bit of altering, can be copy/pasted to present the opposite argument
eg -

Religion is right, atheism is a cancer.

 

[visceral_instinct]

Ok.

I think religion is a cancer because it causes unnecessary suffering and problems in a world where there are enough already. I think it messes up people's minds. I mean if someone was brought up having never heard of religion, and they went out and met people who believed that there is an invisible person in the sky who tells people what to do and how to live their lives...I imagine they would laugh at them.That it is a normality is quite frankly very disturbing.

And I don't see how anyone could say that atheism is a cancer. An atheist is just someone who doesn't happen to believe in some invisible all-powerful mind-rapist.

 

[VitalOne]

Why do people keep denying that A cannot be B?

Our solar system either has one sun or two. The earth is either round or flat.

God is either a Trinity (pluristic) or a singular entity. Jesus either was or was not the Son of God.

Well I'm really saying they're all saying the same things in different ways...your thinking is more western oriented ("East is east, west is west, and they shall never meet" [or something like that])...mine is more Eastern oriented ("In the sky, there is no distinction of east and west; people create distinctions out of their own minds and then beleive them to be true")

The Bible says God is a Trinity.

The Quran says:

"People of the Book (Jews and Christians)! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, and attribute to God nothing except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was only a Messenger of God, and His command that He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in God and in His Messengers, and do not say: ‘God is a Trinity.' Give up this assertion; it would be better for you. God is indeed just One God. Far be it from His glory that He should have a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and in the earth. God is sufficient for a guardian" (Quran 4:171).

The Bible says Jesus is God's only son:

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him (Bible: John 3:16).

Jesus actually seems to agree with the Qu'ranic version:
"And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the {age} to come" (Mat 12:32)

Clearly the Holy Spirit (Allah in the Qu'ran) is higher than Jesus in some way.

The Quran says otherwise:

"Say: "God is Unique! God, the Source [of everything]. He has not fathered anyone nor was He fathered, and there is nothing comparable to Him!" (Quran 112:1-4).

"Such was Jesus, the son of Mary; it is a statement of truth, about which they vainly dispute. It is not befitting to the majesty of God, that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! When He determines a matter, He only says to it, ‘Be' and it is" (Quran 19:34-35).

Again, there's no real contradiction, Jesus seems to agree that the Holy Spirit is higher than himself.,,

Hinduism claims that Jesus was just another avatar. Islam says that Jesus was just another messenger.

Again, there would really be no contradiction since in Hinduism avataras are considered to be equal to God himself, yet God is still the original one, the source all, beyond the senses, etc...

The Bible paints a picture of Jesus completely opposite to the beliefs of Hinduism and Islam (and all other religions):

Col 1:16-20
16 For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven
KJV

Heb 1:1-4
1:1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
NKJV

Matt 28:16-20
16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. 17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.
NKJV

No real contradiction here in Hinduism at all, since if Jesus was an avatara he really would be all those things, as would Ram also

As for Islam, there's still really no contradiction, Allah is doer of all, Jesus is the great prophet, but Allah or the Holy Spirit is still above Jesus, the Qu'ran never denies the divinity of Jesus, it just says that Allah is above him...

LG and VitalOne. You are seriously in error if you state that every religion has the exact same beliefs on who Jesus was.

If I told you both that the earth was flat, you would say:

No, it is flat and round at the same time. LOL, good one.


If you can't see any contradictions between beliefs of religions which I have presented above, then, well, you cannot grasp the concept of the Law of Idenity and the Law of Contradcition.

I never stated every religion has the exact same beliefs as who Jesus was. I stated that although they appear different, they are really all teaching the samethings, non-different from each other, only appearing different due to a lack of knowledge, as I illustrated in the 168 example.

 

[VitalOne]

Hey, Lightgigantic and VitalOne,

You both claim that no religion contradicts each other in beliefs.

Adstar, a Christian member of this forum seems to disagree:



There you go. So don't try and tell me that all religions have the same beliefs on the nature of reality, because YOU ARE WRONG.

I never said they all have the same beliefs, they all appear differently, but in reality they're really trying to accomplish the samethings. It would be like me saying 7*2*6*2 is correct but 42*4 is not correct....

This is why all religions aren't alike.

According to VitalOne and LG, I can simply choose either Islam or Christianity, which both contradict each other in beliefs and practical application, as long as it "suits me." Great advice.

So here is LG and VitalOne's solution to the problem of what religion to choose:

Choose the religion that best suits you.

Great. So I can pick and choose my beliefs to suit me. Good deal.

Choose which ever you feel the most comfortable with...which ever you feel will help you achieve the truth...for instance an intellectual may choose to fixate their mind on the absolute truth (which is equal to God)...a devotional person may choose to perpetually worship God....a person more action-oriented may choose to always do good deeds....someone more attracted to meditation or mind-sciences may choose to control their mind and destroy insecurities within them.....all will lead to salvation...freedom from suffering

 

[VitalOne]

Ok.

I think religion is a cancer because it causes unnecessary suffering and problems in a world where there are enough already. I think it messes up people's minds. I mean if someone was brought up having never heard of religion, and they went out and met people who believed that there is an invisible person in the sky who tells people what to do and how to live their lives...I imagine they would laugh at them.That it is a normality is quite frankly very disturbing.

And I don't see how anyone could say that atheism is a cancer. An atheist is just someone who doesn't happen to believe in some invisible all-powerful mind-rapist.

LMAO@ this typical atheist...hey wasn't Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, and others atheists...and hey didn't they cause many problems and suffering in the world? Where does the Bible/Qu'ran/Bhagavad Gita or any religion say that God is situated in the sky?

Anyone can easily say atheism is a horrible cancer, I mean look at all the people Stalin not only killed, but ruthlessly killed, simply because he didn't care. Hitler constantly ridiculed Jesus on his radio recordings. If you desire to kill millions of people and you can get away with it, then why not? To the atheists, there is no heaven or hell, no karma, no bad consequences as long as you get away with it...so who cares?

 

[Oniw17]

What did Lenin do that was so bad?

 

[Prince_James]

Nds1:

No Hindu scripture talks about Jesus. It is the opinion of most Hindus who are aware of Jesus that he was a saintly guru and possibly an avatar of Vishnu. Just as they would claim any other religious leader of worth was.

 

[Kron]

LMAO@ this typical atheist...hey wasn't Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, and others atheists...and hey didn't they cause many problems and suffering in the world? Where does the Bible/Qu'ran/Bhagavad Gita or any religion say that God is situated in the sky?

Anyone can easily say atheism is a horrible cancer, I mean look at all the people Stalin not only killed, but ruthlessly killed, simply because he didn't care. Hitler constantly ridiculed Jesus on his radio recordings. If you desire to kill millions of people and you can get away with it, then why not? To the atheists, there is no heaven or hell, no karma, no bad consequences as long as you get away with it...so who cares?

Hitler and Stalin weren't atheists. They were God-fearing Christians.

...and WHY do you have to resort to reductio ad Hitlerum???

 

[Oniw17]

Stalin was a christian?

 

[nds1]

Well I'm really saying they're all saying the same things in different ways

LOL. Your joking, right?

No, they are all saying that the other one is wrong.

I guarantee you most if not all Christians believe that Vishnu, Rama, and Krishna, are all made up bullshit.

And guess what, when we die, we will know the truth. Either Jesus is second to God and is the King of everything HIMSELF, or Jesus is 4th or 5th in the hierarchy as LG pointed out.

Either Christians, or Hindus wil be right or wrong. They both can't be right.

VitalOne, why can't you accept the fact that all religions believe different things?

Do Hindus believe in the book of Reveleations where JESUS HIMSELF rules over all and there is no more earth as we know it?

When we die, we will either become an animal and become reborn in physical form again as Hindus believe, or we will be judged and go to heaven or hell.

Christians and Muslims probably both believe that Hindus are going to hell for their extremely different beliefs.

There is one truth VitalOne, whether you want to keep denying it or not. One of the existing religions may be correct in what they believe about the nature of God, the afterlife, and how to live life. Maybe none is correct. But all of them sure as hell are not correct as that would be impossible.

 

[nds1]

Nds1:

No Hindu scripture talks about Jesus. It is the opinion of most Hindus who are aware of Jesus that he was a saintly guru and possibly an avatar of Vishnu. Just as they would claim any other religious leader of worth was.

Yes, exactly.

And I guarantee you Jesus never even came close to mentioning anything about the Hindu avatars, or the Hindu system. Jesus clearly did not believe in Hinduism and never said anything even remotely related to Hinduism.

VitalOne and LG are on a wild goose chase in trying to prove that all religions have the same beliefs about the truth of reality (nature of God, afterlife, God's word, creation, etc.).

It truly baffles me.