Sunder,
The second thread is not intended to discuss only about existence of Jesus. It could also discuss other myths missionaries propagate. For example, Jesus in India story needs deeper exploration to prove if that is true or another strategy. It is also worth discussing what motivates missionaries to even sacrifice their lives to propagate christianism. None of these discussions form part of missionary activities in India but they are worth understanding.
<!--QuoteBegin-Sunder+Jul 29 2006, 11:41 AM-->QUOTE(Sunder @ Jul 29 2006, 11:41 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hence David Frawley's call for the Intellectual Kshatriya. If we are deep-rooted in Truth, then Truth itself will be our weapon. When we adhere to Dharma unflinchingly, Dharma itself will protect us.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I doubt there is anything called Intellectual Kshatriya. If there are any, they are called Brahmanas. Adi Shankara could do an intellectual battle with Buddhist monks. Fortunately he was dealing civilized people who believed in direct intellectual debate and willing to accept their defeat. That is not the case with missionaries. Missionary activities are based on strategy, deception, manipulation and financial and political muscle.
I think it is naive to believe that if you strictly follow dharma, it will protect you. Rather you should be willing to go for a Dharmmayuddha to protect Dharma and not the other way.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>A fight is not won by one punch or kick. Either learn to endure or hire a bodyguard. Forget about winning and losing; forget about pride and pain. Let your opponent graze your skin and you smash into his flesh; let him smash into your flesh and you fracture his bones; let him fracture your bones and you take his life. Do not be concerned with escaping safely â lay your life before him</b> <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is true if you are in a direct fight and you do understand the enemy. If you are being attacked from behind, like that happened to Bali in Ramayana, do not expect to win.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way round or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves.</b>
[right][snapback]54827[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If what is blocking your way is a dam, the dam and canals will decide where you finally reach and help the dam designers objective - flexibility is a disadvantage.
Ashyam,
Two good links to help gather information about Xtianity:
http://www.burningcross.net
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com
Hi all,
It is often said missionaries provide food, clothes etc. to poor people, only because they want to actively convert. In other words, it's just bribing them to convert. While I agree wholeheartedly with this, I'd like to know how many of us have worked for one day, yes, ONE SINGLE DAY, without a motive? See what I am driving at? It's human nature to work for, or toward, something, and NOT just work aimlessly.
So I am finding it hard to understand the argument of most Hindus, when they say: missionaries are feeding the poor, only because they want to convert. Of course, they do. You don't expect them to come all the way to India, face the heat and dust, spend a lot of money on schools and hospitals, JUST TO HELP, any person, even a saint will expect something in return for all that hard labor of going to another country, investing money etc. So how can we expect missionaries to work, work and work, and not have any motive? Aren't we asking too much?
Mind you, I am not defending missionaries, rather, just pointing out that it's impossible to find people working without motives, without aims and objectives. 95%, if not all, work with motives and desires, so isn't it hypocritical to blame missionaries for expecting something in return, in this case, conversion to their religion? You honestly don't expect them to invest millions and not even seek one good return on their investment, do you?
Again, I am not at all justifying their actions, but this line of argument from hindus-that missionaries have motives and all-is hardly convincing to the average guy, who also has motives. So he sees nothing wrong with missionaries doing the same, hence rejects the hindu viewpoint at once. This is something to think about.
http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/.../3/3hare94.html
<b>Hare Jesus: Christianity's Hindu Heritage</b>
Stephen Van Eck
"Can one go upon hot coals, and his feet not be burned" (Prov. 6:28)? But of course!
Objective and open-minded scholars long ago conceded that Christianity is at heart a revamped form of Judaism. In the process of its development as something distinct from its mother religion, it became hybridized with so much pagan influence that it ultimately alienated its original Jewish base and became predominantly Gentile. The source of this pagan influence is varied and vague in the minds of most advanced Bible critics, but it may owe more to Hinduism than most people suspect.
The average person does not connect India with the ancient Middle East, but the existence of some trade between these two regions is documented, even in the Bible. Note the reference to spikenard in the Song of Solomon (1:12 ; 4:13-14 ) and in the Gospels (Mark 14:3 ; John 12:3 ). This is an aromatic oil-producing plant (Nardostachys jatamansi) that the Arabs call sunbul hindi and obtained in trade with India.
It is axiomatic that influence follows trade, and the vibrant culture of India could not help but impact on anyone exposed to it. The influence on Judaism came for the most part indirectly, however, via the Persians and the Chaldeans, who dealt with India on a more direct basis. (Indeed, the Aryans, who invaded and transformed India over 1500 years before Christ, were of the same people who brought ancient Persia to its greatest glory. Persia's name today--Iran--is a corruption of Aryan.) The ancient Judeans absorbed much of this secondhand influence during the Babylonian captivity of the sixth century B. C., and during the intertestamental period, when Alexandria became the crossroads of the world, intellectuals both Jew and Gentile were exposed to a variety of ideas, some of which originated on the subcontinent.
The precise pattern of influence was neither observed nor documented, but it can be inferred from the numerous uncanny similarities in concept and expression, not all of which can be coincidental. Let us examine the telltale evidence (none of which, it may be added, depends upon any apocryphal account of the alleged "lost years" of Jesus in India).
Most Christians are familiar with Galatians 6:7 , "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." Less known is Proverbs 26:27 , "Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall therein, and he that rolleth a stone, it will return upon him." Both express the Hindu principle of karma (the sum and the consequences of a person's actions during the successive phases of his existence), but since no direct connection can be deduced, we'll merely consider it an interesting coincidence and move on.
The concept of a soul that is distinguishable from the body and can exist independently of it is alien to Judaism. It is first known in Hinduism. Only after the Babylonian captivity did any such concept arise among the Jews, and it is in the epistles of Paul, the "debtor to both the Greeks and the Barbarians," that the notion receives its first clear expression. (See 2 Corinthians 5:8 and 12:3 .)
The Brahmin caste of the Hindus are said to be "twice-born" and have a ritual in which they are "born in the spirit." Could this be the ultimate source of the Christian "born again" concept (John 3:3 )?
The deification of Christ is a phenomenon often attributed to the apotheosis of emperors and heroes in the Greco-Roman world. These, however, were cases of men becoming gods. In the Jesus story, the Divinity takes human form, god becoming man. This is a familiar occurrence in Hinduism and in other theologies of the region. Indeed, one obstacle to the spread of Christianity in India, which was attempted as early as the first century, was the frustrating tendency of the Hindus to understand Jesus as the latest avatar (incarnation) of Vishnu.
It is in the doctrine of the Trinity that the Hindu influence may be most clearly felt. Unknown to most Christians, Hinduism has a Trinity (or Trimurti) too: Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, who have the appellations the Creator, the Preserver, and the Destroyer (and Regenerator). This corresponds to the Christian Trinity in which God created the heavens and the earth, Jesus saves, and the Holy Spirit is referred to as a regenerator (Titus 3:5 ). It is interesting to note, furthermore, that the Holy Spirit is sometimes depicted as a dove, while the Hebrew language uses the same term for both "dove" and "destroyer"!
The Trinity was a major stumblingblock for the Jews, who adhered to strict monotheism. The inherent polytheism in the Trinity doctrine cannot be explained away with the nonsensical claim that three is one and one is three. Besides, Jesus himself undermined any pretense of triunity (or omnipotence, for that matter) in Matthew 19:17 , "And he said unto them, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God...." Matthew 20:23 ; Mark 14:32 ; John 5:30 ; 7:16 and 14:28 also contradict the Trinitarian concept.
The Hindu scriptures, which are the oldest in the world, contain a number of astonishingly familiar expressions. The Upanishads mention things like "the blind led by the blind" (Matt. 15:14 ) and God's being "the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow" (Heb. 13:8 ). The path is said to be "narrow and difficult to tread" (Matt. 7:14 ). They also make reference to "a voice from out of the fire" (Ex. 3:4 ) and a man's face shining after encountering God (Ex. 34:29 ). They refer to those who are "wise in their own conceits" (Prov. 34:29 ; Rom. 12:16 ), warn against "fleshly desires" (1 Pet. 2:11 ), and advise that "it is not by works alone that one attains the Eternal" (Gal. 2:16 ]), and "to many it is not given" to know of metaphysical truth (Matt. 13:11 ). They describe the Self as "smaller than a mustard seed" (Matt. 17:20 ), and they speak of "the highest knowledge, having drunk of which, one never thirsts" (John 4:14 ). And how about this: "Man does not live by breath alone, but by him in whom is the power of breath" (Matt. 4:4 )?
Sounds a little too familiar, I'd say!
Then there is the Hindu epic, the Bhagavad-Gita, a story of the second person of the Hindu Trinity, who took human form as Krishna. Some have considered him a model for the Christ, and it's hard to argue against that when he says things like, "I am the beginning, the middle, and the end" (BG 10:20 vs. Rev. 1:8 ). His advent was heralded by a pious old man named Asita, who could die happy knowing of his arrival, a story paralleling that of Simeon in Luke 2:25 . Krishna's mission was to give directions to "the kingdom of God" (BG 2:72), and he warned of "stumbling blocks" along the way (BG 3:34; 1 Cor. 1:23 ; Rev. 2:14 ). The essential thrust of Krishna's sayings, uttered to a beloved disciple, sometimes seems to coincide with Jesus or the Bible. Compare "those who are wise lament neither for the living nor the dead" (BG 2:11) with the sense of Jesus' advice to "let the dead bury their own dead" (Matt. 8:22 ). Krishna's saying, "I envy no man, nor am I partial to anyone; I am equal to all" (BG 9:29) is a lot like the idea that God is no respecter of persons (Rom. 2:11 ; see also Matt. 6:45 ). And "one who is equal to friends and enemies... is very dear to me" (BG 12:18) is reminiscent of "love your enemies" (Matt. 6:44 ). Krishna also said that "by human calculation, a thousand ages taken together is the duration of Brahma's one day" (BG 8:17), which is very similar to 2 Peter 3:8 .
In fairness, however, one purported similarity needs to be discredited. Skeptics sometimes cite Kersey Graves in Sixteen Crucified Saviors or Godfrey Higgin's Anacalypsis (which Graves drew from) in asserting that Krishna was a crucified deity. No such event occurred in the Gita or in any recognized Hindu scripture. Given the pronounced syncretic tendency of Hinduism, it is safe to assume that any odd tales of Krishna's being crucified arose only after the existence of Christian proselytism, in imitation of the Christian narrative. It is neither authentic to Hinduism nor is Hinduism the source of that portion of the Christian narrative. The same may be said for most of the purported nativity stories. In my opinion, both Higgins and Graves are highly unreliable sources and should be ignored.
That notwithstanding, the existence of uncanny similarities in concept and phraseology in those Hindu writings that are both ancient and authentic leaves Christians in a difficult quandary. With the historical reality of Indian influence on the Middle East being an established fact, how can they account for these similarities with anything less feeble than coincidence, or less bizarre than the notion of "Satanic foreknowledge and duplication," which is sometimes invoked to explain the similarities of Judeo-Christian precursors?
I'll close with Ecclesiastes 1:10 , another inconvenient and uncomfortable passage: "Is there anything whereof it may be said, See, this is new? It hath been already of old time, which was before us."
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So how can we expect missionaries to work, work and work, and not have any motive? Aren't we asking too much?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So they are selfish. They are cheating people, i call them street crooks.
We never asked them to come. First they came and robbed are country with everything. Made us poor, now they want to remove our poverty.
Hindusim promotes selfless service.
If you are Hindu, do selfless service, and don't promote selfish crooks.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->... just pointing out that it's impossible to find people working without motives, without aims and objectives. 95%, if not all, work with motives and desires, so isn't it hypocritical to blame missionaries for expecting something in return, in this case, conversion to their religion? You honestly don't expect them to invest millions and not even seek one good return on their investment, do you?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So, all those non-missionary NGOs that are working in fields llike education, tsunami relief, Sardar Sarovar dam protests, the Chipko movement to save the trees, etc., are all working to convert people to their religion? The problem with your argument is: <b><i>you have accepted conversion as a legitimate objective to spending money</i></b>.
When most organizations have aims, those aims are directly related to their work. For eg., the aim of tsunami relief is to save people from starvation in a post-tsunami situation. In contrast, the aim of a missionary organization in tsunami relief is indirect: to seek conversion using the disaster as a tool to subvert a suffering people's religious beliefs.
In fact, going by your argument, the missionary organziations can actually make a case that all convent-educated Hindus are <b>actually obligated to convert to Christianity</b>! After all, if the objective is legitimate and the the missionaries have spent money to give the Hindus an education, you could make the argument that the Hindus should be appropriately grateful, and convert.
Also, if the objective of conversion is legitimate, then why aren't the missionaries upfriont about the motivation <b>at the point of giving relief, that is, to the person they seek to convert?</b> They aren't. They always seek to pretend to seek their welfare as the ultimate objective. Turns out that a component of that "welfare" is your need to be "saved".
So, why the need for such deception? The reason is simple. The people, and the community they wish to convert does not accept the idea of conversion. Which is why the missionaries approach their victims initially under the garb of welfare, or nowadays, social justice. Then, once the victim has been placed under obligation (convent school, financial aid, etc.), the hard-sell begins.
The saleswomen who sell soap products door-to-door practise less deception.
http://www.jesusisbuddha.com/
<b>Welcome to the first and only website
devoted to the original Buddhist sources
of the New Testament Gospels</b>
The 27 books of the New Testament, as known, constitute the fundamental holy scripture of Christianity.
Without the four Gospels according to Matthew, to Mark, to Luke and to John, Christianity is virtually null and void.
Recent epoch-making discoveries of old Sanskrit manuscripts in Central Asia and Kashmir provide decisive proof that the four Greek Gospels have been translated directly from the Sanskrit.
A careful comparison, word by word, sentence by sentence shows that the Christian Gospels are Pirate-copies of the Buddhist Gospels. God's word, therefore, is originally Buddha's word.
Comparison reveals that there is no person, no event, no locality mentioned in the four Christian Gospels not already present in the Buddhist Gospels that, for sure, are far earlier in time than their Christian copies.
A Buddhist original... ...and a Christian copy
The Sanskrit
TRi-RaTNaS
becomes the Latin
TRi-NiTaS.
...even the name is copied...
Guide to the Site:
http://www.jesusisbuddha.com/
CLT: Provides a statement of Christian Lindtner's Theory (= CLT) that the New Testament is a Pirate-copy of Buddhist Gospels = Q.
CV for CL: Being a chronological survey of some of the scholarly activities of Christian Lindtner since 1979.
Q = MSV + SDP: Identifies the Buddhist sources of the New Testament by providing examples of how the Greek words and phrases imitate the Sanskrit orginal. Beginning with Matthew 1:1, to be updated monthly.
Audio/Video: Wait, see and listen...
Opinions: A scholarly forum for an on-going debate of the CLT. Address communications to the editor jesusisbuddha@yahoo.co.uk
Archive: Reviews and essays on Comparative Gospel Studies previously published by CL.
News: Announcements and reports about conferences and other public activities relating to the CLT.
Links: Resources and references to issues variously related to the CLT.
christ of the four Gospels is a fictional messiah. The
New Testament was patched together by hacks and
plagiarists. Almost everything in the story of christ
is a copy or a rewrite from the older works of other
nations and religions.
Reviews:
Since 1980, about 100 reviews (or about 300 pages), mainly of learned books about Buddhism, Sanskrit
and Indian philosophy and philology, to be consulted in: Indo-Iranian Journal, Acta Orientalia, Journal of
the American Oriental Society, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, Studies in Central and East Asian Religions,
Cahiers d´Extreme-Asie, Kratylos, Buddhist Studies Review, The Adyar Library Bulletin, etc.
# 1999d : From Brahmanism to Buddhism
in Asian Philosophy 9/1, Abingdon. - pp. 5-37
Conclusion
Buddhists have a long tradition for counting the number of words and syllables in their gospels. They also have a deep experience in translating Indian texts into foreign languages. It goes back to the time of king Asoka.108 is the lucky number. Even the Rgveda is said to consists of 10800 x 40 syllables. Many texts have titles indicating the number of syllables that it consists of. Masters of counting are often extolled in the Buddhist texts. They are said to be masters of gananâ or ganite.
The pentagram is the basic geometrical figure of the New Testament, possibly also of at least some of the Buddhist canonical texts. The figures 36, 54, 108, combined with 100 etc., certainly point in that direction, i.e. in the direction of a Pythagorean background.
Gematria, therefore, provides the key to New Testament studies.
Therefore one must start by counting.
I promised to say a few words about the title âThe New Testamentâ itself.
Again, one must start by counting.
The Greek is, of course, hê kainê diathêkê.
This is a translation of the Sanskrit Tathâgatasya kâyam, from Q, more precisely MPS 42: 10, a part of MSV.
Luke 22: 20, and Paul I Kor 2: 25 prefer the rendering hê kainê diathêkê, 7 syllables. Here Sanskrit kâyam, âbodyâ becomes Greek kainê (k-a-y-m = k-a-i-n), and di-a-thê-kê imitates ta-thâ-ga-ta-, but one dental is missing. The hê is there so that all the 7 syllables of the original are preserved. The genitive of the original is also lost in Luke and Paul.
<img src='http://www.jesusisbuddha.com/images/pentagram.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
From a Forum at http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/
12-25-2005, 06:56 AM #1
Guest
Posts: n/a <b>I only did the things I had seen the Father do - John 5:19 </b>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similar Names
Chrishna (Krishna)
Christ
Birth
Chrishna's birth occurs while his foster father, Nanda, is in his native city to pay taxes to the king, King Kansa.
Christ's birth occurs while his foster father, Joseph, is in his native city to pay taxes to the Governor.
King
King Kansa tried to kill Chrishna by ordeing the slaughter of all males born on the same day as Chrishna.
King Herod ordered the slaughter of all infants born on the same day as Christ. Source: St. Matthew, 2:16.
Mother
The Virgin (the virgin birth is applied to miraculous conception and birth) Devaki is told by an angel, "In thy delivery, O favored among women, all nations shall have cause to rejoice."
The Virgin Mary is told by an angel, "Hail, thou that art highly favored, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. ... Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favor with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end."
Source: St. Luke 1:28-33.
Star
The nativity of Chrishna is heralded by a star.
The nativity of Christ is heralded by a star.
Birth place
Chrishna is born in a cave like prison. The cave story is an indication of lower-class birthplace.
Christ is born in a cave. Source: The Apocryphal Gospel entitled Protevangelion, supposedly written by James, the brother of Jesus.
The manger story (wherein Jesus was born in a stable) is an indication of a low-class birthplace.
Three wise men
Chrishna is visited in the cave by three wise men bearing gifts.(Brahma, Vishnu,Shiva)
Christ is visited in the stable/cave by three wise men bearing gifts.
Illumination after Birth
The cave was mysteriously illuminated. Vasudev and Devki could not tolerate the light.
The cave was illuminated so brightly Joseph and Mary's midwife could not tolerate the light.
Source: The Apocryphal Gospel Protevangelion.
Warnings
Vasudeva is warned by an angel to flee from King Kansa by crossing the Jumna River with the infant Chrishna.
Joseph is warned in a dream to flee from King Herod into Egypt with the infant Jesus and the Virgin Mary.
Conversation after Birth
The baby Chrishna began speaking to his mother shortly after birth.
The baby Christ began speaking to the Virgin Mary shortly after his birth, saying, "Mary, I am Jesus, the Son of God, that WORD which thou didst bring forth according to the declaration of the Angel Gabriel to thee, and my Father hath sent me for the salvation of the world."
Source: The Apocryphal Gospel, The First Gospel of the Infancy.
Miracles in Mathura/Materea
Chrishna performs miracles in Mathura.
Christ performs miracles in the town of Materea in Egypt.
Second person of Trinity
Chrishna is the second person of the Hindu Trinity: (1) Brahma, (2) Vishnu, (3) Siva. Krishna is the incarnation of Vishnu.
Christ is the second person of the Christian Trinity: (1) God, the Father, (2) Jesus the Son, (3) the Holy Ghost.
Before leaving Earthly bodies
At noon on the day Chrishna left the Earth, the sun darkened.
From the sixth hour to the ninth hour on the day of Jesus' crucifixion, the sun darkened.
Message
Chrishna - I am the Father (Bhagavad Gita)
Christ - I am the Son (Bible)
Chrishna - AhamBrahmasmi (I am The Brahman, Soul and The Brahman are one)
Christ - I and The Father are one.
(there is much more but leaving it here)
Some interesting Verses:
"My Father is greater than I" ( John 14:28).
"I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and have revealed them unto babes" (Luke 10:21)
God incarnate, the second person of the Trinity, the son of man who will be coming to us in the future on the clouds: "For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man" (Matthew 24:27).
Some Vedic definations applicable for Yogis, The Realised souls.
anima siddhi -one can go though walls or closed doors (John 20:19,26),
laghima siddhi - one can walk over water (Matthew 14.25),
prapti siddhi - one can bring into three dimensional space and from a higher plane, things, like food-feeding the four or five thousand (Matt.15:38, 16:10; Mark 8:9, 8:20),
isitva siddhi - to appear and disappear at will-"then their eyes were opened, and they recognized him; and he vanished from their sight" (Luke 4:29:30, 24:31).
I only did the things I had seen the Father do - John 5:19
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Jul 30 2006, 09:21 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Jul 30 2006, 09:21 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So how can we expect missionaries to work, work and work, and not have any motive? Aren't we asking too much?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So they are selfish. They are cheating people, i call them street crooks.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am not so sure. We all do that, one way or the other. We go to office, not for the joy of working but to earn. So we also have motives, it's human nature.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->We never asked them to come.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are you suggesting they're here illegally? I highly doubt it.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->First they came and robbed are country with everything.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't you think that's a whole different matter? People could argue that in those days, there were no ownership rights and that people could roam around the world without being called invaders.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Made us poor, now they want to remove our poverty.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It may be hypocritical, but they'll argue that all's fair in love and war. It's a battle between cultures, after all. Moreover, Indians also use trchnology 'invented' by the west. Some people may consider that hypocrisy.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hindusim promotes selfless service.
If you are Hindu, do selfless service, and don't promote selfish crooks.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, but again, Swamis like Premananda and others have been caught red-handed, and they weren't doing selfless service. goes on to show there are selfish people in every community. And I am not promoting selfish crooks at all, just trying to think differently. Moreover, the concept of selfless service is part of Indian culture, western culture revolves around the profit principle. It would be unfair to expect a westerner, missionary or otherwise, to give that up since it forms the very basis of a free market enterprise.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So, all those non-missionary NGOs that are working in fields llike education, tsunami relief, Sardar Sarovar dam protests, the Chipko movement to save the trees, etc., are all working to convert people to their religion?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They may, they may not. That matters little.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The problem with your argument is: you have accepted conversion as a legitimate objective to spending money.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not necessarily. I've accepted the "DESIRE FOR REWARD" as a legitimate desire on the part of any human being. Conversion simply fits into this whole scheme, that's all.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->When most organizations have aims, those aims are directly related to their work. For eg., the aim of tsunami relief is to save people from starvation in a post-tsunami situation. In contrast, the aim of a missionary organization in tsunami relief is indirect: to seek conversion using the disaster as a tool to subvert a suffering people's religious beliefs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That may be, but you cannot expect everyone to have the same motive, same objective. People are different from each other. You may give charity hoping to accrue some punya, whereas another person may do the exact same thing as karma yoga, meaning without expectations. Whilst still others may do nothing at all. Who are we to play judge, jury, and executioner? the whole thing is rather subjective, there's no right and wrong.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In fact, going by your argument, the missionary organziations can actually make a case that all convent-educated Hindus are actually obligated to convert to Christianity! After all, if the objective is legitimate and the the missionaries have spent money to give the Hindus an education, you could make the argument that the Hindus should be appropriately grateful, and convert.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course not, this also is subjective. So there's no definitive answer. Put simply, just as you cannot force people NOT to have motives, you cannot force people to show gratitude.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, if the objective of conversion is legitimate, then why aren't the missionaries upfriont about the motivation at the point of giving relief, that is, to the person they seek to convert?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In business, don't we often give freebies first to attract customers, and then provide another product or service, the ones which we really intend to sell? This method is indispensable in a competitive world, or your business is doomed. You don't try to be honest and tell your customers: look, we are giving away worthless freebies, so that you'll be fooled into buying our product. We take this for granted, every business in the world does this. It is impossible to survive without it. And we never ask awkward questions such as 'why can't we be upfront about the whole matter' and so forth.
So just think of what missionaries do as business. They're promoting a certain product/service, and they need to attract people by giving freebies, in this case, education, food etc. Everything in life is a business opportunity, so it's asking too much to work without expecting rewards, or without telling some lies every now and then. Such is life. This is not a perfect world. The problem stems from our expectations that every person must be saintly. It doesn't work that way. It's not always about right versus wrong, it's profit vs loss for most people.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes, but again, Swamis like Premananda and others have been caught red-handed, and they weren't doing selfless service.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think Premanada was set up by the missionaries as well as the illustrious Tamil Nadu Police Force. see this link http://www.vishvarupa.com/swami-sri-premananda.html
Premananda was doing same type of work as Kanchi Shankaracharyas.
Deepak:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->deepak: So how can we expect missionaries to work, work and work, and not have any motive? Aren't we asking too much?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Mudy: So they are selfish. They are cheating people, i call them street crooks.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Deepak: I am not so sure. We all do that, one way or the other. We go to office, not for the joy of working but to earn. So we also have motives, it's human nature.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
When one ignores thousands of sexually abused children on one's own shore (Boston archideosces anyone?) and go on mission to 'rescue' others around the world, shouldn't we question their motives and their human nature?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So, all those non-missionary NGOs that are working in fields llike education, tsunami relief, Sardar Sarovar dam protests, the Chipko movement to save the trees, etc., are all working to convert people to their religion?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
deepak: They may, they may not. That matters little.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why not? Let missionaries say that their cause is socio-political issues and be honest about their agenda. Doesn't Christ and or Bible tell them to speak the truth? You surely can't be preaching the word of lord where the foundation is based on a lie.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->When most organizations have aims, those aims are directly related to their work. For eg., the aim of tsunami relief is to save people from starvation in a post-tsunami situation. In contrast, the aim of a missionary organization in tsunami relief is indirect: to seek conversion using the disaster as a tool to subvert a suffering people's religious beliefs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
deepak: That may be, but you cannot expect everyone to have the same motive, same objective. People are different from each other. You may give charity hoping to accrue some punya, whereas another person may do the exact same thing as karma yoga, meaning without expectations. Whilst still others may do nothing at all. Who are we to play judge, jury, and executioner? the whole thing is rather subjective, there's no right and wrong.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Let's get this straight. Every missionary orgranisation gets it's fund from goverment and other charitable organizations or NGOs. Donors or taxpayers don't want missionary to play god here. During Tsumani and countless other calamaties the way these missionaries operated was that they clearly discriminated against those weren't willing to convert. I'm 100% sure even Christ didn't indulge against such blatant discriminations against needy persons.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->deepak: In business, don't we often give freebies first to attract customers, and then provide another product or service, the ones which we really intend to sell? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thank you for highlighting this. This is exactly what this thread seeks to shine the light upon. Missionary organizations are indeed business organizations whose sole purpose is to increase the count and alter demographic maps of nations.
Yes, you are allowed to give freebies. So do dealers who will offer freebies till the prey is addicted, after which the drug lord will surely fleece him. This has been documented in the writings of Mahatama Gandhi himself and this was over a hundred years ago, situation has gotten only worse since. Please read previous posts and historial evidence and govt published reports before stating some anecdotal evidence you have.
Also, if you are offereing "freebies" of your religion, have some respect and dignity towards other religions. To state in business parlance, if you enter Coke factory/business establishment with Pepsi in hand, you'll for sure be kicked out. Try parking an non-Chrysler vehicle in Chrysler's employee parking and pardon the pun, you won't have a prayer. Similarly when you tried this missionary food for Christian Tsumani victims only in Indonesia and Malaysia, you certainly can't complain the way they treated this racists fleecing on hungry, needy and shelterless.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Made us poor, now they want to remove our poverty.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
deepak: It may be hypocritical, but they'll argue that all's fair in love and war. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So we need to ask these missionaries, are they spreading the love? Or the war? You might be a bit naieve. Or you might believe rest here are naieve.
But to most their agenda is pretty clear.
To summarize, if missionaries are engaged in fraud should they be given a free pass just because they are carrying a book of God in their hand or treated like any other criminal? If they are abusive towards others religious beliefs, should they be treated with respect? If they are engaged in political activites shouldn't they deserve any more or less contempt that's reserved for a politicians? If they run a business enterprise should they be treated any differently than any other business enterprise? If they discriminate against hungry and needy (especially during the times of need) do they deserve our compassion or our charity $?
taruvar, sarovar, sant-jan, chauthe barse meh,
parmartha ke karane, charo dhare deh.
(Trees, Ponds, Clouds, and spiritual people - only come into being for selflessly helping others)
If Christian missionaries are not selfless in their service, they can not be said to be spiritual people.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->...just trying to think differently. Moreover, the concept of selfless service is part of Indian culture, western culture revolves around the profit principle. It would be unfair to expect a westerner, missionary or otherwise, to give that up since it forms the very basis of a free market enterprise.
...Who are we to play judge, jury, and executioner? <b>the whole thing is rather subjective, there's no right and wrong.</b>
...They're promoting a certain product/service, and they need to attract people by giving freebies, in this case, education, food etc. Everything in life is a business opportunity, so it's asking too much to work without expecting rewards, or without telling some lies every now and then. Such is life. This is not a perfect world.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I suspect, with these words, one can justify even the Islamic invasion. After all, no one had any ownership rights, right?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In business, don't we often give freebies first to attract customers, and then provide another product or service, the ones which we really intend to sell? This method is indispensable in a competitive world, or your business is doomed. You don't try to be honest and tell your customers: look, we are giving away worthless freebies, so that you'll be fooled into buying our product. We take this for granted, every business in the world does this. It is impossible to survive without it. And we never ask awkward questions such as 'why can't we be upfront about the whole matter' and so forth.
So just think of what missionaries do as business. They're promoting a certain product/service, and they need to attract people by giving freebies, in this case, education, food etc. Everything in life is a business opportunity, so it's asking too much to work without expecting rewards, or without telling some lies every now and then. Such is life. This is not a perfect world.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Precisely! This is exactly what we are talking about. Here is one of my previous posts on the same thread:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The missionary apparatus, for all its sound-and-light effects, is a corporate organization, just like Hindustan Lever. It sells a brand of religion - an exclusivist monotheism at that - with the important advantage that it has enormous sums of money and a well-motivated cadre for its mission. It has deadlines, it has an advertising budget, it has competition, and it has to meet numbers, to give its financial backers (the richer set among the laity) a sense of achievement, and a sense of vindication that they or their ancestors made the right choice.
Notice how carefully the Church seeks to define its product as different from that of rival faiths? Notice how carefully the Church seeks to devalue the concept of works alone as a way to salvation and the concept of reaching God directly as a means of salvation, and instead lays emphasis on "faith" in this "Son of God"? Read here for the faith vs works debate. These are the systemic characteristics of a corporate organization, and attempt by the "Church" to justify its existence to the laity and the rest of the world.
[right][snapback]54248[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If your point is that this is life, and "all is fair in love and war", and we are supposed to "deal with it", then we actually are dealing with it, by showing
1: that the Christian mission is not a "saintly" organization with the welfare of the people as its objective.
2: that the Christian mission, beaing a corporatist entity, should be treated exactly like one. No specific advantage should be given to it, like trating it as a charitable organziation, or a minority religious organization.
3. that the monetary advantage that the church and mission have, is all that stands between themselves and other religions in the field.
Reading your question again, (quoted below)...
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In business, don't we often give freebies first to attract customers, and then provide another product or service, the ones which we really intend to sell? This method is indispensable in a competitive world, or your business is doomed. You don't try to be honest and tell your customers: look, we are giving away worthless freebies, so that you'll be fooled into buying our product. We take this for granted, every business in the world does this. It is impossible to survive without it. And we never ask awkward questions such as 'why can't we be upfront about the whole matter' and so forth.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
... I have a question: Where exactly is the business that works very similar to the missionaries? Remember what the missionaries are doing (in the language of corporations):
1. They offer you freebies, and <b>pretend they only want to do that</b>.
2. Once you are placed under obligation, and are feeling properly grateful, they ask you to accept another service - this one has some costs to you.
Where in the world do you find such a business? I got it: <b>Amway!</b> except that Amway doesn't offer any freebies, but the costs are not very clear upfront, so we might consider it similar.
Also, I believe spies are recruited the same way in foregin countries. First, you wine and dine the person, then put him in a compromising position where he is obligated to you, then tighten the screws.
There is a recent controversy in Tirupati about the sanctity of only two out of seven hills. And after much protests and statements and subsequent fears of political fallout all of the hills were designated as under the TTD board and all secular activities banned. The piligrim demographics is follows: About 50 % come from TN, 25 % from Karnataka and the rest from all India. The initial order designating only two hills shows there was a plan to limit the TTD reach and allow 'secular' development.
Upon making enquiries there was a INC plan/desire to allow a Church on one of the hills to provide a beacon to the rest of South India from where there is massive inflow of pilgrims_ akin to the seven hills of Rome. This is now on back burner till 2009 elections as re-electing the INC in AP, is very crucial to the INC for retaining power in Delhi.
<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+Aug 1 2006, 12:07 AM-->QUOTE(ramana @ Aug 1 2006, 12:07 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Upon making enquiries there was a INC plan/desire to allow a Church on one of the hills to provide a beacon to the rest of South India from where there is massive inflow of pilgrims_ akin to the seven hills of Rome. This is now on back burner till 2009 elections as re-electing the INC in AP, is very crucial to the INC for retaining power in Delhi.
[right][snapback]54902[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ramana,
Can we have more info about this? Did you speak to someone in the know, some insider or to some friend of an insider? I understand, if you are not comfortable discussing this.
|
