The Capture of Christianity

So let's bring in Hinduism here.....


The two first teachers of Budhdha were Hindus ascetic Allara and Udaka. These were the people who taught Budhdha initial Gyan Yoga, or Meditation etc. These were in the same tradition as so many Unknown Gurus/sages who wrote Upanishads. And then later the desciples of Budhdha were again Brahmins who compiled initial texts.

So unfortunately, a naturally evolving religion Hinduism which created Buddhism was evolving naturally till it went to middle east in half hearted way, then it created Christianity, either through Theravada or through appolonious and then from this Christianity Islam was created.


Buddha knowing well what Hindu ascetism is (meditation, god realization, Tapasya, Sadhna), wanted to dilute it for common man as he didn't want people to do the hardwork he did; so he asked people to adopt middle path. His middle path was thoughtful, simplified version of Hinduism (infact initially too simplified version which later got complicated when Budhdhism started taking shape of organized religion).

In case of Christianiy what came to Christianity was half baked, there was no Budhdha who was simplifying things deliberately in proper manner. And then when Islam got things from Christianiy, there was another half baked, half knwoledge transfer.


====
Somebody said so well, "little knwoledge is a dangerous thing":-)

But all knowledge is little if you stop learning???, and that is what aggravated problem for Islam and Christianity; they were first based on little knwoledge and then they didn't let themselves evolve.


What Budhdha proved was that there was no need of religion (middlepath was basically to say so, neither you need to worry about God, nor hard-core ascetism, nor extreme knowledge/intellect, nor extreme material wealth, almost noting, except truthful life).

"Jesus was elevated from a mortal human..."

Unfortunately, we don't have enough Christians here to disccus that with you..

Murad, Jesus was no more or no less a mortal human than Prophet Muhammad, working under some psychic conditions, put together the Quran using some very well-established ideas of the place and the time, with nothing divine about the book.

These are matters of faith.

Murad, it is becoming increasingly hard to distinguish you from a dishonest Islamist fanatic. At least be open about it.

There has also been no myth


I bet murad baig wouldn't have called it a myth if he was discussing mohammed...

Re: # 3

I agree- for an Islamist some one else's faith is "superstition" and "gobble dock stories" but his own hallucinating prophet on whose chest wings are pressed by some Abrahmic angel and who comes up with fantastic revelations about loots, slaughters, murders and other perversity is just amazing.

An Islamist understanding of Jesus is contrary to a practicing christian's understanding. The two are NOT the same. Even Allah is not same as the GOD of Jesus.

When an Islamist speaks nonsense about christ he is just trying to tell christians that they are under the mistaken identity about christ - especially the fact about resurrection.

However, for a momeen splitting of moon by Mohammad or his travels on Buraq to 10 heavens is a true miracle - but the fact about resurrection of christ is a falsity!!

Re: # 2

I agree, Murad is turning into a deceptive Islamist who aims at calling other's matters of faith as superstitions- while at the same time saying Mashallah at stories about the coming of Mahndi to kill all the non-muslim unbelievers and crying at Moharram on listening to horrible randi-ronas as some sort of "spiritually elevating practice".

No, laddu, Murad does not say Mashallah at any of that.

He simply says that Islam has been 'misunderstood' and 'hijacked.'

And that others (non-Muslims) have stupid religions.

Re: # 6
Kal...
who misunderstood islam? Mo, the 7th century trader-cum-raider? If you follow his activities, there is no scope of misunderstanding; 24 carat barbarism....murad beg etc. , who live in civilised env. has to bluff to look islam decent. anyhow it does not work. go to the caves of pak-afg border...they have no confusion and no interpretation problem of what mo had preached and what shoul they do when you take food on arabic month of ramadan (before sunset)....

Laddu...
I have also seen this kind of story in BBC programs....
Buddha was atheist and never believed in miracle/magic,god, heaven etc? may be his kshatriya background helped him a lot to avoid dealing with god etc....he was firm believer of re-incarnation. Lot of people think that way, to explain some events. Ramkrishna's gospels were also like that (you take repeated births in different form until you die without keeping anything in mind).
...but then, how come it(christianity) turned into stupidity and fanaticism? much depends upon place and people...ancient brahmins never exposed vedas to the non-brahmins to avoid distortion....buddha should have kept some pre-conditions for preaching buddhism...
if you try to preach spirituality and knowledge to the beduines, it will simply fail. Mo, was perceft to deal with stupid people. but he had used it to commit gang crime....

How can these Islamists come up with nonsense about Christ who was a true prophet and a saint.

It is time these Islamists stop abusing other faiths.

Re: # 6

I know from my Shia friends how this Islamist does a true randi rona act of shedding tears during that horrible recounting of the tale of hate........

"Early Christianity, in the Jewish tradition, had also been bitterly opposed to pagan gods and their idols or `graven images’ but quickly succumbed to the appeal of idols so Catholics today worship the idols and portraits of over ten thousand saints."

Again a nonsense propaganda that first tries to create a negative image of pagans and then trying to prove that Christians follow "idolatory" in creating icons and images of Lord Jesus.

What is this nonsense propaganda bout the "appeal of idols" by the way, Mr. Murda??

"shedding tears during that horrible recounting of the tale of hate........"

Could you please clarify? What do you mean?

Re: # 2

Pl read my article on the hijacking of Islam on Chowk before making a statement like that. You will see from the several interacts that there were many who would completely disown me as any form of Islamiat.

And, if you read my article on `faith and religion' on Chowk I think you will be in no doubt that I am neither an islamist or believer in any religion.

I love the founders of all faiths but loathe the professional priests who created religions to enslave the masses.

Pl do me a favour and read these before calling me names.

May I also request all of you to please stick to the subject. We are trying to examine a very old and rather cold trail about Jesus and the evolution of Christianity that has very little to do with Islam or Hinduism. So lets examine whatever we know about Christianity without any prejudices.

Please also do not try that old ploy of trying to shoot the messenge. Do please be objective and comment on the message without religious or other prejudices.

Re: # 12

"I love the founders of all faiths.."

what the hell you mean by that??

And who are you to think that what you know about these founders is correct and what the 'priests' know is false?

How can you disparage the traditional understanding within religious traditions and claim them to be 'false' and claim your own understanding as superior?

You arrogantly think that those who recounted about christ in the new Testament "created religions to enslave the masses" without any basis . You are thousands of years removed from those so called "founders" , yet you arrogantly think you know what they preached correctly.??

Lahol!! You do not even deserve the jahannum.

Murad bhai, I have thoroughly read those articles, and have understood them. It's also not a matter of shooting the messenger, but examining what your basic message is.

Agreed, many Muslims will definitely argue that you do not follow Islam. But that is true of or for any Muslim.

------------------

May be you do not realize it but your approach is ideally suited to push the Islamist agenda. It is designed to protect Islam while you actively seek to pull down the bases of other religions.

Here is how it works. Islam has a myriad means of protecting itself fully. Some of them are -

1. Separating itself fully from (any negative actions and consequences in) the real world or from (any negative actions of and consequences for) its practioners. We have never seen you question Islam itself.

2. Propagating a 'love' for its founder, Prophet Muhammad, and hence inevitably, for his 'message' (whatever one may assume it to be, but it is invariably Islam).

That immediately knocks out Christianity, because Christianity not only relies on 'love' for its founder but also on assigning certain divinity to Jesus Christ.

And it immediately takes Hinduism our of reckoning since Hinduism has no 'founder.'

In essence, your views are no different at all from that of any traditional or non-traditional Muslim who believes that Islam has been 'hijacked,' and that 'original' Islam was very different than what it is today or what it has always been (except in the time of the Prophet).

That is perfectly fine, but you have devoted all your life to attacking other religions, while still being known, by many Indians, as a secularist and liberal.

That is kind of sad.

Baig saheb, you are truly a destroyer of all myths. What myth are you destroying next - the one about someone producing custom-made revelations from God, what he needed and when he needed them?