Is Religion the Source of Morality?
- Thread starter 2-0-Sixx
- Start date
Have you studied the history behind Hinduism?
It started with a myth, with this myth came a philosophy.
Over time people ran out with this philosophy and made a religion out of it.
It falls in the same lines as Budhism, Confucianism, Shintoism, etc.
It's the Asian way dude, people make religions up out of someone's philosophy.
Now compare that with the biblical scriptures?
There are thousands of historical and archeological findings that prove many of the stories found in the bible to be true.
Here's a few:
The great flood in Genesis,
recorded in the Sumerian King tablets found Iraq.
Campaign into Israel by Pharaoh Shishak (1 Kings 14:25-26), recorded on the walls of the Temple of Amun in Thebes, Egypt.
Revolt of Moab against Israel (2 Kings 1:1; 3:4-27), recorded on the Mesha Inscription.
Fall of Samaria (2 Kings 17:3-6, 24; 18:9-11) to Sargon II, king of Assyria, as recorded on his palace walls.
Defeat of Ashdod by Sargon II (Isaiah 20:1), as recorded on his palace walls.
Campaign of the Assyrian king Sennacherib against Judah (2 Kings 18:13-16), as recorded on the Taylor Prism.
Siege of Lachish by Sennacherib (2 Kings 18:14, 17), as recorded on the Lachish reliefs.
Assassination of Sennacherib by his own sons (2 Kings 19:37), as recorded in the annals of his son Esarhaddon.
Fall of Nineveh as predicted by the prophets Nahum and Zephaniah (2:13-15), recorded on the Tablet of Nabopolasar.
Fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon (2 Kings 24:10-14), as recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles.
Captivity of Jehoiachin, king of Judah, in Babylon (2 Kings 24:15-16), as recorded on the Babylonian Ration Records.
Fall of Babylon to the Medes and Persians (Daniel 5:30-31), as recorded on the Cyrus Cylinder.
Freeing of captives in Babylon by Cyrus the Great (Ezra 1:1-4; 6:3-4), as recorded on the Cyrus Cylinder.
The existence of Jesus Christ as recorded by Josephus, Suetonius, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, the Talmud, and Lucian.
Forcing Jews to leave Rome during the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54) (Acts 18:2), as recorded by Suetonius.
There is proof like this all over the world.
I know where you are coming from and do know that I studied this stuff. I am not a youngster running my mouth.
I understand when you say that it's not only Atheists who are closed minded because I have a hard time trying to convince my Catholic parents that salvation is not based on deeds. And have a hard time trying to convince Protestants that it won't be just Christians who will be saved.
Man is stubborn by nature, even Jesus said that....
About the serpent in the garden of eden, that is a metaphor.
The devil has always been described as reptillian.
You have to read between the lines and not take what you read literately. Reptiles are cold blooded animals.
Notice how Demons or goblins are always depicted as of reptillian form even outside the biblical world?
It started with a myth, with this myth came a philosophy.
Over time people ran out with this philosophy and made a religion out of it.
It falls in the same lines as Budhism, Confucianism, Shintoism, etc.
It's the Asian way dude, people make religions up out of someone's philosophy.
Now compare that with the biblical scriptures?
There are thousands of historical and archeological findings that prove many of the stories found in the bible to be true.
Here's a few:
The great flood in Genesis,
recorded in the Sumerian King tablets found Iraq.
Campaign into Israel by Pharaoh Shishak (1 Kings 14:25-26), recorded on the walls of the Temple of Amun in Thebes, Egypt.
Revolt of Moab against Israel (2 Kings 1:1; 3:4-27), recorded on the Mesha Inscription.
Fall of Samaria (2 Kings 17:3-6, 24; 18:9-11) to Sargon II, king of Assyria, as recorded on his palace walls.
Defeat of Ashdod by Sargon II (Isaiah 20:1), as recorded on his palace walls.
Campaign of the Assyrian king Sennacherib against Judah (2 Kings 18:13-16), as recorded on the Taylor Prism.
Siege of Lachish by Sennacherib (2 Kings 18:14, 17), as recorded on the Lachish reliefs.
Assassination of Sennacherib by his own sons (2 Kings 19:37), as recorded in the annals of his son Esarhaddon.
Fall of Nineveh as predicted by the prophets Nahum and Zephaniah (2:13-15), recorded on the Tablet of Nabopolasar.
Fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon (2 Kings 24:10-14), as recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles.
Captivity of Jehoiachin, king of Judah, in Babylon (2 Kings 24:15-16), as recorded on the Babylonian Ration Records.
Fall of Babylon to the Medes and Persians (Daniel 5:30-31), as recorded on the Cyrus Cylinder.
Freeing of captives in Babylon by Cyrus the Great (Ezra 1:1-4; 6:3-4), as recorded on the Cyrus Cylinder.
The existence of Jesus Christ as recorded by Josephus, Suetonius, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, the Talmud, and Lucian.
Forcing Jews to leave Rome during the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54) (Acts 18:2), as recorded by Suetonius.
There is proof like this all over the world.
I know where you are coming from and do know that I studied this stuff. I am not a youngster running my mouth.
I understand when you say that it's not only Atheists who are closed minded because I have a hard time trying to convince my Catholic parents that salvation is not based on deeds. And have a hard time trying to convince Protestants that it won't be just Christians who will be saved.
Man is stubborn by nature, even Jesus said that....
About the serpent in the garden of eden, that is a metaphor.
The devil has always been described as reptillian.
You have to read between the lines and not take what you read literately. Reptiles are cold blooded animals.
Notice how Demons or goblins are always depicted as of reptillian form even outside the biblical world?
On what basis do you make the claim that it is a "myth" and based on a "myth" came philosophy? Where you present at the time the Vedas were written? Unless you were there and saw everything that happened, how do you know what is a "myth" and what is not?
Exactly how do you know that Jesus' resurrection and the talking snake is not a "myth"? Were you there to witness him be resurrected? I doubt it. Yet you do not relegate the resurrection to "myth" status.
Let's see. Jesus rose from the grave. There is your "myth". Then with this "myth" came the philosophy of "Christianity". People take myths and then make up religions, right? Don't you see that your unsupported argument can be used against "Christianity" as well? Such feeble mental speculation has no place in a sincere seeker of truth.
It is my experience that most people WANT their book to be the only authoritative scripture, and like you they will make the false and unsupported claim that ALL other philosophies are "made up" or "mythological", when they can't even substantiate the validity of their own religion.
You must not have done much research on Hinduism, because "Hindu" is the name that was given to a group of people who resided in a particular region at a particular time, the name "Hindu" does NOT describe a particular religion.
"Hindus" read the Vedas, which I also adhere to. So if it is not too much trouble, could you explain to me exactly what is the "myth" that you are talking about? And do you know what the philosophy is that is based on this "myth"? What are its fundementals?
Hinduism is NOT a religion! I see you are good at speculating on things you don't have firsthand knowledge about.
Is it your belief that because these disciplines are not "Christianity", that they have no value and do not preach the truth? That is the mentality of most "Christians", they do not understand the true nature of the all-pervading Supreme Being, and as such they become closed-minded and exclusionary.
What are you talking about? The Asians were studying the Vedas millenia BEFORE Jesus ever even walked the earth. It seems you do not understand the distinction between religion and philosophy. Religion cannot be manufactured. Religion means to know God. God has His processes by which one can know Him. One CANNOT create a religion artificially and make up a way to know God.
For you to make the claim that all other religions except yours is "made up" is placing yourself in the position of the all-knowing Supreme Being, a position which you obviously do not hold. Therefore, your claims are nothing but sentimentally motivated mental speculation.
Exactly how do you know that Jesus' resurrection and the talking snake is not a "myth"? Were you there to witness him be resurrected? I doubt it. Yet you do not relegate the resurrection to "myth" status.
Let's see. Jesus rose from the grave. There is your "myth". Then with this "myth" came the philosophy of "Christianity". People take myths and then make up religions, right? Don't you see that your unsupported argument can be used against "Christianity" as well? Such feeble mental speculation has no place in a sincere seeker of truth.
It is my experience that most people WANT their book to be the only authoritative scripture, and like you they will make the false and unsupported claim that ALL other philosophies are "made up" or "mythological", when they can't even substantiate the validity of their own religion.
You must not have done much research on Hinduism, because "Hindu" is the name that was given to a group of people who resided in a particular region at a particular time, the name "Hindu" does NOT describe a particular religion.
"Hindus" read the Vedas, which I also adhere to. So if it is not too much trouble, could you explain to me exactly what is the "myth" that you are talking about? And do you know what the philosophy is that is based on this "myth"? What are its fundementals?
Hinduism is NOT a religion! I see you are good at speculating on things you don't have firsthand knowledge about.
Is it your belief that because these disciplines are not "Christianity", that they have no value and do not preach the truth? That is the mentality of most "Christians", they do not understand the true nature of the all-pervading Supreme Being, and as such they become closed-minded and exclusionary.
What are you talking about? The Asians were studying the Vedas millenia BEFORE Jesus ever even walked the earth. It seems you do not understand the distinction between religion and philosophy. Religion cannot be manufactured. Religion means to know God. God has His processes by which one can know Him. One CANNOT create a religion artificially and make up a way to know God.
For you to make the claim that all other religions except yours is "made up" is placing yourself in the position of the all-knowing Supreme Being, a position which you obviously do not hold. Therefore, your claims are nothing but sentimentally motivated mental speculation.
Hiduism, Taoism and Budhism are all "way's of life" at the same time their religions, but they cannot be catgorized along with the Western monotheistic religions. They do not rely on a God or gods,but yet they belive in a creator and supernaturals(deities). Unlike Judaism, Christianity and Islam which gives atributes to God and feel God cares and adheres to the events which take place in the world.
It's odd cause Hiduism I feel could be argued as a monotheistic religion at the same time it is not. Hiduism is in a class of it's own. And NO it is not a myth.
"truth is the sovereign priciple, and the Bhagavad-Gita is the book par excellence for the knowledge of Truth"- Gandhi
It's odd cause Hiduism I feel could be argued as a monotheistic religion at the same time it is not. Hiduism is in a class of it's own. And NO it is not a myth.
"truth is the sovereign priciple, and the Bhagavad-Gita is the book par excellence for the knowledge of Truth"- Gandhi
If a religion did in fact begin from a "myth" but it holds wise spiritual teachings, what difference does it make? Are you ever gonna prove it absolutely true?
What is a myth? Really ask yourself this question.
reality versus myth is an abstraction of truth. What we perceive as myth is merely another level of reality. The "illusion" here is the dualistic belief in which we separate truth from itself. It never was a question of "real" or "fake". what appears "fake" to us only appears that way because we do not perceive it in the same way, that which we perceive as "reality". Always keep an open mind......
What is a myth? Really ask yourself this question.
reality versus myth is an abstraction of truth. What we perceive as myth is merely another level of reality. The "illusion" here is the dualistic belief in which we separate truth from itself. It never was a question of "real" or "fake". what appears "fake" to us only appears that way because we do not perceive it in the same way, that which we perceive as "reality". Always keep an open mind......
@ Vyasadeva
Oh God, now I gotta explain this shit for your benefit.
Oh well....
1) How about I take a page from your philosophy and answer your question with another question?
Where did the Vedas come from????
Hinduism hardly has a clue as to where they came from.
Do you know their origin?
Of coarse not but Hinduism "tells" you that they came from God at one point. But where is the evidence to confirm that?
There is none!
Just like the Aztecs had no proof for the Sun being a God.
They made it up....
That's mythology for you...
One last point on the subject, do you know that Hinduism originated from the Sanatana Dharma?
This religion and yes it's a religion, it seems you do not even understand what the word religion means. No wonder you're having so much trouble soaking this info.
If you study the subject you will know that every Eastern spiritual based religion has it's roots connected to the Vedas Upanishads Sutras Epics Granthas and Prabhandhams.
2) This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that I have a hard time being sensitive towards other people's mentality.
It's real hard to be diplomatic with people who come out with idiotic claims.
First of all, do your homework before you question me.
You claim to believe in the bible,
yet you're asking me "Pre-school" questions.
How can you accept one religion if you have so many questions about it?
Look before you leap....
You totally ignored my last post, but it's cool.
You ignored the facts and decided to hand pick little details that you feel are incorrect. But yet you base that on your limited knowledge. Ooooh, very clever thinking Sherlock!
Very well, I'll put my surgical gloves on.
How do I know that the "Serpent" in the garden of eden wasn't a myth? Because it comes from the same book written by Moses, called Genesis. The same book that talks about the creation of mankind and everything else. The same book that tells us that Adam and Eve were God's first human creation. And that we are all descendents of Noah's family, which has been confirmed by genetic science that we are related to each other.
The same book that talks about the great flood that archaeologists today point to by the discovery of under water monuments, etc.. There are buried secrets all over the world and we're finding them every day.
Secrets which suggest that ancient civilizations as we know today are only mirror images of what's sunken under the 7 seas.
There is outside sources which add credibility to the book of Genesis, such as the Sumerian tablets who speak of stories mirroring Adam & Eve and Noah's Ark.
Satanic sects also add credibility to the book of Genesis with the book of Necronomican. Which speaks of the pre-diluvial ages spoken of in Genesis.
You are reading the Adam & Eve story literately.
It doesn't necessarily mean that a snake talked to Eve and deceived her. This story is a metaphor on how Satan deceived Eve and then Adam through her....
Was I there to witness Jesus's crucifixion?
Of coarse not, what kind of question is that?
Is this how you base your beliefs?
Let me answer you with something worthy of such question.
If I were to think like you, then I don't believe John F Kennedy was assassinated just because I wasn't alive to witness it.
Neither do I believe in the American revolution.
Oh yeah and Christopher Columbus is just a myth!
Like I said, you totally ignored my previous post which listed a few facts supporting certain bible claims.
It is documented that the prophet Daniel, prophecised the coming of Jesus 538 years before his birth.
Jesus himself fulfilled over 300 prophecies documented well before his arrival.
It is documented that the prophet David saw Jesus's death by crucifixion 1000 years crucufixion was even used.
Micah not only saw the coming of Jesus over 700 years earlier, but he also named the town he would be born in.
Around the same time, Isaiah is documented to have predicted Jesus would be born to a virgin.
All of these prophecies back up the claims of Luke, Mark, and Matthew. The gospel which you are question, the books which state that Jesus died and resurrected.
Now you think the prophecies of the old testament above were made up during the Apostle Creed in the first century AD?
That is when the church was established and the doctrine was put together. The bible came to be after that, and it hasn't changed ever since.
But people like you question it's authenticity, fine....
But then the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls killed the speculation in 1947. When ironically, 3 Muslim boys discovered them. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that the Creed was very authentic. Up to that point, the oldest existing old testament scriptures dated back to the 9th and 10th centuries.
The skeptic bubble buster was that the scrolls contained the old testament scriptures, but the scrolls date back about a thousand years before copies of the Creed.
Now we can safely say that the original Church didn't fabricate the Old Testament scriptures as most none believers think.
It is safe to say that Daniel, David, Micah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah truly prophecised the coming of the Messiah ahead of time.
With that in mind, we can draw the conclusion that Matthew, Luke, and Mark weren't bullshitting about Jesus's resurrection.
His resurrection was already prophecised prior to them writing their books. We know that their books are authentic because there is loads of evidence supporting their claims but I won't go into detail this time as evidence for the New Testament is even richer than the old testament.
I will point out one major finding though.
Matthew and the apostle Paul mention James, the brother of Jesus in their gospels.
They are the only documented claims of James existence.
Well you heard the new archaeological finding of what appears to be the burial bone box of James.
The box makes it very clear that this is from the same James that Matthew and Paul wrote about.
Also, the early Jewish historian Josephus,
clearly recorded the execution of James,
the brother of who was called the Christ.
You see, Jesus appeared to James after his resurrection and asked him to establish a body (church) in his name to spread Jesus's word. James was stoned to death for his actions.
Now since you are so smart, can you please explain to me why someone would die for a fabricated lie?
Just about all of Jesus's disciples were stoned to death for claiming he was the Messiah.
Why would anyone die for a lie?
Maybe it wasn't a lie after all.
Hell, everyone in their shoes would lie and say Jesus was false, just to avoid getting killed....
3) Now I won't even respond to the rest of your nonsense claims because I've covered what's important.
I do not claim that other religions were made up just because they are a different then what I believe in.
I don't even subscribe to any Christian denomination.
I only read the bible after researching everything else.
Which I keep an open eye to.
I still read on other religions but throw the ones with no credibility out the window....
But make no mistake about it, I keep them in mind because I have a firm belief that anything is possible.
And that seeing isn't necessarily believing....
Something you obviously lack....
Peace,
Miggidy
Oh God, now I gotta explain this shit for your benefit.
Oh well....
1) How about I take a page from your philosophy and answer your question with another question?
Where did the Vedas come from????
Hinduism hardly has a clue as to where they came from.
Do you know their origin?
Of coarse not but Hinduism "tells" you that they came from God at one point. But where is the evidence to confirm that?
There is none!
Just like the Aztecs had no proof for the Sun being a God.
They made it up....
That's mythology for you...
One last point on the subject, do you know that Hinduism originated from the Sanatana Dharma?
This religion and yes it's a religion, it seems you do not even understand what the word religion means. No wonder you're having so much trouble soaking this info.
If you study the subject you will know that every Eastern spiritual based religion has it's roots connected to the Vedas Upanishads Sutras Epics Granthas and Prabhandhams.
2) This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that I have a hard time being sensitive towards other people's mentality.
It's real hard to be diplomatic with people who come out with idiotic claims.
First of all, do your homework before you question me.
You claim to believe in the bible,
yet you're asking me "Pre-school" questions.
How can you accept one religion if you have so many questions about it?
Look before you leap....
You totally ignored my last post, but it's cool.
You ignored the facts and decided to hand pick little details that you feel are incorrect. But yet you base that on your limited knowledge. Ooooh, very clever thinking Sherlock!
Very well, I'll put my surgical gloves on.
How do I know that the "Serpent" in the garden of eden wasn't a myth? Because it comes from the same book written by Moses, called Genesis. The same book that talks about the creation of mankind and everything else. The same book that tells us that Adam and Eve were God's first human creation. And that we are all descendents of Noah's family, which has been confirmed by genetic science that we are related to each other.
The same book that talks about the great flood that archaeologists today point to by the discovery of under water monuments, etc.. There are buried secrets all over the world and we're finding them every day.
Secrets which suggest that ancient civilizations as we know today are only mirror images of what's sunken under the 7 seas.
There is outside sources which add credibility to the book of Genesis, such as the Sumerian tablets who speak of stories mirroring Adam & Eve and Noah's Ark.
Satanic sects also add credibility to the book of Genesis with the book of Necronomican. Which speaks of the pre-diluvial ages spoken of in Genesis.
You are reading the Adam & Eve story literately.
It doesn't necessarily mean that a snake talked to Eve and deceived her. This story is a metaphor on how Satan deceived Eve and then Adam through her....
Was I there to witness Jesus's crucifixion?
Of coarse not, what kind of question is that?
Is this how you base your beliefs?
Let me answer you with something worthy of such question.
If I were to think like you, then I don't believe John F Kennedy was assassinated just because I wasn't alive to witness it.
Neither do I believe in the American revolution.
Oh yeah and Christopher Columbus is just a myth!
Like I said, you totally ignored my previous post which listed a few facts supporting certain bible claims.
It is documented that the prophet Daniel, prophecised the coming of Jesus 538 years before his birth.
Jesus himself fulfilled over 300 prophecies documented well before his arrival.
It is documented that the prophet David saw Jesus's death by crucifixion 1000 years crucufixion was even used.
Micah not only saw the coming of Jesus over 700 years earlier, but he also named the town he would be born in.
Around the same time, Isaiah is documented to have predicted Jesus would be born to a virgin.
All of these prophecies back up the claims of Luke, Mark, and Matthew. The gospel which you are question, the books which state that Jesus died and resurrected.
Now you think the prophecies of the old testament above were made up during the Apostle Creed in the first century AD?
That is when the church was established and the doctrine was put together. The bible came to be after that, and it hasn't changed ever since.
But people like you question it's authenticity, fine....
But then the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls killed the speculation in 1947. When ironically, 3 Muslim boys discovered them. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that the Creed was very authentic. Up to that point, the oldest existing old testament scriptures dated back to the 9th and 10th centuries.
The skeptic bubble buster was that the scrolls contained the old testament scriptures, but the scrolls date back about a thousand years before copies of the Creed.
Now we can safely say that the original Church didn't fabricate the Old Testament scriptures as most none believers think.
It is safe to say that Daniel, David, Micah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah truly prophecised the coming of the Messiah ahead of time.
With that in mind, we can draw the conclusion that Matthew, Luke, and Mark weren't bullshitting about Jesus's resurrection.
His resurrection was already prophecised prior to them writing their books. We know that their books are authentic because there is loads of evidence supporting their claims but I won't go into detail this time as evidence for the New Testament is even richer than the old testament.
I will point out one major finding though.
Matthew and the apostle Paul mention James, the brother of Jesus in their gospels.
They are the only documented claims of James existence.
Well you heard the new archaeological finding of what appears to be the burial bone box of James.
The box makes it very clear that this is from the same James that Matthew and Paul wrote about.
Also, the early Jewish historian Josephus,
clearly recorded the execution of James,
the brother of who was called the Christ.
You see, Jesus appeared to James after his resurrection and asked him to establish a body (church) in his name to spread Jesus's word. James was stoned to death for his actions.
Now since you are so smart, can you please explain to me why someone would die for a fabricated lie?
Just about all of Jesus's disciples were stoned to death for claiming he was the Messiah.
Why would anyone die for a lie?
Maybe it wasn't a lie after all.
Hell, everyone in their shoes would lie and say Jesus was false, just to avoid getting killed....
3) Now I won't even respond to the rest of your nonsense claims because I've covered what's important.
I do not claim that other religions were made up just because they are a different then what I believe in.
I don't even subscribe to any Christian denomination.
I only read the bible after researching everything else.
Which I keep an open eye to.
I still read on other religions but throw the ones with no credibility out the window....
But make no mistake about it, I keep them in mind because I have a firm belief that anything is possible.
And that seeing isn't necessarily believing....
Something you obviously lack....
Peace,
Miggidy
Man you have no idea what you are talking about.
Hahahhaa, come on man, who are you trying to fool? You don't even know what sanatana-dharma is, let alone what "Hinduism" says about it.
Who said I was having trouble? I understand things just fine.
Seriously playa, I could give a fuck about your level of sensitivity towards differing viewpoints. If it is anything near your level of intelligence, it is probably negligible at best.
The only idiotic claim is the one YOU are making, which is that ONLY the Bible is authoritative spiritual scripture. You are basing that on your limited experience and subjective mentality, and as a result you look like he fanatical Bible thumpin clowns who don't even understand the message it carries.
Nah homie, YOU are the one making pre-school statements like "Everything besides the Bible is a myth." That is the type of uninformed speculative bullshit that a pre-schooler might say.
And I am not about "accepting religion", I leave that to people who define themselves by labels. I have no questions about Christianity nor sanatana-dharma, but I ask you those questions so that you might recognize the bias and sentiment which motivates your categorization of everything outside of "Christianity" as being a myth. You can't prove that Christ's resurrection was not a myth so what support do you have to refute the claim that what you believe in is not a myth?
Telling me about other descrptions contained in the book DO NOT prove it's TRUTHFULNESS. So again, I will ask you, what PROOF do you have that what the Bible says is TRUE?
Since you cannot present PROOF that Christ's resurrection actually happened, you do not have PROOF that it is not a myth. As such, an intelligent person would realize the hypocritical position of one who claims that ALL OTHER spiritual scripture is a "myth".
I understand that. But exactly how do you KNOW what stories are literal and which are allegory? Since you were not present at the time of the events which are being described, isn't it kind of retarded for you to sit here and speak as if you possess all-knowledge, and can irrefutably claim that the Bible alone is accurate and ALL OTHER SCIPTURE is "mythological"? That doesn't strike you as being a bit presumptuous?
That is exactly my point. You also did not witness Krsna lift Govardhana Hill with one pinky. Does that mean that it didn't happen? Since you were not there to witness EITHER of those acts, then ON WHAT BASIS do you say conclusively that ONE happened, but the other is a "Myth"?
That is the point, genius, I know that you were not there at his crucifixion. There is alot of other things you were not present at, and your ignorance of them does not mean that they did not take place.
No, it has nothing to do with my beliefs. And that again is exactly my point. You were not there to witness the events described in the Vedas nor in the Bible, so HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHAT IS MYTH AND WHAT IS REAL?
You weren't there to see Christ rise from the grave, yet you believe it as fact. You weren't there to see Krsna lift Govardhana Hill, but you say it is "myth". See the subjective contradiction?
As for the Bible quotes, they were rhetoric and nothing worth responding to with regards to your baseless assertions.
What you don't seem to understand is that I DO NOT question the authenticity of the Bible. I accept it as authoritative scripture. YOU, on the other hand, question the authenticity of EVERY OTHER spiritual scripture in existence.
One of us sees God as unlimited and accessible to all, and the other thinks that God is limited to ONE book and ONE doctrine.
I agree.
I can dig all of this. Do you think you are preaching to someone who doesn't believe in the divinity of Jesus? That is not the case, champ, I already know who he is and believe in him 100%.
People die for fabricated lies every day my friend, open your eyes. However, since I do not believe that Jesus's resurrection is a lie, I fail to see the relevance.
I understand that Jesus was the truth, and I know that he was the Son of God. Like I said, the point is not about the authenticity of Jesus, it is about your ignorant categorization of ALL OTHER scripture as "myth". Since I accept the truth of Jesus, I do not need to be convinced of his divine quality. However, unlike you, I do not arrogantly and prematurely conclude that everything else in the world is false and mythological. To make statements like that just show how incomplete your knowledge really is.
Then what do you base that statement on?
And exactly how do you determine the "credibility" of these other religions?
Hahahhaaa, yeah right, that's why you just got done saying that "Hinduism" is nothing but a myth, right? Because you have an open mind and anything's possible?
Anything is possible as long as it falls right in line with what you already believe about Jesus Christ, right?
Trust me potna, I know that seeing isn't believing, which is why I do not make idiotic claims about the "myth" of any scripture. I leave that for cats like you to do. The world is an illusion and you don't even know it. Wake the fuck up or get woke the fuck up, as Killarmy would say.
Peace.
Hahahhaa, come on man, who are you trying to fool? You don't even know what sanatana-dharma is, let alone what "Hinduism" says about it.
Who said I was having trouble? I understand things just fine.
Seriously playa, I could give a fuck about your level of sensitivity towards differing viewpoints. If it is anything near your level of intelligence, it is probably negligible at best.
The only idiotic claim is the one YOU are making, which is that ONLY the Bible is authoritative spiritual scripture. You are basing that on your limited experience and subjective mentality, and as a result you look like he fanatical Bible thumpin clowns who don't even understand the message it carries.
Nah homie, YOU are the one making pre-school statements like "Everything besides the Bible is a myth." That is the type of uninformed speculative bullshit that a pre-schooler might say.
And I am not about "accepting religion", I leave that to people who define themselves by labels. I have no questions about Christianity nor sanatana-dharma, but I ask you those questions so that you might recognize the bias and sentiment which motivates your categorization of everything outside of "Christianity" as being a myth. You can't prove that Christ's resurrection was not a myth so what support do you have to refute the claim that what you believe in is not a myth?
Telling me about other descrptions contained in the book DO NOT prove it's TRUTHFULNESS. So again, I will ask you, what PROOF do you have that what the Bible says is TRUE?
Since you cannot present PROOF that Christ's resurrection actually happened, you do not have PROOF that it is not a myth. As such, an intelligent person would realize the hypocritical position of one who claims that ALL OTHER spiritual scripture is a "myth".
I understand that. But exactly how do you KNOW what stories are literal and which are allegory? Since you were not present at the time of the events which are being described, isn't it kind of retarded for you to sit here and speak as if you possess all-knowledge, and can irrefutably claim that the Bible alone is accurate and ALL OTHER SCIPTURE is "mythological"? That doesn't strike you as being a bit presumptuous?
That is exactly my point. You also did not witness Krsna lift Govardhana Hill with one pinky. Does that mean that it didn't happen? Since you were not there to witness EITHER of those acts, then ON WHAT BASIS do you say conclusively that ONE happened, but the other is a "Myth"?
That is the point, genius, I know that you were not there at his crucifixion. There is alot of other things you were not present at, and your ignorance of them does not mean that they did not take place.
No, it has nothing to do with my beliefs. And that again is exactly my point. You were not there to witness the events described in the Vedas nor in the Bible, so HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHAT IS MYTH AND WHAT IS REAL?
You weren't there to see Christ rise from the grave, yet you believe it as fact. You weren't there to see Krsna lift Govardhana Hill, but you say it is "myth". See the subjective contradiction?
As for the Bible quotes, they were rhetoric and nothing worth responding to with regards to your baseless assertions.
What you don't seem to understand is that I DO NOT question the authenticity of the Bible. I accept it as authoritative scripture. YOU, on the other hand, question the authenticity of EVERY OTHER spiritual scripture in existence.
One of us sees God as unlimited and accessible to all, and the other thinks that God is limited to ONE book and ONE doctrine.
I agree.
I can dig all of this. Do you think you are preaching to someone who doesn't believe in the divinity of Jesus? That is not the case, champ, I already know who he is and believe in him 100%.
People die for fabricated lies every day my friend, open your eyes. However, since I do not believe that Jesus's resurrection is a lie, I fail to see the relevance.
I understand that Jesus was the truth, and I know that he was the Son of God. Like I said, the point is not about the authenticity of Jesus, it is about your ignorant categorization of ALL OTHER scripture as "myth". Since I accept the truth of Jesus, I do not need to be convinced of his divine quality. However, unlike you, I do not arrogantly and prematurely conclude that everything else in the world is false and mythological. To make statements like that just show how incomplete your knowledge really is.
Then what do you base that statement on?
And exactly how do you determine the "credibility" of these other religions?
Hahahhaaa, yeah right, that's why you just got done saying that "Hinduism" is nothing but a myth, right? Because you have an open mind and anything's possible?
Anything is possible as long as it falls right in line with what you already believe about Jesus Christ, right?
Trust me potna, I know that seeing isn't believing, which is why I do not make idiotic claims about the "myth" of any scripture. I leave that for cats like you to do. The world is an illusion and you don't even know it. Wake the fuck up or get woke the fuck up, as Killarmy would say.
Peace.
Damn mayn the siccness is trippin. Shit deleted my other post.
Although Buddhism and Taoism do not recognize any God(s), "Hinduism" is based on the Vedas, which do in fact describe many various demigods and Deities.
Most Hindus believe that the Supreme Lord is the impersonal Brahman, and that all incarnations are manifestations of the impersonal potency.
The Vedas describe Brahman, which is the impersonal, unmanifested effulgence. They also describe Krsna, who is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and who is the source of the impersonal Brahman. It is likened to the sunshine and the sun. Brahman is the sunshine, or the unmanifested radiance, and Krsna is the sun, which is the source of the emanation. Since most Hindus do not recognize the Absolute Truth as ultimately being a person, you are correct that "Hinduism" is categorically different from "Judeo/Christianity".
Where I disagree is where you say that Hindus or Vaisnavas do not believe in a God who has attributes and cares for the events of the world. The Vedas are filled with different descriptions of different incarnations, demigods, and Deities of the one Supreme Lord, and they each describe different attributes of Him.
For example, there is Lord Nrsimhadeva, who is Krsna incarnated in the form of a half-lion, half-man. Lord Nrsimha's pastime is the vicious killing of the great atheist Hiranyikasipu. There is Govinda, who gives pleasure to the land, the cows, and the senses. Goddess Sarasvati bestows learning. Goddess Laksmi is the giver of wealth. Lord Siva gives one material affluence and a beautiful wife. Ganesh removes obstacles and ensures success in one's endeavors. There are innumerable incarnations of the Supreme Lord because He is infinite and limitless.
Yet all the powers of the various demigods are invested in them by the Supreme Lord, Sri Krsna, and thus only He, the complete whole, can bestow any kind of benediction. The source of all the demigods and their ability to bestow favor is due to the Supreme Lord alone.
So you are correct also that "Hinduism" can be seen as a monotheistic philosophy, although 99.9% of Hindus do not recognize Krsna as being the Supreme Lord. Most worship Lord Siva because Siva is the giver of material wealth and Siva is the destroyer of the universe. Some worship Visnu because He is the avatara representing the mode of goodness and liberation. But even beyond Visnu is Krsna, who is the source of Visnu and Siva and indeed every single demigod.
That is an excellent quote. The Bhagavad-Gita has no equal in terms of Supreme Truth, it is like reading the neverending story, and the knowledge one reaps by studying it is incalculable.
Gandhi, however, preached something which is counter to the message of the Gita. He was using it to promote nonviolence, which is very ironic considering the Bhagavad-Gita is actually a conversation between Krsna and Arjuna, and Krsna is telling Arjuna to give up his petty bodily conception of life and fight his enemies. As Gandhi was dealing with the Muslims, he decided to use the Gita to preach nonviolence, when in reality the Gita justifies violence when carried out for a righteous cause. And the Muslim conflict was most definitely a righeous cause for self-defense, it was not a conflict befitting nonviolence.
Lord Nrsimhadeva would have fucked them Muslims up..
Peep him out:
Although Buddhism and Taoism do not recognize any God(s), "Hinduism" is based on the Vedas, which do in fact describe many various demigods and Deities.
Most Hindus believe that the Supreme Lord is the impersonal Brahman, and that all incarnations are manifestations of the impersonal potency.
The Vedas describe Brahman, which is the impersonal, unmanifested effulgence. They also describe Krsna, who is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and who is the source of the impersonal Brahman. It is likened to the sunshine and the sun. Brahman is the sunshine, or the unmanifested radiance, and Krsna is the sun, which is the source of the emanation. Since most Hindus do not recognize the Absolute Truth as ultimately being a person, you are correct that "Hinduism" is categorically different from "Judeo/Christianity".
Where I disagree is where you say that Hindus or Vaisnavas do not believe in a God who has attributes and cares for the events of the world. The Vedas are filled with different descriptions of different incarnations, demigods, and Deities of the one Supreme Lord, and they each describe different attributes of Him.
For example, there is Lord Nrsimhadeva, who is Krsna incarnated in the form of a half-lion, half-man. Lord Nrsimha's pastime is the vicious killing of the great atheist Hiranyikasipu. There is Govinda, who gives pleasure to the land, the cows, and the senses. Goddess Sarasvati bestows learning. Goddess Laksmi is the giver of wealth. Lord Siva gives one material affluence and a beautiful wife. Ganesh removes obstacles and ensures success in one's endeavors. There are innumerable incarnations of the Supreme Lord because He is infinite and limitless.
Yet all the powers of the various demigods are invested in them by the Supreme Lord, Sri Krsna, and thus only He, the complete whole, can bestow any kind of benediction. The source of all the demigods and their ability to bestow favor is due to the Supreme Lord alone.
So you are correct also that "Hinduism" can be seen as a monotheistic philosophy, although 99.9% of Hindus do not recognize Krsna as being the Supreme Lord. Most worship Lord Siva because Siva is the giver of material wealth and Siva is the destroyer of the universe. Some worship Visnu because He is the avatara representing the mode of goodness and liberation. But even beyond Visnu is Krsna, who is the source of Visnu and Siva and indeed every single demigod.
That is an excellent quote. The Bhagavad-Gita has no equal in terms of Supreme Truth, it is like reading the neverending story, and the knowledge one reaps by studying it is incalculable.
Gandhi, however, preached something which is counter to the message of the Gita. He was using it to promote nonviolence, which is very ironic considering the Bhagavad-Gita is actually a conversation between Krsna and Arjuna, and Krsna is telling Arjuna to give up his petty bodily conception of life and fight his enemies. As Gandhi was dealing with the Muslims, he decided to use the Gita to preach nonviolence, when in reality the Gita justifies violence when carried out for a righteous cause. And the Muslim conflict was most definitely a righeous cause for self-defense, it was not a conflict befitting nonviolence.
Lord Nrsimhadeva would have fucked them Muslims up..
Peep him out:
Wow! I have no idea what I'm talking about,
yet look at your post.
1) If you know anything about ancient religions then you know that Sanatana dharma is early Hinduism before it became known as Hinduism. There is no proof for the Vedas hymns as they're the oldest form spiritual religion. Historians believe that they introduced the concept of one God to the world.
The problem is that there is no documented record for them and maybe that's why you have so many groups who branched off them. Just about every Eastern religion is based around the Vedas....
A religion that's based from one's humming.
Picture that....
Why does that sound similar to American Indians whom base their beliefs from smoking opium?
Show me your evidence or anything suggesting that Krishna even existed?
Even Hindu people agree that Krishna is a mythological character. And what is a myth? It is a story.
There's a problem, then the journey, then victory.
All adding up to creating a hero, then people look up to this hero. There are myths everywhere bro, but only in the East do these myths turn into religion.
Now here's your Hinduism heart breaker;
If Krishna has reincarnated in the past to fight evil, bad people, demons and monsters like the myth says.
And reincarnation is supposed to be real,
where is Krishna at now????
Why hasn't he come out to help his people who are being attacked by Islamic extremists????
We have myths all over Europe, but you don't see people worshiping these mythological characters.
People use the philosophy of these myths as a form of religion. The East a perfect example as to how people use both mythological and real characters looked upon as heros, to turn their philosophies into religion.
And you bro, cannot deny that!
Buddha was simply a philosopher, and so was Confucius, but look at how people ran off with their philosophies and have made a religion out of them.
Why is that? Confucius never claimed to be God sent, he simply shared his findings and wrote about them. Which is very good scripture, but why make it a common belief? I think the Vedas killed Eastern religions because of people's tendencies to take what suits them best. People are like water, wind, and electricity.
Water always takes the path of least resistance, so does wind and electricity. And people are the same, they don't want a belief that has restrictions.
I don't blame them but religion is not like a pair of pants, "which one will I wear today".
You can't just simply choose a religion just because you like what it brings to you. You have to choose one with the most credibility. And it just so happens that the bible has the most credibility. Not only that but it is the only book supported by actual facts.
No other "holy" scripture is as rich with evidence supporting it.
That's a fact you cannot argue that.
And if you don't agree then it's because you are ignorant on the subject.
It is not about which one appears to "me" as the most legit like you keep whining about.
You and I know the credibility behind it and what is considered credibility.
It is not just that Christianity is the largest religion in the world.
Not everyone is born into Christianity.
Thousands of people convert to it every day because they see the credibility behind it.
And a lot of people leave it for other religions because they are in search of something less strict.
That is the reason why there are so many religions with similar beliefs to Christianity, only that people twist it around a little for personal gain.
They are acting in a selfish way because they seek what's better for themselves but not for humanity in general.
2) Once again, you didn't even look into the evidence supporting the bible. I make my claims based around facts. And the fact is that no other religious faith has a solid foundation or any foundation at all.
Come on, defend the religions I rebuked with facts.
Why don't you try doing that?
Show me proof for Islam? Buddhism? Hinduism, or anything else? You claim that they are as viable as Christianity. Go ahead and prove it!
You categorize them together with the bible.
I just showed you evidence and you denied it.
You see, only a narrow minded person cannot accept facts.
And will low ball anything, just ask Jesus who was low balled by the Pharicees. He performed miracles in front of their eyes and they still didn't believe he was the Messiah.
People with your mentality will down play God even if he were to show himself to you. You would just call it a hallucination.
You claim to believe the bible is legit only to contradict yourself when you are skeptic of Jesus's resurrection.
Make up your mind because you're making a hypocrite out of yourself.
You either believe the entire bible or you don't.
You can't just take what you like out of it for your own benefit.
That is what got us in this mess in the first place.
Jews, Christians, and Muslims all speak of the God of Abraham. The same God no matter what people say, he's the ultimately reality right?
Why don't Jews accept that Jesus was the Messiah? Why must they say he was just a lunatic when lunatics do not perform miracles. And why must Muslims believe Jesus existed but only see him as another prophet?
Why must Mohammed make the same assumptions you do and believe Jesus was a real character but was not the man people claim he was?
You either believe it or you don't but don't make any changes just because you disagree with some of the stuff in the scriptures. Jesus clearly instructed man not to add or delete to the bible yet both Catholics and Protestants did just that.
Fucking fools! If you truly believe in the teachings of the bible then you believe in Satan.
And you know that he is always reffered to as a liar, the great deceiver. The Angel of Deception.
It is my theory is that this is all work of Satan.
You see the key to conquer an entire group of people when you are outnumbered is to divide them.
Ask any military general and they will tell you that if you can divide your enemy, you just made conquest a lot easier for yourself. A perfect example of that is the way the US is trying to talk the Iraqi people to rebel against the tyrant Hussein.
It is my personal belief that Satan has been instrumental in the creation of so many different religions. Only to confuse us and blind us from the truth. You can call me what ever you want because I have little proof to support my theory.
But I don't care, I speak from personal experience. And the only way you would understand that is if you've walked my shoes.
I was blinded from the truth for many years, believing what "they" were teaching.
It was only in August that the ultimate reality slapped me in the face....
3) So I have woken the fuck up. You might be awake and can see the light, but your problem is your mentality.
The mentality that the Judicial system has embedded in your subconscious that "they" have created.
You believe that credibility is seeing for yourself.
There is hundreds if not thousands of different forms of evidence supporting the new testament.
But the judicial system has created a system that imposes a subconscious belief in people who accept it.
For instance, we all know OJ did it. And only a jack ass might not agree for the simple fact that he shares the same mentality residing in your dome.
The only thing that shows OJ didn't do it is the fact that we didn't see him committing the crime.
But that doesn't mean he's innocent of it, all of the evidence shows that he did it.
And the same can be said for Jesus.
yet look at your post.
1) If you know anything about ancient religions then you know that Sanatana dharma is early Hinduism before it became known as Hinduism. There is no proof for the Vedas hymns as they're the oldest form spiritual religion. Historians believe that they introduced the concept of one God to the world.
The problem is that there is no documented record for them and maybe that's why you have so many groups who branched off them. Just about every Eastern religion is based around the Vedas....
A religion that's based from one's humming.
Picture that....
Why does that sound similar to American Indians whom base their beliefs from smoking opium?
Show me your evidence or anything suggesting that Krishna even existed?
Even Hindu people agree that Krishna is a mythological character. And what is a myth? It is a story.
There's a problem, then the journey, then victory.
All adding up to creating a hero, then people look up to this hero. There are myths everywhere bro, but only in the East do these myths turn into religion.
Now here's your Hinduism heart breaker;
If Krishna has reincarnated in the past to fight evil, bad people, demons and monsters like the myth says.
And reincarnation is supposed to be real,
where is Krishna at now????
Why hasn't he come out to help his people who are being attacked by Islamic extremists????
We have myths all over Europe, but you don't see people worshiping these mythological characters.
People use the philosophy of these myths as a form of religion. The East a perfect example as to how people use both mythological and real characters looked upon as heros, to turn their philosophies into religion.
And you bro, cannot deny that!
Buddha was simply a philosopher, and so was Confucius, but look at how people ran off with their philosophies and have made a religion out of them.
Why is that? Confucius never claimed to be God sent, he simply shared his findings and wrote about them. Which is very good scripture, but why make it a common belief? I think the Vedas killed Eastern religions because of people's tendencies to take what suits them best. People are like water, wind, and electricity.
Water always takes the path of least resistance, so does wind and electricity. And people are the same, they don't want a belief that has restrictions.
I don't blame them but religion is not like a pair of pants, "which one will I wear today".
You can't just simply choose a religion just because you like what it brings to you. You have to choose one with the most credibility. And it just so happens that the bible has the most credibility. Not only that but it is the only book supported by actual facts.
No other "holy" scripture is as rich with evidence supporting it.
That's a fact you cannot argue that.
And if you don't agree then it's because you are ignorant on the subject.
It is not about which one appears to "me" as the most legit like you keep whining about.
You and I know the credibility behind it and what is considered credibility.
It is not just that Christianity is the largest religion in the world.
Not everyone is born into Christianity.
Thousands of people convert to it every day because they see the credibility behind it.
And a lot of people leave it for other religions because they are in search of something less strict.
That is the reason why there are so many religions with similar beliefs to Christianity, only that people twist it around a little for personal gain.
They are acting in a selfish way because they seek what's better for themselves but not for humanity in general.
2) Once again, you didn't even look into the evidence supporting the bible. I make my claims based around facts. And the fact is that no other religious faith has a solid foundation or any foundation at all.
Come on, defend the religions I rebuked with facts.
Why don't you try doing that?
Show me proof for Islam? Buddhism? Hinduism, or anything else? You claim that they are as viable as Christianity. Go ahead and prove it!
You categorize them together with the bible.
I just showed you evidence and you denied it.
You see, only a narrow minded person cannot accept facts.
And will low ball anything, just ask Jesus who was low balled by the Pharicees. He performed miracles in front of their eyes and they still didn't believe he was the Messiah.
People with your mentality will down play God even if he were to show himself to you. You would just call it a hallucination.
You claim to believe the bible is legit only to contradict yourself when you are skeptic of Jesus's resurrection.
Make up your mind because you're making a hypocrite out of yourself.
You either believe the entire bible or you don't.
You can't just take what you like out of it for your own benefit.
That is what got us in this mess in the first place.
Jews, Christians, and Muslims all speak of the God of Abraham. The same God no matter what people say, he's the ultimately reality right?
Why don't Jews accept that Jesus was the Messiah? Why must they say he was just a lunatic when lunatics do not perform miracles. And why must Muslims believe Jesus existed but only see him as another prophet?
Why must Mohammed make the same assumptions you do and believe Jesus was a real character but was not the man people claim he was?
You either believe it or you don't but don't make any changes just because you disagree with some of the stuff in the scriptures. Jesus clearly instructed man not to add or delete to the bible yet both Catholics and Protestants did just that.
Fucking fools! If you truly believe in the teachings of the bible then you believe in Satan.
And you know that he is always reffered to as a liar, the great deceiver. The Angel of Deception.
It is my theory is that this is all work of Satan.
You see the key to conquer an entire group of people when you are outnumbered is to divide them.
Ask any military general and they will tell you that if you can divide your enemy, you just made conquest a lot easier for yourself. A perfect example of that is the way the US is trying to talk the Iraqi people to rebel against the tyrant Hussein.
It is my personal belief that Satan has been instrumental in the creation of so many different religions. Only to confuse us and blind us from the truth. You can call me what ever you want because I have little proof to support my theory.
But I don't care, I speak from personal experience. And the only way you would understand that is if you've walked my shoes.
I was blinded from the truth for many years, believing what "they" were teaching.
It was only in August that the ultimate reality slapped me in the face....
3) So I have woken the fuck up. You might be awake and can see the light, but your problem is your mentality.
The mentality that the Judicial system has embedded in your subconscious that "they" have created.
You believe that credibility is seeing for yourself.
There is hundreds if not thousands of different forms of evidence supporting the new testament.
But the judicial system has created a system that imposes a subconscious belief in people who accept it.
For instance, we all know OJ did it. And only a jack ass might not agree for the simple fact that he shares the same mentality residing in your dome.
The only thing that shows OJ didn't do it is the fact that we didn't see him committing the crime.
But that doesn't mean he's innocent of it, all of the evidence shows that he did it.
And the same can be said for Jesus.
"Documented record"? Man shut the fuck up with that lame shit, the Vedas were written more than 5000 years ago, before there even was such a THING as recorded history.
And yeah, most all eastern thought has its roots in the Vedas. SO what? That does not mean that the Vedas are not authentic, it means that people will be people and will use things to further their selfish desires.
How many fuckin denominations are there which "claim" to have the perfect translation and interpretation of the Bible? There are HUNDREDS! SO FUCKIN WHAT?! That does not mean that the Bible is any less authoritative.
Man you really are a ignorant muthafucka. You obviously know nothing about sacred mantras. The entire universe is vibrating at all times. Even the Bible says "In the beginning, God said".. God "SAID", that means God is the source of all sound vibration. By chanting mantras or singing gospels, one tunes in to that divine vibration of the Supreme Lord. Of course, I do not expect you to understand that.
I bet your silly ass doesn't even know that the pyramids were built through the use of mantras. Mantras are powerful enough to lift 50 ton bricks, or transport one's soul throughout the cosmic manifestation.
It doesn't sound similar at all. You are arguing like a 5 year old and reaching for things because you don't even know what the fuck you are arguing against.
Sure, no problem. Why don't you just hop in my time machine and we'll go holla at him. I can't "prove" that Krsna existed any more than you can "prove" that Jesus did. You back on that ole pre-school shit again.
Hahahhahhaaa keep talkin out your ass mayn. Hindu people accept the Gods of the Vedas, and Krsna is *repeatedly* referred to as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Hindus, however choose to focus on Brahman, the impersonal unmanifested reality.
You say Krsna is mythological, but that Jesus is factual. You can't prove either of your statements to be true, so it is obvious that you are basing your claims on sentiment and nothing more. The reality is that they are both factual.
Are you serious?! You say that I present pre-school arguments and then you spit this bullshit?! Damn homie, that shit aint no heartbreaker. Its just a display of ignorance of Krsna, reincarnation, and his actions.
Which shows that you REALLY do not know what sanatana-dharma is. It is the eternal religion of the eternal soul. Therefore, only a sucka ass fool decides to "choose" a religion.
"It just so happens"? The Bible is the ONLY Holy scripture? That's a "fact" I can't argue?
COME ON DOG, you are OBVIOUSLY placing your love for the Bible above common sense and rationale. You are not giving me facts, you are giving me YOUR OPINIONS and calling your opinions "facts".
If I take a chemistry class at a school, and then I walk outside and say "ONLY my chemistry class is credible, all other chemistry classes are mythological and false!" Do you see that such a claim is ignorant at best and downright fuckin retarded at worst?
The old "if you don't agree with me then you are ignorant" argument, huh? Real convincing. Miggidy and the Bible is right, the rest of the world who does not agree is ignorant.
Sure it is, you just don't got the nuts to come right out and say it.
Yup, as I said, I do not doubt the credibility of the Bible. So what?
There is a reason it is the largest religion in the world. It is the most basic, simple, and easily bastardized faith on the earth, and most people are quite unintelligent.
"You mean all I have to do is believe that Christ died for my sins?! Sign Me Up!"
The Vedas are not like that. The Vedic scripture is like a diamond dealer. A diamond dealer is only going to be approached by a very select few who can afford to buy his diamonds. Everybody wants a diamond, but not everybody wants to do what it takes to earn one. Therefore not everyone is meant to receive the diamonds embedded within the Vedic scripture. Those who can afford diamonds go to the Vedas, yet there are many other places (Christianity) for those who cannot.
Unlike you, however, I do not make the claim that ONLY the Vedas are authentic. I know that they are, and I know that the Bible is. I do not need to try to discredit other scripture in order to make one appear superior.
Hahahhaa, how convenient. People convert TO it because it is credible, but when they LEAVE it, it is because it is too strict?!?
People leave Christianity because there are TOO MANY unanswered questions, and the average preacher does nothing but spout out useless rhetoric, kinda like you do so well.
How do you know that the "facts" you presented are legitemate? Am I supposed to just accept them? And when I present "facts" to you, what are the odds that you will dismiss them categorically as being "myth"?
What the fuck are you talking about? I believe in God, I know who He is, and I never downplay Him. God is not a hallucination.
YOU, on the other hand, would not believe in Krsna even if He showed himself to you. Why not? Because Krsna is not a part of "Christianity". So don't try to lump me in with your exclusionary mentality, I know God and I know He is the reality behind the illusion.
I'm not skeptic of his resurrection. I KNOW HE WAS RESURRECTED. So try again.
Damn man you obviously are borderline illiterate. I said before and I will repeat for your reading pleasure, I believe in Jesus, his divinity, and that he was the messiah. Do you get it?
All you see is that my beliefs do not STOP at Christ, so you go on these strawmen crusades, making arguments for me that I don't even hold, and then trying to defeat them.
You think of Satan as this entity who is willfully causing harm and destruction to the world? See, that is the danger. Fanatics like you are the ones who run around labelling everything they do not know about as "Satan", killing people and burning villages all in the name of eradicating "Satan".
If you had any knowledge, you would know that "Satan" is actually maya, or illusion. Since we have imperfect and impure vision, we see the material world NOT AS IT IS. What we think we see is actually an illusion. When a person mistakes that illusion for the reality, he is in ignorance, and that ignorance is personified by the "Satan" character.
I thought you know about the metaphors contained within the Bible?
How convenient. Any religion which does not exactly match your personal beliefs, is "Satan". Do you see the elementary and circular reasoning at work here?
What the fuck does the judicial system have to do with my mentality? Man FUCK the judicial system.
No I don't you moron, I just got done telling your dumb ass that everything we see is an ILLUSION. Do you understand that? It means that seeing is NOT necessarily believing.
And yeah, most all eastern thought has its roots in the Vedas. SO what? That does not mean that the Vedas are not authentic, it means that people will be people and will use things to further their selfish desires.
How many fuckin denominations are there which "claim" to have the perfect translation and interpretation of the Bible? There are HUNDREDS! SO FUCKIN WHAT?! That does not mean that the Bible is any less authoritative.
Man you really are a ignorant muthafucka. You obviously know nothing about sacred mantras. The entire universe is vibrating at all times. Even the Bible says "In the beginning, God said".. God "SAID", that means God is the source of all sound vibration. By chanting mantras or singing gospels, one tunes in to that divine vibration of the Supreme Lord. Of course, I do not expect you to understand that.
I bet your silly ass doesn't even know that the pyramids were built through the use of mantras. Mantras are powerful enough to lift 50 ton bricks, or transport one's soul throughout the cosmic manifestation.
It doesn't sound similar at all. You are arguing like a 5 year old and reaching for things because you don't even know what the fuck you are arguing against.
Sure, no problem. Why don't you just hop in my time machine and we'll go holla at him. I can't "prove" that Krsna existed any more than you can "prove" that Jesus did. You back on that ole pre-school shit again.
Hahahhahhaaa keep talkin out your ass mayn. Hindu people accept the Gods of the Vedas, and Krsna is *repeatedly* referred to as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Hindus, however choose to focus on Brahman, the impersonal unmanifested reality.
You say Krsna is mythological, but that Jesus is factual. You can't prove either of your statements to be true, so it is obvious that you are basing your claims on sentiment and nothing more. The reality is that they are both factual.
Are you serious?! You say that I present pre-school arguments and then you spit this bullshit?! Damn homie, that shit aint no heartbreaker. Its just a display of ignorance of Krsna, reincarnation, and his actions.
Which shows that you REALLY do not know what sanatana-dharma is. It is the eternal religion of the eternal soul. Therefore, only a sucka ass fool decides to "choose" a religion.
"It just so happens"? The Bible is the ONLY Holy scripture? That's a "fact" I can't argue?
COME ON DOG, you are OBVIOUSLY placing your love for the Bible above common sense and rationale. You are not giving me facts, you are giving me YOUR OPINIONS and calling your opinions "facts".
If I take a chemistry class at a school, and then I walk outside and say "ONLY my chemistry class is credible, all other chemistry classes are mythological and false!" Do you see that such a claim is ignorant at best and downright fuckin retarded at worst?
The old "if you don't agree with me then you are ignorant" argument, huh? Real convincing. Miggidy and the Bible is right, the rest of the world who does not agree is ignorant.
Sure it is, you just don't got the nuts to come right out and say it.
Yup, as I said, I do not doubt the credibility of the Bible. So what?
There is a reason it is the largest religion in the world. It is the most basic, simple, and easily bastardized faith on the earth, and most people are quite unintelligent.
"You mean all I have to do is believe that Christ died for my sins?! Sign Me Up!"
The Vedas are not like that. The Vedic scripture is like a diamond dealer. A diamond dealer is only going to be approached by a very select few who can afford to buy his diamonds. Everybody wants a diamond, but not everybody wants to do what it takes to earn one. Therefore not everyone is meant to receive the diamonds embedded within the Vedic scripture. Those who can afford diamonds go to the Vedas, yet there are many other places (Christianity) for those who cannot.
Unlike you, however, I do not make the claim that ONLY the Vedas are authentic. I know that they are, and I know that the Bible is. I do not need to try to discredit other scripture in order to make one appear superior.
Hahahhaa, how convenient. People convert TO it because it is credible, but when they LEAVE it, it is because it is too strict?!?
People leave Christianity because there are TOO MANY unanswered questions, and the average preacher does nothing but spout out useless rhetoric, kinda like you do so well.
How do you know that the "facts" you presented are legitemate? Am I supposed to just accept them? And when I present "facts" to you, what are the odds that you will dismiss them categorically as being "myth"?
What the fuck are you talking about? I believe in God, I know who He is, and I never downplay Him. God is not a hallucination.
YOU, on the other hand, would not believe in Krsna even if He showed himself to you. Why not? Because Krsna is not a part of "Christianity". So don't try to lump me in with your exclusionary mentality, I know God and I know He is the reality behind the illusion.
I'm not skeptic of his resurrection. I KNOW HE WAS RESURRECTED. So try again.
Damn man you obviously are borderline illiterate. I said before and I will repeat for your reading pleasure, I believe in Jesus, his divinity, and that he was the messiah. Do you get it?
All you see is that my beliefs do not STOP at Christ, so you go on these strawmen crusades, making arguments for me that I don't even hold, and then trying to defeat them.
You think of Satan as this entity who is willfully causing harm and destruction to the world? See, that is the danger. Fanatics like you are the ones who run around labelling everything they do not know about as "Satan", killing people and burning villages all in the name of eradicating "Satan".
If you had any knowledge, you would know that "Satan" is actually maya, or illusion. Since we have imperfect and impure vision, we see the material world NOT AS IT IS. What we think we see is actually an illusion. When a person mistakes that illusion for the reality, he is in ignorance, and that ignorance is personified by the "Satan" character.
I thought you know about the metaphors contained within the Bible?
How convenient. Any religion which does not exactly match your personal beliefs, is "Satan". Do you see the elementary and circular reasoning at work here?
What the fuck does the judicial system have to do with my mentality? Man FUCK the judicial system.
No I don't you moron, I just got done telling your dumb ass that everything we see is an ILLUSION. Do you understand that? It means that seeing is NOT necessarily believing.
You fuckin gotta be kidding me? Since you are such a Bible scholar I'm sure you are aware of who Jesus appeared to after his resurrection? And do you remember what happened when she went and told what she had seen? Do you remember reading about how they said that because they did not see it for themselves that they would not believe her?
But yet it was the "judicial system" that created this type of thought huh?
Do you just make this shit up as you go along?
But yet it was the "judicial system" that created this type of thought huh?
Do you just make this shit up as you go along?
miggidy.....
You are still assuming as if Vyasadeva holds beliefs against the bible, when he doesn't. He has stated it multiple times. You are arguing the narrow against the broad. He believes in Christ just as he believes in Krsna. Just as Krsna manifests in different ways, so does Christ. Do you actually believe Christ was limited to the confines of a physical body? Or do you understand the concept of spirit?
Vyasadeva isn't attempting to put down Christianity. He was only using your logic against your own beliefs. Because, in the end, no matter how much proof you think you have, you have nothing absolute; especially since you never even met Jesus Christ first-hand and you have no "proof" of his miracles. You have faith in the teachings, which is as justified as people having faith in the teachings of any other doctrine. Like I stated in my last post: Reality versus myth is an abstraction of truth. If “All is Mind”, (and it is), then a distinction between "real" and "fake" is only relative to the observer (or the believer). Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that the Vedas are based on purely myth. Does this take away from its credibility? Or do you really take everything literal? Do you feel to believe in Krsna would mean one can not also believe in Christ? This seems to be what you are implying. Vyasadeva believes in the credibility of both and he sees how they are similar to each other. Stop assuming that because he is using your narrow minded logic against you that he does not believe in Christianity. Lets, once again, establish the premise that he adheres to the Vedas as well as the Bible. One does not replace the other......
You are still assuming as if Vyasadeva holds beliefs against the bible, when he doesn't. He has stated it multiple times. You are arguing the narrow against the broad. He believes in Christ just as he believes in Krsna. Just as Krsna manifests in different ways, so does Christ. Do you actually believe Christ was limited to the confines of a physical body? Or do you understand the concept of spirit?
Vyasadeva isn't attempting to put down Christianity. He was only using your logic against your own beliefs. Because, in the end, no matter how much proof you think you have, you have nothing absolute; especially since you never even met Jesus Christ first-hand and you have no "proof" of his miracles. You have faith in the teachings, which is as justified as people having faith in the teachings of any other doctrine. Like I stated in my last post: Reality versus myth is an abstraction of truth. If “All is Mind”, (and it is), then a distinction between "real" and "fake" is only relative to the observer (or the believer). Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that the Vedas are based on purely myth. Does this take away from its credibility? Or do you really take everything literal? Do you feel to believe in Krsna would mean one can not also believe in Christ? This seems to be what you are implying. Vyasadeva believes in the credibility of both and he sees how they are similar to each other. Stop assuming that because he is using your narrow minded logic against you that he does not believe in Christianity. Lets, once again, establish the premise that he adheres to the Vedas as well as the Bible. One does not replace the other......
n9ne,
V is bullshitting and I'm playing along with it.
He claims to believe in the bible but under what basis?
He dismisses the facts laid down by history and archeology as "my" opinion. Facts are facts, I don't make them up.
You can't argue against them.
He deny's the facts but yet he believes in the bible, that is pure contradiction....
Now if you feel that the Vedas are more than a myth, do you have any facts to back it up?
V certainly didn't have any, but yet he claims I'm the ignorant one.
Does that make sense to you?
How are my claims narrow minded?
We haven't seen anything supporting the Vedas, so you cannot label me narrow minded.
Call me narrow minded when we've found some kind of proof for the vedas and all other deities found in the myths.
But if there were, such proof, i'd be acceping them as legit.
There for I am not a dumb ass and accept them at this point.
Take the Sumerian tablets, I feel that they might be legit.
I think the Sumerians beliefs are connected to our bible.
The tablets tell a destinct story then that of the bible, but yet it depends how you look at both claims.
They can very well be the same exact story, just told in a different language and with different metaphors.
Now since you guys are so in "tune" and open to the possibility that other religions might be connected to the bible, how come you 2 haven't picked up on the Sumerian King Tablets?
Read about them, they are extremely interesting....
I know that foo! I brought that up to make my point that they have no validity. As far as we know that shit was made up.
For example Mormon's are what you might call a modern religion.
But it doesn't mean jack, we know everything about it's founder and his philosophy. But this information doesn't automaticly make it a legit religion.
And for very obvious reasons that I won't waste my time elaborating on.
All through history people love making shit up for their sanity's sake. And Hinduism is a perfect example,
Nothing says that the Vedas are authentic either, so I won't be jumping into conclusions like ypu are.
But I do agree that people abuse beliefs for personal gain, just ask the Holy prophet Mohammed.
Another Christian Kindergarden question.
There are exactly 2 denominations each with their own version of the bible. There is the Catholic bible, the eldest that contains the Deuterocanonical books that Protestants rebuked. Of coarse, these books are not included in their bibles.
Don't get it twisted, all of these bibles are basically the same, some are in King James version which is very difficult to read and then you have the NIV version that's basically in lamens terms.
I'm ignorant but look at what you come back with?
Those sound vibrations that you are talking about, are actually sound waves which in turn cause vibrations by bouncing off particles.
I learned that at my recording engineering class, but what would you know....
So in order to speak, we need air, but God hadn’t made air at the time when he spoke.
The fact that Moses says “God said” doesn’t literately mean God spoke!
How can God speak with no vocal cords?
It is said that when he speaks, you can hear it your head. He is a spiritual being and speaks through a way unknown by man. There for Moses writes in a way that every one can understand. You bro, are committing the common mistake of taking the bible out of it’s context. I wonder if you are even familiar with that?!?!?!?
Now if you really believe In the bible and the account of Jesus, and you believe in the mantras, why didn’t Jesus ever chant mantras in order to “tune” into god?
Wake up fool! That is an old ass theory!
Today, we are pretty sure how the pyramids were built.
How in the hell are you going to move stones with vibrations with out breaking them?
That is totally retarted! And pyramids aren’t only found in Egypt!
The Mayans and Aztecs had them, and they never believed in such vibrations.
The great pyramids were built using earthen and extant ramps.
Their remains have been found around the pyramids.
You spit out a comment like that and yet you have the odasity to say I sound like a 5 year old?
If that's the case then you're still in your father's nut sack!
Really? Prophets fortold the coming of Jesus, which is documented in the Dead Sea Scrolls at least a thousand years before he was born. Not only that but the scrolls were found about 3 thousand years later in 1947.
Renown non-believing Jewish historians have recorded Jesus and people who dwelled with him, in their record books.
Ancient cities, monuments, towns, and even people whom only the bible recorded, have actually been proven facts by archeological findings.
Man are you just joking around
or are you really that fucking retarted????
How can you even begin to compare Krishna with Jesus?
You know, that comment shows just how ignorant you are!
Listen dumb ass, were you aware that the Gospels are full of detail? So far, they have not lied in any way.
One example is the claim that Jesus was presented to the governer Pontius Pilot, whom had him killed.
No one knew if this character, it was just another make believe person from the bible skeptics said.
But his name came up in the old Roman record books that were found not long ago in ruins!
The gospels have yet to be proven inaccurate, 2000 years later. On the contrary, nothing but evidence has been unearthed to back up their authenticity.
Man it goes to show how IGNORANT you are on the subject.
I'll be cool though, you're just another youngster who thinks he knows everything.
Bro, do your homework! Or should I say finish it?
You are on the right path, but yet your journey is only getting started.
Continue your journey and you will see for yourself.
But you're really making yourself look bad for speaking too soon.
Again, you totally eluded my question. Krishna supposedly reincarnated a number of times to fight battles. You say that he retired and became the presonality of Godhead.
That’s what you say, good. In a way Hindus claim Krishna became God or part of God, again in a way. Who in the hell was God before Krishna then?
I know the myth claims there is one God, but that’s not what Hinduism teaches.
There is one God with multiple personalities and now you are saying that some warrior who supposedly fought monsters, now has become a personality.
Cool, why then all have all these idols?
You believe in the bible, God clearly states that we cannot have any idols, yet the Eastern spiritual religions have hordes of them.
Another thing, if you believe the bible then you know that according to God and Jesus, the bible is the complete story. Everything is covered in it and nothing resembling the Eastern religions is found in the bible. If you supposedly believe in the bible, why do you believe in these bullshit Vedas?
As a believer of the bible, you shouldn’t believe in other Gods.
I know what you are saying, it is the same God. Bullshit, it’s not covered in the old testament there for it’s not the same God.
You are contradicting your beliefs and I can see that you are very confused.
V is bullshitting and I'm playing along with it.
He claims to believe in the bible but under what basis?
He dismisses the facts laid down by history and archeology as "my" opinion. Facts are facts, I don't make them up.
You can't argue against them.
He deny's the facts but yet he believes in the bible, that is pure contradiction....
Now if you feel that the Vedas are more than a myth, do you have any facts to back it up?
V certainly didn't have any, but yet he claims I'm the ignorant one.
Does that make sense to you?
How are my claims narrow minded?
We haven't seen anything supporting the Vedas, so you cannot label me narrow minded.
Call me narrow minded when we've found some kind of proof for the vedas and all other deities found in the myths.
But if there were, such proof, i'd be acceping them as legit.
There for I am not a dumb ass and accept them at this point.
Take the Sumerian tablets, I feel that they might be legit.
I think the Sumerians beliefs are connected to our bible.
The tablets tell a destinct story then that of the bible, but yet it depends how you look at both claims.
They can very well be the same exact story, just told in a different language and with different metaphors.
Now since you guys are so in "tune" and open to the possibility that other religions might be connected to the bible, how come you 2 haven't picked up on the Sumerian King Tablets?
Read about them, they are extremely interesting....
I know that foo! I brought that up to make my point that they have no validity. As far as we know that shit was made up.
For example Mormon's are what you might call a modern religion.
But it doesn't mean jack, we know everything about it's founder and his philosophy. But this information doesn't automaticly make it a legit religion.
And for very obvious reasons that I won't waste my time elaborating on.
All through history people love making shit up for their sanity's sake. And Hinduism is a perfect example,
Nothing says that the Vedas are authentic either, so I won't be jumping into conclusions like ypu are.
But I do agree that people abuse beliefs for personal gain, just ask the Holy prophet Mohammed.
Another Christian Kindergarden question.
There are exactly 2 denominations each with their own version of the bible. There is the Catholic bible, the eldest that contains the Deuterocanonical books that Protestants rebuked. Of coarse, these books are not included in their bibles.
Don't get it twisted, all of these bibles are basically the same, some are in King James version which is very difficult to read and then you have the NIV version that's basically in lamens terms.
I'm ignorant but look at what you come back with?
Those sound vibrations that you are talking about, are actually sound waves which in turn cause vibrations by bouncing off particles.
I learned that at my recording engineering class, but what would you know....
So in order to speak, we need air, but God hadn’t made air at the time when he spoke.
The fact that Moses says “God said” doesn’t literately mean God spoke!
How can God speak with no vocal cords?
It is said that when he speaks, you can hear it your head. He is a spiritual being and speaks through a way unknown by man. There for Moses writes in a way that every one can understand. You bro, are committing the common mistake of taking the bible out of it’s context. I wonder if you are even familiar with that?!?!?!?
Now if you really believe In the bible and the account of Jesus, and you believe in the mantras, why didn’t Jesus ever chant mantras in order to “tune” into god?
Wake up fool! That is an old ass theory!
Today, we are pretty sure how the pyramids were built.
How in the hell are you going to move stones with vibrations with out breaking them?
That is totally retarted! And pyramids aren’t only found in Egypt!
The Mayans and Aztecs had them, and they never believed in such vibrations.
The great pyramids were built using earthen and extant ramps.
Their remains have been found around the pyramids.
You spit out a comment like that and yet you have the odasity to say I sound like a 5 year old?
If that's the case then you're still in your father's nut sack!
Really? Prophets fortold the coming of Jesus, which is documented in the Dead Sea Scrolls at least a thousand years before he was born. Not only that but the scrolls were found about 3 thousand years later in 1947.
Renown non-believing Jewish historians have recorded Jesus and people who dwelled with him, in their record books.
Ancient cities, monuments, towns, and even people whom only the bible recorded, have actually been proven facts by archeological findings.
Man are you just joking around
or are you really that fucking retarted????
How can you even begin to compare Krishna with Jesus?
You know, that comment shows just how ignorant you are!
Listen dumb ass, were you aware that the Gospels are full of detail? So far, they have not lied in any way.
One example is the claim that Jesus was presented to the governer Pontius Pilot, whom had him killed.
No one knew if this character, it was just another make believe person from the bible skeptics said.
But his name came up in the old Roman record books that were found not long ago in ruins!
The gospels have yet to be proven inaccurate, 2000 years later. On the contrary, nothing but evidence has been unearthed to back up their authenticity.
Man it goes to show how IGNORANT you are on the subject.
I'll be cool though, you're just another youngster who thinks he knows everything.
Bro, do your homework! Or should I say finish it?
You are on the right path, but yet your journey is only getting started.
Continue your journey and you will see for yourself.
But you're really making yourself look bad for speaking too soon.
Again, you totally eluded my question. Krishna supposedly reincarnated a number of times to fight battles. You say that he retired and became the presonality of Godhead.
That’s what you say, good. In a way Hindus claim Krishna became God or part of God, again in a way. Who in the hell was God before Krishna then?
I know the myth claims there is one God, but that’s not what Hinduism teaches.
There is one God with multiple personalities and now you are saying that some warrior who supposedly fought monsters, now has become a personality.
Cool, why then all have all these idols?
You believe in the bible, God clearly states that we cannot have any idols, yet the Eastern spiritual religions have hordes of them.
Another thing, if you believe the bible then you know that according to God and Jesus, the bible is the complete story. Everything is covered in it and nothing resembling the Eastern religions is found in the bible. If you supposedly believe in the bible, why do you believe in these bullshit Vedas?
As a believer of the bible, you shouldn’t believe in other Gods.
I know what you are saying, it is the same God. Bullshit, it’s not covered in the old testament there for it’s not the same God.
You are contradicting your beliefs and I can see that you are very confused.
Idiot! How many times are you going to say that someone else who has found, evidence supporting the bible, is only my opinion????
Why? Why must you insist that it is my opinion when someone else found the Dead Sea Scrolls, an ancient replica of the ark of the covnent, evidence for the great flood, the remains of Noah’s Ark, ancient Elba tablets supporting Genesis’s account of the city of Canaan, evidence supporting the bibles claim that the Jews moved to Egypt, evidence for Hittites, the walls of Jericho, ancient replica of the golden calf from Exodus proving that this calf was indeed an ancient idol, proof for king David and Solomon, proof of Assyrian king Sargon, Babylonian King Belshazzar and his son Nabonidus, findings of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lysanias the Tetrarch, City of Erastas, evidence for the cesus of Luke, finding of Caiaphas’s ossuary, and the Jewish historian confirmed the existance of John the Baptist.
These are a few “facts” of evidence supporting some of the many biblical claims.
I base my beliefs from facts such as these amongst other reasons.
Now I challenge you to come up with a list of facts ¼ the size of my list supporting your Hindu claim????
Christianity is not the most basic and simplest religion in the world.
It is very complex and it’s not simple. That’s why many are intimidated by it.
The main reason why it’s the largest religion in the world is mostly due to the Spanish inquisition whom spread it just about every where.
Of coarse, it also seems to be much more legit than other religions.
All of these things add up to make it the largest religion in the planet.
It is very strict, look at the 10 commanments, now look at how Jesus in Matthew made them even tougher. If you were to follow Jesus’s teachings, you would live a very restricted life compared to life today.
Other religions are very free compared to the bible.
You can have as many wives as you want. Worry about yourself and if you have spare change, give it to the needy. Some times that point isn’t even mentioned in most religions. The point I’m trying to make is that this freedom takes credibility away from these religions because they seem man made. Let me explain, if I were to make a religion, that’s how I would make it.
Not too demanding and rewarding to everyone who accepts it.
That’s right, exclusivity! Every religion in the world is exclusive as are the Vedas.
The church brain washes you into believing that salvation is exclusive to Christianity.
Bullshit! According to Jesus, now he said this, not me;
No man sees the father with out going through Jesus. Jesus makes it clear that those who believe in him make it to heaven.
But at the same time he doesn’t leave everyone else off the boat.
According to him, you will be judged according to how much light has been shined on you. Don’t believe what the currupted churches tell you.
Read the bible for the straight truth….
It’s not convenience, it’s true. Think about it, those who are brighter and open minded, convert to it. The people who leave it are ones who are brought up into it. People who were never taught the gospel correctly. Christianity has no unanswered questions, people are ignorant when it comes to the bible and make assumptions. They are not the ones to blame though, it’s the people responsible for preaching the gospel.
That is the reason why I stopped believing in God or anything from the bible.
I had so many questions and my family couldn’t answer them.
The priest at church couldn’t answer them either.
But then just a few months ago all those questions were answered when I started reading the bible for myself.
Read the bible bro, all of your questions are answered in there.
God pointed me in it’s direction and made sure that I would find my answeres in there.
And you can too, just read the whole thing…..
I challenged you to bring facts and you backed off.
Myths and facts are 2 different things so if you have any facts, bring them to the table.
I know you have said it many times, I’m just playing along with your childish game.
Why are you playing stupid and questioning me?
Are you looking for your answers through me?
How about you explain to me why “you” believe in the bible????
Research it and all your questions will be answerd, the truth is out there.
If krishna were to appear in front of my eyes, I wouldn’t question it.
I am not like you who would have to take him to the Supreme Court so that he argues his case. How ever since Krishna is only a myth, I speak through a hypothetical situation.
Fanatics like me? I only believe in what is true.
I’m no fan of anyone but the 49ers!
I keep my mind opened and read the bible, that doesn’t make me a fan.
Why would I kill if I follow the bible?
That would make me a hypocrit! I harm no one now that I’ve learned that Jesus is real.
Not even my enemies! Maybe you say that because that’s something that has crossed your mind.
I don’t blame everything on Satan, how ever I do feel that his influence has a lot to do with the down fall of man’s heart.
But we are naturally violent, we have a violent nature. Our evil can only be blamed on ourselves. You got me confused with religious extremists.
Goes to show how little you know about me but yet you’re quick to allow your ass to do the talking by labeling me.
I am against the church as well….
And where the hell you been? Satan’s an illusion?
How old are you? You claim to believe the teachings of the bible but then you claim that Satan is an illusion.
How many times are you going to contradict yourself????
The Judicial system that the United Snakes of America has embedded in this nation.
The court system!
Dahmer kills these kids, 50’s find body parts in his home but yet that ain’t good enough, you have to take him to trial to prove it first.
This entire court system is corrupt and people abuse it.
Then this shit is absorbed by empty minds like yourself and now every time shit comes out, it needs to go through loops before it’s considered authentic.
One doesn’t need such shit to draw a conclusion!
Scientists and asstronomers tell you that there isn’t life in other planets, but yet we are visited by UFO’s. Which are discreditted by everyone because we haven’t been able to find life in other planets. The fact that we haven’t seen anything and the fact that UFO’s seem far fetched does not discredit the idea that they are real.
First of all the universe is vast and anything is possible, so you have to keep an open mind. Plus you have to know how to sum shit up.
Thousands of people claim to have seen them, the government has claimed to have found one but then changed the story.
You gotta add it up and draw the conclusion that this shit might be real.
And what do you know, the government has acknowledged their existence.
The same can be done with the bible, we have similar facts like the situation above, if not even more solid facts. At one point you gotta make a judgment call, that’s what I did.
Now all I have to do is wait for the return of the Messiah to show the non-believers….
Now go ahead and critisize me for drawing the conclusion that the bible is correct, I have accepted the facts. Time after time, more info emerges suggesting the bible is legit. And nothing has arrose to discredit it.
You can go ahead and judge me now but I didn’t draw the conclusion alone on facts but through personal experience as well….
You gotta look at it this way too, if you don’t believe in eternal life, give it a try cuz you ain’t got nothing to lose. You’re gonna die any way. If you lose, you’ve lost nothing because you never had it.
But If you win, then you’ve won big time, you’ve been awarded eternal life.
Why not give it a shot? It’s like gambling with free money….