Biblical Creationism versus Hindu Creationism

[MoonLancer]

I dunno --- do they?

And if they do, he can tell them too.

what happens when abstinence education fails? lots of unplanned pregnancies.

What happens when Daddy Dearest finds out Little Princes has been courted by all the guys?

He wont... Thank god for Abortions.

Ironic how abstinence only education is almost a direct cause of unwanted pregnancies. Its almost like it was planned that way.

 

[AV1611VET]

what happens when abstinence education fails?

Sin occurs --- you remember that word, don't you? Even though it is fast disappearing from our language?

lots of unplanned pregnancies.

Abstinence education has no cause-and-effect with pregnancies. How much education does it take to tell someone to say "No"?

What happens when Daddy Dearest finds out Little Princes has been courted by all the guys?

Little Princess walks the aisle with Little Prince.

He wont... Thank god for Abortions.

Uh-huh.

Ironic how abstinence only education is almost a direct cause of unwanted pregnancies.

Not if it's implemented.

Its almost like it was planned that way.

Keep saying that --- you'll eventually believe it.

 

[UncleHermit]

Assuming you meant What, and not Why, I'd say he didn't read (and heed) the Bible.

No, I meant why. My fault, I didn't word that very well. How about this:

At any rate, he said "If an atheist treats a fellow human well". Why are you talking about an atheist, in your opinion, not treating a fellow human well?

 

[AV1611VET]

No, I meant why. My fault, I didn't word that very well. How about this:

At any rate, he said "If an atheist treats a fellow human well". Why are you talking about an atheist, in your opinion, not treating a fellow human well?

Well, if Thaumaturgy's point is that we don't need the Bible to do what is right --- and that doing right just comes naturally --- how's come atheists get abortions?

Do they get abortions in respect to what comes right naturally --- or in spite of what come right naturally?

And if they refuse to get abortions --- is it in respect --- or in spite --- of nature?

Or --- as I suspect --- is it this principle in action:

In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

 

[ragarth]

Wow, this thread got really derailed. Time to get a Mod to delete a few posts.

Just to note, this thread is not about Atheism vs Christianity and it's not about Abortion. It's about Christianity vs Hinduism.

 

[juvenissun]

Well if their is so many examples, care to share some that show a difference between the Effects of God manifested by people vs the effects of people doing good on their own.

If their are so many examples, it should be simple to show them.

OK, how about feed the monkey (Hindus vs atheist).

 

[ragarth]

OK, how about feed the monkey (Hindus vs atheist).

I don't understand the reference, care to elaborate?

 

[juvenissun]

Asserting the that the Celtic gods were saints while doing so with threats of death or fire was an unforgivable atrocity. I don't agree that other peoples gods are angles. I think its wrong to destroy other peoples cultures as the christains did.

However, if you really beleave your argument, thier would be no need for missionaries. Clearly they dident get the memo.

Other cultures get destroyed or not is other people's business. Sending out missionaries is Christian's business. You do your job and I do my job. Success or not is not a concern. People in a remote mountain tribe all converted to Christian does not mean their culture is destroyed.

 

[juvenissun]

I don't understand the reference, care to elaborate?

The short-term action is the same, the motivation is different, the goal is different, and there are many other differences.

 

[ragarth]

The short-term action is the same, the motivation is different, the goal is different, and there are many other differences.

I'm afraid I don't understand. How about I rephrase? How does this apply to the topic of this thread, specifically Christianity vs Hinduism? I could care less about Atheism at this moment in time, so please do not try to derail this thread onto another topic.

 

[AV1611VET]

How does this apply to the topic of this thread, specifically Christianity vs Hinduism?

Christianity was founded by the Prince of Peace.

Hinduism is predicated on Shiva, the god of destrucion, as Shoko Asahara made plain.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Christianity was founded by the Prince of Peace.

Hinduism is predicated on Shiva, the god of destrucion, as Shoko Asahara made plain.

Well, when you strip away the detail and oversimplify the concept you can make anything sound bad.

Here's a bit more depth to your pitiful "gloss":

In the Yajurveda two contrary sets of attributes for both malignant or terrific (Sanskrit: rudra) and benign or auspicious (Sanskrit: śiva) forms can be found.(SOURCE)

(emphasis added).

Another of Shiva's fearsome forms is as Kāla (Sanskrit: का&#2354, "Time", and as Mahākāla (Sanskrit: महाका&#2354, "Great Time", which ultimately destroys all things
...
In contrast, the name Śaṇkara (Sanskrit शङ्क&#2352, "Beneficent" or "Conferring Happiness" reflects his benign form. (ibid)

That's pretty neat. "Time" is a destroyer. Which, as you no doubt know, is kind of metaphorically true. Time wipes away all things. But the point also seems to my mind that any supreme being who can bring can take. It is the nature of a transcendent god.

I find it so fascinating to see fundamentalist christians slag other relgions for whatever reason they can find and usually those reasons are predicated on a gross failure to realize that other cultures can have thoughts too!

Surely Yahweh must be the one who created Satan. Who else could?

 

[Morcova]

I like what a commentator once said:Also, qv please: 563.

Might as well have said, "If Christianity was true then South America would be a paradise right now."

 

[ragarth]

Christianity was founded by the Prince of Peace.

Hinduism is predicated on Shiva, the god of destrucion, as Shoko Asahara made plain.

So in other words, what your saying is that to truly believe in the truth of Christianity over Hinduism, you must completely misunderstand and misinterpret the words and spirit of Hinduism via the use of oversimplification and other forms of logical fallacies?

 

[AV1611VET]

So in other words, what your saying is that to truly believe in the truth of Christianity over Hinduism, you must completely misunderstand and misinterpret the words and spirit of Hinduism via the use of oversimplification and other forms of logical fallacies?

In other words, what I'm saying is that Christianity is founded upon the Prince of Peace, whereas Hinduism is predicated on Shiva, the god of destruction, as Shoko Asahara made plain.

 

[thaumaturgy]

In other words, what I'm saying is that Christianity is founded upon the Prince of Peace, whereas Hinduism is predicated on Shiva, the god of destruction, as Shoko Asahara made plain.

Oh I get it! Shoko Asahara was a nut who happened to try to roll in some Hindu stuff in Aum Shinrikyo, ergo you can slag all of hinduism!

I can see how this works. So am I to assume that all Christians are defined by Fred Phelps and his "God Hates ****" website and his protests at U.S. Military funerals? (linky)

Well, sure 'nuff, because AV1611VET has done this very thing in relation to Hinduism, we are encouraged to do likewise to Christianity! (Luke 6:31)

(Do you ever bother to think even one step ahead of your posts?)

 

[thaumaturgy]

So in other words, what your saying is that to truly believe in the truth of Christianity over Hinduism, you must completely misunderstand and misinterpret the words and spirit of Hinduism via the use of oversimplification and other forms of logical fallacies?

That is what happens when one worships their own ignorance.

 

[MoonLancer]

In other words, what I'm saying is that Christianity is founded upon the Prince of Peace, whereas Hinduism is predicated on Shiva, the god of destruction, as Shoko Asahara made plain.

does this mean i can judge all christains based on the Salim which trials and the Crusades. good to know

 

[MrGoodBytes]

One of the most important, maybe even the most important gods of Hinduism is Brahman, traditionally depicted as a wise creator, while Christianity was founded by a man who physically assaulted people in a temple and said that he didn't "come to bring peace, but the sword." Furthermore, the violent nature of Christianity was demonstrated by Shoko Asahara, who declared himself Christ in 1992.

Therefore, Christianity is wrong, and by extension, so is Christian creationism.

 

[ragarth]

One of the most important, maybe even the most important gods of Hinduism is Brahman, traditionally depicted as a wise creator, while Christianity was founded by a man who physically assaulted people in a temple and said that he didn't "come to bring peace, but the sword." Furthermore, the violent nature of Christianity was demonstrated by Shoko Asahara, who declared himself Christ in 1992.

In other words, you're saying that AV's source of information is a false prophet?