What Year Did Evolution Start?

[AV1611VET]

[Edit] I think the number is actually 30,000,000 gods[/edit]

All deserving equal airtime with JEHOVAH -- right?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Buddhism was formed as a breakaway religion from Hindu's extremely oppressive caste system, in which society was locked into ways of life they didn't agree with.

And God help the ones who were considered the UNTOUCHABLES.

But atheists seem to revere Hinduism over Christianity, and that's par for the course.

Anything ... any-thing ... so long as it's not supported by the Bible, is okay with unbelievers.

They prefer Hindu's caste system over the Bible's feed the poor.

They prefer Islam's convert-or-die religion over the Bible's love-thine-enemy.

Anything -- so long as it's not the Bible.

That has zero relevance to my post. Take your blinkers off.

 

[dlamberth]

So the fact that the Hindu story has us in a state of de-evolution, but God's creation tells you we are in a state of evolutionary progress, you have not developed any opinion???

Yet you're sure Genesis is wrong.

Hmmm ...

Maybe Mother Nature should be more convincing, don't you think?

Ask her if the Hindus got it right, or if the scientists got it right, and see what she has to say.

(Actually don't. That would be tantamount to consorting with familiar spirits. I just said that to make the point that I think you're as confused as scientists are about what happened in 4004 BC.)

I need to know something about a subject before I'm able to comment. I know nothing about Hindu creation stories. If it were to comment, it would be from a place of ignorance.

I'm convinced that what I see in the evolution of life forms on Earth is an evolution of consciousness. I don't have to jump far to believe that the evolution of consciousness is what it's really all about.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

All deserving equal airtime with JEHOVAH -- right?

No argument there, but I didn't raise the subject. Just another irrelevant post from you with your blinkers on.

 

[Yttrium]

But atheists seem to revere Hinduism over Christianity, and that's par for the course.

Anything ... any-thing ... so long as it's not supported by the Bible, is okay with unbelievers.

For me, it's Bible > Hinduism > Mainstream Christianity

 

[AV1611VET]

I need to know something about a subject before I'm able to comment. I know nothing about Hindu creation stories.

So Frank Robert and Wikipedia don't know what they're talking about?

You can't even comment on what they said?

Pretend they were right, then answer my questions to you.

Or pretend they were wrong, then answer my questions to you.

 

[dlamberth]

So Frank Robert and Wikipedia don't know what they're talking about?

You can't even comment on what they said?

Pretend they were right, then answer my questions to you.

Or pretend they were wrong, then answer my questions to you.

I've actually answered. As I've said already, the Earth shows an evolution of form and consciousness. I follow what the Earth shows us. It doesn't lie. I don't follow Hindu or Bible Creation stores. Though from what little I know about Hindu spirituality, it seems they are closer to the state of consciousness then we find in Christian spirituality.

In thinking about your comment about Hindu de-evolution, your Genesis story also has a de-evolution story in the form of Adam. Interesting thing there.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Good! Are they Christians?

I don't know.

Actually I worded that wrong.

I don't think that changed anything.

 

[Frank Robert]

Well I’m not a Hindu,I’m a devout Christian.As a matter of fact that you speak of Hinduism,it’s among one of the most broken (false)religions in the world.It’s do badly broken that it recognizes 320,000,000 different Gods,it’s a pantheistic belief system with no formal structure.

The post was simply a reminder that there are outher religions whose devout adherents have contrary beliefs to Christians and most of which would think it odd that Christianity claims three gods in one.

Also, many Hindus do not agree with this number. Some say there is only one God, while some say there are 33 gods only. The reason behind this confusion is that the different scriptures give different numbers.

Source: Brihandaranyaka Upanishad (3.9.1):

The same question was asked by Vidagdha to Sage Yajnavalkya, and he gave the following answer:
Then Vidagdha, the son of Sakala, asked him: “How many gods are there, Yajnavalkya?
Yajnavalkya said, “As many as are indicated in the Nivid of the Visvadevas – 300 and 3003.”
“Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?”
“Thirty-three.”
“Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?”
“Six.”
“Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?”
“Three.”
“Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?”
“Two.”
“Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?”
“One-and-a-half.”
“Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?”
“One.”
“Very good,” said Sakalya, and he asked: “Which are those 303 and those 3003?”
Yajnavalkya said: “There are only 33 gods. These others are but manifestations of them.”
“Which are those thirty-threes?”
“The eight Vasus, the eleven Rudras, and the twelve Adityas–these are thirty-one, and Indra and Prajapati make up the thirty-three.’
Therefore, per the Brihandryaka Upanishad, there are a total of 3003 gods, but they are manifestations of 33 gods.​

 

[Frank Robert]

But atheists seem to revere Hinduism over Christianity, and that's par for the course.

Atheists don't believe in any gods and agnostics don't know if there are so there are no gods or religion to revere they do not have a god or religion to revere..

 

[AV1611VET]

Atheists don't believe in any gods and agnostics don't know if there are so there are no gods or religion to revere they do not have a god or religion to revere..

You've never talked to an atheist that makes it clear they have more respect for Hinduism than Christianity?

 

[dlamberth]

You've never talked to an atheist that makes it clear they have more respect for Hinduism than Christianity?

Perhaps, if true, it could be because of their experiences with Christians.

 

[AV1611VET]

Perhaps, if true, it could be because of their experiences with Christians.

So it's out of the frying pan and into the fire then?

QV please:

"Traditionally, the groups characterized as untouchable were those whose occupations and habits of life involved ritually polluting activities, of which the most important were (1) taking life for a living, a category that included, for example, fishermen, (2) killing or disposing of dead cattle or working with their hides for a living, (3) pursuing activities that brought the participant into contact with emissions of the human body, such as feces, urine, sweat, and spittle, a category that included such occupational groups as sweepers and laundry workers, and (4) eating the flesh of cattle or of domestic pigs and chickens, a category into which most of the indigenous tribes of India fell."

SOURCE

And for the record, I was wrong. An UNTOUCHABLE is a person considered outside of the caste system.

So, Lamberth, a person who "has a bad experience with Christians," and goes and embraces a religion that treats some of their people like UNTOUCHABLES is justified or unjustified in your book?

 

[dlamberth]

So it's out of the frying pan and into the fire then?

QV please:

"Traditionally, the groups characterized as untouchable were those whose occupations and habits of life involved ritually polluting activities, of which the most important were (1) taking life for a living, a category that included, for example, fishermen, (2) killing or disposing of dead cattle or working with their hides for a living, (3) pursuing activities that brought the participant into contact with emissions of the human body, such as feces, urine, sweat, and spittle, a category that included such occupational groups as sweepers and laundry workers, and (4) eating the flesh of cattle or of domestic pigs and chickens, a category into which most of the indigenous tribes of India fell."

SOURCE

And for the record, I was wrong. An UNTOUCHABLE is a person considered outside of the caste system.

So, Lamberth, a person who "has a bad experience with Christians," and goes and embraces a religion that treats some of their people like UNTOUCHABLES is justified or unjustified in your book?

Who said anything about "embracing" Hinduism? Only you. Your original words used and to which I responded was "respect Hinduism". I can't say for sure why some go the way of Hinduism cause I'm not one of those. Though in my crossing paths with those who do lean towards Hindu spirituality, being Westerners, it's my understanding from what they say that it's about the spiritual aspect only and has nothing to do with any India social constructs.

What I know directly are a lot of folks who went to different spiritual paths outside of Christianity or even became atheist is because of their experiences with Christians. I can tell you that my spiritual community is full of such folks that migrated over. And you can count me as one of those as well. So I know what I'm talking about with this particular subject. For those concerned about the shrinking Christian population, I would think it's something worth a good listen to.

 

[Frank Robert]

You've never talked to an atheist that makes it clear they have more respect for Hinduism than Christianity?

Having respect for any religion is a personal choice. My belief is that all religions have attributes that others can respect along with some aspects that do not deserve respect.

 

[AV1611VET]

Having respect for any religion is a personal choice.

Correct. That's why we have mission fields.

My belief is that all religions have attributes that others can respect along with some aspects that do not deserve respect.

I feel that way too. And that's the danger with other religions. They hook you, then reel you in.

 

[dlamberth]

Correct. That's why we have mission fields.I feel that way too. And that's the danger with other religions. They hook you, then reel you in.

I can say that it wasn't until I began to bring in other spiritual trajectories that God became a reality for me. The only reeling in that I've experience from any of them is the Religion of Love. It's been helpful, to myself at least, to know the Universe differently from Christian or Hindu or Native Americans or Islam. In an attempt to somewhat bring the discussion back to the OP, being aware of the various creation models from the different perspectives of the Universe is very interesting. Some are taken quite literally with the need for definite time frame and others spiritually with no time stamp at all.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Nobody can state the day. We cannot even state the day Jesus was born.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nobody can state the day. We cannot even state the day Jesus was born.

All I want is the year.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

All I want is the year.

Not a calendar year, but the day would be the day God said, "let the earth bring forth..."