Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Buddha and other bogus persons

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

In Islam, the idea that Allah is a person is a blasphemy.

 

No. You have it wrong.

God is a person in Islam, only he is a person who's form and personal features cannot be known by man.

They believe that God is a person, the male creator God.

They just are against trying to portray his image in a picture or idol.

 

You obviously don't know enough about Islam to be making such uniformed statements.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

but sadly due to some unknown cause a vegetarian , truthful hindu shakta shaiva or ganapatya who shudders to think of eating a cow , following the vedas and puranas with full belief in personal god can never be a vaishnav .

 

ridiculous and insane !!! thats what it is !!

 

The reason they aren't considered as Vaishnavas is because ultimately they are impersonalists who believe in many gods and are against the idea of ONE supreme God.

 

Despite the meat-eating and violence to animals, at least the Christian theology and Muslim theology propose that there is ONE supreme God and they are against the impersonal idea that there are many gods like the ones you listed.

[Smiley 1]

 

Prabhupada is actually being polite here.

 

The god depicted in islamic and christian books is a jealous and vengefull one.

 

Krishna is not a jealous god.

In my book a jealous and vengeful god is no god.

"Do not worship any other god, for the LORD,

whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God".

Exodus 34:14 (NIV)

 

"You shall not bow down to them or worship them;

for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,

punishing the children for the sin of the fathers

to the third and fourth generation of those

who hate me" Exodus 20:5 (NIV)

 

"If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.

 

"If you hear it said about one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you to live in that wicked men have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods you have not known), then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. Destroy it completely, [a] both its people and its livestock.

 

"Gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the LORD your God. It is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt. None of those condemned things shall be found in your hands, so that the LORD will turn from his fierce anger; he will show you mercy, have compassion on you, and increase your numbers, as he promised on oath to your forefathers, because you obey the LORD your God, keeping all his commands that I am giving you today and doing what is right in his eyes". Deuteronomy 13:6-18 (NIV)

Footnotes:

[a] Deuteronomy 13:15

The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things

or persons to the LORD, often by totally destroying them.

Deuteronomy 13:17

The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things

or persons to the LORD, often by totally destroying them.

The Bible in over 100 versions and 50 languages

www.BibleGateway.com

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

 

 

Allah ( God )

 

 

 

"To God ( Allah ) belongs 99 names"

 

<hr>

 

It is a known fact that every language has one or more terms that are used in reference to God and sometimes to lesser deities. This is not the case with Allah. Allah is the personal name of the One true God. Nothing else can be called Allah. The term has no plural or gender. This shows its uniqueness when compared with the word god which can be made plural, gods, or feminine, goddess. It is interesting to notice that Allah is the personal name of God in Aramaic, the language of Jesus and a sister language of Arabic.

The One true God is a reflection of the unique concept that Islam associates with God. To a Muslim, Allah is the Almighty, Creator and Sustainer of the universe, Who is similar to nothing and nothing is comparable to Him. The Prophet Muhammad was asked by his contemporaries about Allah; the answer came directly from God Himself in the form of a short chapter of the Quran, which is considered the essence of the unity or the motto of monotheism. This is chapter 112 which reads:

 

 

 

 

 

"In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.

Say (O Muhammad) He is God the One God, the Everlasting Refuge, who has not begotten, nor has been begotten, and equal to Him is not anyone."

 

 

 

Some non-Muslims allege that God in Islam is a stern and cruel God who demands to be obeyed fully. He is not loving and kind. Nothing can be farther from truth than this allegation. It is enough to know that, with the exception of one, each of the 114 chapters of the Quran begins with the verse: "In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate." In one of the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) we are told that "God is more loving and kinder than a mother to her dear child."

But God is also Just. Hence evildoers and sinners must have their share of punishment and the virtuous, His bounties and favors. Actually God's attribute of Mercy has full manifestation in His attribute of Justice. People suffering throughout their lives for His sake and people oppressing and exploiting other people all their lives should not receive similar treatment from their Lord. Expecting similar treatment for them will amount to negating the very belief in the accountability of man in the Hereafter and thereby negating all the incentives for a moral and virtuous life in this world. The following Quranic verses are very clear and straightforward in this respect:

 

 

 

 

 

"Verily, for the Righteous are gardens of Delight, in the Presence of their Lord. Shall We then treat the people of Faith like the people of Sin? What is the matter with you? How judge you?" (68:34-36)

 

 

<center> <hr> </center>

 

Islam rejects characterizing God in any human form or depicting Him as favoring certain individuals or nations on the basis of wealth, power or race. He created the human beings as equals. They may distinguish themselves and get His favor through virtue and piety only.

The concept that God rested in the seventh day of creation, that God wrestled with one of His soldiers, that God is an envious plotter against mankind, or that God is incarnate in any human being are considered blasphemy from the Islamic point of view.

The unique usage of Allah as a personal name of God is a reflection of Islam's emphasis on the purity of the belief in God which is the essence of the message of all God's messengers. Because of this, Islam considers associating any deity or personality with God as a deadly sin which God will never forgive, despite the fact He may forgive all other sins.

 

 

 

Sounds like they believe that God is a person, though a person who cannot be represented in any deity or idol.

[sant 0]

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>You are absolutely correct. Unfortunately people have been killed for saying less and so it is good that these truths can be communicated anonymously. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->whos been killed for saying less

be clear or dont say

 

<!-- / message -->you cant answer because you talk nonsense you come up with such ridiculous posts and start picking out 2 lines of what prabhupada has said

[kaisersose 0]

 

The reason they aren't considered as Vaishnavas is because ultimately they are impersonalists who believe in many gods and are against the idea of ONE supreme God.

 

Despite the meat-eating and violence to animals, at least the Christian theology and Muslim theology propose that there is ONE supreme God and they are against the impersonal idea that there are many gods like the ones you listed.

 

Wrong answer. You are as usual ignorant about the difference between Shaivism and Advaita. The Lingayats believe Shiva is the Supreme God. So do most Shaivas in Tamilnadu and the rest of India.

 

And what about Radha worship, Subadhra, Balarama worship, etc., among the Gaudiyas claiming Radha is the soul of Krishna? By your logic, the Muslims and Christians are better than Gaudiyas for they simply deal with a single God!

 

And why is worshipping a single God better than worshipping multiple Gods? Please do not quote the Gita as Gaudiyas worship multiple gods themselves.

 

Cheers

[sambya 0]

 

The reason they aren't considered as Vaishnavas is because ultimately they are impersonalists who believe in many gods and are against the idea of ONE supreme God.

 

there are many who are stern personalists .

all of them accept the supremacy of brahman , doesnt that amount to ' one god ' ?

 

 

 

Despite the meat-eating and violence to animals, at least the Christian theology and Muslim theology propose that there is ONE supreme God and they are against the impersonal idea that there are many gods like the ones you listed.

 

 

just see what a idiotic system you follow . it is specifically stated by prabhupada that meat eaters CANNOT be spiritual . going by this there is no question of islam or christianity being true faiths .

[sant 0]

 

Wrong answer. You are as usual ignorant about the difference between Shaivism and Advaita. The Lingayats believe Shiva is the Supreme God. So do most Shaivas in Tamilnadu and the rest of India.

sorry youre wrong on that one

Lingayats believe in a monotheistic world where Linga or Parashiva the supreme god and self are one and the same

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingayatism

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

Wrong answer. You are as usual ignorant about the difference between Shaivism and Advaita. The Lingayats believe Shiva is the Supreme God. So do most Shaivas in Tamilnadu and the rest of India.

 

And what about Radha worship, Subadhra, Balarama worship, etc., among the Gaudiyas claiming Radha is the soul of Krishna? By your logic, the Muslims and Christians are better than Gaudiyas for they simply deal with a single God!

 

And why is worshipping a single God better than worshipping multiple Gods? Please do not quote the Gita as Gaudiyas worship multiple gods themselves.

 

Cheers

Shaivites think that ultimately Shiva is the impersonal Brahman.

Shaivism is impersonalism.

It is not Vaishnavism nor do they believe that the personal form of Shiva is above or beyond his impersonal form as Brahman.

 

Your arguments concerning the Vaishnava conception of Shakti and Bhagavan are not valid as the Vaishnavas do not consider the Shakti as some independent god or goddess apart from Shaktiman.

 

Radha is manifested out of Krishna's internal pleasure.

She manifests the pleasure that Krishna feels within himself as a self-realized and self-satisfied soul.

 

In Vaishnavism Brahman comes from Krishna.

In Shaivism Shiva comes from Brahman.

These are the basic fundamental differences and why Shaivism is ultimately impersonalist because Brahman is above Shiva.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

 

 

just see what a idiotic system you follow . it is specifically stated by prabhupada that meat eaters CANNOT be spiritual . going by this there is no question of islam or christianity being true faiths .

 

No.

All it means is that the part of the Muslim and Christian theology that promotes the idea of ONE supreme God is fundamentally a Vaishnava position.

It doesn't mean that Prabhupada considered Muslims and Christians as Vaishnavas.

It simply means that fundamentally the Muslim and Christian theology is Vaishnava in as much as it promotes the concept of ONE supreme God.

 

The theology is Vaishnava-like.

The followers are pseudo-Vaishnavas.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

No. You have it wrong.

God is a person in Islam, only he is a person who's form and personal features cannot be known by man.

They believe that God is a person, the male creator God.

They just are against trying to portray his image in a picture or idol.

 

You obviously don't know enough about Islam to be making such uniformed statements.

 

You should ask an Islamic scholar these questions and he would have set you straight.

 

Allah is certainly neither male nor female, without shape or form, cannot be seen or heard. That is what the Koran says and all muslims believe. What exactly makes Allah a person in your eyes? Is Brahmajyoti a person too?

 

According to Shia branch of Islam, Allah will not be seen by his believers even after they ascend to his abode. The Sunnis believe they will see him only as white light. Does it sound like Vaishnavism to you?

 

To say that Allah is a person IS a blesphemy in a Muslim world. But of course you know better what Islam REALLY is, or what Christianity REALLY is...

[chandu_69 0]

 

<b>When people speak of essential unity of all religions, such as: "we are all worshipping the same one God", "all religions are good" etc. this can be seen as political correctnes.</b>

 

<b>It is political correctness - because you do not want to offend others by showing inferiority of their religion</b>

.

 

Excellent explanation.I am guilty of not expanding on my assertion.

:smash::smash::smash:

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

You should ask an Islamic scholar these questions and he would have set you straight.

 

Allah is certainly neither male nor female, without shape or form, cannot be seen or heard. That is what the Koran says and all muslims believe. What exactly makes Allah a person in your eyes? Is Brahmajyoti a person too?

 

According to Shia branch of Islam, Allah will not be seen by his believers even after they ascend to his abode. The Sunnis believe they will see him only as white light. Does it sound like Vaishnavism to you?

 

To say that Allah is a person IS a blesphemy in a Muslim world. But of course you know better what Islam REALLY is, or what Christianity REALLY is...

So, you are saying that Islam is monism and not monotheism.

That of course is wrong and any Muslim scholar would correct you.

 

Islam is MONOTHEISM not MONISM as you are trying to assert.

 

The problem with your assertion is that it makes Islam into a monistic faith that ultimately proposes oneness of God and the living entity.

For that reason, Muslim scholars reject this monistic interpretation of Islam.

[chandu_69 0]

Adding to Smiley's post(in this page) with regards to jealous and vindictiveness on account of nonworship or competetive worship.

 

004.048

: Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed.

 

004.116

: Allah forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right).

 

 

025.068 : Those who invoke not, with Allah, any other god, nor slay such life as Allah has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; - and any that does this (not only) meets punishment.

 

continuation of 68

 

025.069 : (But) the Penalty on the Day of Judgment will be doubled to him, and he will dwell therein in ignominy,-

[sambya 0]

 

It doesn't mean that Prabhupada considered Muslims and Christians as Vaishnavas.

 

thats what he said and not just once !!

 

 

It simply means that fundamentally the Muslim and Christian theology is Vaishnava in as much as it promotes the concept of ONE supreme God.

 

The theology is Vaishnava-like.

The followers are pseudo-Vaishnavas.

 

 

thats what you think !!! fact remains unchanged................

[chandu_69 0]

009.029 : FIGHT those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

[chandu_69 0]

How effortlessly Sambya is changing his position in the same thread.

 

Page-1 he is condemning prabhupada for saying that the above religions are imperfect.

 

now he is against prabhupada for inferring the opposite.

 

Sambya for a change comeout with your real islamic identity.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

thats what he said and not just once !!

 

 

 

 

 

OK, then please provide your quotes and we will look at them and discuss.

Otherwise, if you have no quotes, then you should not make false claims.

[Smiley 1]

Why not give me a chance to respond before claiming that I can't answer?

 

To answer your question (and of course none of this reflects on Swami

Prabhupada who always preached non-violence), there are devotees

who are willing to kill if their guru is offended:

 

Sulocana Das was killed by such devotees who felt their guru was offended.

 

Steve Bryant was killed by such devotees who felt their guru was offended.

 

The gurus who were offended are considered less than Swami Prabhupada.

Therefore the murder victims were killed for "saying less" than if they had

spoken against Swami Prabhupada. Now will you concede this point?

 

 

 

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-right: 3ex; padding-left: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0">You are absolutely correct. Unfortunately people have been killed for saying less and so it is good that these truths can be communicated anonymously. </td></tr></tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->whos been killed for saying less

be clear or dont say

 

<!-- / message -->you cant answer because you talk nonsense you come up with such ridiculous posts and start picking out 2 lines of what prabhupada has said

[sambya 0]

 

Page-1 he is condemning prabhupada for saying that the above religions are imperfect.

 

yes !! i dont support the veiw that there is only one perfect religion . if it has to do with imperfection it must be there in all faiths by varying degrees as no one can know god in totality .

 

 

 

now he is against prabhupada for inferring the opposite.

 

im against anyone trying to propagate that the fault lies with indian religions and hindu sects in exclusion of major world religions .

[sambya 0]

here you are ....

 

 

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => PoP 8: Failure and Success in Yoga

Prabhupada: No, no. Christianity is Vaisnavism.

Dr. Patel: Vaisnavism? Absolutely Vaisnavism.

Prabhupada: Anyone who… Mohammedan is also Vaisnavism.

Dr. Patel: Mohammedanism is not Vaisnavism.

Prabhupada: No, no. Caitanya Mahaprabhu had talk with the Pathanas. He proved that “Your religion is Vaisnavism.”

Dr. Patel: Christianity is Vaisnavism 100%.

Prabhupada: Therefore in Caitanya-caritamrta there is. I have already explained that.

Dr. Patel: No, Christianity is 100% Vaisnavism. I have studied Christianity very well.

Prabhupada: Not hundred percent, but…

Dr. Patel: More or less.

Prabhupada: Yes.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

here you are ....

 

 

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => PoP 8: Failure and Success in Yoga

Prabhupada: No, no. Christianity is Vaisnavism.

Dr. Patel: Vaisnavism? Absolutely Vaisnavism.

Prabhupada: Anyone who… Mohammedan is also Vaisnavism.

Dr. Patel: Mohammedanism is not Vaisnavism.

Prabhupada: No, no. Caitanya Mahaprabhu had talk with the Pathanas. He proved that “Your religion is Vaisnavism.”

Dr. Patel: Christianity is Vaisnavism 100%.

Prabhupada: Therefore in Caitanya-caritamrta there is. I have already explained that.

Dr. Patel: No, Christianity is 100% Vaisnavism. I have studied Christianity very well.

Prabhupada: Not hundred percent, but…

Dr. Patel: More or less.

Prabhupada: Yes.

Ok, so calm down and observe exactly that it says what I said.

Prabhupada said "Christianity is Vaishnavism".

He did not say that the people who claim to be Christians are Vaishnavas.

He said that "Christianity" is Vaishnavism and he is referring to the theology and not to the pseudo-Christians.

 

Srila Prabhupada said many times that he did not believe that the all these people who claim to be Christians were real Christians.

 

He repeated over and over "though shalt not kill" and pointed out that they all kill animals and eat meat and don't deserve the right to claim to be Christians.

 

Show me a quote where Prabhupada referred to any "Christian" in particluar as a Vaishnava.

 

Pay attention.

He is referring to the theology and not to the false Christians.

[sant 0]

 

Why not give me a chance to respond before claiming that I can't answer?

 

There are devotees who are willing to kill if their guru is offended.

 

Steve Bryant was killed by such devotees who felt their guru was offended.

Sulocana das was killed by such devotees who felt their guru was offended.

 

The gurus who were offended are considered less than Swami Prabhupada.

Therefore the murder victims were killed for "saying less" than if they had

spoken against Swami Prabhupada. Now will you concede this point?

 

im sorry smiley

you took quite some time but im shore you must have been finding the link

please forgive me

[sambya 0]

 

He said that "Christianity" is Vaishnavism and he is referring to the theology and not to the pseudo-Christians.

 

Srila Prabhupada said many times that he did not believe that the all these people who claim to be Christians were real Christians.

 

HA......HA........HA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

and what exactly is the difference between christianity proper and psuedo christianity ? maybe you are trying to sugggest ideal christianity . but remember that there is nothing like ideal christianity or ideal hinduism . it is an utopian concept that never existed .

 

either prabhupada was relying on this utopian absurdity or he is genuinely meaning practicing christianity .

 

 

you're absurd !!!!!!!!!

[kaisersose 0]

 

Shaivites think that ultimately Shiva is the impersonal Brahman.

 

Wrong Again. You are still holding on to the Shaivism = Advaita theory, which is wrong.

 

Shaivas see their final abode as Kailsas where they will reside with Shiva. Most of them never even heard of Brahman nor are are they interested.

 

There is a world beyond the little iskcon world you live in, in case you want to explore and learn the truth.

 

Cheers