“Hindus fall because they worship lesser gods.” Abrahamics are trampling Hindus. Can you help me understand?

[River Sea]

My senses that when the Jews left the Indus Valley, they were confronted with the enemies from here right up to Israel these included the Kings of Eden and others. In this period, it was necessary for the Hebrews to stick together at that point their god became jealous with respect to other people in order to keep the Hebrew flock together.

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Do you mean the kings of Eden who lived at Meru in Pushkar, Rajasthan, India, or where did these kings of Eden live? However, if you mean India, their god was jealous before leaving the Indus Valley.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I believe I would be happy to hear what am missing.

I believe I'd be happy to show you.

Let's start with you sharing the verses you feel are misinformation, and we can discuss those individually.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

I believe you recognize that not every perception is from God. I have not solidified my perceptions. There have been marked changes in the last ten years.

Oh Good.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

I believe exclusivity is God's prerogative. Thou shalt have no other Gods beside me. However a willing to ask if you think there is another way to be saved. The Muslims offer one: fighting for God although I believe that is a rare thing and that doesn't save the person from sin.

I don’t think God wants exclusivity, if God is all encompassing and God is infinite, there is no reason why God should limit his writ to a particular people. The exclusivity in my mind is totally an invention of human being that have demeaned the majesty of God. The ten commandments have no exclusivity but the Jews after the ten commandments made it exclusive and brought in the concept of chosen people. Jesus himself has no exclusivity but Paul and others after him brought in the whole idea that the only way to be saved is through Jesus. Mohmmad does not have exclusivity but the Sunnah after Mohmmad developed the idea that if you do not follow tradition of prophet Mohmmad then you are a Kafir. So, exclusivity not a product of God, it is totally a product of political manipulation of the concept of God by political persons.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Do you mean the kings of Eden who lived at Meru in Pushkar, Rajasthan, India, or where did these kings of Eden live? However, if you mean India, their god was jealous before leaving the Indus Valley.

My reading is that the God of the Jews was not jealous in the Indus Valley. He was turned around by Moses and created as a jealous entity in order to keep the Jews together that is a purely political phenomena and have nothing to do with theology.

 

[MayPeaceBeUpOnYou]

The Muslims offer one: fighting for God although I believe that is a rare thing and that doesn't save the person from sin

That’s a not totally the picture, with all respect. Sure when a person dies as a martyr his sins are forgiven by Allah. But we Muslims believe that every person who dies as a Muslim you are certain of paradise., obviously this will be by the grace and mercy of Allah. Just wanted to clarify, cheers

 

[firedragon]

The Muslims offer one: fighting for God although I believe that is a rare thing and that doesn't save the person from sin.

You should honestly do some research when you make statements like this. It's so irresponsible.

Which term in arabic are you referring to here as "Fighting for God"?

 

[River Sea]

My reading is that the God of the Jews was not jealous in the Indus Valley. He was turned around by Moses and created as a jealous entity in order to keep the Jews together that is a purely political phenomena and have nothing to do with theology.

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Did people invent their god to be jealous, putting a baby in danger? Two similar examples: 1) When Moses was a baby, his mother protected him from danger by placing him in a basket that floated on a river. 2) When Krishna was a baby, Krishna's father placed him in a basket and carried him over a river. Was it because people invented their god to be jealous?

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Did people invent their god to be jealous, putting a baby in danger? Two similar examples: 1) When Moses was a baby, his mother protected him from danger by placing him in a basket that floated on a river. 2) When Krishna was a baby, Krishna's father placed him in a basket and carried him over a river. Was it because people invented their god to be jealous?

People did not put baby in danger because of God, they put baby in basket to save it from tyrannous things.

 

[Muffled]

I believe I'd be happy to show you.

Let's start with you sharing the verses you feel are misinformation, and we can discuss those individually.

"Everything is connected with us, and all the forces of nature keep an eye over us. Exactly in the manner in which it is necessary for us to have experiences in the future life, in that particular manner alone do the forces of nature work"

 

[Muffled]

Oh Good.

For instance I believed in reincarnation before I was saved but it was never an issue afterwards. Now that I am more in tune with God I can see that it is very much an essential plan for people.

 

[Muffled]

You should honestly do some research when you make statements like this. It's so irresponsible.

Which term in arabic are you referring to here as "Fighting for God"?

I believe I don't always retain the source but I assure you it did exist.

 

[firedragon]

I believe I don't always retain the source but I assure you it did exist.

That's not responsible. Epistemically.

 

[SalixIncendium]

"Everything is connected with us, and all the forces of nature keep an eye over us. Exactly in the manner in which it is necessary for us to have experiences in the future life, in that particular manner alone do the forces of nature work"

Please share a the verse itself, not the commentary.

What you have shared appears to be a line of commentary on the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad by Swami Krishnananda copied and pasted from Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.

What is curious about this version is that there is no original Sanskrit...only a transliteration followed by no English translation...only commentary. I find this suspect.

Let's use this version of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, which is an English translation of the actual verses followed by commentary by Shankara: Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

Please select the actual verse you feel is misinformation and we can discuss from there.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

Please share a the verse itself, not the commentary.

What you have shared appears to be a line of commentary on the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad by Swami Krishnananda copied and pasted from Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.

What is curious about this version is that there is no original Sanskrit...only a transliteration followed by no English translation...only commentary. I find this suspect.

Let's use this version of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, which is an English translation of the actual verses followed by commentary by Shankara: Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

Please select the actual verse you feel is misinformation and we can discuss from there.

I lost track of the thread. Can you help me understand how we got here, please.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I lost track of the thread. Can you help me understand how we got here, please.

You would need to read upstream in the thread by clicking the arrow next to '[member] said'.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

You would need to read upstream in the thread by clicking the arrow next to '[member] said'.

I spent 10 minutes but could not get there. Let us drop this please.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I spent 10 minutes but could not get there. Let us drop this please.

Drop what? I wasn't speaking to you. I quoted another member in my post about the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

Drop what? I wasn't speaking to you. I quoted another member in my post about the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.

Please look at your reply to whom you Quote there...post # 336

 

[SalixIncendium]

Please look at your reply to whom you Quote there...post # 336

Of course. It would have been rude of me to not respond to what you requested of me.

However, the post you quoted in post #335 was directed at another member, not at you.