Secular world has a Christian foundation

[civfanatic]

well, who here is supporting bajrang dal and their ilk ?

I am positive that the thread starter is a supporter of Bajrang Dal and like-minded groups, and I could identify several other posters on this forum who have directly or indirectly supported such groups.

 

[Mad Indian]

What is Russian there?

How is Marxism any different from Religious Cults?

 

[parijataka]

I am positive that the thread starter is a supporter of Bajrang Dal and like-minded groups, and I could identify several other posters on this forum who have directly or indirectly supported such groups.

ok then why direct bajrang dal jibe at me ? even important bjp leaders like narendra modi and manohar parrikar hv kep bajrang dal and vhp on tight leash so dont conflate.

 

[civfanatic]

ok then why direct bajrang dal jibe at me ? even important bjp leaders like narendra modi and manohar parrikar hv kep bajrang dal and vhp on tight leash so dont conflate.

Huh, why do you think the Bajrang Dal "vibe" was directed at you? It was a general statement.

The views and actions of people like Bajrang Dal are just one example of how modern "Hinduism" has little to do with the "civilizational heritage" claimed by such people. Obviously, not all "Hindus" act like Bajrang Dal goons and go the lengths that they do, but I think the general views on society that Bajrang Dal and other organizations represent are quite common. I have seen even educated, middle-class members on this forum make some amazing statements, like blaming girls and their attire for causing rapes (reminds me of what Islamic mullahs spout). And this is the cream of Indian society.

 

[parijataka]

Huh, why do you think the Bajrang Dal "vibe" was directed at you? It was a general statement.

The views and actions of people like Bajrang Dal are just one example of how modern "Hinduism" has little to do with the "civilizational heritage" claimed by such people. Obviously, not all "Hindus" act like Bajrang Dal goons and go the lengths that they do, but I think the general views on society that Bajrang Dal and other organizations represent are quite common. I have seen even educated, middle-class members on this forum make some amazing statements, like blaming girls and their attire for causing rapes (reminds me of what Islamic mullahs spout). And this is the cream of Indian society.

well, you quoted bajrang dal in a reply to me, thats why.

 

[Waffen SS]

Because, in the prevailing atmosphere on DFI, you have to be politically correct, toe the UPA/Congress line, sympathize with left-leaning liberal ideologues (dutifully accept what JNU mandarins preach), try hard not to sound nationalist/patriotic for it is "cliched/old-fashioned/not-the-in-thing" & subscribe to what the DFI elite coterie/old-boys club tells you.

Or else, one faces the inevitable. yes, your got it (Infractions are doled out & real threat of ban).

Spelling the world "Hindu" might spell doom for your short-lived stint at DFI. The moment you commit any of the above mistakes, the ultra-liberal brigade at DFI would be at your neck. Out-of-the-blue, you would be abused by all & sundry & you cannot do a thing about it since all your privileges were already revoked the moment you dared to committed any of the above folly. Toe our line/Get in line or get banned, is the clear message on DFI.

One may or may not agree with me (no one has to) but I have been made to learn these facts in a very subtle way. No offence intended to anyone
I prostrate before all of you on DFI.

:thumb:

Majority of well known Atheists are ex-Christians and they are harsh criticizer of Christian Missionaries.

Another cause is developed countries are mainly Christian, and after enjoying too much Materialism and Consumerism they found this cant give satisfaction prooving what Swami Vivekananda said.

May be that's why now people from West are heading towards Buddhism and Hinduism like ISCKON??

 

[afako]

it is impossible to understand the idea of the secular without appreciating that, at root, it is Christian. "A Short History of Secularism" will fundamentally reshape discussions of western culture, religion and politics.

http://www.ibtauris.com/Books/Humanities/Philosophy/Social%20%20political%20philosophy/A%20Short%20History%20of%20Secularism.aspx?menuitem={65A3FB7C-5D2E-4158-BBA9-D7824186AD5B}

 

[Ray]

It really makes no difference which religion it is connected with.

Good things should be appreciated.

 

[Dovah]

Very well said. 10/10 will read again.

 

[happy]

:thumb:

Majority of well known Atheists are ex-Christians and they are harsh criticizer of Christian Missionaries.

Another cause is developed countries are mainly Christian, and after enjoying too much Materialism and Consumerism they found this cant give satisfaction prooving what Swami Vivekananda said.

May be that's why now people from West are heading towards Buddhism and Hinduism like ISCKON??

I do not know how you have come to this conclusion (in bold), but AFAIK this is twisted logic. A cheap way to support your theory perhaps.

Every person has his/her own reasons to choose the course of their life. But, when we take those persons as examples, we should be taking their reasons as well. Or else, we are fooling ourselves.

Not that you agree with me, but I felt to express my view.

 

[Waffen SS]

I do not know how you have come to this conclusion (in bold), but AFAIK this is twisted logic. A cheap way to support your theory perhaps.

Every person has his/her own reasons to choose the course of their life. But, when we take those persons as examples, we should be taking their reasons as well. Or else, we are fooling ourselves.

Not that you agree with me, but I felt to express my view.

It is not twisted logic. Neither to support my theories.

Most Athiests are from Europe and America, right? They are Christian countries right? Now my question is why South Americans and African Christians are not atheist? Because they are poor compared to Europe or US.

After enjoying too much materialism people will find matter cant give peace, peace can be achieved in 2 way by expecting more(suppose now you have Windows XP, 7 is better then you tried to get that) or by sacrificing demand(suppose you say I dont need computer after all).

It is truth about all religion. South Korea and Japan Buddhist country are now largely atheist.

Hence Christian countries in Europe and US are developed, so they have more atheists, another reason is West followed Christianity from a long past, now after enjoying too much materialism now they find it cant give peace at all, there is no limit in demand and expectation, now they are becoming religious, but here is another problem, you know man gets more addicted which are new. Hence West followed Christianity from a long time, they see nothing interesting here any more. So now some converts to Buddhism, Islam(German Muslims are killing Syrian Christians, Japanese Muslims are becoming increasingly violent, British Muslims helped in Nairobi attack) or to Hinduism's ISCON.

I am not here to defeat Christianity neither to prove Hinduism better, what I say West found materialism cant give peace, only religion can hence they are following Christianity from a long time, they see nothing interesting here, so most are atheist and while others are now Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu. It is truth about all religious people specialy when they are very rich.

 

[happy]

Most Athiests are from Europe and America, right? They are Christian countries right? Now my question is why South Americans and African Christians are not atheist? Because they are poor compared to Europe or US.

After enjoying too much materialism people will find matter cant give peace, peace can be achieved in 2 way by expecting more(suppose now you have Windows XP, 7 is better then you tried to get that) or by sacrificing demand(suppose you say I dont need computer after all).

It is truth about all religion. South Korea and Japan Buddhist country are now largely atheist.

Hence Christian countries in Europe and US are developed, so they have more atheists, another reason is West followed Christianity from a long past, now after enjoying too much materialism now they find it cant give peace at all, there is no limit in demand and expectation, now they are becoming religious, but here is another problem, you know man gets more addicted which are new. Hence West followed Christianity from a long time, they see nothing interesting here any more. So now some converts to Buddhism, Islam(German Muslims are killing Syrian Christians, Japanese Muslims are becoming increasingly violent, British Muslims helped in Nairobi attack) or to Hinduism's ISCON.

I am not here to defeat Christianity neither to prove Hinduism better, what I say West found materialism cant give peace, only religion can hence they are following Christianity from a long time, they see nothing interesting here, so most are atheist and while others are now Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu. It is truth about all religious people specialy when they are very rich.

Well, I do agree with you that materialism gives a sense of self satisfaction and hence the urge to denounce the hand of God. You are also right in your statement regarding the West. After all, it is the human nature to forget his God when his spirits are high !!! When you are uber rich, you seldom put your feet on the ground. You are yourself treated as a God. It all gets to your head and finally, you believe that you are a god?

But, there are quite a few ultra rich who give God His credit.

I know many will never acknowledge this as true, but, the west became prosperous because of the righteous livelihood imbibed by Christianity. (I would rather say, by believing in Christ). This applies to all Europe and the Americas including USA. At the height of material satisfaction, all these countries are straying from the path shown by their fore fathers. Hence, the various calamities that are befalling them, be it natural or induced or financial.

It is to one's own peril that he/she denounces the Divine.

Also, when you believe that religion can give peace, I would like to ask, is Atheism a religion (or the lack thereof)??

 

[Free Karma]

Well, I do agree with you that materialism gives a sense of self satisfaction and hence the urge to denounce the hand of God. You are also right in your statement regarding the West. After all, it is the human nature to forget his God when his spirits are high !!! When you are uber rich, you seldom put your feet on the ground. You are yourself treated as a God. It all gets to your head and finally, you believe that you are a god?

But, there are quite a few ultra rich who give God His credit.

I know many will never acknowledge this as true, but, the west became prosperous because of the righteous livelihood imbibed by Christianity. (I would rather say, by believing in Christ). This applies to all Europe and the Americas including USA. At the height of material satisfaction, all these countries are straying from the path shown by their fore fathers. Hence, the various calamities that are befalling them, be it natural or induced or financial.

It is to one's own peril that he/she denounces the Divine.

Also, when you believe that religion can give peace, I would like to ask, is Atheism a religion (or the lack thereof)??

lol, heard of the dark ages? and the renaissance after it? The church dictated that the earth was the center of the universe, homosexuals are evil, and other random bits of "knowledge". Breaking away from such school of thought was the best thing that happened to the west.

 

[Tolaha]

I know many will never acknowledge this as true, but, the west became prosperous because of the righteous livelihood imbibed by Christianity. (I would rather say, by believing in Christ). This applies to all Europe and the Americas including USA.

Check when the West started getting prosperous, more so than the rest of the world. They were Christians from long time but the process of becoming relatively richer started after they began their journey away from the Vatican. The more they became atheists, the richer they got! In comparison, India was rich, then became poor and now is getting richer, without any major changes in it's religious demography. So the question that we need to ask ourselves is, what's exactly in Christianity that forces a society's creative spirits to be tied down?

At the height of material satisfaction, all these countries are straying from the path shown by their fore fathers. Hence, the various calamities that are befalling them, be it natural or induced or financial.

yeah, their forefathers lived a life full of peace and without calamities!

 

[Waffen SS]

Well, I do agree with you that materialism gives a sense of self satisfaction and hence the urge to denounce the hand of God. You are also right in your statement regarding the West. After all, it is the human nature to forget his God when his spirits are high !!! When you are uber rich, you seldom put your feet on the ground. You are yourself treated as a God. It all gets to your head and finally, you believe that you are a god?

But, there are quite a few ultra rich who give God His credit.

Basically, human when in trouble prays to God but seldom thanks God or follow God's way.

I know many will never acknowledge this as true, but, the west became prosperous because of the righteous livelihood imbibed by Christianity. (I would rather say, by believing in Christ). This applies to all Europe and the Americas including USA. At the height of material satisfaction, all these countries are straying from the path shown by their fore fathers. Hence, the various calamities that are befalling them, be it natural or induced or financial.

It is to one's own peril that he/she denounces the Divine.

Actually calamities were more on them when they believed in Religion more. If we compare then believing in religion led Europe to Crusade, Protestant vs Catholic war, destruction of Native American civilization and subsequent liberty war, French revolutionary war, Napoleonic wars, and finally WW1 and WW2, for US civil war, Paraguayan war and many more, but now very few. Calamity depends on our hand or in natures hand. God does nothing. God did not or could not stop Black Death.

Being rich or poor depends on time. It is not due to Christianity for which West is developed. Once India, China and Native American civilization were developed, now they are, but we are becoming now. Religion apart from giving mental satisfaction does basically nothing.

Another fact is we Hindus in India, Buddhist, Confucian and Native Americans were rich with out plundering other's wealth, mean while Christians are rich after pludering Asia, Africa and America's wealth. So you can see when Dharmic religion's followers, Native Americans and other religion's followers became prosperous by producing more wealth mean while followers of Abrahamic religion became rich only after pludering other people's wealth.

Also, when you believe that religion can give peace, I would like to ask, is Atheism a religion (or the lack thereof)??

Atheism does not believe in God, so hence no God so no religion. Religion is in believing God, Atheism is in denying very basic concept of Religion, that is God's existence.

Now you may ask hence Athiests are not Christian then how secular world can have Christian foundation? It is because suppose a person, Michael Bell from Canada(with British ancestry) is atheist, now going to marry, his marriage ceremony still will be Christian because he came from Christian back ground, you see the point?

Religion has many systems(suppose for every religion different marriage ceremony) but Atheism has no system or concept apart from not believing in God. That's why you may be atheist but when you are going to marry you will still follow Christian marriage system because Atheism does not have their own marriage ceremony.

If any American atheist dies, he will be buried according to Christianity, not will be burnt according to Hinduism.

So hence majority of atheists are from West, and are from Christian back ground so Secular world has Christian foundation.

 

[Free Karma]

^^ a lot of people in the west now find cremation acceptable, especially due to lack of space.

 

[civfanatic]

Being rich or poor depends on time. It is not due to Christianity for which West is developed. Once India, China and Native American civilization were developed, now they are, but we are becoming now. Religion apart from giving mental satisfaction does basically nothing.

Another fact is we Hindus in India, Buddhist, Confucian and Native Americans were rich with out plundering other's wealth, mean while Christians are rich after pludering Asia, Africa and America's wealth. So you can see when Dharmic religion's followers, Native Americans and other religion's followers became prosperous by producing more wealth mean while followers of Abrahamic religion became rich only after pludering other people's wealth.

Your statement does not explain why Finland has a GDP per capita of $46,000 while Nepal has a GDP per capita of just $700.

Finland did not become rich by "plundering other people's wealth", nor did Nepal become poor by having its wealth plundered by others. Nepal was never conquered by the Muslims or even the British. It was ruled by independent Dharmic Hindu kings from ancient times until 2008.

You are right that Christianity is not the reason why the West is so powerful and developed today (it would be ridiculous to make such a claim), but you are wrong on pretty much everything else. Read up some more and you will find the answers.

 

[Waffen SS]

Your statement does not explain why Finland has a GDP per capita of $46,000 while Nepal has a GDP per capita of just $700.

Finland did not become rich by "plundering other people's wealth", nor did Nepal become poor by having its wealth plundered by others. Nepal was never conquered by the Muslims or even the British. It was ruled by independent Dharmic Hindu kings from ancient times until 2008.

You are right that Christianity is not the reason why the West is so powerful and developed today (it would be ridiculous to make such a claim), but you are wrong on pretty much everything else. Read up some more and you will find the answers.

As West we dont mean Finland generally. We understand West as mainly West Europe and new world. Well, Finland was part of Russian empire, they have low population, but Nepal is densely inhabited comparing it's too few usable lands, because most of Nepal are mountainous.

Nepal was once richer than Finland, but from late 18th century Asia began to decline, Europe rose just like Asia was better than Europe in Medieval age. We still have that situation, tide is not changed completely in favour of Asia yet, despite rise of China and India. Finland has access to sea, has developed countries as Neighbours, Sweden, and Russia, Nepal has India as neighbour which itself was exploited by British, Tibet was always primitive due to it's unique location. Nepal additionally suffered long civil war.

Having modern neighbours, political peace, access to sea plus being part of such continent which ruled world for late 200 years make Finland more developed, mean while Nepal is in Asia which was exploited in late 200 years by Europe.

 

[civfanatic]

As West we dont mean Finland generally. We understand West as mainly West Europe and new world. Well, Finland was part of Russian empire, they have low population, but Nepal is densely inhabited comparing it's too few usable lands, because most of Nepal are mountainous.

Nepal was once richer than Finland, but from late 18th century Asia began to decline, Europe rose just like Asia was better than Europe in Medieval age. We still have that situation, tide is not changed completely in favour of Asia yet, despite rise of China and India. Finland has access to sea, has developed countries as Neighbours, Sweden, and Russia, Nepal has India as neighbour which itself was exploited by British, Tibet was always primitive due to it's unique location. Nepal additionally suffered long civil war.

Having modern neighbours, political peace, access to sea plus being part of such continent which ruled world for late 200 years make Finland more developed, mean while Nepal is in Asia which was exploited in late 200 years by Europe.

Finland is not the only European country which became rich and well-developed without having any colonies. The same is true for many other European countries, including Ireland, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, Greece, and even Poland. Ireland was itself a colony for 800 years and lost half of its population to famine and emigration. It became independent only in the 20th century, but today it is has a GDP per capita of $45,000, which is higher than that of Britain itself.

Being landlocked, having a dense population, or being mountainous does not prevent a country from becoming developed. Switzerland has a higher population density than Nepal, and is also very mountainous as well as landlocked.This did not prevent Switzerland from becoming one of the richest countries in the world with a GDP per capita of $80,000, while Nepal has a GDP per capita of just $700.

Before the Industrial Revolution, per capita incomes throughout the world were mostly the same. An average Nepali in the Middle Ages was not richer than an average man from Finland, Switzerland, or Ireland.

Nepal is in Asia just like Japan is in Asia, but the Nepalis never attempted to modernize their country like the Japanese did in the 19th century - even though they were not a colony. They did not take even basic steps towards modernization, like the Iranians and Thais did in the 19th and 20th centuries. The result is that the Nepali monarchy was overthrown in 2008, for failing to provide anything useful in hundreds of years of rule.

I am not sure why you said Tibet was "always primitive". Tibet was an important regional power at its height. A "primitive" place cannot build something like this:

 

[civfanatic]

it is impossible to understand the idea of the secular without appreciating that, at root, it is Christian. "A Short History of Secularism" will fundamentally reshape discussions of western culture, religion and politics.

@afako I am still waiting for your response to my query about Shastra Dharma Prachar Sabha. Explain to me what your fellow Hindus meant when they said, "The [Hindu Code] bills go against fundamental principles of the Hindu Shastras, God's spoken words, on which the society is based."

What "God" are they talking about and how did it speak?

Here is the link to the Shastra Dharma Prachar Sabha website: Shastra Dharma Prachar Sabha