First 2 of 3 posts are moved here from the christianism=terrorism thread.
Post 1/3
A distinguishing feature of many missionary religions - certainly of all the missionary religions I'm familiar with - is the famous "seal of the prophets" routine, which is that technique whereby an invented missionary religion backprojects itself by dragging in the Gods/heroes/sacred/famous persons of other religions as its own predecessors (e.g. as previous prophets in the same lineage) and parading these characters from Other religions as having always belonged to the newly invented missionary ideology and having propounded said invention at an earlier time. (Backprojection and hijacking established pedigree/authority and riding on the popularity of familiar personages, is always the reason for encroaching on the prominent characters of other religions.) The inventor of the newly-minted missionary religion is then declared the "seal of the prophets" - which was the whole purpose - and the nonsense he (it's usually a he) propounds is declared "the final say" on the subject of religion, even as anything said and done by the Other religionists - who got lumped as predecessors/preceding prophets - is declared as being in line with the nonsense, though usually it is not only unrelated but often even contrary.
Besides the jeebus invention being peddled as the rabbi whose theology was to replace Judaism - the final "prophet" having the final say as per christianism (i.e. OT being superceded by the NT, even though they also had jeebus claiming he was coming to uphold the Law/OT) - there were many others.
Famous examples (outside known Indian-origin cases) are:
- Manichaeanism (around the same century of origin as christianism): hijacked the then much-popular Krishna and Buddha - backwards in time, of course - and declared them "previous avataras" of the new religion in order to peddle itself. It further poached on IIRC Ganapati, Hindus' view of reincarnation, used Hindus' Supreme Brahman/Parampurusha as a basis for the Manichaeans re-worked "Great Spirit" and more.
Therefore poaching was not just applied to Zoroastrianism and christianism/Judaism, but had to involve Indic religions too. (And as if jeebus creepus said the same thing as Krishna. In other words, Manichaeanism is so *obviously* a concocted religion.) Then Mani got crowned the Seal of the Prophets. Literally.
- Islamania: hijacked Alexander "The Great" - backwards in time, of course - declared Alexander a prophet, despite Alexander regarding himself as the son of Zeus and being a Hellene who had never heard of islamania nor even christomania (rather like Krishna and Buddha had never heard of Manichaeanism or the next example: Bahai). Then Mohammed anointed himself the Seal of Prophets. Again, literally. Not even original at this game.
Of course islam was a typical late ME religion and poached from Judaism and christianism and even Zoroastrianism. And at least Hellenism's Alexander.
- Bahai: Abrahamic religion invented in the mid 19th century (1800-something), incorporated not just prophets from IIRC all 3 famous Abrahamic religions (backwards in time), but also hijacked Buddha and the God (not "prophet") Krishna as prophets. Worse still, Bahai like to mangle the Mahabharatam and Gita - pretending it has something to do with their religion (backwards in time again) merely because they decided to poach on Krishna - all in order to declare that the MBh is in line with Bahai/that it belongs to them, so as to interpret it to align with their religion and to prove that Krishna was teaching Bahai/mono-moronism. (Bahai also poached on Ashtanga yoga and a zillion other Hindu stuff, and like to pass it off as theirs. Clearly they don't have anything original - and desperately need to steal Others' stuff - to acquire converts.) And for those who want to cheer the fact that some monotheists have made a "special" (actually meaningless and offensive) place for Krishna and Buddha - though no more "special" than Alexander or even jeebus' position is in islam - it's not all fun and games: e.g. see angelfire.com/mo3/bahai/krishna.txt where some Bahai looney is trying to argue that Krishna - and Buddha - was an oryan/Euro/"white", by mangling the Mahabharatam to do it. He even argues that Krishna would have been blue because of a skin disorder. (Now there's a first.) Rather like oryanists who always insist that Krishna cannot have been dark - and that this must have been attributed to him later on by the miscegenated Hindus - because surely Krishna "must" have been oryan=European="white", since the MBh is all important for aliens/oryanists to claim as their own (since they have absolutely nothing like it).
It doesn't matter to me that characters of missionary religions should themselves become victims of poaching/hijacking by other even later missionary religions that similarly attempt backprojection. But Krishna belongs to a heathen religion. Not to mention belonging to Hindoo religion exclusively. I know other Indians like to "share" away with everything - starting within India - but this is the sort of thing that always happens because Hindus don't draw the line between their own religion and every spin off.
Note that it is not just ME religions that did this to Hindu Gods: Buddhism declared Buddha an avataaram of Vishnu (and poached on many Hindu Gods) - just like Manichaeanism declared IIRC Mani an avataaram of Krishna and Buddha and poached on Ganapati, while Bahai - invented in ~1850 - declared their cult's inventor to be an avataaram of Krishna. And Jainism roped in Shiva by declaring their first (unhistorical, backprojected) teerthankara to be an avataaram of Shiva, and similarly used Krishna to tie some other backprojected unhistorical Jina characters as Krishna's relatives as a means to acquire a longer lineage for Jainism. All are cases of late missionary religions needing backprojection to present a pedigree to the masses and project themselves as religions established "since the beginning", whether this "beginning" starts at the monogawd and Adam or is the cyclical eternity of Hindu religion. Bahai is no different. And the tactic clearly works: look how many people, including western ones, fall for the lately invented and obvious fraud called Bahai. [No, I'm not tolerant of fictional religions that encroach on other religions to sell themselves/to missionise.]
In contrast to these inculturating and poaching tactics seen in most if not all missionary religions, you don't see heathen, ancestral religions (which are all original) ever doing such things. Heathens never pretend to have a claim on others' religion, they certainly don't pretend to know it better than the actual adherents of the ancestral religion, they wouldn't dare to mangle it, and they would Never pretend it all belonged to them (let alone more than it belonged to the real adherents). More reasons why heathens can't help being awesome, while missionary religions are just Replacement Theologies. Christoislam aren't the only ones who inculturated and then tried to replace the religion they spun off from (Judaism) as a precursor to peddling themselves all over.
Here's another example of Bahai craziness on Krishna
alaska.net/~peace/krishna.htm
^A page^ on how to convert "followers of Krishna" (i.e. Hindus) to Bahai - I mean, how to present Bahai to Hindus - using "Krishna was a prophet of Bahai-ism" re-invention/excuse. Sort of like how jeebus followers try to use christna to convert Hindus from Krishna to jeebusism. Or how islamaniacs try to use "jeebus was a prophet of islam" to convert jeebusites to islamania. [=That other feature of late ME religions: where Gods of others are turned into "prophets" - human characters - of their own religions, a la christianism turning Gods of Hellenismos into christian saints.]
Post 1/3
A distinguishing feature of many missionary religions - certainly of all the missionary religions I'm familiar with - is the famous "seal of the prophets" routine, which is that technique whereby an invented missionary religion backprojects itself by dragging in the Gods/heroes/sacred/famous persons of other religions as its own predecessors (e.g. as previous prophets in the same lineage) and parading these characters from Other religions as having always belonged to the newly invented missionary ideology and having propounded said invention at an earlier time. (Backprojection and hijacking established pedigree/authority and riding on the popularity of familiar personages, is always the reason for encroaching on the prominent characters of other religions.) The inventor of the newly-minted missionary religion is then declared the "seal of the prophets" - which was the whole purpose - and the nonsense he (it's usually a he) propounds is declared "the final say" on the subject of religion, even as anything said and done by the Other religionists - who got lumped as predecessors/preceding prophets - is declared as being in line with the nonsense, though usually it is not only unrelated but often even contrary.
Besides the jeebus invention being peddled as the rabbi whose theology was to replace Judaism - the final "prophet" having the final say as per christianism (i.e. OT being superceded by the NT, even though they also had jeebus claiming he was coming to uphold the Law/OT) - there were many others.
Famous examples (outside known Indian-origin cases) are:
- Manichaeanism (around the same century of origin as christianism): hijacked the then much-popular Krishna and Buddha - backwards in time, of course - and declared them "previous avataras" of the new religion in order to peddle itself. It further poached on IIRC Ganapati, Hindus' view of reincarnation, used Hindus' Supreme Brahman/Parampurusha as a basis for the Manichaeans re-worked "Great Spirit" and more.
Therefore poaching was not just applied to Zoroastrianism and christianism/Judaism, but had to involve Indic religions too. (And as if jeebus creepus said the same thing as Krishna. In other words, Manichaeanism is so *obviously* a concocted religion.) Then Mani got crowned the Seal of the Prophets. Literally.
- Islamania: hijacked Alexander "The Great" - backwards in time, of course - declared Alexander a prophet, despite Alexander regarding himself as the son of Zeus and being a Hellene who had never heard of islamania nor even christomania (rather like Krishna and Buddha had never heard of Manichaeanism or the next example: Bahai). Then Mohammed anointed himself the Seal of Prophets. Again, literally. Not even original at this game.
Of course islam was a typical late ME religion and poached from Judaism and christianism and even Zoroastrianism. And at least Hellenism's Alexander.
- Bahai: Abrahamic religion invented in the mid 19th century (1800-something), incorporated not just prophets from IIRC all 3 famous Abrahamic religions (backwards in time), but also hijacked Buddha and the God (not "prophet") Krishna as prophets. Worse still, Bahai like to mangle the Mahabharatam and Gita - pretending it has something to do with their religion (backwards in time again) merely because they decided to poach on Krishna - all in order to declare that the MBh is in line with Bahai/that it belongs to them, so as to interpret it to align with their religion and to prove that Krishna was teaching Bahai/mono-moronism. (Bahai also poached on Ashtanga yoga and a zillion other Hindu stuff, and like to pass it off as theirs. Clearly they don't have anything original - and desperately need to steal Others' stuff - to acquire converts.) And for those who want to cheer the fact that some monotheists have made a "special" (actually meaningless and offensive) place for Krishna and Buddha - though no more "special" than Alexander or even jeebus' position is in islam - it's not all fun and games: e.g. see angelfire.com/mo3/bahai/krishna.txt where some Bahai looney is trying to argue that Krishna - and Buddha - was an oryan/Euro/"white", by mangling the Mahabharatam to do it. He even argues that Krishna would have been blue because of a skin disorder. (Now there's a first.) Rather like oryanists who always insist that Krishna cannot have been dark - and that this must have been attributed to him later on by the miscegenated Hindus - because surely Krishna "must" have been oryan=European="white", since the MBh is all important for aliens/oryanists to claim as their own (since they have absolutely nothing like it).
It doesn't matter to me that characters of missionary religions should themselves become victims of poaching/hijacking by other even later missionary religions that similarly attempt backprojection. But Krishna belongs to a heathen religion. Not to mention belonging to Hindoo religion exclusively. I know other Indians like to "share" away with everything - starting within India - but this is the sort of thing that always happens because Hindus don't draw the line between their own religion and every spin off.
Note that it is not just ME religions that did this to Hindu Gods: Buddhism declared Buddha an avataaram of Vishnu (and poached on many Hindu Gods) - just like Manichaeanism declared IIRC Mani an avataaram of Krishna and Buddha and poached on Ganapati, while Bahai - invented in ~1850 - declared their cult's inventor to be an avataaram of Krishna. And Jainism roped in Shiva by declaring their first (unhistorical, backprojected) teerthankara to be an avataaram of Shiva, and similarly used Krishna to tie some other backprojected unhistorical Jina characters as Krishna's relatives as a means to acquire a longer lineage for Jainism. All are cases of late missionary religions needing backprojection to present a pedigree to the masses and project themselves as religions established "since the beginning", whether this "beginning" starts at the monogawd and Adam or is the cyclical eternity of Hindu religion. Bahai is no different. And the tactic clearly works: look how many people, including western ones, fall for the lately invented and obvious fraud called Bahai. [No, I'm not tolerant of fictional religions that encroach on other religions to sell themselves/to missionise.]
In contrast to these inculturating and poaching tactics seen in most if not all missionary religions, you don't see heathen, ancestral religions (which are all original) ever doing such things. Heathens never pretend to have a claim on others' religion, they certainly don't pretend to know it better than the actual adherents of the ancestral religion, they wouldn't dare to mangle it, and they would Never pretend it all belonged to them (let alone more than it belonged to the real adherents). More reasons why heathens can't help being awesome, while missionary religions are just Replacement Theologies. Christoislam aren't the only ones who inculturated and then tried to replace the religion they spun off from (Judaism) as a precursor to peddling themselves all over.
Here's another example of Bahai craziness on Krishna
alaska.net/~peace/krishna.htm
^A page^ on how to convert "followers of Krishna" (i.e. Hindus) to Bahai - I mean, how to present Bahai to Hindus - using "Krishna was a prophet of Bahai-ism" re-invention/excuse. Sort of like how jeebus followers try to use christna to convert Hindus from Krishna to jeebusism. Or how islamaniacs try to use "jeebus was a prophet of islam" to convert jeebusites to islamania. [=That other feature of late ME religions: where Gods of others are turned into "prophets" - human characters - of their own religions, a la christianism turning Gods of Hellenismos into christian saints.]