It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Anti-Christian conspiracy

page: 156
16
<< 153  154  155    157  158  159 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


You may want to clear up your understanding of other religions.

www.hinduwisdom.info...

Unless we recognize the fact that the Vedic hymns and the Puranic story of Vedic origin are deliberate camouflage and allegory - a code, in fact - we cannot interpret them or understand their true meaning. To do otherwise would lead us to the same kind of ridiculous conclusion reached by British astronomer, Patrick Moore, who wrote, "The Vedic priest in India believed that the world to be supported upon twelve massive pillars, during the hours of darkness, the Sun passed underneath, somehow managing to thread its way between the pillars without hitting them. According to the Hindus, Earth stood on the back of four elephants, the elephants in turn rested upon the back of a huge tortoise, while the tortoise itself was supported by a serpent floating in a limitless ocean. One cannot help feeling sorry for the serpent.!"

In fact, after the chaff is removed, the Puranas have a kernel and exhibits what may be termed a reverse symbolism. The twelve pillars that support the world are evidently the twelve months of the year, and they are specifically mentioned in the Vedic hymns. The four elephants on which Earth rests are the Dikarin, the sentinels of the four directions. These in turn rest on a tortoise and a serpent. The tortoise is Vishnu's Kurma or tortoise avatar and symbolizes the fact that the Earth is supported in space in its annual orbit around the Sun. Finally, the coiled serpent represents Earth's rotation. Vishnu, or the Sun, himself rests upon a coiled snake - the Ananta, or Adisesha, which represents the rotation of the Sun on its own axis.


It's actually very interesting symbolism not to be taken at face value. When people take ancient scripture at face value you end up with people mucking around with poisonous snakes and thinking that the Earth is 6,000 years old.


[edit on 13-2-2008 by Rasobasi420]




posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by junglejake
 


My point was simply that what is interpreted by Christians as a conspiracy against them is more likely the rest of the world lo longer kowtowing to every whim that Christians put forth.

And that throughout history Christians have committed countless horrendous acts and that we (non-Christians) can and will speak up against. And that your Christianity is no more valid to the snakehandler than his is to you or I.

With that being said, those who committed acts against humanity in the name of Christianity are Christian, and can't simply be ignored and disassociated from the discussion.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Rasobasi420
 


And those who committed crimes in the name of Eugenics, a.k.a. evolution? Shall we hold it to the same standard?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by junglejake
 


Not sure what you mean by that. To which standard do you refer? Could you give me an analogy replacing Christianity with evolution?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
When people take ancient scripture at face value you end up with people mucking around with poisonous snakes


Hindus DO that as well as other religions.



and thinking that the Earth is 6,000 years old.


How old is the Earth according to hindus?
155 trillion years. What?

4.5 billion according to some scientists.

According to Buddhists;
"In the eyes of the Buddha, the world is nothing but Samsara -- the cycle of repeated births and deaths. To Him, the beginning of the world and the end of the world is within this Samsara. Since elements and energies are relative and inter-dependent, it is meaningless to single out anything as the beginning. Whatever speculation we make regarding the origin of the world, there is no absolute truth in our notion." K. sri Dhammananda Maha Thera.

They don't know.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Rasobasi420
 


No, but I can say that the whole concept of the Aryan race in both Hitler's propaganda as well as current neo-nazi propaganda is based around an evolutionary belief that the white race is more evolved and stronger than other races. In addition to this we have that of the KKK, lynching blacks because they're an inferior work-race that needs to be kept in its place.

Does everyone who believes in evolution have to answer for these crimes against humanity?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


Actually, in Hinduism, it is believed that the universe's full age, from beginning to end is a Brahma day/night cycle. Each day lasts one Kalpa, and each night lasts one Kalpa.

A Hindu Kalpa is a span of time lasting 4.32 Billion years.
Hindu Kalpa

So, the age of the universe's life is meant to be approximately 8.64 billion years. That's actually much closer than most other estimates at the time.

I find it very interesting though that one Kalpa is almost exactly equal to the estimated age of the Earth.

They don't know, but they had a pretty accurate guess wouldn't you say?


[edit on 13-2-2008 by Rasobasi420]



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by junglejake
 


I see what you mean. Well, no. I suppose people who believe in evolution can't be equated to those who practice Eugenics. And they can't be held responsible for those crimes.

And I wouldn't hold you accountable for the actions of past Christians, or any Christian other than yourself.

I will however dispute the belief system itself as being inaccurate, and 'sketchy' . I'll also call out it's questionable origins, and past.

And, since it's entire following is based on faith (rather than empirical evidence as evolution and natural selection's is) I invoke the right to call that faith into question through debate.

Is that Anti-Christian, and a conspiracy against it?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
And, since it's entire following is based on faith (rather than empirical evidence as evolution and natural selection's is)


I think you're going to have to back that statement up, because I disagree. And I don't mean to bring this to a "belief in evolution is faith" point, but rather quite the opposite. Though some have spoken of blind faith being what Christianity requires, I don't believe it is at all, and actually believe quite the opposite.

So on what do you base that claim?

As to that being a conspiracy, one could ask, is the media's output of information and selection of religious "experts" that have led to the wide acceptance of the belief that it is faith and faith alone and that it is sacreligious to try to allow facts and evidence to influence that belief intentional or accidental? If intentional... Were there more than two individuals in that intentionality, if ya get my drift.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
And those who committed crimes in the name of Eugenics, a.k.a. evolution? Shall we hold it to the same standard?


Eugenics isn't really evolution, as we all know and love it


It's actually more 'intelligent design'.

Eugenics is just artificial selection applied to humans. The same process we've been using for livestock, pets, and plants (even humans) since well before Darwin's day. Eugenics just had more scientific clothing.


No, but I can say that the whole concept of the Aryan race in both Hitler's propaganda as well as current neo-nazi propaganda is based around an evolutionary belief that the white race is more evolved and stronger than other races. In addition to this we have that of the KKK, lynching blacks because they're an inferior work-race that needs to be kept in its place.


Slavery was being justified using the bible well before Darwin was a glint in his daddy's eyes. I'm not sure you can put lynching down to evolution.

Why an evolutionary belief? The ideas of some 'races' or social groups being inferior have been around for a very long time. Actually, I can't remember where I first heard the idea of divine 'chosen' groups of people...

Lineaus first 'scientifically' defined humans into races, and others, like De Gobineau (who Hitler appreciated), actually suggested Ayran's were superior. This was before Darwin.

And christians were in on this at the same time as De Gobineau:


Nations and races, like individuals have each an especial destiny: some are born to rule, and others to be ruled. And such has ever been the history of mankind. No two distinctly marked races can dwell together on equal terms.

Josiah Nott, M.D.; Types of Mankind, 1854

Moreover, the KKK were no friends of Charles Darwin. His theory meant there was no real difference between them and other races.

[edit on 13-2-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 


So you're saying your interpretation of evolution and their interpretation of evolution don't match, so therefore it is unfair to lump all of it together?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
So you're saying your interpretation of evolution and their interpretation of evolution don't match, so therefore it is unfair to lump all of it together?


Nope, I'm saying that evolutionary theory doesn't really underpin eugenics or racism.

Racism and the idea of inferior races has been around since the days of the greeks and before, it never needed Darwin. And eugenics is just artificial selection based on heredity, again, it doesn't require evolution. The likes of Hitler and the KKK never used evolution to support their position. Both used the idea of chosen races created by god himself. Doesn't sound like evolution to me.

[edit on 13-2-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Rasobasi420
 


Yes, but (from what I've read) there have been 51 DIFFERENT brahma cycles! 51 times each cycle equals......?

"Where We Need More Insight

However, the similarity between modern astronomy and Hindu cosmology has to pause here, until more research will bring more agreement into light. For, as per the Big Bang theory, the age of the Universe is around 13.7 Billion Years (which is the age of the oldest known star, not really a conclusive/direct measure of the age of the universe), whereas as per Hindu cosmology, Brahma is in his 51st year, so he has so far completed 1500 Billion Human Years."
Hindu Cosmology



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by junglejake
So you're saying your interpretation of evolution and their interpretation of evolution don't match, so therefore it is unfair to lump all of it together?


Nope, I'm saying that evolutionary theory doesn't really underpin eugenics or racism.


I will assume, then, that those operating under the name of evolution who don't understand evolution are held to a different standard in your mind than those operating under the name of Christianity who don't understand Christianity. Please correct this assumption if it is incorrect.

Assuming it is correct, do you think this is because you have a more thorough understanding of evolutionary theory, a prejudice against Christianity, a double standard, or something else? Can you at least understand where it is I'm coming from?



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


A single Brahma Cycle is the total age of the universe, from birth until death. The following Brahma Cycle is a new universe. Every birth of a Brahma Cycle is like a new Big Bang. Catch their drift?

I should also point out that Indian Astronomy is extremely accurate, and the calendars are still used today, with amazing precision, surpassing those of the Mayans and centuries before. The mathematical techniques were more accurate than those of the Greeks as well.



[edit on 14-2-2008 by Rasobasi420]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Assuming it is correct, do you think this is because you have a more thorough understanding of evolutionary theory, a prejudice against Christianity, a double standard, or something else? Can you at least understand where it is I'm coming from?


I'm really assessing this purely from the issue of evolution, and the motivations of the two groups you mentioned.

I think I do agree on the christianity issue, and there probably are people who have used evolutionary theory to support racist ideology. Indeed, I won't deny that eugenics was supported by the new science of genetics at the time. But during this period (i.e. the 1920s), darwinian theory was actually not favoured at all, it was under attack from many directions (including the protestants in the south of the USA).

So, I don't accept that eugenics is 'a.k.a.' evolution, or that the racism of nazis and the KKK was based on evolutionary theory. They both had the idea that they were god's chosen race. Indeed, if you read the link I posted earlier, this is quite obvious. Darwin was basically saying that the differences between the human races are mainly social and cultural in his books. The nazis mainly took their eugenics from the US eugenics movement, which was supported by scientists, other academics, and people of faith.

But, again, I won't tar all theists with the crimes of these two groups. And if that's the ultimate point you are making. No problem, I agree.

I think if you want to use this sort of argument, it might be better to just say a more generic 'scientists', as historically they have supported both eugenics and racism. Not sure if that helps any.

Ai, the link from earlier is a bit duff:

www.rationalrevolution.net...

and from the link is this excerpt from a journal article on the issue of racism and evolution in the US:


In the year after the 1924 Democratic convention, where [William Jennings] Bryan [the prosecutor of the Scopes trial] had thrown his weight against a resolution condemning the Ku Klux Klan, Pickens lumped Bryan together with the Klan as a matter of course. Bryan's offense, suggested J. A. Rogers in the Messenger, A. Philip Randolph's radical journal, was the same hypocrisy that tainted Fundamentalists throughout the South: "Bryan from the pulpit preaches the domination of Christ; in politics he practices Ku Kluxism and white domination, the bulwarks of which are lynching, murder, rape, arson, theft, and concubinage." ... And Bryan was one of the more racially benign antievolutionists. One of his allies, South Carolina's former governor and current U.S. senator, Cole Blease, not only endorsed a rigid antievolution law but also virulently and publicly supported the extralegal lynching of black men. Blease had earned notoriety by planting the severed finger of a lynched African American in the gubernatorial garden.

www.rationalrevolution.net...

As I said, the KKK were not friends of evolutionary theory.


[edit on 14-2-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Rasobasi420
 



All religion came from Babylon.

Babylonian Calandar
Chrishna
The trinity

Babylon and India
"Traditional Hindu astrology has a sidereal coordinate zodiac system with twelve signs. The names of the Hindu zodiacal signs, or rāśis, are similar to Graeco-Babylonian signs, apparently as a result of Indo-Greek contact.

1. meṣa "ram" (Aries)
2. vṛṣabha "bull" (Taurus)
3. mithuna "a pair" (Gemini)
4. karka "crab" (Cancer)
5. siṃha "lion" (Leo)
6. kanyā "girl" (Virgo)
7. tula, from tulā "balance" (Libra)
8. vrushchik "scorpion" (Scorpius), also kaurpi, loaned from the Greek
9. kārmuka, cāpa, dhanus "bow, arc", cāpin "armed with a bow" (Sagittarius)
10. eṇa, mṛga "antelope", also makara "sea-monster" (Capricornus)
11. kumbha "pitcher, water-pot" (Aquarius)
12. matsya "fish", also jhaṣa, timi, mīna after specific kinds of fish (Pisces)

This "Hindu zodiac" (adhvan, rāśi) thus has similarities to Greek zodiac. The Graeco-Babylonian system of twelve signs overlays the native Hindu system of nine grahas or planets." wiki


"the ancient Hindu and Mayan civilizations exhibit other interesting convergences. Hindu records say that a member of a great race which preceded ours, a highly-developed personage known as Asuramaya, learned all the basic cosmic cycles and used his knowledge to determine the durations of the various geological and cyclical periods of human evolution. The chronology and computations of their still used Tamil calendar, say the Brahmans, are based upon the works of Asuramaya and upon carefully maintained collateral zodiacal records. Their most ancient extant work on astronomy, the Surya Siddhanta, says that Asuramaya lived toward the end of the Krita-yuga, a former age that ended approximately 2,165,000 years before the present. This would place Asuramaya at something less than 2.5 million years ago."


"The name Asuramaya is a compound of the two Sanskrit words, Asura and Maya. The personage himself is Maya, the prefix Asura signifying that Maya was of the Asuras, a name given to a certain caste or people of the great prehistoric race that preceded our own, or Aryan humanity. The word Asura derives from surya, Sanskrit for the sun. In accordance with the archaic Indian manner of describing the matter, the astronomer named Maya was said to have gained his knowledge from studying the sun. The sun and its encircling planets also occupied the central attention of the Mayan astronomer caste in Central America."
Hindu and Mayan similarities

similarities in piramid mathematics

[edit on 14-2-2008 by Clearskies]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


All very interesting, but I think we've strayed unbelievably off topic. We can leave it at Vedic astronomy being extremely advanced for it's time, and more advanced than Western Astronomy of a thousand years later.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 05:33 PM
link   


Chad Farnan, a 16-year-old sophomore, says the teacher, James Corbett, told his students that “Jesus glasses” obscure the truth and suggested that Christians are more likely than other people to commit rape and murder.

Farnan recorded his teacher telling students in class: “What country has the highest murder rate? The South! What part of the country has the highest rape rate? The South! What part of the country has the highest rate of church attendance? The South!” Farnan said he took the tape recorder to class to supplement his class notes.

“It was very hard for me because it’s like basically telling me all this stuff that I’ve believed my whole entire life — it’s just basically trying to throw it out the window,” Farnan told FOX News.

Farnan’s family has filed a federal lawsuit against the Capistrano Unified School District, claiming Corbett's remarks violated the First Amendment, which prohibits laws "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." They are demanding that Corbett be fired.

Corbett’s attorney, Dan Spradlin, says his client has been teaching at Capistrano Valley High for 15 years and is in no way anti-Christian.


www.foxnews.com...

Of course he isn't. Clearly he's Anti-Whig Party.

As an aside, I hope Chad is awarded $0 and instead receives an official apology from the teacher issued to the students for such prejudices.

[edit on 2-4-2008 by saint4God]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


You show an article about a moron of a teacher. There are plenty of disgusting articles about Christians if you want to compare notes. Catholic priests sodomizing very young boys for instance. Shall we compare notes?

Some Christian leader just got arrested for all kinds of nastiness. Do you really compare stories?




top topics



 
16
<< 153  154  155    157  158  159 >>

log in

join