And that's why the Creator said that in the Judgment Day, people will be confronted with their sins that they thought they are good work of their own. At that time they can see the truth. Praise be to the Almighty.
Yes, Lord Krishna is the Supreme Lord, and the other devas and devis (gods and goddesses) are His parts and parcels.
This is false. Brahma is the Supreme Lord. Krishna was made into a god, and there is logical proof that he was not. We can easily debate about this.
Originally Posted by MichaelArchangelos
However, the teaching that all the devas and devis are simply different forms or facets of the Supreme Lord is called the Mayavada philosophy, which the Scriptures attest to be false. It is a very fine distinction. To read more about the distinction, click here.
Now this I agree with. In fact, I believe a majority of Hindu gods are false and simply made up to satisify the whims and fancies of peoples' lame imaginations.
Not to mention that as an astrophysicist (the kind who got his degree from an institution slightly more prestigious than Wikipedia College), I have to object to this particular scientific interpretation of Scripture
Then please show where in the bible does it say once the earth rotates around the sun. The Vedas easily does that more than once.
Then please show where in the bible does it say once the earth rotates around the sun. The Vedas easily does that more than once.
I think you missed my point about why I object to the supposedly scientific interpretation of ancient literature.
__________________ Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:18)
This is false. Brahma is the Supreme Lord. Krishna was made into a god, and there is logical proof that he was not. We can easily debate about this.
The Vedas disagree with you:
Maha Upanisad: I-1-4. Then we shall expound the Mahopanishad. They say Narayana was alone. There were not Brahma, Shiva, Waters, Fire and Soma, Heaven and Earth, Stars, Sun and Moon. He could not be happy.
Narayana Upanisad: Narayana desired to create people. Because of this thought, Soul (prana) rose from him. Mind and all body parts, sky, air, light, water and the earth which can carry all these created beings took their form. From Narayana, Brahma was born. From Narayana, Rudra (Shiva) was born. From Narayana, Indra was born .From Narayana those people who rule these human beings were born. From Narayana, the twelve suns, eleven Rudras, Eight Vasus and all those meters (for writing) were born. All these function because of Narayana. All these end in Narayana. Thus is read, the Upanishads of Rig Veda.
Narayana is an expansion of Lord Krishna, the Supreme Lord.
I've never heard of any Hindu sect that worships Lord Brahma as the Supreme. As far as I know, there are only two temples dedicated to him in the whole of India.
I'm curious, Sukumanu - what sect of Hinduism, if any, do you believe in? And have you ever read the Bhagavad-Gita? The best one out there is Bhagavad-Gita As It Is, which is transmitted in the disciplic succession, guru to disciple, all the way back to Lord Krishna Himself. The other translations out there are often done by Mayavadis and the commentary reflects their dangerous philosophy. The Bhagavad-Gita As It Is can be accessed online here.
__________________
Ekam Sat Vipra Bahuda Vadanti
Truth is one; the wise perceive it in different ways.
Rig Veda 1.164.43
Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me [God]. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear.
- Bhagavad-Gita 18:66
My Blog - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Learning science from an ancient text is a bad idea.
Try reading this science text written not even 100 years ago.
I agree. And I'm not even saying that the Bible isn't completely correct even when it speaks on scientific issues. What I am saying is that the genre of both the Bible and the Veda is not scientific. When one reads any text with an incorrect understanding of the genre, it will usually lead to gross misunderstandings.
In science we use specialized vocabularies which are specific to the scientific community. Words have rather specific meanings, and there's no such thing as poetry or prose. The Bible, on the other hand, is replete with poetry and prose, and to read it as one would read a scientific journal article borders on idiotic. Furthermore it demonstrates a misunderstanding of the scientific process. To read "this moving world" to refer to motion of the earth is as incorrect as to interpret the "principle of least action" to refer to a sedentary lifestyle. Please, use common sense when reading and discussing any form of literature.
__________________ Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:18)
So tell me where in the bible does it say at least once the earth rotates around the sun?
It doesn't. And more to the point, the Bible is under no obligation to do so. Shall we also discount all literature that makes reference to "the four corners of the earth?" (it's not square) Or "the ends of the earth?" (does a circle have an end?) Or how about "God's green Earth?" (let's not discount brown, blue, and a number of other colors). If you want to really split hairs, you might as well discount any reference to the earth being round, since in truth, it's an oblate spheroid.
Look at it this way. A red train is moving east from the station at 40mph, while the blue train is moving north from the station at 60mph. In 30 minutes, will the color of the train have absolutely anything to do with the distance between the two trains?
Still don't understand? Go look up the words "extraneous" and "superfluous," maybe that will help.
Originally Posted by Sukumanu
Psalm 93:1, "The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved."
You have already said this, and I replied:
Originally Posted by Druweid
This is obviously metaphor, and unless you can begin to indicate how "majesty" can be put to a loom, woven into cloth, and/or sewn into a robe, by no means can anything in this phrase be treated as a literal, much less a scientific principal.
What makes you think that simply repeating yourself makes your argument any stronger? Your point is every bit as invalid as it was the first time you made it.
The life of a person can come an go, leaving barely a whisper of his name years after.
But the efforts of that life, no matter how little-known, can last forever.
Thank you H.C., Bob Geldof, and Brenden Foster.
"If a man tried, to take his time on Earth, and prove before he died, what one man's life could be worth, well I wonder what would happen to this world?"
"I think the garden of human spirituality is more beautiful with many, varied flowers rather than all flowers being the same." - vajradhara To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by Druweid; 1st December 2008 at 04:16 PM.
Many Christians and Muslims claim Hinduism is a false religion. If that is the case, then please tell me which of the following verses, Veda and Bible, are false and true.
Sama Veda - Book 3: Chp 1: Decade 5, "O omnipotent God, the illuminator of sun and Lord of this moving world or what moveth not, we bow before thee, as unmilked kine bow before the calves!
Biblw - Psalm 93:1, "The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved."
So what is true? Does the earth revolve around the sun or does it firmly stay in one place?
To be honest you can't use that verse to argue about which is most scientifically accurate. The verse says:
*He is robed in majesty. Christ said that the God is spirit. If he is spirit, how could he be robed? Majesty is an intangible how could He be robed in majesty?
*The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved. This line is followed by "Your throne was established long ago; you are from all eternity." To me, the world is firmly established means that what is true has been true from all eternity, that God has sovereignty over everthing, and the world being "everything that exists" is established. It does not say the earth is established. One reading of the world could be the planet earth. Another is everything that exists.
So to me we can't argue whether or not the world moves from this verse. In fact to me that is not why the scriptures were written.
I'm sure this thread has gone on for pages but I hope we can come to some agreement about what is important and go on from there.
__________________ The theme song:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The Myth about Paul (for people who pretend they've have read what he taught):
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
20 First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and to the Gentiles also, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.
Book Recommendations (Your Opinions Please!)
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Linear Mode
