Is Religion the Source of Morality?

[Vyasadeva]

No no no, like I stated before, the Vedas are about 3 thousand years old.

And as I stated before, you are incorrect.

The idea dates back to 5 thousand years.

Wrong again. Veda means knowledge, and the knowledge is eternal.

The problem is that the scripture is very new.

Wrong again, the scripture is very OLD. It is the oldest writing known to man. Do yourself a favor and go to any university and inquire about the origins of the Vedas.

There is no proof for the Vedas going back to 5 thousand years, that idea is only a claim.

That is what you keep telling yourself in order to maintain the fabricated superiority of the Bible in your head. Archaeology and history disagrees with you.

I totally understand what you are saying. But you are simply twisting things around to make them compatible.

HOW am I "twisting things around"?! The simultaneous TRUTH of both equations is self-evident. Your attempt to reject the TRUTH is what is twisted.

Unfortunately we don’t know much about the life of Parashara, so I can’t speak of what inspired him to write the Vedas.

Wrong yet again! ***YOU*** don't know about the life of Parasara, but that does not mean that "we" don't. I can give you explicit details of his life, who his parents where, what he did in his life, etc.

Your powers of assumption and speculation are extraordinary.

It was my understanding that Krishna was a normal man who later became God.

Asides being a logical impossibility, the Vedas say nothing of the sort. Where did you get that idea from?

And on top of that, the Angels are all of male gender. There are no female angels in the scriptures so the Demigods and angels aren’t the same thing because the Vedas teach of Goddesses.

Don't you know that spirit souls, which would include angels, demigods, and goddesses, are genderless? Since they are pure spiritual beings, they are absolute, and not similar to our dualistic condition of man/woman. Spirit is man and woman and neither at the same time.

I agree, one should only worship the Father. But yet Buddhists, Hindu, and Catholics pray to servants of God.

Buddhists do not worship God, they attempt to reach nirvana by meditation on the void. Hindus are mostly polytheistic, and Catholics are pretty confused.

Vaisnavas worship God the Father, Lord Sri Krsna, not His servants.

That’s what everyone claims. But only a select few know him personally.

Says who? You?! Hahahhaa, come on man, you are obviously spitting OPINION and not FACT.

The last one who knew God personally was Jesus.

Unless you are God you have no basis with which to make that statement. And once again you are incorrect.

After that, no one knows him. Me might come into your life, but you don’t know him personally.

More "Christian" dogma, and since you are not God, your claim is null and void.

Mother Teresa didn’t even know him personally, how is that you do?

*YOU* don't know what Mother Theresa knew, and you don't know what *I* know. You are not God.

If I’m fixated with the biblical view of God it’s because it is the only view of the true God.

You’re talking about the Spirit of God.

God is pure spirit.

Only those who can bring evidence to their claims get my attention.

And yet there is not one shred of evidence you can bring me which proves that there even exists a God. So your attention means what now?

Moses and Jesus performed many miracles with thousands of eyewitnesses, proving that God was with them..

And so did Krsna, He performed countless miracles in front of thousands of eyewitnesses proving that He was God.

People like the prophet Mohammed never performed a miracle, proving that God was not behind him.

What backwards rationale you are using. Not performing miracles does not mean that God is not with a person. Only the lesser intelligent need displays of mystic power to realize the presence of God. Magicians can show you miracles. Love of God supersedes miracles.

All the Vedas speak of is both his physical and spiritual form.

It is clear that you have not read ANY Vedic literature, otherwise you would not continually make statements which show that you are speculating about things you do not know about.

The Vedas describe that God is PURE SPIRIT. He is NEVER manifest in a material form. His form is 100% spiritual.

"When you see that there is nothing beyond these three modes of material nature in all activities and that the Supreme Lord is transcendental to all these modes, then you can know My spiritual nature." (14.19)

Your contention that the Vedas describe a "physical" form of the Lord shows that you do not know His spiritual nature.

I am telling you that he has another form beyond what we know, even in the spiritual realm.

You are speculating and inventing things. Your assertion has no grounds in TRUTH.

The physical and spiritual realms are in the same dimension because they can intertwine with each other.

No they cannot. My material eyes cannot view the spiritual. My material hands cannot grab the spiritual.

Material and spiritual are like oil and water. They may be situated together in the same glass, but they never mix. So our spirit is in contact with the material and we are entangled in it, but we never intertwine with it, and the aim of life is to become untangled and return to the spiritual world.

That is why God booted Satan and his Demons down to Earth. That’s how you can explain their Satanic activities here on Earth.

I know better than to believe in the existence of Satan.

That is how Jesus was able to manipulate the environments when he made miracles. Jesus is an example of the physical realm, while the Holy Spirit is an example of the Spiritual realm, But God goes beyond both these realms.

No, Jesus was able to manipulate the material realm because he is NOT UNDER IT'S CONTROL like we are. We are controlled by the material and Jesus is eternally liberated and transcendental to it.

This third realm you speak of, what is it called and where do you get your information on it? It sounds alot like you are just speculating about it.

He does not reside inside these realms, they are only his creation to house Angels and man.

One minute ago you said you understood that God is omnipresent and all-pervading. Now you are saying that He does not reside within these realms. Which one is it? When you truly understand what TRANSCENDENTAL means, then you will know the answer.

Think of it as a software engineer who has created this world in his PC.
The world has everything from physical life, to the spiritual after life. The simulated realm is only a creation of the software engineer, there for he exists in a totally different dimension….

There is a huge flaw to your analogy. Spirit, by definition, is ETERNAL. It has NO beginning, NO middle, and NO ending. Something which is outside of the material realm of TIME, cannot be "created". It is eternally existing. The spiritual realm is eternal and ever-existing, and the material realm is that which is created.

Your hypotheetical 3rd realm does not make sense nor can you point to any information on it. It only resides in the speculative recesses of your mind.

So what you are saying is that even though the bible and the Vedas present different philosophies, they are referring to the same ultimate reality?

Yes, exactly. Just like water can be known as "liquid", "H2O", "fluid", "solution", yet they all describe the same reality.

It is just a different equation, but the answer is the same.
Yeah, when you look at it that way, they are speaking of one God just like the Quran.
But you have to understand that these God’s have different ideals.

I ALREADY UNDERSTAND THAT! :classic:

What YOU have to understand is that God is not LIMITED to any one of these philosophies or descriptions of His attributes. He is transcendental and limitless, therefore He can be described in a infinite number of ways.

The Biblical God is much more strict than the Vedic God.

You have GOT to be kidding?!?

The Vedas describe that eating food (meat or not) which was not offered to God is a sin. Sex for pleasure is a sin. Intoxication is a sin. Gambling is a sin. These are just the four REGULATIVE principles, they do not even touch on the strict rules for Deity worship.

Compare the 10 Commandments and Jesus’ philosophy about them with the 4 Vedic laws?

Don't steal, don't kill, don't lie, don't covet your neighbor's wife or his goods, no idols, no blasphemy, remember the sabbath, honor thy parents, no adultery, no other Gods.

These are BASIC information that are not strict at all. Common sense tells us not to do any of those things. These rules are not strict, they are rules for children.

And you will see that they contradict each other. Meaning that they didn’t come from the same being….

They don't contradict each other, they are simply DIFFERENT rules for DIFFERENT classes of men. The 10 commandments are for mlecchas and children, and the regulative principles are for those who are God conscious.

We agree in a lot of things, and I like your approach of trying to bridge the gap between Islam, Judaism, Christianity, and Orientalism. But the only thing these beliefs have in common is the idea of one supreme God….

Actually we do agree on alot of points, but I am not trying to bridge any gaps. There are different religions for a reason.

Peace.

 

[XianeX]

quite to the contrary in acts there is. look harder. its plain as day. the sequence of events in acts are different than those in the "gospels" even in how it is said that judas died.

i think i must share in vy's laughter

 

[HERESY]

heres an example on why a person should STUDY hebrew.

in regards to jesus being hung on a tree or the death of judas by hanging or judas hitting the rocks.......have any of you studied hebrew and greek to see how words are used, conjunctions etc etc etc......

i suggest some of you do that.

your questions about judas or jesus death will be explained.

please study hebrew and greek

ok im gone for good now.


:H:

ps keep in mind that in regards to judas it never said he DIED in the field. this is where knowledge of hebrew and greek comes into play BIG TIME. OH YEAH IM OUT 4 GOOD.

 

[miggidy]

quite to the contrary in acts there is. look harder. its plain as day. the sequence of events in acts are different than those in the "gospels" even in how it is said that judas died.

i think i must share in vy's laughter

Let me join you in laughter X,
there isn't anywhere in Acts that suggests Jesus was hung on a tree it is only a misconception of people lacking knowledge on the subject. You and other ignorant people "to" the subject take the scribes out of context and jump into conclusions. Here's what Heresy's referring to;
Had you researched the subject you would know that early Jewish people’s way of dealing with blasphemy was through stoning people to death and then hanging them on trees.
It was common for people to attribute blasphemy punishable by tree hanging even though that doesn’t exclude them from death by execution.
And execution could come in many ways, more common were stoning and crucifixions.
You see the executions were carried out first, then came the hanging on a tree deal.
The hanging on a tree deal was to show that the blasphemous person was put to death by God’s curse on such people. It is a Jewish belief that everyone who is guilty of blasphemy will be killed by God in the form of hanging on a tree. The Jewish people used the word “tree” in a metaphoric manner to describe the death of a blasphemer. That’s why you find the word “tree” not only in Acts, but also in the books of Peter and Paul. The same books who make it very clear that Jesus was crucified by the Romans. Remember now, the Romans carried out their executions via crucifixion only….

And as for Judas’s death, Acts just goes more into detail as to how Judas died.
Judas did not trip and fall as most people assume Acts implies,
his body simply slipped from where he was hanging and his insides spilled everywhere.
This was written to reinforce the fact that Judas did die because there were false stories fabricated around that time that Judas never hung himself. But that’s not to say that this really didn’t happen. What do you think would happen to a corpse after days of being hung? Eventually the decaying body will break away at the neck and splatter against the ground….

I hope this answers your question.

Peace,
Miggidy

 

[miggidy]

The text is over 5,000 years old, and prior to them being written down they were passed on strictly by mantra for millenia.

LMAO! Dog you have got to be kidding!? The book of Genesis is like pre-school material when contrasted with the Vedas. There is NO WAY that the transcendental knowledge of the Vedas are inspired by that book, because the Vedas predate it.

Where is the evidence that the Vedas are 5 thousand years old? It's nowhere to be found, it is only a claim.
It does seem that Genesis inspired the Vedas, only that the original Vedic writers gave it their own twist. It's clearer than water.

Meat eating is an act of ignorance. It is sinful if one does not offer the meat to Kali before eating it, and eating anything without offering it is also sin.

"The devotees of the Lord are released from all kinds of sins because they eat food which is offered first for sacrifice. Others, who prepare food for personal sense enjoyment, verily eat only sin."(B.G. 3.13)

Jesus speaking in the Essene Gospel of Peace: "For I tell you truly, he who kills, kills himself, and whoso eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats of the body of death...Kill not, neither eat the flesh of your innocent prey, lest you become the slaves of Satan. For that is the path of sufferings, and it leads unto death."

LOL! It's also a sin to eat anything that's not offered to the deity Kali? Says who? Oh yeah the Vedas do.
And again you are using false gospels that were not inspired by God that talk about Jesus.
Look up the history of the Essene gospel.
Now back to the meat eating convo, it's interesting to me that you would take this mythology seriously.
The entire idea of meat eating being considered a sin kills the whole concept.
More on that later....

Illicit sex is sex for the purpose of sense gratification. Sex is permitted only for begetting children. Because sex pleasure is the highest pleasure one can have through his material body, it is the most common sinful activity and the hardest to refrain from. Sex binds us to the material world and hampers spiritual progress. Why do you think the Bible says that to even LOOK at a woman in a lustful manner is to have already commited adultery with her?

Orgasms and the clitoris have NOTHING to do with child bearing. The fact that we enjoy sex does not mean it is not sinful to endlessly indulge in it. There is some sick fucks who get an orgasm when they kill people, does their enjoyment mean that the act is not sinful?

Sex pleasure is the highest pleasure, no question, and it is on the basis of sex attraction that we are in this material world in the first place. Women are the personification of maya, or the illusion of the material world, and our inability to resist their allure and form is what keeps us here in conditioned entanglement. The whole world is spinning and the universe is oscillating due to sex attraction alone. Sex attraction is so strong it binds the atoms together.

Ok and how does this support the Vedic idea that sex is for childbearing purposes only?
When Jesus said that it's a sin to even look at women in a lustful manner he was simply reinforcing God's commandment of no cheating. He just made it clear that it's not what we do, but it's our intentions that count as well. What's the point of not cheating if you desired to do so in the first place?
You are not of pure heart in God's eyes.

Orgasms and the female clitoris have everything to do with child bearing. It is the first step to conceiving a child. God made it this way, but people abuse this God given pleasure.
Just like people abuse other things in life.... Yeah I agree, these people are wicked....

The difference between demons and demigods is that a beautiful woman very easily attracts the minds of demons, but she cannot attract the mind of a godly person. A godly person is full of knowledge, and a demoniac person is full of ignorance. Just as a child is attracted by a beautiful doll, similarly a demon, who is less intelligent and full of ignorance, is attracted by material beauty and an appetite for sex. The godly person knows that this nicely dressed and ornamented attraction of high breasts, high hips, beautiful nose and fair complexion is maya. All the beauty a woman can display is only a combination of flesh and blood. Sri Sankaracarya has advised all persons not to be attracted by the interaction of flesh and blood; they should be attracted by the real beauty In spiritual life.

I agree for even the bible speaks of this, demons are attracted to women.
Hell, even angels were attracted to women at one point, it's in Genesis.

I wonder if you have any idea of what you are talking about, because the author of the Kama Sutra NEVER HAD SEX.

How does this change things?

You continue to display ignorance. There is ONE author of the ENTIRE Vedic scripture, Sri Vyasadeva. There was not a group of writers. The Vedas were written by an incarnation of Visnu.

Umm no. Check again, Parashara started and then Vyasadeva finished them.
That is only 2 people, or 1 person according to you. How can these people be taken seriously? As far as I know there weren't any witnesses to the incarnation of Visnu. These are the claims of 2 men, or one man according to you. Can you supply some facts here? Facts from outside sources would help?

We are NOT a carniverous species, that is simply what you have been conditioned to believe. Our teeth are obviously designed not for tearing and ripping flesh, but for chewing fruits, grains, and vegetation. Any semi-intelligent dentist will tell you that. It is due to the canine teeth that people think we are omnivores, and while we have the ability to chew and tear meat, we are not meant to do so.

Nonsense. There have been countless vegetarians who have lived into their 90s and 100s who NEVER ate a piece of meat. Meat is NOT necessary for survival, and if you want to quote Genesis, what does "Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat." mean to you? God clearly says "I have given you plants, trees, and fruits, and to you it shall be for meat."

Or Genesis 9:3-4 "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat."

ANIMALS are SUPPOSED to eat ANIMALS!

HUMANS are NOT ANIMALS. You may have adopted animalistic behavior as a result of your conditioning, and maybe you can't put your animalistic desires in check, but you are a HUMAN, *NOT* an ANIMAL.

More nonsense. How does people not eating meat = personal gain?! The opposite is true, by conditioning man to eat meat, the slaughterhouses have reaped personal gain. Meat eating is unhealthy, it is sinful, and it dulls the mind. You are simply proving the Vedic teachings correct.

Whatever mayn, keep dulling your mind and believing what you want. Your arguments are simply trying to justify your uncontrollable tongue. You don't eat meat because it is necessary for your survival, you eat it because you like how it tastes. Just be honest.

Ok this is humorous now. I am not even going to debate this. We are a carnivorous species whether you like it or not. Our metabolism is not made for plant life, carbohydrates are killing people now days through obesity. We need proteins to keep up with our metabolism or else we get fat and over weight. Try feeding a lion veggies and you’ll see what I’m talking about.

And that quote you got from Genesis is altered a bit. Speaking of Genesis, this whole debate is killed when you read “Cain and Abel”. Genesis states that Abel kept flocks and Cain worked the soil. Cain was an agriculturer, what was Abel?

Miss me with your dimestore analysis. All you know about the Vedas is what you have seen on some website. That info is not trustworthy. I have gone to India, learned Sanskrit, and studied the Vedas with college professors. On top of that I follow Srila Prabhupada, who is a guru in the line of disciplic succession which originated with Krsna. I am not receiving any distorted information, contrary to your baseless assertions.

This is getting even funnier. What I know about the Vedas is what is there to know about them.
Pure mythology bro. And don’t even begin to tell me that you went to India to study the Vedas. India has a history of teaching false history to its people for selfish induced gain. And they continue to do so today. Very similar to what Islamic countries do to their school kids, and right up there with what is going on in American schools today.
Go ahead and study all the Sanskrit you want, I assume this is how you claim to know God.
Do you have any proof that Sanskrit actually works?

***Cont.***

 

[miggidy]

And if you knew anything about what happened with the Vedas in the 19th century, you would know that it was English scholars who attempted to discredit the Vedas because the knowledge found in them is too great and it overshadows the dogma they were trying to establish in the name of Christ.

YES! EXACTLY! They were tampered with by the English who wished to DISCREDIT THEM! Therefore if one is referring to the Puranas which have been changed and altered, they are not getting the pure original message. I do NOT refer to any changed literature, I have the original, translated by a spiritual master who was a consummate Sanksrit scholar, who also spoke perfect Bengali, Hindi, and English.

The need by the English to poison the Puranas only goes to strengthen the argument that the knowledge contained in them THREATENED the control that the "Christian" church wished to impose on the masses. The Vedas blow the lid off all that dogmatic and poisonous nonsense that the church promulgates, and that is why the church had to try and change them, in vain I might add.

Dude, listen to yourself. Your theology contradicts itself.
That is only an assumption. Why would greedy men alter the Vedas out of fear for what they revealed?
These men were crusaders and not true Christians, they altered the Vedas for personal gain.
And think about it, the British alterations actually add credibility to the Vedic claims.
It seems that these men altered the Purana to make it appear as if it were written before any book found in the bible. Only to discredit the bible…. But they screwed up because they left their fingerprints on the scribes.

You are missing the point, the crusades are a result of snakes taking over the church. Disguising themselves as sons of God, but only to pursue their evil deeds.
The bible itself, warns about this all over the scripture.

More nonsense. The Vedas existed prior to the Bible, and before they were written down the knowledge was transmitted for millenia through sound vibration (mantra).

Your claim is nothing but wishful thinking, let it go bro.

There’s no evidence to support your claim

Now I see where you've gotten that nonsense that Jesus = Prajapati. That website is full of nonsense, I lost count of the untruths after about 2 paragraphs.

I don’t think that website even mentions Prajapati, which tells me that you didn’t even read it.

No Jesus is eternally pure. It is the majority of his followers who are wicked.

True, but the very same thing can be said of all other religious groups.
Including yours….

I understand your mind's desire to categorize everything, but what it demonstrates is that you do not yet see with transcendental vision.

Nope, what it demonstrates is that you know little about the biblical God.
You keep comparing him with Krishna, but according to your beliefs, Krishna is a spiritual being.
Only the Holy Spirit is a spiritual being according to the bible. Study the trinity concept bro….

The Biblical God is describing God according to a particular time in human history. The Vedas have no beginning, they eternally emanate from the sound vibrations of the flute of Krsna.

That is not what Vedic history suggests.
For starters “Hindu” is attributed to a person of Persian ethnicity. In a way it means “Indian”. And it was probably used to describe the Indian people when the Muslims invaded.
Now I am using history only. You should know that Hinduism is a result of the clash of 2 different people. The people who lived in the Indus River Valley around 300 BC and the Aryan people from the Baltic region. These people brought their own religion which is described in the Vedas themselves. There is no indication that the Vedas were written no earlier than 1500 BC.

I still do not understand what YOU base your claims under when you state that the Vedas are 5000 years old. You keep asking where I get my info from.
Here is one of my main sources:
http://www.meta-religion.com/World_Religions/Hinduism/hinduism.htm

They are connected because they both describe God. They are different because they describe different realizations of Him.

You are connecting Krishna and God with your imagination.
Hinduism is a pantheistic religion and you know that. Well actually I wonder if you know what that means.

You are simply telling me what you WANT to be true.

How ironic, you’re describing yourself.

Your mistake is thinking that the Deities of the Vedas are "created". They are eternal beings with their own eternal attributes.

What you don't seem to understand is that even more important than the written scribes is the sound vibration of chanting the mantras. The parampara, or disciplic succession of guru/disciple, has insured that the pure original verses have been preserved through this medium.

If you had any knowledge at all you would know that what we know of the Vedas comes as a result of the spiritual masters in the line of the gaudiya-sampradaya, through the medium of disciplic succession. Spiritual masters such as Narada, Vyasa, Madhva, Lord Caitanya, Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, Bhaktivinode Thakur, and Srila Prabhupada. This disciplic succession goes all the way back to KRSNA Himself.

Vedic deities not created? Says who? Oh you mean the same cats that were in another world intoxicated with Sama Veda?
This is more of the same bro. The Native Americans claim to speak to spirits when they hit the peace pipe.
Back when I used to intoxicate myself, I too saw and heard things that weren’t there.
The difference between your boys and I, is that I didn’t pay attention to the voices….

Where are you getting this shit playa?! Did the same cat that wrote that fraudulent website give you this faulty information?

VYASADEVA wrote the Vedas, get it right. Parasara was the father of Vyasadeva and was a great sage, but he did not write anything! See if you really knew what you were talking about, you would know that originally there was one Veda, the Atharva-Veda.

Yes and Vyasadeva was just following his dads foot steps.

****Cont.****

 

[miggidy]

When Vyasadeva incarnated, it was just prior to the coming age of Kali, which necessitated the division of the Vedas into the 4 main, the 108 Upanisads, the 18 Puranas, the Mahabharata, and the Srimad Bhagavatam.

The Mahabharata has over 100,000 veres. The Bhagavatam has over 18,000. In total there are hundreds of thousands of verses, ALL compiled by ONE person. And if you had any understanding of the profound depth of the philosophical wisdom and spiritual truth within the Vedas, then you would know that it is simply IMPOSSIBLE that some dude just "created" the whole thing in order to brainwash people. You've obviously not read or studied them, so I can't expect you to realize that, but I am amused at your attempts to discredit them using this faulty internet information.

More cut and paste from some erroneous website, huh? The 18 Puranas are not mythologies any more than the Bible is a mythology. Your propaganda is simply incorrect. And as I explained above, Vyasadeva compiled the ENTIRE Vedic literature, which was previously transmitted through sound vibration. Vyasadeva divided the Veda into 4 Vedas, then he divided those 4 into the 108 Upanisads, then he wrote the 18 Puranas, and then summarazed all those in the Vedanta-sutra.

Veda means knowledge.
anta means end.
sutra means a condensed work which carries immense meaning and importance while remaining flawless (i.e. Kama sutra).

And then for the benefit of the degraded society within which we currently reside, he wrote a fifth Veda, the Mahabharata, within which the Bhagavad-Gita is found.

Man you keep hitting me with nothing but claims. I am talking about actual history here. The Rig Veda was the very first. The other 3 were written far later in a span over 1000 years.
And the very first Veda talks about the deities Agni, the fire god and Indra the Sky god and also of war.
Do you see how this falls right in place with Greek mythology?
Your beliefs seem to come out of the New Age Philosophy also known as NAM, but with a vedic twist.
Look at the Vedas in their pure form.
Purasa is the ultimate reality in the Rig Veda, the demigods stem from him.
This is 100% pure mythology. Sorry man countless numbers of other Indigenous groups have come up with very similar beliefs. And it is a result of man’s mortal search for God and immortality.
That is why God sent his son, to clear things up. And in spite of that, people are still lost. Creating pantheistic religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism. The reason why these religions are so popular with people, is because they are very tolerant of what seems to be contradictions in other religions.
Hinduism can co-exist with evolution and spirituality, making it perfect for people looking for an alternative to the other major religions of the world.

It makes perfect sense. THAT WAS NOT HIS MISSION! Jesus was preaching to meat-eaters and barbaric savages and appeared to teach them to love God.

Contradiction! You are implying that Jesus was out to create mass confusion between people in Europe and Asia. Look at your statement, think about what you just said. Had Jesus really been hiding the entire story from these people, then he inadvertently is responsible for the religious wars that have been fought over the course of history.
But that it’s not that, Jesus spoke the truth and didn’t spare anything.
It was man’s dark heart that widened the gap between the people by imposing different belief systems.
It is no coincidence that the bible remains the most evidence-backed scripture in history.
Quote from Isaiah 48:16- "I have not spoken in secret from the beginning”.

No, it would not make sense, especially given the climate in which Jesus appeared. Look at you, you are dismissing them with no grounds other than your preconceived biases, but if you were among the Pharisees, you would have KILLED Jesus just for mentioning a God other than YHWH.

LMAO!!!! There are no grounds for them in the first place….

God is infinitely complex, He is not simple. But for the simple people, He makes Himself known to them in their simple terms.

You act like every man can understand the same thing. Why is there a pre-algebra class and an advanced calculus class? Shouldn't there just be ONE math class? Of course not, different levels of intelligence require different levels of learning. The Bible is for the beginner class, and the Vedas are for the advanced class.

You say that the bible is for beginners yet you do not understand what the Holy Trinity is about.
The idea of the Holy Trinity contradicts with your Vedic beliefs. It is so obvious that you are stuck in the Vedic point of view because your words indicate how little knowledge you have about the Trinity.
I urge you to read up on it! For starters you have to understand that God is the unseen, omnipresent ultimate reality, revealed in and by the Son, and experienced in and by the Holy Spirit.
Do you understand that the Father is the Thought behind it, the Son is the Word calling it forth, and the Spirit is the Deed making it a reality????
God thought the plan out, Jesus constructed the plan, and the Holy Spirit holds everything in order.
There is no transcendental Krishna deity, that is a totally different concept. Jesus is the living God whom sacrificed himself for our sake. The Holy Spirit is he whom keeps everything in order. He is the invisible forces known to us. He is gravity, he is energy, and he is both the small and large forces that hold atoms of matter together keeping them from falling apart, he keeps the universe and everything in it, in perfect order. God the father is transcendental of everything, all knowing and omni-present, through time and space.

Dude, before you respond educate yourself on the Trinity.
And absorb it as a different concept of God….

Wrong again, the scripture is very OLD. It is the oldest writing known to man. Do yourself a favor and go to any university and inquire about the origins of the Vedas.

So are you implying that you went to some University and studied these claims you speak of?
If so, you got ripped off! Go and ask for a refund LOL!

That is what you keep telling yourself in order to maintain the fabricated superiority of the Bible in your head. Archaeology and history disagrees with you.

Where is the proof? Trust me, I really wanna know.

Asides being a logical impossibility, the Vedas say nothing of the sort. Where did you get that idea from?

Look for historical evidence on Krishna the legend. A mere warrior who became a hero to his people.
This is where I believe this whole Vedic claim stemmed from.
A story, then a Legend, becomes a myth, and now a religion.

Don't you know that spirit souls, which would include angels, demigods, and goddesses, are genderless? Since they are pure spiritual beings, they are absolute, and not similar to our dualistic condition of man/woman. Spirit is man and woman and neither at the same time.

That is incorrect even the Vedic demigods have gender. But that’s not my area of expertise.
Angels have gender, it’s all over the bible. They might be spiritual beings but many of them have gender related names. That is why it’s written that through the years, both Angels and Demons have lusted for women. Not for men….

Says who? You?! Hahahhaa, come on man, you are obviously spitting OPINION and not FACT.

Yes and where are your facts? You claim to know God personally but you cannot even begin to understand him other than through Vedic concept.

And yet there is not one shred of evidence you can bring me which proves that there even exists a God. So your attention means what now?

The evidence is there, right in front of your face. You just have to know what to look for. Most people don’t even know how to look in the first place.

And so did Krsna, He performed countless miracles in front of thousands of eyewitnesses proving that He was God.

And so did countless of other men during his time. This was during pre-floodl times.
Krisha died just like everyone else did…. Except for Noah and his family….

What backwards rationale you are using. Not performing miracles does not mean that God is not with a person. Only the lesser intelligent need displays of mystic power to realize the presence of God. Magicians can show you miracles. Love of God supersedes miracles.

You missed my point. One doesn’t need proof that God is with you. But people during those times did need it. And Mohammed didn’t display anything but his words….

****Cont.****

 

[miggidy]

It is clear that you have not read ANY Vedic literature, otherwise you would not continually make statements which show that you are speculating about things you do not know about.

How does it feel to have the game backfire on you?

The Vedas describe that God is PURE SPIRIT. He is NEVER manifest in a material form. His form is 100% spiritual.
Your contention that the Vedas describe a "physical" form of the Lord shows that you do not know His spiritual nature.

No, the Vedas describe God as a spiritual being.

No they cannot. My material eyes cannot view the spiritual. My material hands cannot grab the spiritual.

Material and spiritual are like oil and water. They may be situated together in the same glass, but they never mix. So our spirit is in contact with the material and we are entangled in it, but we never intertwine with it, and the aim of life is to become untangled and return to the spiritual world.

But oil and water exist in the same bottle even though they cannot mix.

I know better than to believe in the existence of Satan.

That is the biggest mistake one can ever make.
Ultimately it is that which blinds you from seeing the entire picture….

This third realm you speak of, what is it called and where do you get your information on it? It sounds a lot like you are just speculating about it.

I stated it earlier, read about the Holy Trinity concept.

One minute ago you said you understood that God is omnipresent and all-pervading. Now you are saying that He does not reside within these realms. Which one is it? When you truly understand what TRANSCENDENTAL means, then you will know the answer.

He does reside within these realms through the Son and the Holy Spirit. God the father is transcendental in this way and is of another realm if you can even call it that.

There is a huge flaw to your analogy. Spirit, by definition, is ETERNAL. It has NO beginning, NO middle, and NO ending. Something which is outside of the material realm of TIME, cannot be "created". It is eternally existing. The spiritual realm is eternal and ever-existing, and the material realm is that which is created.

You are going by the Vedic definition of Spirit. Think beyond that….

You have GOT to be kidding?!?

The Vedas describe that eating food (meat or not) which was not offered to God is a sin. Sex for pleasure is a sin. Intoxication is a sin. Gambling is a sin. These are just the four REGULATIVE principles, they do not even touch on the strict rules for Deity worship.

The bible instructs all of those except the restriction to eat meat. The others are biblical pre-school compared to the 10 commandments.

They don't contradict each other, they are simply DIFFERENT rules for DIFFERENT classes of men. The 10 commandments are for mlecchas and children, and the regulative principles are for those who are God conscious.

So according to you. Christians and Muslims are not God conscious?

Actually we do agree on alot of points, but I am not trying to bridge any gaps. There are different religions for a reason.

Peace.

Obviously….

Peace,
Miggidy

 

[XianeX]

::caps-lock and quotes for emphasis and to indicate words which should be looked up::

how funny, sounds like apologetics to me. "the acts" DID mention him being "hanged" from a tree. being "HANGED" and being CRUCIFIED are TWO TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS. like the red and purple robes that the gospels disagree on jesus wearing to the crucifiction. and the patriarchal deliniation of jesus that proves his human descent from davids house although apologetics would have us believe that the two deliniations are attibuted to each parent.

the truth will "make" you free. dont fight it

this is my problem with christian literalists. when they come across something in the bible that is either spurious or contradictory they instantaneously discount it as either being something to take "spiritually" or something that is "allegorical" for something else.

take responsibility for the errors of your belief system or change what you believe.

@heresy so after judas fell and his guts burst out he got up went to a tree then "hanged" himself right? you dont need greek or hebrew to show how flawed the logic of that is.

or maybe he "hanged" himself then un "hanged" himself and then fell and his guts burst open? how ridiculous.

I wait for the day your eyes are opened my dear friend :h:?

 

[miggidy]

Call it apologetics or what ever you want. But the reality is that facts supporting the "apologetics" exist.

Your assumptions are contradicted when you read the gospels of both Peter and Paul who also make refference Jesus's death to tree hanging.
Read it yourself, don't go by what other people tell you.
Both Peter and Paul use the term "tree hung" to describe the Jesus's death due to blasphemy in the eyes of the Jews.
But both those gospels make it clear that Jesus was crucified....

Do you know that your assumptions on the events of the death of Judas are incorrect?
No where in Acts does it say that Judas fell and then lived to hang himself later or vice versa.

Read and compare the gospels for yourself!
I bet you cannot even specify where in Acts does it say Jesus was hung on a tree....
Proving my assumptions are facts. You are only basing your comments from the claims of non-believers.
This is ok as a book that is so highly regarded is always subject to skeptisism and crtisism.
What's interesting is that every other scripture regarding other religions is never put to test as much as the biblical scriptures are. And these other scriptures are full of contradictions and flaws, yet the bible gets picked on exclusively.
It's ok because what people do not realize is that their actions actually give the bible scripture more credibility by keeping their focus centered around them....

Peace,
Miggidy

 

[XianeX]

LOL i dont speak on what i havent read. maybe you missed heresy stepping in to point me to data that would nullify the pertinence of my claim. HE knows what im talking about and HE doesnt even agree with me. so undoubtedly "I" know what im talking about.

undoubtedly you dont know what the word "hanged" means. picc up a dictionary. and make sure the bible you are reading out of is king james (i only make reference from this version of the bible). being "hanged" and being crucified are two different things but i see you are too dense to figure this out.

undoubtedly YOU missed my sarcasm which was directed at heresy(i.e. "how ridiculos"). im sure he would not have mistaken my sarcasm for being an honest opinion. maybe you should READ what i say before you desire to dispute it.

i "will" not specify where because "i" know that its in there. you are the one who has the burden of disproving me. "i" know what "im" talking about. maybe you should take "your" own advice in reference to READING for YOURSELF. pacc your darts up before you try to throw them you have NOTHING to contest with other than opinion. i base my claims on being a "once-believer" who became illuminated by truth.

i speak TRUTH not fact.
a fact is: the sky is cloudy
a truth is: the sky was cloudy.
in other words just because a fact was given doesnt mean its the truth. even in law you are not judged by the truth you are judged by the facts which are debated to find the truth.

mariniate

the bible is contested because it boast so much to be so flawed. i can point out blatant flaws if i wished. BUT why would i waste my energy on a person who is BLINDLY BIASED. as the saying goes "blinded by the light". "cast not your pearls before swine"

criticism does not give credibility it gives publicity. get it right. if smoking weed is stupid and everybody said it was cool and you did it because everyone else said it wasnt stupid that would make you a stupid person.

ism is'muthafuka

 

[HERESY]

THIS IS WHY ONE SHOULD DTUDY HEBREW AND GREEK.

stauros: NOUN
stauroo: VERB

THEY APPEAR 74 TIMES IN THE N.T.

BEFORE ONE LABELS THIS (BEING HUNG ON A TREE/BRING CRUCIFIED) AS A CONTRADICTION ONE SHOULD RESEARCH ***HEBREW*** LAW/EXECUTION. YOU WILL FIND THAT **HEBREWS** HUNG PEOPLE FROM TREES AFTER STONING. IT WAS USED FOR APOSTATES,BLASPHEMERS AND THOSE UNDER GODS CURSE (BECAUSE OF SOMETHING THEY DID THAT WAS WRONG).

xylon:NOUN

xulon: MAN MAD TREE PRODUCT/STRUCTURE OR DEVICE OR MADE FROM TREES (THIS IS THE WORD USED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT WHEN IT IS SAID JESUS HUNG ON A TREE)

ROMANS USED CROSSES. RESEARCH ROMAN HISTORY AND EXECUTION FOR MORE INFO.

SO HOW DOES ONE DIE WHEN BEING CRUCIFIED? TOO MUCH PAIN? NO. BLOOD LOSE? NO. ASPHYXIATION.YES.

talah=TO BE PUT TO DEATH BY HANGING
kremannumi=TO SUSPEND (THIS IS THE WORD USED IN THE NT WHEN IT SAYS JESUS WAS HUNG FROM A TREE)

ets OR dendron= TREE

HAVE FUN PEOPLE. REMEMBER TO STUDY THE WORDS/TRANSLATIONS (NOT JUST THE KING JAMES) SO YOU CAN SEE HOW WORDS ARE USED,WHAT WORDS ARE USED ETC ETC ETC......


IN REGARDS TO JESUS WEARING A RED OR PURPLE ROBE TO HIS CRUCIFICTION HE WORE NEITHER. IF ONE READS HE OR SHE WILL PLAINLY SEE THAT THE ROBE WAS PLACED ON HIM BEFORE HE WAS MOCKED AND BEATEN. AFTER THE BEATING AND MOCKING HIS *OWN* CLOTHES WERE PLACED ON HIM. MARK 15:20 AND MATT 27:31. TO SAY HE WORE A PURPLE OR SCARLET ROBE TO THE CRUCIFICTION WOULD BE FOLLY.....

SO WHAT COLOR WAS IT? SCARLET? OR PURPLE?

TOLA'ATH AND KOKKINOS. PLEASE STUDY WORDS AND COLORS.

in regards to jesus being hung on a tree or the death of judas by hanging or judas hitting the rocks.......have any of you studied hebrew and greek to see how words are used, conjunctions etc etc etc......

i suggest some of you do that.

your questions about judas or jesus death will be explained.

please study hebrew and greek

ok im gone for good now.


:H:

ps keep in mind that in regards to judas it never said he DIED in the field. this is where knowledge of hebrew and greek comes into play BIG TIME. OH YEAH IM OUT 4 GOOD.

IN RESPONSE TO THAT SOMEONE TYPED THIS:

@heresy so after judas fell and his guts burst out he got up went to a tree then "hanged" himself right? you dont need greek or hebrew to show how flawed the logic of that is. or maybe he "hanged" himself then un "hanged" himself and then fell and his guts burst open? how ridiculous.

I wait for the day your eyes are opened my dear friend :h:?

IN THE CASE WITH JESUS BEING HUNG OR CRUCIFIED I JUST SHOWED HOW WORDS ARE USED AND WHICH ONES ARE USED.

IN REGARDS TO JUDAS BEING HUNG ONE CAN GO WITH JUDAS HANGING HIMSELF AND THE ROPE SNAPPING,HIM HITTING THE GROUND AND SPILLING HIS GUTS......OR YOU CAN STUDY HEBREW AND GREEK TO SEE HOW WORDS ARE USED......MAYBE SEE IF JUDAS SPILLING HIS BOWELLS IS SYMBOLIC FOR SOMETHING HE DID.......

SARCASM CAN FLY OUT THE WINDOW. PLEASE STUDY GREEK AND HEBREW (I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH).


:H:

 

[XianeX]

*insightful wink* @ heresy
"hanged" and crucified are 2 different words. if the greek of it is a correct interpretation it still proves that the KJV is flawed and contradictory. this is my premise. review my previous post that i said i use KJV only as a reference. reason being is because it is the book of the people. it is the book that misleads the many. it is the reason that you must look beyond the language of the book you were indoctrinated into believing to prove its relevance. it cannot stand alone. it needs props. like lies they need something else to affirm it.

i find it interesting the interchangability of the literalness of the bible and the symbolic/spiritual/allegorical interpretations. and how people cleverly swap these methodologies to prove their points.

scarlet/purple : red/purple. either or. according to KJV these are blatant discrepancies. i could go a step further. where was it that jesus first saw his disciples after the ressurection? galilee or jerusalem, who saw him first magdelene or the disciples, were there two angels that met mary or one or did she find it empty and just so happen to run into him. each of the gospels give diffrent accounts of what happened. you can use as many languages as you wish but if i was to line out every single one of these idiosyncracies you would run out of excuses.

the bottom line is this. if the bible is used for more than literature or spiritual guidance "true folly" is found.

as always it is enjoyable to debate these issues with one im coming into the belief is of my ilk.

i appreciate that you approach this debate differently in that you speak objectively as opposed to allowing emotions to become involved. im glad to see that you DO have civility

 

[miggidy]

LOL i dont speak on what i havent read.

undoubtedly you dont know what the word "hanged" means. picc up a dictionary. and make sure the bible you are reading out of is king james (i only make reference from this version of the bible). being "hanged" and being crucified are two different things but i see you are too dense to figure this out.

maybe you should READ what i say before you desire to dispute it.

i "will" not specify where because "i" know that its in there. you are the one who has the burden of disproving me. "i" know what "im" talking about. maybe you should take "your" own advice in reference to READING for YOURSELF. pacc your darts up before you try to throw them you have NOTHING to contest with other than opinion. i base my claims on being a "once-believer" who became illuminated by truth.

i speak TRUTH not fact.
a fact is: the sky is cloudy
a truth is: the sky was cloudy.
in other words just because a fact was given doesnt mean its the truth. even in law you are not judged by the truth you are judged by the facts which are debated to find the truth.

mariniate

the bible is contested because it boast so much to be so flawed. i can point out blatant flaws if i wished. BUT why would i waste my energy on a person who is BLINDLY BIASED. as the saying goes "blinded by the light". "cast not your pearls before swine"

criticism does not give credibility it gives publicity. get it right. if smoking weed is stupid and everybody said it was cool and you did it because everyone else said it wasnt stupid that would make you a stupid person.

ism is'muthafuka

LOL!
Forgive me but you reek of ignorance.
You are clearly speaking of something you haven't researched for yourself. Questionning the "tree hanging" claim of the book of Acts it's striaght up shooting from the hip. I assume that you are a person of average intelligence at best. And if so, then you would know the truth when reading the bible for yourself.
There for judging by your questions, I can make the conclusion that you have not read the bible.
For one thing, you claim the bible to be full of flaws. But you present not a flaw, but only a misconception.
I would assume that if you were a knowledgable person you would've brought forth what is probably the biggest question of non-believers.
I won't reveal it, I'll see if you can bring it forward on your own.

What you bring forward is constructive criticism because it helps rid the bible of misconceptions and false claims of biblical error.

Having said that let me ask you a question, do you know who wrote the book of Acts? The apostle Luke did, it is the second part to the gospel he wrote. And in the gospel of Luke, he clearly describes Jesus's death by crucifixion.
Now since you do not believe the FACT that "tree hanged" was a common figure of speach used by the Jews to describe the price blasphemers paid. Let me ask you this? Did you know that Acts clearly states that Jesus was crucified and nailed to a cross?
I bet you didn't know that since the person who you got this info from was hiding the rest of the story.
Below are quotes from the book of Acts....

Early in Acts before any trees are mentioned, Peter spoke to the public whom ever was willing to listen his preaching.
You find the following;

Acts 2:23
This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge, and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him on the cross.

Later down you find;
Acts 2:36
There for let all Isreal be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Later Peter and the apostles were thrown into jail by the towns high priest for preaching about Jesus. They were freed by an Angel and were found preaching to people again.
The high priest approached them and asked why they kept preaching about Jesus making them look guilty of Jesus's death in the eyes of the towns people.
You will find in;
Acts 2:29
Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men!
Acts 2:30
The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead - whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree.

The Apostles clearly used this figure of speech to further incriminate the high priest and the Sadducees in front of the public.
This is why it is important to read the bible for yourself, and not take anyone else's word for it. Wicked people who just hand pick certain parts of the bible and take it out of it's context on top of that.

peace,
Miggidy

 

[MurdaousTHUG]

OH MY GOD!

THIS IS LIKE THE LONGEST THREAD I HAVE SEEN IN MY LIFE ON THA SICCNESS!!!!!!!!! ITS BEEN ON HERE FOR ETERNITY..!!!! DAMMM YALL NEED TO TAKE A LIL BREAK AND PEEP SOME OF MY COOL MUSIC HERE www.soundclick.com/bands/7/murdaousakasuicidalsouljahmusic.htm CLICK THE MP3 OPTION FOR THE BEST QUALITY.. ON THE FILES.. K? ENJOY YOU ALL REALLY NEED A BREAK FROM ALL THIS BIBLE STUFF.. HIT ME BACK AT THE BOARD AND TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK OF MY MUSIC.. WE CAN MAKE IT PART OF THE DISSUSSION I WAS RAISED WITH A RELIGIOUS BACK..GROUD.. BUT I STILL ENDED UP MAKIN THIS KIND OF MUSIC. JUDGE FOR UR SELF IF THE RELGIOUS ELEMENTS.. HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT.. AND SHOUDL HAVE.. ! LOL OK GOOD NITE..!

 

[XianeX]

*insightful wink* LOL. lovely. how clever. i see that you are not beyond literacy. make reference to a thread i made previous to your last post in regards to the fun of the battle. i concede. im suprised that you actually one uped heresy in your approach. you actually in less than 3 post used the bible to refute what i said in plain english. but even with my consession it still does not discount the many other discrepencies in the bible. but who cares its all for the fun of the debate.

~bows out gracefully with a smile~

through your civility and intelligence you have my respect.
XianeX aka the Devil's Advocate

marinara

p.s. whutup ccytz LOL at that post. the spamful intrusion LMAO

 

[HERESY]

i appreciate that you approach this debate differently in that you speak objectively as opposed to allowing emotions to become involved.

when i read ANYONES post. good or bad, directed at me or not i read with an open mind and LAUGH at it as im typing a reply.

the bottom line is this. if the bible is used for more than literature or spiritual guidance "true folly" is found.

if you say so.

each of the gospels give diffrent accounts of what happened. you can use as many languages as you wish but if i was to line out every single one of these idiosyncracies you would run out of excuses.

if an accident happened in front of your eyes do you think the other 12 people who were present will say they saw it EXACTLY how you saw it?

scarlet/purple : red/purple. either or. according to KJV these are blatant discrepancies. i could go a step further. where was it that jesus first saw his disciples after the ressurection? galilee or jerusalem, who saw him first magdelene or the disciples, were there two angels that met mary or one or did she find it empty and just so happen to run into him.

yeah and i can go deeper than that. did judas die BEFORE christ died or AFTER he ressurected and appeared before the 12

those things you have typed are things i have come across b4 many times and answered by simply looking teh words up explaining the meanings etc etc etc.

i find it interesting the interchangability of the literalness of the bible and the symbolic/spiritual/allegorical interpretations. and how people cleverly swap these methodologies to prove their points.

i dont think anyone in this debate has swapped anything. im simply giving you the meaning of the words in GREEK or HEBREW. that way you can have a CLEAR definition of what is being SAID.

*insightful wink* @ heresy
"hanged" and crucified are 2 different words. if the greek of it is a correct interpretation it still proves that the KJV is flawed and contradictory.

if the word "talah" was used you would have a contradiction. talah is the word used for hanging (execution by hanging). however this word is NOT used when it says he hung from a tree.

kremannumi and xulon= suspended (proped or placed up) on a device or object made of wood.

THAT is what you get when you TRANSLATE the words from greek.

if the words talah and ets were used you would have it reading:
hung (executed) from a tree (a real tree and not a man made object out of wood).

this is my premise. review my previous post that i said i use KJV only as a reference. reason being is because it is the book of the people. it is the book that misleads the many.

they mislead themselves (as you have just shown) because they dont READ and STUDY.

it is the reason that you must look beyond the language of the book you were indoctrinated into believing to prove its relevance. it cannot stand alone. it needs props. like lies they need something else to affirm it.

we are working with a book that was translated by many people over periods of time. common sense would tell you to study the ORIGINAL version or at least TRY to study it. look at this.

i can you buy me an orange pop?
if you dont shut up im going to pop you in the lip!
when you pop the cork make sure you dont point it at her face.
the black and whites are gonna pop you if they catch you.

in each of these cases POP is used......BUT each of them have a different meaning.

hebrew is a language that was ALWAYS changing (and its a very "poetic" language) so one must see what words were used etc etc etc.

the "science of god" is old to me. from hermetic magik and writings to the vedas. i have an open mind BUT they dont work for me. why? i cant apply it to my life.

have a nice one.

:H:

 

[odogfelon]

I often see weak yet greedy minded people get sucked DEEP into religion...and I base this on the fact that there is no way that they can amount to a pile of shit in this world. so if they then devote their life towards 'their' mansion and blissfully yellow streets, they'll have a happy after life...but i think damn near everything is powered by greed, so its proably another misconception from your view.

 

[miggidy]

^^^^
Jesus' philosophy is the opposite of greed....

 

[MurdaousTHUG]

Yeaaa i want money!!! call em greedy actually... im just postin to get my 100th post..! lol. yeaaa but i'll be comin back from time to time to advertise in you lovely thread..!!! lol.. aight im out.. peace..!!! lol I wonder how long this thread will go on for.>? its already 11 pages long..? man... whoaaaaaaaa..