Ethnocentrism

[urnotme]

Prove that.

I could say many Christians are dumbasses, but I wouldn't be able to statistically prove it, it would be an ignorant statement, like yours.

I would just take your word for it, many is a relative term though so is dumbass. I get the impression that at least two himdus on this board think hinduuism is a superior religion.

 

[satay]

They can't prove that. It was a retarded thing to say. Hindus' may be proud of their beleifs and reluctant to abandon them, but I've never seen them going around trying to forcefully convert other people to Hinduism. The Hindus that I have interviewed all say that 'there are many paths up the same mountain', which is very tolerant of other peoples beliefs. Christians only believe in one path, and they try to force everyone onto it, or at least believe that if you're not on it then you deserve to burn in hell.

This is why they are Malecchas since they lack the capacity to comprehend Dharma and focus more on numbers instead of the basic principles that will bring peace in the world. This is why I asked; ever imagined what the world will be like when there are only two maleccha organizations left? Ram answered and said that the world will be very "clean". Yes, indeed.

satay

 

[indianx]

I would just take your word for it, many is a relative term though so is dumbass. I get the impression that at least two himdus on this board think hinduuism is a superior religion.

I know that. Many has a connation of a majority to it, which is simply false and something that he can't prove. Just like I can't prove that "many" Christians aren't dumbasses, maybe they are, maybe they aren't. They have every right to think Hinduism is a superior religion, I have seen some Christians here label Christianity as superior and the rest as wicked and crap like that, but you wouldn't notice those people of course.

 

[MortonGneiss]

This is why they are Malecchas since they lack the capacity to comprehend Dharma and focus more on numbers instead of the basic principles that will bring peace in the world. This is why I asked; ever imagined what the world will be like when there are only two maleccha organizations left? Ram answered and said that the world will be very "clean". Yes, indeed.

satay

Sweet I was right! I was only guessing what it meant based on context. I kinda like that word Malecchas, so much meaning in one word. Idiot Christian is a far more problematic term, and doesn't quite convey that meaning with the same precision.

 

[arunma]

Prove that.

Remember when Rahul said "Indians are more spiritual than Christians?"

I would just take your word for it, many is a relative term though so is dumbass. I get the impression that at least two himdus on this board think hinduuism is a superior religion.

Well if the Hindus think that their religion is superior, I can at least respect such a position. After all, we maintain that Christianity is the only true religion. But if the Hindus maintain that Indians are superior to other races, then I do not respect their position. But as you probably know, a racist person will almost never admit that he is racist.

And for you to condemn people based on their beliefs isn't that much different then condemning them for their race, they're both ignorant reasons to hate someone.

Would you then like to suggest that religion is an intrinsic trait with which a person is born?

I'd rather they sent just food. Humanitarian aid should be just that. They use the plight of these people as an excuse to prostelyze, and that's dispicable. Basically the sentiment is "Hey we have food and medicine for you, but first let me tell you a bit about Jesus."

I know I already mentioned this to you, but unless you pay tithes to a church, you really aren't in any position to tell us how we ought to spend our money.

Sweet I was right! I was only guessing what it meant based on context. I kinda like that word Malecchas, so much meaning in one word. Idiot Christian is a far more problematic term, and doesn't quite convey that meaning with the same precision.

And people wonder why we call unbelievers devil-worshipers.

 

[indianx]

"Indians are more spiritual than Christians?"

I suppose he meant Hindus, okay, so according to his beliefs Hindus are more spiritual than Christians and according to your beliefs, Hindus will go to hell. What's the difference here? This is a matter of beliefs and personal faith, so statistics can't come into this, since you can't prove Hindus will go to hell and he can't prove Hindus are more spiritual than Christians using numbers.

But, when you say "many Hindus" are racists, that is a matter of statistics and numbers and if you can't back it up with numbers, it will be rightfully discarded as a lie.

 

[MortonGneiss]

Would you then like to suggest that religion is an intrinsic trait with which a person is born?

That's a silly way to read what I wrote. People aren't born racist, they have to be taught to be racist by other ignorant people. Christianity just happens to work the same way.

And people wonder why we call unbelievers devil-worshipers.

Which is precisely the kind of thing a Hindu would never say.

 

[arunma]

That's a silly way to read what I wrote. People aren't born racist, they have to be taught to be racist by other ignorant people. Christianity just happens to work the same way.

I don't think you understood my point, but maybe it was my fault for being unclear. Discrimination isn't intrinsically a bad thing. There are many personal qualities that people possess based upon which we should discriminate. For example, no graduate school would accept an applicant who didn't have a degree, the Navy SEALs don't accept people who can't pass the qualifications, and churches do not hire pastors who disagree with their doctrine and theology.

The reason racism is wrong isn't because it is a form of discrimination, but because it is discrimination based on an irrelevant quality which isn't under anyone's control. God discriminates based on peoples' beliefs, and I submit that it is right for him to do so (not that God does any wrong to begin with).

Which is precisely the kind of thing a Hindu would never say.

As I'm sure you've noticed, I'm not a Hindu, nor do I agree with any distinct aspect of their religion.

 

[MortonGneiss]

I suppose he meant Hindus, okay, so according to his beliefs Hindus are more spiritual than Christians and according to your beliefs, Hindus will go to hell. What's the difference here? This is a matter of beliefs and personal faith, so statistics can't come into this, since you can't prove Hindus will go to hell and he can't prove Hindus are more spiritual than Christians using numbers.

But, when you say "many Hindus" are racists, that is a matter of statistics and numbers and if you can't back it up with numbers, it will be rightfully discarded as a lie.

I think we can prove it with the numbers. If we look at the cultures that have tolerant spiritual beliefs, and we compare their analytical capacity to those in predominantly Christian nations we can see the trend. I'm fairly convinced that these differences in beliefs help create the differences in analytical capacity, and is why China, Japan, and India kick the United States ass in math and science.

 

[MortonGneiss]

it is discrimination based on an irrelevant quality

That sums up religious discrimination. Again, it's only in your mind that Christianity is superior.

As I'm sure you've noticed, I'm not a Hindu, nor do I agree with any distinct aspect of their religion.

Which is why you're guilty of the above discrimination.

 

[arunma]

That sums up religious discrimination. Again, it's only in your mind that Christianity is superior.

Well, I happen to believe in absolute truth, so I don't think that Christianity can be right "for me," but wrong for others.

 

[MortonGneiss]

Well, I happen to believe in absolute truth, so I don't think that Christianity can be right "for me," but wrong for others.

But where fantasy and reality deviate is 3rd person perspecitve.

 

[urnotme]

I think you just like to pretend this isn't true. The ones that just send food usually aren't Christian, and I happen to respect those ones.

After the tsunami struck I had some great examples of Churches that were rallying missionaries because 'the door was open' for conversion, they were going to do aid and relief, but the major motivator was that they could get into that region, an area Christians had been restricted from, and preach. But alas too much time has passed for me to provide you with those links.

So, no, I'm not just making empty claims. TBN should proof enough that many of these organizations are more interested in promoting themselves and the word of God than doing any actual good.

Let me ask a question, and maybe this will open your eyes. These people are starving to death and illiterate...what good is a new/used bible going do for?

They are sending them food. I wwould think there are some people over there that can read. If they send them food and witness to them too that's better than just witnessing to them.. I don't think iit's wrong to tell them about jesus which is what I think you don't want them to do.

 

[MortonGneiss]

They are sending them food. I wwould think there are some people over there that can read. If they send them food and witness to them too that's better than just witnessing to them.. I don't think iit's wrong to tell them about jesus which is what I think you don't want them to do.

I don't think there is any reason to do that, unless it's to excercise the superiority of their beliefs over a people that are in no position to turn them away. That's why it's taking advantage of them.

 

[arunma]

I think we can prove it with the numbers. If we look at the cultures that have tolerant spiritual beliefs, and we compare their analytical capacity to those in predominantly Christian nations we can see the trend. I'm fairly convinced that these differences in beliefs help create the differences in analytical capacity, and is why China, Japan, and India kick the United States ass in math and science.

Are you just another angry atheist?

 

[urnotme]

I don't think there is any reason to do that, unless it's to excercise the superiority of their beliefs over a people that are in no position to turn them away. That's why it's taking advantage of them.

So they should just tell them about jesus because that's what missionaries do??

 

[MortonGneiss]

Are you just another angry atheist?

I'm not an atheist, if you can read you'll see that I identify myself as agnostic.

So they should just tell them about jesus because that's what missionaries do??

Jesus should be left out of it altogether is what I'm saying. To bring Jesus into the matter is taking advantage of people that need food and medicine. They aren't in a position to refuse food, so missionaries know they aren't in a position to refuse their prostelyzing. Must be a language barrier here.

 

[arunma]

I'm not an atheist, if you can read you'll see that I identify myself as agnostic.

You'll have to forgive me for not seeing much of a difference between the two. Besides that, you are angry (at least as far as I can tell).

Jesus should be left out of it altogether is what I'm saying.

And what we're saying is "no." We aren't leaving Jesus out of anything.

 

[MortonGneiss]

I've already said I've read Diaz... which I doubt you've read, but you call upon me to read - even though I've already said that I have.

I just picked up a copy of Diaz's 'The Conquest of New Spain', and I gotta tell you, Montalban, I'm baffled that you, having read it, don't see the connection between the actions of the Conquistadors and Christianity. It seems like on every 5th page of this book they are talking about God or their divine quest in regards to whatever heinous act they happen to be committing. I'm glad you turned me onto this book, as Diaz was a first-hand witness to these events and will add even more weight to my argument in the future. Thank you.

 

[MortonGneiss]

You'll have to forgive me for not seeing much of a difference between the two. Besides that, you are angry (at least as far as I can tell).

No of course you wouldn't. But I feel there isn't enough evidence either way to prove or disprove God, so I'm taking the responsible road and saying 'I don't know'. What I do know is that God doesn't write books.

And what we're saying is "no." We aren't leaving Jesus out of anything.

A fantatics gotta do what a fanatics gotta do, I guess.