Yeah, the Dr. Zakir Naik gathers from the glorious Qur'an, in words to that effect, that our planet is shaped like the egg of an ostrich. I've had the opportunity to be in the presence of ostriches and they're very awe-inspiring, like mini dinosaurs.
Please elaborate on this. How is Christianity basically Hinduism?
the logos is the son is the image, is VISHNU the universal consciousness
I don’t see the similarities. Hinduism began roughly 4,000 years ago while Christ Is the Word. In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God. All three parts of the trinity were present at the creation. Hinduism worships many gods, but there is only one God and He doesn’t share His glory. Hinduism sees God in all things, literally everything. Christians know that God is everywhere at all times but He is not in all things. Jesus is not reincarnated but the actual God incarnate, God made flesh. Did Muhammad claim to be God or simply a prophet of God? Did Muhammad die and rose again, fulfilling several ancient prophecies? There are fundamental differences in belief for Hindu and Christian that contradict one another. They are not even compatible let alone alike in any meaningful way.the logos is the son is the image, is VISHNU the universal consciousness
Jesus is the incarnation, that is hindusim...it isnt judaism.
im not blind to chapters like 1 Corinithians 1 btw, i understand how the common xtian views my argument of greek and hindu philosophy where it came from.
the way i understand it, a man plants seeds in his mind, develops the idea...but it doesnt mean his heart reflects it. often times the heart rejects it and projects it onto something/someone else.
in much the same way, the collective jewish messianic intent of the 6th/early 7th century was the seed, but the fruit went to the arabs..they received the archetype created in the collective jewish mind.
basically the jewish nation's idea of the messiah was not Jesus...but Mohammad (albeit a jewish version of him). Jesus, everything he was...was a consequence of hindu phiolosophy/beliefs.
a lot of people don't understand how inner beliefs and intent shape the external world. The poor create the rich just by the way their beliefs project wealth onto others. that's down to their philosophical understanding of the world, material success and their own relationship with it. Jung's shadow archetypes theory touches on this topic.
Still when i say 'hinduism' im not on about the idolaterous practices of the ave hindu. im on about sanatan dharma (dharma means the same thing as Torah btw), sanatan dharma means 'eternal law'). the islamic/arabic word is shariah. it isnt to be confused for the individual shariah of a prophet but as a whole, the understanding of a universal truth.
in the same way muslims say 'islam is the original religion', muslims believe that ALL nations have received the truth. so it is easily for someone like me to view krishna and rama in a positive light.
it isnt just about Jesus and the incarnation, but the whole way the NT tries to explain the nature of the Father, Son and Holy spirit, is understood much easier when you have studied vedanta. to the point where you realise it IS vedanta.
keep in mind also, that people like St Augustine were influenced by plotinus, who had travelled to persia to learn about an earlier version of the trinity..and that comes from vedanta. Vedanta is from the Upanishads btw, if you want to study them.
Hinduism - Sacred-Texts
Hinduism Vedas Upanishads Puranas Other Primary Texts Epics Mahabharata Ramayana Bhagavad Gita Vedanta Later texts Modern books The Vedas There are four Vedas, the Rig Veda, Sama Veda, Yajur Veda and Atharva Veda. The Vedas are the primary texts of Hinduism. They also had a...www.sacred-texts.com
You just showed me you have no clue what youre talking about. Have no understanding of hinduism or even christianity for that matter.
Agree to disagree.
Wise move haha
This took an interesting turn didn't it? I've been distracted for a few days and we went from FE to Hinduism vs Christianity? What did I miss?
The sharp right was due to a response made to the religion remarks within the original post. I do slightly regret not making a separate thread haha
Exactly. It is pointless to argue with flat earth rhetoric as it is designed to make you spin in circles, chasing your own tail. Fruitless. Shady people are behind all these FE cults which have nothing going for them but the gullibility of the people who have lost trust in institutions and are now prey for scammers and brainwashers. The institutions are of course at fault for being corrupt, but the history of science and philosophy is not a history of a grand conspiracy hiding the truth from everybody.
I find it interesting to question the history of what’s been established, regardless of what it is. Whether or not it’s fruitful is a matter of perspective. Maybe you’ve had the conversation enough to where it feels like going in circles. I haven’t ever talked to a serious flat earther and thought it’d be interesting to me to ask a question. Guess it wasn’t interesting enough to get a response lol.
Wether or not it is rhetoric is a matter of perspective. You perceive it as chasing your tail while others may believe that it's interesting or even fun. Nothing we research has to be "a hill to die on". Shady beginnings is an eye of the beholder issue as well. Because in the same breath that you say the history of science and philosophy aren't of the grand conspiracy, from my own perspective, those sources are just, if not even more shady. Members of secret societies, gov't agencies, etc. So it's more of a personal thing than a validity thing imo.
I would agree on that first statement. There isn't anything wrong (in my opinion) on questioning anything. Anything at all. That's what science is, right? Somewhere along the way we've stopped trying to PROVE and DISPROVE our own theories and have set out only to PROVE. Questioning should be natural and welcomed and not chastised. Maybe not only with FE but other things as well.
Christian. Just a shortened term.
Sounds to me to be anti Christian. So what would the reaction be if we called Muslims Mux or Catholics Cats? If someone can't be bothered to type the word Christian they are personally and with intention insulting Christianity. Either that or they are just plain lazy. Anyone that lazy is a heathen and an infidel. Also it is likely that they are a Satanist or even worse because they are afraid to say Christ just like a vampire is afraid of garlic or a cross.
Wondered that myself.
