theist Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Hi, theist! It's always a pleasure to chat with you. My understanding is thus...God(YwYh)and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all three one and the same. God is like Jesus' higher self. I am not sure what the proper Hindu word for it is. We each have a higher self,no? We have three parts to us,body soul and spirit, no?, The same with Jesus, there is Jesus, god and Holy Spirit. God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all three the same being. Hi Catholic Vegan, Never noticed the vegan part before. That's great. I am also.I also am enjoying this conversation. The thing is God or Parabrahman is everyone's higher self not just Jesus'. The difference is Lord Jesus Christ is one with the Higher Self or God while we are in illusion and forgetfull of our connection to our Higher Self. And the eternal oneness comes in when we realize we all have the same Higher Self. But while realizing we all have the same Higher Self, Krishna, Yaweh, Allah we remain, as does He, autonomus beings. IOW when we "become perfect even as the Father is perfect" we also will be able to say, "The Father and I are oneBut the Father is greater than I". This is everyone's eternal position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catholic devotee of Christ Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Hi Catholic Vegan,Never noticed the vegan part before. That's great. I am also.I also am enjoying this conversation. I like the Alferd E. newman in a hawaiian shirt with the garland of flowers, too! Marigolds, perhaps? The thing is God or Parabrahman is everyone's higher self not just Jesus'. The difference is Lord Jesus Christ is one with the Higher Self or God while we are in illusion and forgetfull of our connection to our Higher Self. I agree[quote And the eternal oneness comes in when we realize we all have the same Higher Self. But while realizing we all have the same Higher Self, Krishna, Yaweh, Allah we remain, as does He, autonomus beings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chandu_69 Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 Well, we need to find something we don't agree on to spice up this conversation. You can find plenty of spice:P if u get deeper in to paar surrey's(The initiator of this thread) objection to worshipping jesus. Quran explicitly condemns worshipping jesus as evidenced in verse 9:30 Quran 9.30 : The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catholic devotee of Christ Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 You can find plenty of spice:P if u get deeper in to paar surrey's(The initiator of this thread) objection to worshipping jesus. Quran explicitly condemns worshipping jesus as evidenced in verse 9:30 Quran 9.30 : The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! I ran across him in another forum. He said he can't get back on this one.He asked me to try and get him back in. So, I asked the administrators. He said he didn't do anything wrong. I haven't seen him post anything troll like on the Catholic forums. We have actually agreed on a few things, like the universality of all religions.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 You can find plenty of spice:P if u get deeper in to paar surrey's(The initiator of this thread) objection to worshipping jesus. Quran explicitly condemns worshipping jesus as evidenced in verse 9:30 Quran 9.30 : The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! That's true but I have learned not to get into such conversations. He doesn't want to worship Lord Jesus, well that is his business. We do and will eternally bowing down to His lotus feet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chandu_69 Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 That's true but I have learned not to get into such conversations. He doesn't want to worship Lord Jesus, well that is his business. We do and will eternally bowing down to His lotus feet. It has got nothing to do with his(Paarsurrey) personal preferences.He is just following his holy book .It is also his religious duty to tell christians that they are wrong in worshipping jesus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catholic devotee of Christ Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 It has got nothing to do with his(Paarsurrey) personal preferences.He is just following his holy book .It is also his religious duty to tell christians that they are wrong in worshipping jesus Well, it is known that we (in case you hadn't noticed, I'm Christian) went through our phase in the middle ages of what basically amounts to terrorism, too. So, in some ways I understand why they are so adamant. It was a terrible time in history. One of m really big concerns is that if globalism may result in what basically amounts to the outlawing of Islam.I f this happens, then the only way they can make it seem fair is to outlaw all religions. Then what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 It has got nothing to do with his(Paarsurrey) personal preferences.He is just following his holy book .It is also his religious duty to tell christians that they are wrong in worshipping jesus Well choosing the Koran over say the Bible or Bhagavad-gita is a personal preference just as my refusing to take the Koran seriously in my own spiritual path is my preference. I have no ill feeling towards paarsurrey for expressing his opinion but I just disagree. Afterall I also tell Christians they are not totally correct in worshiping Jesus as the Supreme Father. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 All of these types of questions are made clear by accepting the simultaneous oneness and difference taught by Lord Jesus and Caitanya Mahaprabhu. "I and the Father are one." and "The Father is greater than I." Both staements are true simultaneously and any apparent contradictions are illusions from our mundane minds. I especially like how Srila Prabhupada put it when describing the pure jiva in bhakti; "The Supreme Personality of Servitor Godhead." Why should we who are trying to approach bhakti not bow down to the Supreme Personality of Servitor Godhead? It pleases the Lord to see His pure servants highly respected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarva gattah Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 The Catholic church are a bunch of morons, in 76 they threatened to kill Prabhupada although out of the kindness of my heart I did put a garland of Radharanis around the neck of the meat head pope in 1986 and he kissed my hand as he did so, I put some jappa beads in his hand and said chant hare Krishna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chandu_69 Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 Well, it is known that we (in case you hadn't noticed, I'm Christian) went through our phase in the middle ages of what basically amounts to terrorism, too. So, in some ways I understand why they are so adamant. It was a terrible time in history. One of m really big concerns is that if globalism may result in what basically amounts to the outlawing of Islam.I f this happens, then the only way they can make it seem fair is to outlaw all religions. Then what? What you said is mostly true.But you people have the "new covenant" from jesus christ.There are some elements in christianity that take the OT seriously and you have problems here and there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chandu_69 Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 Well choosing the Koran over say the Bible or Bhagavad-gita is a personal preference just as my refusing to take the Koran seriously in my own spiritual path is my preference.. The said person is born in to islam,theresnt any choice there.Who gives a damn whether you(theist) take koran seriously or not.The point i am trying to make is paarsurrey is merely following his holybook when it comes to what he wrote.That is a simple observation on which you are doing lot of unnecessary hair splitting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catholic devotee of Christ Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 What you said is mostly true.But you people have the "new covenant" from jesus christ.There are some elements in christianity that take the OT seriously and you have problems here and there. This is a true statement. There are bad elements everywhere. All I can say is that I try to follow my Lord as best i can; with compassion and mercy. A lot of the protestant/non-denominational types take the bible literally. This is called sola scriptura. The Catholic church is contextual. This means that we understand it was written for the people at the time in a manner in which they would understand it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhaktajan Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Theist [Post #7]: "... past karma is greatly dimished when they (followers) surrender to the guru. Jesus employed the same principle on a world wide scale, one that streches over 2,000 years. You are very right that the Christians have wrongly emphasized Christ dying for their sins while ignoring what He told His disciples as He was going to be crucified, "Pick up your cross and follow Me". The ones that do that are the real Christians and their sins were forgiven and incur no new ones by following Christ's teachings. They are maybe 10% of those that claim to be Christians. I offer them all respects." :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I agree. Therein lies hidden the contemplative mellows which we secretly yearn for -- "Pick up your cross and follow Me" -- out of hapless exasperation"? No. Of Christian follows [other than secular layman of the congregation] I have long been of the opinion that true followers of Christ were priests/monks/clergy who submitted all thier endeavors in "devotional service". There is a rasa [mellow] that has been lost to fringe members of Iskcon and/or anyone who lived a contemplative life for any length nof time and now . . . lives outside the temple walls, for whatever reasons. We all idealise the quiet life --even if we only have glimpse just bits of such a idealic way of life, within the regimen of a religious order --we pine for the time and place we were once in and/or we be again one day. Can you believe it? Souls born with the fortune to know tapasya & penance & still miss out on the chance to gain 'tranquility' in ideal setting(s) living a life of high-thinking & simple-living. WE MISS OUR TAPASYA! HARD-EARNED, DREADFULLY PAINFULL EXERCISE OF LIVING A CONTEMPLATIVE LIFE REPLETE WITH ALL THE NECCESARY SPARTAN COMFORTS OF THE SORT . . . AS WE READ OR DREAMED ABOUT. Shanti as tu te preferably in one's own best-est of circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catholic devotee of Christ Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Indeed, it is sad that many members of the worlds religions are dedicated in word only. Many associate with their tradition only as a means of social identification. To truly embrace it requires much effort on the side of the devotee. On the other hand, there are many who desire ardently to serve their Lord, Guru or deity but find themselves laden with worldly responsibilities and duties. But, heaven is filled with Saints who became Saints in similar circumstances. Who are we to discern what is the Lord's Will for these people? Can you see into their hearts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 The said person is born in to islam,theresnt any choice there.Who gives a damn whether you(theist) take koran seriously or not.The point i am trying to make is paarsurrey is merely following his holybook when it comes to what he wrote.That is a simple observation on which you are doing lot of unnecessary hair splitting. ouch! I could mention that our birth in any particular land is also due to our preferences and karma but I woldn't want to hurt your hair any further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chandu_69 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 ouch! I could mention that our birth in any particular land is also due to our preferences and karma but I woldn't want to hurt your hair any further. sorry, i got carried away.i meant to reinforce the point that the world should take notice why a certain paarsurrey behaves the way he does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 sorry, i got carried away.i meant to reinforce the point thatthe world should take notice why a certain paarsurrey behaves the way he does. You are right to advocate for tolerance. However we got into our present circumstances is not so important. We are force to proceed from where we are. I was not in the least put off by paarsurrey. People have differing views to ours and an equal right to express them as we. Please don't take my attempted play on words above to seriously chandu, it wasn't meant that way. I often cause some minor trouble by trying to sound clever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catholic devotee of Christ Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 So, I am curious. If we are to think that the Koran promotes violence against other religions, should it be banned or edited? Is the correct path to follow? Wouldn't it be better to try and accept it contextually rather than literally? from http://arvindsharma.wordpress.com/2008/07/10/31-the-bhadavadgita-at-war/ The ancients were already concerned with the violence in the Mahābhārata and according to one tradition the sages requested Vyāsa to compose another work which corrected this impression. The Bhāgavata Purāṇa is said to have been composed as a result. It would seem that in all fairness, that all books should then be either banned or edited for the sake of 'political correctness'. Just curious... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I am 100% against the editing of books, especially sacred texts to fit in with the times and political correctness. Just imagine what the Bible would look like once the homosex crowd had their way with it. Better to just ignore that which does not inspire us onward in spiritual life. For me this means ignoring the Koran as well as the Old Testament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhaktajan Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Originally Posted by theist "I often cause some minor trouble by trying to sound clever." :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I'm just the messanger, so don't crucify me for saying the following: The above quote is mine, mine, mine. Please cite your refereces & give credit to proper up-starts. Maybe I have been plagerising theist's schtick? Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catholic devotee of Christ Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Originally Posted by theist "I often cause some minor trouble by trying to sound clever." :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I'm just the messanger, so don't crucify me for saying the following: The above quote is mine, mine, mine. Please cite your refereces & give credit to proper up-starts. Maybe I have been plagerising theist's schtick? Sorry. Imitation is the highest expression of flattery! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chandu_69 Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 So, I am curious. If we are to think that the Koran promotes violence against other religions, should it be banned or edited? Is the correct path to follow? Wouldn't it be better to try and accept it contextually rather than literally? from http://arvindsharma.wordpress.com/2008/07/10/31-the-bhadavadgita-at-war/ The ancients were already concerned with the violence in the Mahābhārata and according to one tradition the sages requested Vyāsa to compose another work which corrected this impression. The Bhāgavata Purāṇa is said to have been composed as a result. It would seem that in all fairness, that all books should then be either banned or edited for the sake of 'political correctness'. Just curious... The mahabharata war is not on account of somebody not worshipping some god.Get it.No unbeleiver is attacked for being an unbeleiver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catholic devotee of Christ Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 The mahabharata war is not on account of somebody not worshipping some god.Get it.No unbeleiver is attacked for being an unbeleiver. You have failed to grasp the point. All of the individuals involved in the various travesty of war for whatever reason it is waged are following their dharma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chandu_69 Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 You have failed to grasp the point. All of the individuals involved in the various travesty of war for whatever reason it is waged are following their dharma. Dharma, yes and not religion.Not following dharma in this context is encroaching on other people's property and rights.That is the point. Nobody was attacked because he was not worshipping krishna. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.