"Christian's theological approach to other religions" Debate between members

I was fascinated in the debate between wegs and wynn.
Wynn said - "And from what position have you approached those other religious/spiritual traditions?

Have you felt like an equal to other members of those traditions, or like an outsider, or like an outcast, or like a potential cult member, or a doormat, or as someone who knows better than they do ...?"

Those are two quite difficult questions. How are Christians going to answer those questions?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hinduism- 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKE7enkhZyo I struggled with that. Was that a fair YouTube regarding Hinduism?
I don't like washing in the ganges, idolatry, caste system? No eating beef.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The term "hindu" derives from the river sindu, which acted as a geological border between india and the muslim west. It was a term used by the invading muslims for anyone who lived over the river (their "S" became a phonetic "H").
The reality is that there was/is a diverse religious field within india but over time, due to mostly political (as opposed to philosophical/theological) machinations, the term is commonly used in a singular sense.

Its kind of like referring to islam , christianity and judaism as "jordanism",
As you can imagine, a 9 minute documentary on "jordanism" would omit quite a bit and many topics it would focus on would do so at the expense of one or more of the three main players behind the term (what to speak of the multitude of takes within each school of thought ......).

why not?

If you refrain from reading the bible whilst in the lavatory or find certain images that take the piss out of the crucifixion of jesus in poor taste, it's simply an issue of semiotics

complicated issue made short - originally scriptural discussions of varna (or caste) revolve around guna (quality) and karma (action) ... with a minor vague reference that janma (birth) can potentially assist in the development of these things.

IOW if one is to be, for example, a high court judge, one could delineate certain actions and qualities that the position requires, and one could also say that if one's father was such a person, one would be dealt an advantage of also having the opportunity to follow in his footsteps (by dint of one's father being able to instruct by example). However at the end of the day, as the child moves into adulthood, they ultimately are designated a social capacity in accordance with their qualities and actions.

The problem is that at a certain period in medieval Hinduism, under the impetus of good old fashioned nepotism, the focus of caste shifted purely to birthright (janma), even though this is not a scriptural conclusion to be found anywhere.

I guess you could say that a lot of the problems of hinduism derive from it shifting mainstream into an orthopraxy (a religious pursuit defined by ritual and practice) as opposed to orthodoxy (a religious pursuit defined by philosophical/theological conclusions).

Given that no animal (including yourself) is joyful about having its throat slit and that there are viable alternatives to eating meat ....which, funnily enough, the cow can contribute to in terms of sustainable agriculture (eg plowing and soil fertilization) and food products (dairy) .... its not such a broad gap to breach

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The ganges looks so polluted.
I didn't understand your toilet comment. You could rip pages out of the bible to wipe your arse all I care, but just not mine thanks. A condom over the Virgin Mary a bit silly, but a crucifix up madonna, I just hope she doesn't hurt herself.
Caste - may have started off ok. But needs to change now.
Did the cow become sacred for those reasons? It mucks up our trade with India.

 

Granted that india tends to deal with many ecological issues with the bravado of a third world country (although that said, first world intelligence on the subject perhaps only distinguishes itself in terms of a refinement of press releases and legal jargon)

If the images associated with christianity evoke reverence within you (or alternatively, aversion, when juxtaposed with poor taste) you already have a functional value system that establishes religious icons with a status above and beyond their mere physical components.

So IOW the bible, even though composed of just paper and ink, warrants a distinct value category above and beyond your ethical estimation of paper and ink.
Eg , when in dire straights you might use some book for toilet paper. Your value system ,however, prohibits you doing the same with a bible (even though materially speaking, there is no distinction in the material components)

actually you see that problems of caste (ie designation of sexual, social, political, intellectual and martial authority/capacity) is an endemic problem of the contemporary age the world over.

In fact there are even scriptural statements that explain this age is ripe with it:

SB 12.2.1: Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Then, O King, religion, truthfulness, cleanliness, tolerance, mercy, duration of life, physical strength and memory will all diminish day by day because of the powerful influence of the age of Kali.

SB 12.2.2: In Kali-yuga, wealth alone will be considered the sign of a man's good birth, proper behavior and fine qualities. And law and justice will be applied only on the basis of one's power.

SB 12.2.3: Men and women will live together merely because of superficial attraction, and success in business will depend on deceit. Womanliness and manliness will be judged according to one's expertise in sex, and a man will be known as a brāhmaṇa just by his wearing a thread.

SB 12.2.4: A person's spiritual position will be ascertained merely according to external symbols, and on that same basis people will change from one spiritual order to the next. A person's propriety will be seriously questioned if he does not earn a good living. And one who is very clever at juggling words will be considered a learned scholar.

SB 12.2.5: A person will be judged unholy if he does not have money, and hypocrisy will be accepted as virtue. Marriage will be arranged simply by verbal agreement, and a person will think he is fit to appear in public if he has merely taken a bath.

SB 12.2.6: A sacred place will be taken to consist of no more than a reservoir of water located at a distance, and beauty will be thought to depend on one's hairstyle. Filling the belly will become the goal of life, and one who is audacious will be accepted as truthful. He who can maintain a family will be regarded as an expert man, and the principles of religion will be observed only for the sake of reputation.

SB 12.2.7: As the earth thus becomes crowded with a corrupt population, whoever among any of the social classes shows himself to be the strongest will gain political power.

SB 12.2.8: Losing their wives and properties to such avaricious and merciless rulers, who will behave no better than ordinary thieves, the citizens will flee to the mountains and forests.

SB 12.2.9: Harassed by famine and excessive taxes, people will resort to eating leaves, roots, flesh, wild honey, fruits, flowers and seeds. Struck by drought, they will become completely ruined.

SB 12.2.10: The citizens will suffer greatly from cold, wind, heat, rain and snow. They will be further tormented by quarrels, hunger, thirst, disease and severe anxiety.

SB 12.2.11: The maximum duration of life for human beings in Kali-yuga will become fifty years.

SB 12.2.12-16: By the time the age of Kali ends, the bodies of all creatures will be greatly reduced in size, and the religious principles of followers of varṇāśrama will be ruined. The path of the Vedas will be completely forgotten in human society, and so-called religion will be mostly atheistic. The kings will mostly be thieves, the occupations of men will be stealing, lying and needless violence, and all the social classes will be reduced to the lowest level of śūdras. Cows will be like goats, spiritual hermitages will be no different from mundane houses, and family ties will extend no further than the immediate bonds of marriage. Most plants and herbs will be tiny, and all trees will appear like dwarf śamī trees. Clouds will be full of lightning, homes will be devoid of piety, and all human beings will have become like asses. At that time, the Supreme Personality of Godhead will appear on the earth. Acting with the power of pure spiritual goodness, He will rescue eternal religion

there are diverse reasons why cows are considered sacred.
I simply gave a brief introduction to the role they play in society, since you seemed to suggest that establishing cows as sacred bears no merit

Industrial trade in turn mucks up many things.
the general principle is that human civilization finds its high point in agrarian civilization. Hunter/gatherer societies are unable to have specialized academic pursuits and industrial societies are unsustainable.

as a detail, the irony is that india is one of the world's leaders of cow slaughter (most of the world's leather goods are made from indian cow hide leather). Cows in states that outlaw/frown on cow slaughter are shipped over the border (commonly very cruelly) to neighbouring states/ communities that aren't so inhibited
Industrial trade dictates that its economically viable to process leather in india and, in terms of cadaver consumption, technologically viable in other countries. So you have one set of animals killed for mostly their skin and another set of animals killed mostly for their flesh ... all because of issue of production and demand ... which, funnily enough, is an act in full accordance with the above description of social occupation and so-called merit in the age of kali.

 

Well, can you answer the questions you quoted in your OP:

From what position are you approaching other religious/spiritual traditions?
Do you feel like an equal to other members of those traditions, or like an outsider, or like an outcast, or like a potential cult member, or a doormat, or as someone who knows better than they do ...?"

 

I treat all people equally, yet my belief is that the Father (top God) has given all authority in Heaven and Earth to Jesus Christ. So he has become the head over all the other religions too.
He will judge people on the basis of how true to their own "books" their own philosophies, each by their own.
Now I could see that this was the way it was written, in the NT and when I spoke this view to my pastor at the time he didn't agree.
I still have this view, but I have no idea whether the other religions can accept that.

My views on Jesus' birth are more "Muslim like" rather than traditional Roman Catholic one. Jesus to me was definitely a man with two Earthly biological parents. The position he has now is one that is gained by following rules and understanding what God wants.

So I feel totally lost, for I am not in anyone's camp. I'm on my own, yet I have gone through struggles like the prophets of old did. (I'm writing about that in my Christian Song thread.) I'm on my own but Jesus is my Lord.
So I am like an outcast, but also someone special at the same time.

 

I'm not a Christian, so the question might not have been directed at people like me.

Do I feel like an equal to members of religions that aren't my own? Of course. Why not?

Do I feel like an outsider? Yes, sometimes. I often feel that way when I enter one of their places of worship.

Do I feel like an outcast? No. I've never felt that.

Do I feel like a potential cult member? I'm not sure what that feels like. But almost certainly no.

Do I feel like a doormat? No, not at all.

Do I feel like somebody who knows better than they do? Yeah, maybe there's a little of that. I rarely think that my ideas are the last word on anything, but I do often think that my ideas are more plausible than something that somebody else believes.

 

Was that the right answer? Could they live with that?

 

What do you mean?

 

Well wynn how would you answer the questions you asked of us.
1. "And from what position have you approached those other religious/spiritual traditions?

2. Have you felt like an equal to other members of those traditions, or like an outsider, or like an outcast, or like a potential cult member, or a doormat, or as someone who knows better than they do ...?"

3. "Could they live with that?" Meaning could the other religions accept that The Lord Jesus is their judge?

 

Most religious traditions tend to speak of non-members in a negative way - "Those that don't belong to our religion, are wrong/bad/pagans/defective/worthless." That's essentially the attitude that many people who believe themselves to be religious, have toward people who don't belong to their religion.

Long story short, as I was born and raised in a (nominally) religious country and town, but myself was one of the very few people who were not religious and I wasn't even baptized as an infant, I was ostracized by the religious and by default considered categorically inferior to them. I was often in a one-against-all situation, I accepted their estimation of myself. That essentially became my basic position toward the religious in general: that I am inferior to them, that they are better people than I ever could be, that they are God's chosen people, that I am an outcast, and that only if I would give in to being their doormat, would they accept me.

Obviously, they aren't accepting any such thing.

 

If the religion is based on only one God in the creator I feel comfortable
If they have many gods , I would like to learn about as why to have many gods , but that their business
With religion of atheism and their members I like to exchange ideas of biology and chemistry, since they use science as their god.

 

No, no, no!
Science is not religion!
Science is based on reasonable explanations of observations and experimental results.....
Science improves as observations and experiments increase.......
Science continues to search for valid answers based on those further observations and experiments...
Science has not yet answered all the questions....
And that is why science will continue to search and learn from further and further observations.
Whereas religion prefer that the prime cause was a deity, without any valid evidence, and that deity had no cause.....Not a real satisfactory answer as far as science is concerned.

 

Atheist use science for their argument . Same way I can use science for my argument , such as micro genesis the way atheist invoke it it is false . example you cah not make polypeptide in an aqueous media without enzyme , sense an enzyme is a poyamide of amino acid you could not have produced in an aqueos media and so you could not start life by itself. and many other examples can be given.

 

Yes, yes, yes!

It does however warrant an institutional decor that in turn leaves it open to many of the short comings a certain class of person appears to enjoy in relegating to the field of religion

hence much of what atheists try to ply in the name of science is simply not science

such increases however never have the capacity to exceed the epistemological boundaries of empiricism

ditto above ... so this in turn explains why its not valid to expect science to answer certain sorts of questions for which it simply doesn't have the tools

your use of the word "yet" reveals a fundamental flaw in your thinking

no valid evidence to suggest science could even hope to approach a prime cause, much less evidence an alternative one
:shrug:

 

From reading the Old Testament the God there is continually suggesting that man could not discover the secrets of his working but science has slowly discovered these, so your statement here seems to be a repetition of the OT God's boast, and with time this will be chipped a way at and may one day man may approach the prime cause. I wouldn't want to take bets against it.

 

The contextualized cannot have a full-scope knowledge of that which contextualizes it.

God contextualizes man.

 

Feel free to philosophically explain how empiricism can surmount the obvious limitations of the senses.

Iow empiricism, by its very method of investigation, has a firm requirement for ignorance

 

Can we do the same to ourselves or even to God (the OT God in any case)? You do realize that a word like contextualizes is like a foreign language to me. Thanks for taking the time to introduce new words to me.

con·tex·tu·al·ize transitive verb \kən-ˈteks-chə-wə-ˌlīz, -chə-ˌlīz, -chü-ə-\
: to think about or provide information about the situation in which something happens"
Thanks http://www.merriam-webster.com

Can you say "God contextualizes man." in a simpler way please.