statistics on the five major world religions

  • Thread starter Thread starter whitecrayon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, from a non-Catholic theological perspective,
You mean a Jesus-Buddhist perspective, of course
Angels would be seen as “supernatural persons”. And, from a Catholic theological perspective, Angels would be seen as “worshipped-in-terms-of-veneration”. Add these two together and, from a non-Catholic theological perspective, we can see that the “Angel” fits the non-Catholic theological definition of “god”
Only in your very own special universe, of course. Once you find other people who agree to your definition then, we can call it a non-catholic perspective. Until then your narcissistic conviction that you speak for the non-catholic world remains your special brand of delusion.

But have fun in your dreams.
 
Good- Now, All forms of Christianity affirm in no uncertain terms the absolute distinction between God and all his creatures, and ascribe no deity to angels- kapish?
Actually, let me rephrase my answer. First, not all forms of Christianity affirm the absolute distinction between God and all His creatures. For instance, in Eastern Orthodoxy there is the concept of theosis, in which the human is able to become One with God’s Energies (without becoming One with God’s Essence, or without becoming God Himself): theosis is the process of “becoming God by the grace of God, without becoming equal to the Essence of God”.

So, no, not all forms of Christian would make that absolute distinction you refer to.

Whether Angels can enter into theosis, as humans are able to, is an interesting question; the answer to which I do not have.

But, I suspect that here, we will have to agree to disagree, as well.🙂
 
You mean a Jesus-Buddhist perspective, of course

Only in your very own special universe, of course. Once you find other people who agree to your definition then, we can call it a non-catholic perspective. Until then your narcissistic conviction that you speak for the non-catholic world remains your special brand of delusion.

But have fun in your dreams.
Completely agree.
 
Actually, let me rephrase my answer. First, not all forms of Christianity affirm the absolute distinction between God and all His creatures. For instance, in Eastern Orthodoxy there is the concept of theosis, in which the human is able to become One with God’s Energies (without becoming One with God’s Essence, or without becoming God Himself): theosis is the process of “becoming God by the grace of God, without becoming equal to the Essence of God”.

So, no, not all forms of Christian would make that absolute distinction you refer to.

Whether Angels can enter into theosis, as humans are able to, is an interesting question; the answer to which I do not have.

But, I suspect that here, we will have to agree to disagree, as well.🙂
Oh please please please!!! You’re really quite special, are you not? Do you just dream this stuff up in your sleep?

What makes you think that the doctrine of theosis involves the abrogation of the Nicene creed by the orthodox? Why don’t you just stick to what you know from now on, eh?😉 Such as Jesus-Buddhism, for example.
 
Actually, let me rephrase my answer. First, not all forms of Christianity affirm the absolute distinction between God and all His creatures. For instance, in Eastern Orthodoxy there is the concept of theosis, in which the human is able to become One with God’s Energies (without becoming One with God’s Essence, or without becoming God Himself): theosis is the process of “becoming God by the grace of God, without becoming equal to the Essence of God”.

So, no, not all forms of Christian would make that absolute distinction you refer to.

Whether Angels can enter into theosis, as humans are able to, is an interesting question; the answer to which I do not have.

But, I suspect that here, we will have to agree to disagree, as well.🙂
The Eastern Orthodox would strongly disagree with your singular notion
that they, in any way, consider man becoming “God.” Perhaps you are
thinking of the Mormons (LDS) who do agree with you - but they are not
a Christian religion despite their formal name.
 
The Eastern Orthodox would strongly disagree with your singular notion
that they, in any way, consider man becoming “God.” Perhaps you are
thinking of the Mormons (LDS) who do agree with you - but they are not
a Christian religion despite their formal name.
I’m slowly becoming convinced that some angel appeared to him and crowned him the true pope of all world faiths. He has a special pontificating charism that allows him to tell everyone else what they believe. Don’t burst his bubble, needlessly.😉
 
I’m slowly becoming convinced that some angel appeared to him and crowned him the true pope of all world faiths. He has a special pontificating charism that allows him to tell everyone else what they believe. Don’t burst his bubble, needlessly.😉
Hmmmmmmmmm - but was it a “divine angel” or a “regular angel?”

By the way, welcome from Africa.
I’m in California USA.
 
Hmmmmmmmmm - but was it a “divine angel” or a “regular angel?”

By the way, welcome from Africa.
I’m in California USA.
Hi, California USA! Thank you. Hope to find you in future discussions…hopefully with other much more sincere individuals.😉

Goodnight! (It’s eleven at night here). God bless:signofcross:
 
Hi, California USA! Thank you. Hope to find you in future discussions…hopefully with other much more sincere individuals.😉

Goodnight! (It’s eleven at night here). God bless:signofcross:
Good night to you then.
Only around 2 in the afternoon here.
God bless you!
 
Yes, except that as you already said before, the Supreme being is worshipped through them, making them deities to humans and above them, showing that this “brother” relationship which you falsely apply to vedas and then dishoneslty equate to the realtionship between angels and men in Christianity is a lie insisted upon by you. The angel is no more deity to me as I am to you- clear and simple.
Marybeloved: Some corrections if I may:

-Nothing is above anything in Hinduism.

-Vedas are not creatures, deities or beings or anything of that sort. They are scriptures.

-In Hinduism, the Supreme Being (as you call) it can be worshiped through anything and everything, as all things emanate from the Supreme Lord. What gives you a sense of connection is what you see when you show your love for God. It is only a conduit. I have prayed in front of statues of Mary (the Hindu faith allows me to do that of course). I was not praying to the statue. It was a conduit through which I directed my thoughts and love. While I don’t believe that Christian theology allows Mary God status, I do think it is common for Christians to pray to her, and I have known some who pray to saints. They too as I understand it, lack God status, yet they are prayed to. Also, there is a Father, a Son and and Holy spirit, yet Christianity is called monotheistic because they are said to be be God in three persons. You see one God expressed in three persons. We see one God expressed in all things, as He is the singularity from which all things emanate, and of course should not be an alien concept, as it closely matches current thinking in physics and cosmology.

Your friend
Sufjon
 
The purpose of the NCR forum is discussion between those of different faiths and religions in a CHARITABLE fashion.
I HIGHLY suggest we follow forum protocal and do that.
Thank you
 
Marybeloved: Some corrections if I may:

-Nothing is above anything in Hinduism.

-Vedas are not creatures, deities or beings or anything of that sort. They are scriptures.

-In Hinduism, the Supreme Being (as you call) it can be worshiped through anything and everything, as all things emanate from the Supreme Lord. What gives you a sense of connection is what you see when you show your love for God. It is only a conduit. I have prayed in front of statues of Mary (the Hindu faith allows me to do that of course). I was not praying to the statue. It was a conduit through which I directed my thoughts and love. While I don’t believe that Christian theology allows Mary God status, I do think it is common for Christians to pray to her, and I have known some who pray to saints. They too as I understand it, lack God status, yet they are prayed to. Also, there is a Father, a Son and and Holy spirit, yet Christianity is called monotheistic because they are said to be be God in three persons. You see one God expressed in three persons. We see one God expressed in all things, as He is the singularity from which all things emanate, and of course should not be an alien concept, as it closely matches current thinking in physics and cosmology.

Your friend
Sufjon
Alright, clarification taken. You also seem to have a good grasp of the distinctions between our faiths. If I may ask, is it your belief that there’s only one true reality and that our current life/experience is only a type of illusion, or is it rather that everything is truly real, (if that is an accurate way to put it) only that each is a part/expression of different aspects of the one reality/supreme being?..I don’t know if you understand my Q? For example, is the tree truly existent and a particular manifestation of God, or is it not truly existent but only appears to be so? What accurately represents the Hindu perspective? If you don’t mind, could you tell me the difference between Hindu approach and Buddhist, or zen etc

I’m also curious about your prayer before an image of the Virgin Mary. Were you praying to the Virgin herself, say for a favor or such or even just thinking about her and her life, or directly to God but by use of the image? Of course, if you were speaking with her, as a Catholic I would be very pleased that you honor her (but no pressure;)). Also, you say Hindu faith allows you to do so, are you also allowed to believe in her as a person as Catholics do? Say for example, that she truly was an existent person who bore God in her womb or that she can as a person truly hear your prayer, etc?

Peace!
 
If you ask any Christian from Arabia & the Middle East what they call Jesus, they’ll tell you his name is “Jasu”

Don’t know why the koran, since it is in Arabic, would call Jesus Isa.

Not even the Jews of Arabia called Jesus Isa…
The word “EESA" in the Qur'an comes from "EESHO” in Aramaic, a language which predates Hebrew by several hundred years and never had any etymological ties with the Hebrew derivative “YESHUA” or even the word “E’SAU”
"the Northern Palestinian Jews pronounced the letter “shin” as “seen”.

Since the language Jesus (pbuh) spoke and taught was Aramaic, the Qur’an have accurately taken his name in Aramaic and not the Hebrew derivative, “YESHUA”

The name “YASO’A” for Jesus (pbuh) in the Arabic Bible is merely a transliteration of the Hebrew name “YESHUA” and is therefore fallacious to claim that this is the correct Arabic name of Jesus (pbuh) since as originally said, Hebrew is not Jesus’ native tongue.
 
Hi MaryBeloved: You have asked some really good questions, but the answers aren’t simple. I may have to respond in parts. As a disclaimer, I will explain Hindu theology on the questions you’ve asked. I am not telling you that this is the way it is or the way you should see it. It’s the way we understand it.

I
f I may ask, is it your belief that there’s only one true reality and that our current life/experience is only a type of illusion, or is it rather that everything is truly real, (if that is an accurate way to put it) only that each is a part/expression of different aspects of the one reality/supreme being?..I don’t know if you understand my Q?
All things in the physical world are components of Prakriti (roughly translated, Prakriti is nature, or physical reality). Prakriti is an epiphenomenon of Purusha (Purusha is the One Self, or God). Prakriti to God is like ripples to a rock thrown in the water. The ripples are caused by the rock and dependent on it in order for them to manifest. The rock is not dependent on the ripples. It exists independently of the drama of the ripple, but can participate in it as the causal component. All things in the realm of Prakriti are governed by the Gunas, which are Rajas (action), Tamas (inertia) and Sattva ( balance). These are very rough translations. Each person is under the dominant sway of one of these. One who becomes completely under the sway of sattva is able to transcend Prakriti altogether, and become fully realized in regard to their oneness with God and all things. The primary characteristic of Prakriti (physical world) is mutability or change. It is all transient, and therefore can never represent a static reality. Much like the way a cloud forms, changes shape and dissipates is the nature of all things, except Purusha, or God. BTW, we have many names for God – Prusha is the one we would use in the context of this sort of conversation, however, in reality, He is nameless and not even a He or a She, yet manifest as both.
For example, is the tree truly existent and a particular manifestation of God, or is it not truly existent but only appears to be so? What accurately represents the Hindu perspective? If you don’t mind, could you tell me the difference between Hindu approach and Buddhist, or zen etc
I am not much of an expert on Buddhism, but I can explain the Hindu perspective. A tree or anything else is passing. It is an expression of God, but not something in and of itself. The experience of a tree is subject to the interdependency of all existence. The eye, the tree, the light of the sun reflecting on the iris of the eye, the brain to process the information – all are interdependent to be revealed. And yet, even without vision, or lighting up an object, of reflecting on the eye, the sun remains distinct and independent. So it is with the Self (God). The Self of all beings is the source of all objects and also the agency by which all are revealed.

I’
m also curious about your prayer before an image of the Virgin Mary. Were you praying to the Virgin herself, say for a favor or such or even just thinking about her and her life, or directly to God but by use of the image? Of course, if you were speaking with her, as a Catholic I would be very pleased that you honor her (but no pressure;)). Also, you say Hindu faith allows you to do so, are you also allowed to believe in her as a person as Catholics do? Say for example, that she truly was an existent person who bore God in her womb or that she can as a person truly hear your prayer, etc?
Yes, we are allowed to believe in Mary as a person who bore God in her womb and that she can hear our prayers. As for asking her for things, we would say that you can do that, but this is counter productive, and I will explain why. This is why I mentioned Prakriti and the Gunas a while back. When we ask Mary or God for favors, we are asking for outcomes in this physical realm. The objective of a Hindu is to transcend all of this and become one with God. You may certainly get what you ask for by praying to Mary, but this is a matter of making YOUR will manifest in physical reality (don’t let me die right now, help me get this job, ect, ect). It is all only temporary. The way to truly make YOUR will manifest is to surrender YOUR will to God’s. By not wanting this or that or being afraid of this or that, you are getting closer to the liberation that brings one to God. So, while we might get what we asked for, we are delaying our journey back to God by remaining entwined in the day to day dealings of transience.

So, yes – Hindu’s will pray for things and get results, but better results are obtained by praying for nothing. That is real prayer. What do I mean by that? The best prayer is to sit quietly in adoration. This is why I like the rosary. I think all Christians should say the rosary. As you recite the prayers, you think on 15 aspects of the lives of Mary and Jesus (five joyful, five sorrowful and five glorious aspects or mysteries). You are no longer thinking about you or what you want. THAT is real prayer. Over time, you may learn to sit quietly in front of a candle and think of Mary or of Jesus. Just feel their presence and listen. This is not easy to do, but anyone can learn to say a rosary and this will lead to the proper level of introspection for real prayer. I know that you can feel God’s love through adoration or Jesus or of Mary. Then each day, try to see them in the people you meet. They are manifestations of God too. So are you. You have to start by loving something. Real prayer is the way to do that. We call that Bhakti or devotion. Devotion leads to surrender, and surrender leads to God’s will taking over in your life and this ends the need for asking for things, and leaves the field of your life more open for real prayer.

Your friend,
Sufjon
 
Hallo, Sufjon,
I am not telling you that this is the way it is or the way you should see it. It’s the way we understand it.
I wouldn’t expect anything else:)
All things in the physical world are components of Prakriti (roughly translated, Prakriti is nature, or physical reality). Prakriti is an epiphenomenon of Purusha (Purusha is the One Self, or God). Prakriti to God is like ripples to a rock thrown in the water. The ripples are caused by the rock and dependent on it in order for them to manifest. The rock is not dependent on the ripples. It exists independently of the drama of the ripple, but can participate in it as the causal component. All things in the realm of Prakriti are governed by the Gunas, which are Rajas (action), Tamas (inertia) and Sattva ( balance). These are very rough translations. Each person is under the dominant sway of one of these. One who becomes completely under the sway of sattva is able to transcend Prakriti altogether, and become fully realized in regard to their oneness with God and all things. The primary characteristic of Prakriti (physical world) is mutability or change. It is all transient, and therefore can never represent a static reality. Much like the way a cloud forms, changes shape and dissipates is the nature of all things, except Purusha, or God. BTW, we have many names for God – Prusha is the one we would use in the context of this sort of conversation, however, in reality, He is nameless and not even a He or a She, yet manifest as both.
It’s very strange how close/similar many of the things you say here are to Catholic philosophy of reality- especially thomism- I wonder if you’ve read anything of st. Thomas Aquinas’ metaphysics?? I suppose that what we call the cosmos, the material world of change, is what you call Prakriti. The only difference I see between us is that with you, God is the self of all, while with us, we each have a distinct self and can never metaphysically merge/dissolve into each other or God. Why then, If I may ask, does it seem that Hindus are polytheists, worship hundreds of gods? Are there differences within Hinduism? How would you react to the suggestion that Hindus are more monist than polytheists unlike the ancient Romans/Greeks/Egyptians who were properly polytheists in their beliefs?
You may certainly get what you ask for by praying to Mary, but this is a matter of making YOUR will manifest in physical reality (don’t let me die right now, help me get this job, ect). It is all only temporary. The way to truly make YOUR will manifest is to surrender YOUR will to God’s. By not wanting this or that or being afraid of this or that, you are getting closer to the liberation that brings one to God. So, while we might get what we asked for, we are delaying our journey back to God by remaining entwined in the day to day dealings of transience.
Again, it’s nothing short of amazing how strikingly familiar what you say is!! This is the teaching of the saints!! It’s what Blessed John the Baptist said of Christ “He must increase, and I must decrease”. I wonder if you’re familiar with the our mystical doctors, the Carmelite saints.

They teach that, at different points in our journey to the centre of “the interior castle” or towards what we call “union” or “the mystical marriage” (this is the goal of all ascetic practices, sacraments, prayer etc, and the state immediately preceding/necessary for beatific vision in heaven), God himself usually “interferes” with our own acts of the will and faith and initiatives and makes them passive- such that our will is acted upon by the Divine will, as is our intellect, and as long as this state lasts, the soul cannot love(will) except as God wills/love- The Soul also knows and grasps truths of the faith, truths about God that are usually difficult and beyond it, with the greatest ease and immediacy(no concepts). We call this state contemplation. As the soul progresses closer to the union, the contemplation takes a larger and larger portion of the soul’s activity than meditation(the activity/initiatives of the soul towards God).

From what you’ve explained, the true differences between us can be said to be:
  • We believe that God and all intelligent free beings, each have true and distinct selves.
  • Consequently, the union of the soul of a Saint with God is not metaphysical but mystical- It’s a union of perfect exchange of love, the selves don’t cease in reality, or it would not be love(giving wholly to an “other”)- For example, the highest creature after our Lord’s humanity, is the Blessed Virgin. Her immense grace causes her to far surpass even the highest angels, closest to God- The Seraphim and the Cherubim. To us Catholics, therefore, no creature (again whenever I say this, please assume I’m not including our Lord’s sacred humanity which can be compared to no-one, not even his Blessed Mother) can enjoy, not even closely, the degree of union with God that she enjoys in heaven. But to us it’s a “participation” of the divine life, not a metaphysical union- Mary is still a distinct self right now in heaven, she has never disappeared. It’s perfect exchange of love between two selves (relational). I give myself utterly to you (perfect love) and you return the same and give yourself utterly to me (the only way to repay love is with love)- So I experience what belongs only to you (that is, you!) because you have offered it to me freely out of love and vice-versa.
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions:)
 
Hi MaryBeloved:
The only difference I see between us is that with you, God is the self of all, while with us, we each have a distinct self and can never metaphysically merge/dissolve into each other or God.
I think that’s a good assessment.
Why then, If I may ask, does it seem that Hindus are polytheists, worship hundreds of gods? Are there differences within Hinduism? How would you react to the suggestion that Hindus are more monist than polytheists unlike the ancient Romans/Greeks/Egyptians who were properly polytheists in their beliefs?
Actually, we consider ourselves monotheistic. All of these gods, demigods and what have you are manifestations of one God. Basically, we have a Trinity in much the same way you do. Brahman is the creative aspect, Vishnu is the sustaining aspect and Shiva is the destroying aspect (old things must be destroyed to make way for the new in the world of Prakriti). We also have visitations of God among us as you do with Jesus, except that we have many and this can also include Jesus if you are aware of Him. The main incarnation of God for us is Krishna, but all incarnations are Krishna at the core of their being. These manifestations are incarnations of Vishnu (the sustaining aspect of God).

A
gain, it’s nothing short of amazing how strikingly familiar what you say is!! This is the teaching of the saints!! It’s what Blessed John the Baptist said of Christ “He must increase, and I must decrease”. I wonder if you’re familiar with the our mystical doctors, the Carmelite saints.
Yes, our saints say pretty much the same things as yours do in that regard.
They teach that, at different points in our journey to the centre of “the interior castle” or towards what we call “union” or “the mystical marriage” (this is the goal of all ascetic practices, sacraments, prayer etc, and the state immediately preceding/necessary for beatific vision in heaven), God himself usually “interferes” with our own acts of the will and faith and initiatives and makes them passive- such that our will is acted upon by the Divine will, as is our intellect, and as long as this state lasts, the soul cannot love(will) except as God wills/love- The Soul also knows and grasps truths of the faith, truths about God that are usually difficult and beyond it, with the greatest ease and immediacy(no concepts). We call this state contemplation. As the soul progresses closer to the union, the contemplation takes a larger and larger portion of the soul’s activity than meditation(the activity/initiatives of the soul towards God).
Beautifully said.
From what you’ve explained, the true differences between us can be said to be:
  • We believe that God and all intelligent free beings, each have true and distinct selves.
  • Consequently, the union of the soul of a Saint with God is not metaphysical but mystical- It’s a union of perfect exchange of love, the selves don’t cease in reality, or it would not be love(giving wholly to an “other”)- For example, the highest creature after our Lord’s humanity, is the Blessed Virgin. Her immense grace causes her to far surpass even the highest angels, closest to God- The Seraphim and the Cherubim. To us Catholics, therefore, no creature (again whenever I say this, please assume I’m not including our Lord’s sacred humanity which can be compared to no-one, not even his Blessed Mother) can enjoy, not even closely, the degree of union with God that she enjoys in heaven. But to us it’s a “participation” of the divine life, not a metaphysical union- Mary is still a distinct self right now in heaven, she has never disappeared. It’s perfect exchange of love between two selves (relational). I give myself utterly to you (perfect love) and you return the same and give yourself utterly to me (the only way to repay love is with love)- So I experience what belongs only to you (that is, you!) because you have offered it to me freely out of love and vice-versa.
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions:)
That is true. We see our separateness as a product of the nervous system experiencing itself. It’s interesting that you bring up the fact that Mary maintains an individuality of Her own, and this does not actually conflict with what we believe. While we believe that all things are one, the great saints and Avatars (like Jesus, Krishna, ect) can and do maintain their form for the sake of the rest of us. It is the knowledge of our oneness that is important, therefore it is not necessary for us all to meld. We are the One manifest as the many. The many are the glory of God’s creation, and we are the vehicle by which God experiences what He creates. The problem is that we become identified with these instruments of experience we are wearing.

I have enjoyed your insights.

Your friend
Sufjon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top