Lessons of Krishnaism: We are ALL Female!

chaela said:

It is true that other religions are just as diverse within themselves as Christianity -- or rather, Christianities
-- is/are within itself. However, to go around calling others' beliefs "silly" is a tad rude, no?

Click to expand...

I think they meant, the concept of "Authentic Hinduism" was silly..

Syrokal said:

I think they meant, the concept of "Authentic Hinduism" was silly..

Click to expand...

The concept of Hinduism is a single, organized religion is an outgrowth of British colonialism in India (the "Raj"); it was they who coined the term.

Cerdic said:

Given that this is a Christian forum and this is a non-Christian assertion about the true divinity of a pagan deity.. No.

I am the Way, the truth, and the life: no man comes unto the Father, but by me.

Click to expand...

Per the rules of this subforum:

Mutual respect means that neither Christians nor non-Christians will mock, degrade or belittle each others religious beliefs, or make posts that are disruptive to the peace and harmony of the forum.

Syrokal said:

I think the notion is more to do with the spiritual notion of Gender in regards to creation and expansion as opposed to Biological rolls.

However saying that, ive never heard of this concept before and certainly haven't come across it in the scriptures.

Click to expand...

I've never heard of it before. My knowledge of Hinduism is relatively decent, and it's the first I've heard of it.

Cerdic said:

The concept of Hinduism is a single, organized religion is an outgrowth of British colonialism in India (the "Raj"); it was they who coined the term.

Click to expand...

This I know hehe, did a 4000 word assignment on it not so long ago.

But it's good that "you" know.

Syrokal said:

This I know hehe, did a 4000 word assignment on it not so long ago.

But it's good that "you" know.

Click to expand...

An assignment on the development of Hinduism as a modern religion? The British of the colonial period had an obsession with the antique cultures of the Orient.

Cerdic said:

Given that this is a Christian forum and this is a non-Christian assertion about the true divinity of a pagan deity.. No.

Click to expand...

LoAmmi said:

Per the rules of this subforum:

Mutual respect means that neither Christians nor non-Christians will mock, degrade or belittle each others religious beliefs, or make posts that are disruptive to the peace and harmony of the forum.

Click to expand...

"Authentic Hinduism"? There is no such animal.

The very term is but a loose umbrella for all sorts of religious schools of thought that exist on the subcontinent, from the most primitive folk beliefs to highly complex philosophies (that often clash with one another).
Even the Baghavad Gita shows signs of several different schools (and was written over an extended period of time by several different authors).

Cerdic said:

An assignment on the development of Hinduism as a modern religion? The British of the colonial period had an obsession with the antique cultures of the Orient.

Click to expand...

Ic lóclóca fram úre onlícnes ðu gelíce Angelcyning Artōrius

There are no "pagan gods" because there is no religion called "paganism" to begin with. It was just a word invented by Christians to mock non-Christians. The word means "country dwellers" and was used by Christians to deride non-Christians as backwards rednecks so to speak. They haven't yet caught up with the times and embraced the "true religion".

SeventhValley said:

Ic lóclóca fram úre onlícnes ðu gelíce Angelcyning Artōrius

Click to expand...

þæt wæs god cyning.

WonderBeat said:

You may not accept this final view to what is the Absolute Truth - that is fine, I am only giving you my own viewpoint...

Click to expand...

Well, I didn't say I reject this claim, only that it's the first I'm hearing of it. I'll give most interesting ideas due consideration before accepting or rejecting them. I hope nothing I said came off as judgmental.

TG123 said:

Thank you for your kind words. My dad didn't believe in salvation through the Hare Krsna religion, but he pushed vegetarianism on us and was angry when we went to church.

...

According to my mom, my dad was an entirely different person before getting involved in the Hare Krsna religion. The years afterwards came close to destroying my family and have messed me up for a very long time. None of this is your fault and I am sure you are a very kind and sincere person, but I do not believe that your religion is of God.

Click to expand...

Heh, my dad and mom pushed vegetarianism on me and would have been angry if I went to church. But then, that was a rather different situation from yours since we are Indian and ought to live this way. Also there was no disagreement in my family, both parents taught the same religious beliefs. I'm sorry to hear of what happened in your family and think it is a good example of why all families should retain the religion of their respective cultures. I find evangelism, whether performed by Christians or Hare Krishnas, to be antithetical to family values, precisely because of situations like your own. Please do not take this as any sort of backhanded, anti-Christian comment, but this is why I find it strange that evangelical Christians claim to uphold family values. If one is in favor of family values, he won't preach Christianity to Indians, Jews, and other people whose cultures are tied to other religions. Such a thing has a devastating impact on families, as you can very well attest.

Cerdic said:

Given that this is a Christian forum and this is a non-Christian assertion about the true divinity of a pagan deity.. No.

I am the Way, the truth, and the life: no man comes unto the Father, but by me.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. LoAmmi's observation of the forum rules notwithstanding, I suppose that whether your comments are rude or not, you are well within your rights to claim that my religion's deities are "pagan", false gods, etc. Christians likewise are well within their rights to make derogatory comments about any religion they wish. But let me speak to you of what is practical. Many of us here would like to have discussions regarding faiths that we do not share. Evangelical Christians, in particular, are eager to use such debates as vehicles for persuading others to become Christians. If you refer to my religion as pagan - and I'm sure you do so due to an unwaivering support for what you percieve as the brutal, honest truth - do you believe it will make me more or less likely to consider becoming a Christian? My entire family without exception is Hindu, as are many of my friends, and becoming a Christian would require me to join a group of individuals who speak poorly of these people. Given this, do you think there is any chance at all that I would even consider becoming a Christian?

Op do you really know about Krishna? Or did you skim through a wiki entry?
It's all symbolic, kinda like how we are the brides of Christ

sanjaya1984 said:

Fair enough. LoAmmi's observation of the forum rules notwithstanding, I suppose that whether your comments are rude or not, you are well within your rights to claim that my religion's deities are "pagan", false gods, etc. Christians likewise are well within their rights to make derogatory comments about any religion they wish. But let me speak to you of what is practical. Many of us here would like to have discussions regarding faiths that we do not share. Evangelical Christians, in particular, are eager to use such debates as vehicles for persuading others to become Christians. If you refer to my religion as pagan - and I'm sure you do so due to an unwaivering support for what you percieve as the brutal, honest truth - do you believe it will make me more or less likely to consider becoming a Christian? My entire family without exception is Hindu, as are many of my friends, and becoming a Christian would require me to join a group of individuals who speak poorly of these people. Given this, do you think there is any chance at all that I would even consider becoming a Christian?

Click to expand...

Your choice to become a Christian is your own to make; no one can do that for you. Jesus makes it abundantly clear that being a Christian isn't easy and it's a choice one has to make for oneself in a sincere manner:

Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

Etc.

Some have used force, deceit, coercion, etc. to make others into Christians, which I find utterly despicable even though it might be justified in some certain cases (i.e. the forced conversion of rebellious Moors in Andalusia by Cisneros). An insincere conversion to the Faith is meaningless; God sees beyond the purely superficial and into a person's heart and mind. I wouldn't expect you to join any group that reviled your religion, nor would I expect you to turn your back on your ancestral beliefs without a good reason.

Don't assume I was using the term pagan in a pejorative sense. It's simply how I see other religions that aren't Christianity (the concept of the virtuous pagan is a part of Christian theology that isn't spoken of much nowadays- neither is the idea that paganism contains kernels of Christianity's truth within its manifold nature); either Jesus is what he says he is or he isn't. The great religions and philosophies that existed at the time of the Lord's Incarnation were largely pagan and, as noble as some of them may've been (i.e. Mithraism, Stoicism, and so on), they were still pagan and Judaism itself contained some debased denominations that perverted the spirit of the Holy Writings. Jesus himself uses such terms, in various translations he calls them "pagan," "heathen," "gentiles" and so on and one doesn't assume that he does so from any spirit of maliciousness (he actually had positive encounters with pagans, such as with the centurion in Jerusalem- Jesus said the centurion had greater faith than in all of Israel!). The message of Jesus is often hard for people to put up with so, when someone sees a Christian apparently intolerant or vindictive, they moan and groan ("The Burning Times!" (exaggerated persecutions) "The Spanish Inquisition!" (inquisitors had no power except what the secular authorities gave them) "The Crusades!" (initially self-defense against Islamic aggression towards Byzantium) and so on; the intolerant Christian cretin/bigot is a favorite stereotype of course but it's historically true that Christians have often been some of the greatest preservers of non-Christian beliefs and cultures- largely as academia perhaps but still..). This is sometimes true, but it's usually a case of a Christian believer stating what he or she believes is true. A friend of mine, Tridentine Catholic (they are extremely conservative even to the point of rejecting Vatican II), is married to a man who she says has pagan beliefs (neo-pagan actually, Asatru/Odinism, but it's more of an intellectual belief in pre-Christian folklore; religiously he's largely an atheist except for a belief in the Jungian archetypes, collective unconsciousness, etc.), and no one would say that she hates her husband for his beliefs.

Other than, say, absorbing cultic rituals and whatnot, such as how the Roman Church absorbed some of the rituals of the old classical religion of Rome that King Numa founded (i.e. veneration of saints rather than heroes and so on), Christianity's syncretism is largely superficial.

Illuminaughty said:

There are no "pagan gods" because there is no religion called "paganism" to begin with. It was just a word invented by Christians to mock non-Christians. The word means "country dwellers" and was used by Christians to deride non-Christians as backwards rednecks so to speak. They haven't yet caught up with the times and embraced the "true religion".

Click to expand...

This is sort of true, but not quite.
The Romans (following the pre-christian state religion [Roman Pantheon adapted from the Greek one]) used the term "Pagan" for those who still indulged in the worship of older Gods. Such practices were much more common in rural areas (practiced by country-dwellers, wherefrom the term originates).
Once he Roman Empire adopted Christianity as a state religion, anyone still following the old ways (be that the Roman Pantheon or older Gods still) were referred to by the official Roman Empire as Pagans (and persecuted for not following the state religion, just as the Christians had been persecuted before them).