Ethnocentrism

[Ram]

Muslims raped Vedic culture for hundreds if not thousands of years. They did not employ cunning methods like trying to assimilate Vedic rituals in their mosques; they simply killed and butchered those who refused to convert. What happened in India? I will let the history speak for itself.

Satay, I hope you know that forcible muslim conversions have happened even in the 20th century. In the 19th century, Tippu Sultan's army ran amok in Kerala with the slogan - convert or die! Why do you think Kerala has a 25% muslim population much above the 13% India average? A huge number of Hindus were forcibly converted in northern part of Kerala. 50% of North Kerala is muslims. In the 20th century, many Hindus were threatened to adopt Islam during the Moplah rebellion in muslim dominated areas. As Islam does not have any provision for apostasy and any attempt by a forciblly converted Hindu to get back to Hinduism would be met with the death sentance, they just remained muslims. Niow, after several generations, their successors do not even know their forefathers became muslims this way. There are many people who have come back to Hinduism recently after they uncovered their ancestory.

Many Hindus that I know of go have gone to Muslim 'dargha' or Sikh gurudwaras or churches. I have done this myself. I feel comfortable doing this because I am secure in my faith and Vedic culture teaches tolerance of others' beliefs and cultures. But this tolerance of Hindus is often mistaken as cowardice. This is why now a more 'fundamentalist' movement is surfacing in India. In my opinion, it is long overdue.

I guess we need 90% liberal Hindus and 10% fundamentalist Hindus for good balance, else India will repeat the past slavery. Too much tolerance to people who use convert or die slogans, eh!

Ever wonder what will happen if all the christians are able to convert people of other faiths but muslims? Ever wonder what will happen when there are only two religions on this planet - Islam and Christianity? I wonder about that all the time.

That will not happen. Sanatana Dharma will ever be there.

In the case of this happening, rest assured the world will be "clean" in no time.

 

[satay]

I guess we need 90% liberal Hindus and 10% fundamentalist Hindus for good balance, else India will repeat the past slavery. Too much tolerance to people who use convert or die slogans, eh!

It's long overdue. Time to have gita in one hand a sword in the other like the icon you see in my avatar!

That will not happen. Sanatana Dharma will ever be there.

In the case of this happening, rest assured the world will be "clean" in no time.

Yes, I know it will never happen.

"clean" is the most politically correct word to describe it isn't it?

satay

 

[MortonGneiss]

I think we're straying a bit off topic here, not to say the input has been invaluable. But I believe the real focus here is to examine the belief structures of these religious institutions, and illustrate why those beliefs necessarily put them at odds ends.

To clarify a few things:

Ethnocentric, despite the earlier posts, is being used in this topic to mean the attitude that one's own group is superior. The individual adherent to one of these 3 religions adopts the core beliefs that their God is the true God, their beliefs are the truth, they are God's chosen, and all other beliefs/Gods/scripture is false.

Culture is the number one factor in determining what spiritual belief system will be adopted by individuals in that culture. You can provide counter examples all day long, but those are still the absolute minority of cases. The trend, by vast majority, is to go with the cultural norm.

Now the cultural norm in the US is Christianity. But there are thousands of sects of Christianity in the US, each one claiming superior interpretation of scripture. My question is, if these beliefs aren't inherently devisive and ethnocentric then how is it possible that so many opposing sects of Christianity exist?

 

[Helo]

False. Christians are peaceful towards all sorts of religions.

Untill they disagree with them.

False. The butchering of the Germans in WWII was not undertaken because of "Christian values"

Butchering of GERMANS? I think the butchering of JEWS was a tad bit more important. And besides, you totally ignore things like the Crusades and the Inquisition.

False. Christians believe in the truth of Christianity; which is the example of Christ who never forcibly converted anyone.
Islam had both peaceful, and forced converts right from the start.

Christianity was a weak cult to start out with. They couldnt force anyboddy because they knew that if they did, the Roman authorites would have sought them out and crushed them.

You sure about that? Hitler explained his actions as lead by his Lord and Savior. If you don't believe that Nazism was in part a Christian organization, then please explain why they Aryan Nation(Nazi remnants) today is known as the Church of Jesus Christ Christian

Actually....Hitler was not a Christian or a Catholic. He had a mutated form of the old Germanic traditions inter-mixed with totalitarian thought.

 

[satay]

I think we're straying a bit off topic here, not to say the input has been invaluable.

Sorry, didn't mean to take the thread on a tangent.

satay

 

[MortonGneiss]

Christianity was a weak cult to start out with. They couldnt force anyboddy because they knew that if they did, the Roman authorites would have sought them out and crushed them.

Let's see what 2nd century philosopher Celsus has to say of early Christian conversion: "And how can one overlook the fact that Christian teachers are only happy with stupid pupils, indeed they scout about for the slow witted."

Actually....Hitler was not a Christian or a Catholic. He had a mutated form of the old Germanic traditions inter-mixed with totalitarian thought.

I should have clarified that, he expressed those sentiments, but I don't believe that he was of any Christian denomination. It was simply a tool.

 

[troglodyte]

the word culture pretty much makes ethnocentrism in any group of people a given.
ethnocentrism is something Anthropologists try hard to avoid when studying different peoples.

 

[Vaneeza Malkah]

I think we're straying a bit off topic here, not to say the input has been invaluable. But I believe the real focus here is to examine the belief structures of these religious institutions, and illustrate why those beliefs necessarily put them at odds ends.

To clarify a few things:

Ethnocentric, despite the earlier posts, is being used in this topic to mean the attitude that one's own group is superior. The individual adherent to one of these 3 religions adopts the core beliefs that their God is the true God, their beliefs are the truth, they are God's chosen, and all other beliefs/Gods/scripture is false.

Culture is the number one factor in determining what spiritual belief system will be adopted by individuals in that culture. You can provide counter examples all day long, but those are still the absolute minority of cases. The trend, by vast majority, is to go with the cultural norm.

Now the cultural norm in the US is Christianity. But there are thousands of sects of Christianity in the US, each one claiming superior interpretation of scripture. My question is, if these beliefs aren't inherently devisive and ethnocentric then how is it possible that so many opposing sects of Christianity exist?

I believe you can be correct and humble about your beliefs, no need to develope a superiority (or should I say insecurity) complex if you study what you believe and feel confident in it. I think watered-down christianity is the cultural norm at least in America. I've mentioned this in posts before, but a survey of americans showed that ~65% claimed to be christian, but only 10% regularly attended a church. Even then once you get into the church, there's the ones that go as a sort-of social club and others who are sincerely interested. To me the numbers seem very few in America. As to why there are so many 'sects' here I think you will find that it too is cultural. Don't be surprised if you find many Lutherans with German decent, Catholic Italians or Greek Orthodox.

 

[arunma]

First, the common definition, which you should look up, is simply a group that considers themselves superior.

So if I tell you that physics majors consider ourselves superior to psychology majors, we are guilty of ethnocentrism?

Second, the beliefs in question address both. You have looked into Christianity haven't you?

Where does the Bible say that Christians are superior to non-Christians? The Bible contains many exhortations for Christians to be holy, and that Christ sanctifies us. But it also says that salvation is the free gift of God, and is not acquired by works. So you could say that God gives Christians more than he gives non-Christians. But you cannot say that Christians have any intrinsic superiority over Gentiles.

Yes I do. I couldn't befriend someone that I was constantly judging for their beliefs...it just seems insincere.

Then perhaps this is more of a personal issue for you rather than an indication that your philosophy is superior. I am able to make friends with people whose beliefs offend me. I can even point to an example on this forum. There are several Jews on this forum, and I like to think that I have a mutual respect with most of them. As you may know, I find Judaism to be a highly offensive religion, because it denies that Jesus is the Christ, and the Son of God. That doesn't prevent me from befriending the Jews on this forum.

It would silly to say Western Civ. didn't exist before Christianity. But it would irresponsible to say that Christianity had a positive impact on it.

It would also be irresponsible to say that Christianity had a negative impact on European civilization.

No, I'm saying that people like you reject family tradition in the face of these systems. There are lot's of ploys used to draw people into Christianity. And that's what we're looking at, this mechanism of Christianity that sends them into other regions, across these boundaries, to change the beliefs of the people that live there.

But you can't find very much evidence to support this conclusion. Mexicans are almost exclusively Catholic, and yet their Mexican culture remains. Ethiopians have been largely Christians since the time of the apostles, and they don't seem to become European in culture (I assume you believe that Christians seek to westernize all Gentiles, but correct me if I'm wrong).

If your culture has spiritual beliefs, then the Christian missionary is interested in having you reject it, they'd be more interested in destroying it, but they go one step at a time. With missionaries, we're not talking about one or two people, their goal is to convert everyone.

So what do the Big Bad Missionaries want to do? Are they going stop me from eating mattar paneer? Do they want to take away my Bollywood movies? Or do they just want to burn my Diwali lights?

Hindu's have one of the oldest traditions on the planet, it's dispicable to want to take that away from them.

No, Indians have one of the oldest traditions on the planet. India has been the home of many different religions for quite awhile now, so it makes no sense to say that Indian culture and Hinduism are the same thing.

Now as for Hindu culture, I find nothing dispicable at all about encouraging people to turn from false idols to worship the triune God who created them.

Some see it as forsaking your culture..cause well it is, you're tossing out your entire heritage to follow someone else's.

And if I may be so bold as to ask: precisely whose heritage have I forsook, and whose have I taken up?

And innoculating children against Christianity is a very good and nobel goal.

Well, at least we now know that you don't plan to argue from an objective standpoint.

Cortez was a Christian paladin, and his actions were in strict accordance to the Christian doctrine of that time. I'll send you 30pg essay on that if you like.

The Christian church has no such position as a paladin. If anyone is ethnocentric, it is only you, because you've already equated Christendom with Europe.

And by identifing yourself with the organization, yes you are culpable for it's crimes. That's as silly as trying to call yourself a Nazi, but not wanting to accept everything associated with the title.

The Christian church on earth has no episcopal leadership, so it's impossible to say that modern Christians belong to the same organization as Cortez. If you were talking to a Roman Catholic, that argument might fly, but he'd simply tell you that the Catholic Church has acknowledged its error and repented.

What good has the Gospel of Christ brought the world?

As Saint John might say, if every good deed that the church has done in the name of Christ were written down, then I suppose the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.

Or were you looking for a website that lists the good deeds of the church? Anyway, an equally pertinent question is this: precisely what good has your secular philosophy done? If you wish to convict all Christians for the sins of Cortez and his European contemporaries, then you must also convict all atheists for the deaths that Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong caused (which outweigh the loss of life caused by the bad deeds of the Catholic Church).

 

[urnotme]

Just recently, we saw an article where missionaries and Christian priests of Indian churches are trying to assimilate Vedic rituals in their church this includes but is not limited to worshipping the deity of Jesus and performing aarti ritual to the statue of jesus. This shows the cunning and arrogant nature of the christian organization where they will do anything to destroy the cultures that tolerate them. It also shows the absurdity and lack of sensitivity to the land that feeds them special privileges in the name of secularism. But then again, from a missionary point of view such act as immoral as it may be, are valid since they are under the illusion that they are "saving" souls which in itself is the height of absurdity, since the final analysis of Christian dogma is that a man is imperfect himself!

satay

I thought you would be glad that the catholics were trying to adopt some of your beliefs.Why do you see it as rapping your culture? If there are christians in those countries why shouldn't they have the oppertunity to watch christian tv.

 

[arunma]

I thought you would be glad that the catholics were trying to adopt some of your beliefs.Why do you see it as rapping your culture? If there are christians in those countries why shouldn't they have the oppertunity to watch christian tv.

I think Satay's position can be summed up by "don't do anything that will cause Hindus to convert to Christianity."

 

[satay]

I thought you would be glad that the catholics were trying to adopt some of your beliefs.Why do you see it as rapping your culture? If there are christians in those countries why shouldn't they have the oppertunity to watch christian tv.

You thought wrong then. This is just another ploy of the missionaries to silence the Hindus that are showing some interest in their own Vedic tradition for a change.

It just shows how cunning, arrogant and insensitive these missionaries are to the hand that feeds them.

satay

 

[MortonGneiss]

Where does the Bible say that Christians are superior to non-Christians? The Bible contains many exhortations for Christians to be holy, and that Christ sanctifies us. But it also says that salvation is the free gift of God, and is not acquired by works. So you could say that God gives Christians more than he gives non-Christians. But you cannot say that Christians have any intrinsic superiority over Gentiles.

Read what you wrote..then read your bible. You just told me that God favors his followers, his chosen ones, more than anyone else. Think about that for a minute please.

It would also be irresponsible to say that Christianity had a negative impact on European civilization.

You're obviously not a student of history. Before signing your soul over to the religion perhaps it would have been wise of you to examine it's track record. Start with the fall of Rome, and the beginning of the Dark Ages and go from there.

But you can't find very much evidence to support this conclusion. Mexicans are almost exclusively Catholic, and yet their Mexican culture remains.

We talked about this remember. That region of the world hasn't always been Catholic, Cortez had to do a lot of killing to get it that way. Pretty sure the Aztecs and other natives lived quite different lives before the Christians turned up.

Ethiopians have been largely Christians since the time of the apostles, and they don't seem to become European in culture (I assume you believe that Christians seek to westernize all Gentiles, but correct me if I'm wrong).

They are seeking to Christianize, which has an impact on culture..which I think is where you are getting quite confused.

So what do the Big Bad Missionaries want to do? Are they going stop me from eating mattar paneer? Do they want to take away my Bollywood movies? Or do they just want to burn my Diwali lights?

Why don't you check with them. Check out ChristianCinema.com. As far as Diwali lights, I'm not sure they've made enough of an impact on Hinduism to tackle that one yet. But if you want to see how the worst kind of Christian missionary approaches Hindus read this: http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0070/0070_01.asp

The Christian church has no such position as a paladin. If anyone is ethnocentric, it is only you, because you've already equated Christendom with Europe.

I was using the term figuratively because in essence it perfectly describes his actions. No, I equate Christendom with Christendom. Unless you want to renounce all of the Western world as not being 'true' christians, I suggest you stop this nonsense.

The Christian church on earth has no episcopal leadership, so it's impossible to say that modern Christians belong to the same organization as Cortez. If you were talking to a Roman Catholic, that argument might fly, but he'd simply tell you that the Catholic Church has acknowledged its error and repented.

Oopsie, we commited genocide. Pardon. And though Catholic Church is the parent organization of these other sects, we are examining that they all use the same texts which is the source of their belief, so it's fair to say, and easy enough to prove, that the text that is the source of this belief is the source of the behavior. Belief leads to action.

As Saint John might say, if every good deed that the church has done in the name of Christ were written down, then I suppose the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.

Or were you looking for a website that lists the good deeds of the church?

St. John sure knew how to dodge a question. I want you to list one thing, just one.

 

[arunma]

Read what you wrote..then read your bible. You just told me that God favors his followers, his chosen ones, more than anyone else. Think about that for a minute please.

Yes, I certainly did say that God favors his followers. Of course, this is quite difficult to see in the world, since God's favor often leads to persecution and martyrdom. Now, instead of asking me to "think about that for a minute," perhaps you should tell me why Christians have an intrinsic superiority over Gentiles.

You're obviously not a student of history. Before signing your soul over to the religion perhaps it would have been wise of you to examine it's track record. Start with the fall of Rome, and the beginning of the Dark Ages and go from there.

You're right to say that I'm not a student of history. As I already said, I'm a student of physics, not history. But I like to think that I know a thing or two about the history of the Roman Catholic Church. What would you like to talk about? Crusades? Ghettos? Pogroms? If you'd like to talk me out of my religion, then try again.

By the way, technically I've already signed my soul over to Jesus Christ.

We talked about this remember. That region of the world hasn't always been Catholic, Cortez had to do a lot of killing to get it that way. Pretty sure the Aztecs and other natives lived quite different lives before the Christians turned up.

True. Some North Americans used to sacrifice humans to their gods before Cortez brought his own brand of savagry to the continent. I still fail to see how this advances your point. For that matter, I think you should more clearly define the point that you're trying to make.

They are seeking to Christianize, which has an impact on culture..which I think is where you are getting quite confused.

How are the Ethiopeans seeking to "Christianize?" Most of them are already Christian.

Why don't you check with them. Check out ChristianCinema.com.

I just did. Most of those movies are made for pre-tribulation, end-time fanatics. But there are a few good titles.

By the way, sometimes after I watch a Bollywood film, I put "The Gospel of John" into my DVD player. Does that make me a heretical Christian?

As far as Diwali lights, I'm not sure they've made enough of an impact on Hinduism to tackle that one yet. But if you want to see how the worst kind of Christian missionary approaches Hindus read this:

It's very clever of you to make generalizations about us based upon the most extremist of Christians.

Anyway, I've read this, and most of Jack Chick's tracts. Chick tells blatent lies about the Catholic Church, so I don't trust most of what he says. That said, I'm quite disappointed that he's only published one anti-Hindu polemic.

I was using the term figuratively because in essence it perfectly describes his actions. No, I equate Christendom with Christendom. Unless you want to renounce all of the Western world as not being 'true' christians, I suggest you stop this nonsense.

I certainly don't claim that all Westerners are non-Christians. Throughout history, there has been no short supply of godly Western Christians. A few of my favorite Christian figures from church history are Westerners. My issue is with your assumption that Western culture and Christianity are the same thing.

And though Catholic Church is the parent organization of these other sects, we are examining that they all use the same texts which is the source of their belief, so it's fair to say, and easy enough to prove, that the text that is the source of this belief is the source of the behavior. Belief leads to action.

I don't think you've realized what you just said. You claim that because all Christians recognize the Bible as the authority of our faith, all Christians are responsible for the acts of the Roman Catholic Church. Most American pro-choice groups recognize the same constitution that I do. I suppose that makes me responsible for murdering unborn children, doesn't it?

St. John sure knew how to dodge a question. I want you to list one thing, just one.

Last month my church collected money for aid to the victims of the hurricane in New Orleans. Do you plan to respond with a list of Roman Catholic atrocities committed during the crusades?

 

[MortonGneiss]

Yes, I certainly did say that God favors his followers. Of course, this is quite difficult to see in the world, since God's favor often leads to persecution and martyrdom. Now, instead of asking me to "think about that for a minute," perhaps you should tell me why Christians have an intrinsic superiority over Gentiles.

It's interesting to examine how many Christians scream persecution, and then take an honest look at which side of the table the persecution is coming from. I asked you to think about it, because that statement is exactly the kind of elitest garbarge I'm talking about. You aren't even aware you're doing it. How tragic.

True. Some North Americans used to sacrifice humans to their gods before Cortez brought his own brand of savagry to the continent. I still fail to see how this advances your point.

Cortez's actions were dictated by his beliefs. His beliefs were in direct accordance with those of the Church at that time. Are you seeing the connection yet?

I just did. Most of those movies are made for pre-tribulation, end-time fanatics. But there are a few good titles.

It's very clever of you to make generalizations about us based upon the most extremist of Christians.

Christianity is, and always will be an apocalypse cult. You are throwing your card in with that lot. What you take away from the scripture may be different, but the scripture they are using is the same. And they take the liberty of counting you in their statistics when advancing their fundamentalist agenda.

By the way, sometimes after I watch a Bollywood film, I put "The Gospel of John" into my DVD player. Does that make me a heretical Christian?

John is propably the most fictitious of the 4, if you agree with Q and Markian priority. Which I do.

Anyway, I've read this, and most of Jack Chick's tracts. Chick tells blatent lies about the Catholic Church, so I don't trust most of what he says. That said, I'm quite disappointed that he's only published one anti-Hindu polemic.

I simply think he is the most disgusting. Any missionary that plans to operate in India is equally guilty, however. Pay attention cause this is the point. Missionaries going to India are doing so to get people there to abandon Hinduism and follow Christianity. Which tells us they, and anyone who supports their effort, believe a) Christianity is superior and b) Christianity is superior I realize that is technically only one point, but I felt that it was so important it was worth mentioning twice.

I certainly don't claim that all Westerners are non-Christians. Throughout history, there has been no short supply of godly Western Christians. A few of my favorite Christian figures from church history are Westerners. My issue is with your assumption that Western culture and Christianity are the same thing.

I haven't said that. I've said Christianity is the dominant religion in Western Civ., and has had tremendous influence on it, there is a big difference.

I don't think you've realized what you just said. You claim that because all Christians recognize the Bible as the authority of our faith, all Christians are responsible for the acts of the Roman Catholic Church. Most American pro-choice groups recognize the same constitution that I do. I suppose that makes me responsible for murdering unborn children, doesn't it?

It's good point, only the Constitution isn't a holy text or the basis of a religion. The scripture in the bible justifies the action of the Church at every point of it's atrocious history, it even justifies the KKK and Aryan Nation. The Constitution doesn't inspire people to have abortions, but the Bible has inspired all of the above. So it was almost a compelling parallel.

Last month my church collected money for aid to the victims of the hurricane in New Orleans. Do you plan to respond with a list of Roman Catholic atrocities committed during the crusades?

And with the number of Christians that claimed God caused the hurricane as divine retribution for human sin..I think it's fair the Church coughed up some reparations.

But serioiusly, that was a good deed. That'll be the first one on my list.

 

[urnotme]

The Muslims I've interviewed have all said they are just waiting for Christianity to fullfill enough prophecy before they Jihad. There is quite a selection of books on the topic. Try CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM: THE FINAL CLASH never read it myself, but it jumped to the top of the book list dealing with the subject on Amazon.



How can you befriend someone if you can't tolerate, let alone respect, their beliefs?



No, I don't want you do conversions. I want you to have your beliefs and keep them to yourself, like more self-respecting religions like Hinduism.

That's talking about radical islamm, radicals of any rren or any other kind of radical are dangerous. Don't talk about religion. Why is hinduissm more self respecting in your oppinion, what makes it seem that way to you??

 

[urnotme]

[/font]

Let's see what 2nd century philosopher Celsus has to say of early Christian conversion: "And how can one overlook the fact that Christian teachers are only happy with stupid pupils, indeed they scout about for the slow witted."

.

Where did you get that info from and whhy do you think they look for slow witted people???

 

[MortonGneiss]

Where did you get that info from and whhy do you think they look for slow witted people???

That's the observation of a second century philosopher named Celsus, and it comes from a reconstruction of Celsus' work. I say reconstruction because the Christians burned all of the originals. But luckily Origen, an early Christian apologist cited heavily enough from Celsus that were able to reconstruct his original arguments. And I own the book, On the True Doctrine: A Discourse Against the Christians, I also happen to own Contra Celsus, which is Origen's book.

 

[MortonGneiss]

That's talking about radical islamm, radicals of any rren or any other kind of radical are dangerous. Don't talk about religion. Why is hinduissm more self respecting in your oppinion, what makes it seem that way to you??

The Muslims I interviewed weren't radicals.

Let me add that if they were..I wouldn't be sitting here, I'd be buried over the Middle East.

 

[urnotme]

I believe you can be correct and humble about your beliefs, no need to develope a superiority (or should I say insecurity) complex if you study what you believe and feel confident in it. I think watered-down christianity is the cultural norm at least in America. I've mentioned this in posts before, but a survey of americans showed that ~65% claimed to be christian, but only 10% regularly attended a church. Even then once you get into the church, there's the ones that go as a sort-of social club and others who are sincerely interested. To me the numbers seem very few in America. As to why there are so many 'sects' here I think you will find that it too is cultural. Don't be surprised if you find many Lutherans with German decent, Catholic Italians or Greek Orthodox.

Going to church does not make a chriistian.