@ Rave:

You DID notice that she said she's from a Hindu family - didn't you?

THANK YOU.

@Rave - Not to mention that members of my family are, in fact, priests of the faith. Thank you kindly for explaining to me how Hinduism "works." 

[rave phillaphia]

let me guess American Hindu though, right? She also said that there are members in her family that practice Hinduism, which doesn't mean that she actually does though.

Removed my post. Rave, make as many assumptions as you want.

I'm kindly backing out of this conversation as I feel I'll only be arguing a very verifiable point against a budge-less wall. 

[rave phillaphia]

I am sorry, I know I shouldn't have said that second statement. I just get frustrated when I am trying to be helpful and give information that has been recommended to me by other people who are part of the culture/religion and others jump on me because automatically the people who are part of it are experts on the religion to the point where no one else is allowed to disagree. I didn't mean to aim at you I am just frustrated when I get Americans telling me they know it because they are related. For example, my great grandmother was Jewish and a survivor of the Holocaust and converted to Catholism, but I don't go and say I am the most expert of Judaism because of my family (or Catholism for that matter). Instead I go and research what scholars say and what anthropologists (the good ones, not the ones that exotictise the traditions) have found when they interviewed the people on a mass scale and the historical context. Not to mention the stories themselves. I really do appologize for being rude.

http://www.youtube.com/user/HinduAcademy#p/u/11/jzco3wWMY_U

[rave phillaphia]

But when I read that it said "members of my family" it didn't say she followed the tradition, so I wouldn't have assumed that she practiced or did not practiced. Like "members of my family practice Catholism" that doesn't mean all my family does or that I do. It just says that I have been around the religion so I know about it. So I didn't want to assume that she practiced Hinduism because members of her family does.

Understood, and therefore apologies. I said it that way because there are a few members of my family that do not practice Hinduism.

OK..... semantics are interesting, but what do you say about us trying to get back on topic? 

I think the original post was talking about the views different faiths have on the end of times......


In Norse myth the endtimes are called Ragnarök (Dusk of the Powers). Ragnarök will be heralded by the Fimbulvinter - three winters with no summer in between. In this time all fetters will shatter and the boundaries between the worlds will open up. There will be a great war between the Gods and their enemies and many of the Gods will fall in that battle.
Sol (the Sun) and Måne (the Moon) will be swallowed by the wolves Skoll and Hate respectively, which have been pursuing them. And the chaos powers will wreck havoc on the worlds.

However, just before being swallowed, Sol gives birth to a daughter that willl take her mother's place in the sky. And when the dawn comes anew the surviving Gods and Goddesses will gather at Idavallen (a green field in Asgård) to remember what has passed. And in Yggdrasil (the World Tree) a man and a woman has survived, hidden in and protected by the tree, and they will be the ancestors of humanity renewed.

Hmm. So here, too, is the speaking of the "second coming," so to speak, of very important mythological figures. I really find the similarities between all of these "end of time" theories!

[Loki]

Good point but as every cult, Hinduism cannot be reduced to a few dogmas. Today there are different sects, each revering a particular Hindu God: Shiva, Vishnu, Krishna, Kali, ....  and this is just a confirmation of God being one and several.

Telling that all religions worship the same God is also oversimplifying ...  One has to find the religion that particularly fit his personality and deep beliefs.

I was born a Christian but I quickly got sick about this. Why? Probably because I got no interest in the stories of the Jewish people. My ancestors are celts, not from Palestine. Also, Catholicism is controlled by the Vatican, an assembly of old religious-servants that do more bad than good.

So I experienced different beliefs before finding the avatar of God that fits my style, a monstrous God of course, not that stupid dove. How can you worship God if you have no physical representation in your mind?

The end of it should be in line with such a representation.  And its where I now should pay tribute to The Book of Revelation (a somehow Christian book) which contains a lot of nice monsters: The Great Prostitute, the riders of apocalypse, gog and magog, several dragons and other exotic beasts.  This is something I would die for to experience 

This is something I would die for to experience   

And just maybe, u will

*snip*
And its where I now should pay tribute to The Book of Revelation (a somehow Christian book) which contains a lot of nice monsters: The Great Prostitute, the riders of apocalypse, gog and magog, several dragons and other exotic beasts.  This is something I would die for to experience 

I've always wondered why the end of the book is so freaky crazy acid trippy, when jesus was all love and peace. I don't know if he personally mentioned a deadline coming do you?

Having said that though, which one would you personally prefer?

I've actually studied Revelation, and am re-studying it with a group of non-religious people who have an interest in theologies on the whole. Just out of curiosity, do you realize that Revelation is comprised of symbolism? For instance, the chapter on the dragon and the woman -- dragon = Lucifer. In the beginning of Revelation, it mentions that the stars are the angels; the dragon swipes 1/3 of the stars with its tail and falls to the earth with them, etc. etc. Just sayin'. I'm sure you both already knew that it was symbolism, I just thought I'd clarify :p many scholars believe it was written that way as, if it was publicly circulated otherwise (e.g. The End is coming, and this is how it's gonna be, and Lucifer did this, and Jesus was this, etc.) - at that time, its author, John, the apostle, would have been killed by the Romans. Just a historical tidbit.

That said, yes, it does point to The End, and I'm sure that some things can be taken literally. I have yet to study it more in detail, but once I do I'm sure more of it will make sense, to me at least...

Yes, revelation is obviously comprised of religious symbolism. 
However, I am merely curious why I can't recall jesus ever setting a definitive deadline or sign when these times are supposedly arriving.

And I'd like to ask if you can recall a time when he becomes all symbolic using the dragon, the whore, and the beasts or possible analouges himself. Beause a lack of consistency makes revelation look like a good adrenaline pumping read, but not exactly a believable one.

We must also understand that the bible was written around 300 years after Jesus' death (&resurrection )  So within that time frame, a bit might have been changed, as well as the fact that the ones who compiled the bible may have pulled a Disney on us. (no offense Walt. I Love YOUR SHOWS!)

I dont think that Jesus actually ever said anything about End of All, at least not as detailed as John did.

The Book of Revelation was written by st John, not Jesus. Also, there were four of the evangelists (Mark, Mathew, John and Luke, if my sunday class is still a bit inside my head properly), so every part of the New Testament can be very different from other, considering it was written by different men at different times. As AWBrielle stated, I also believe that most stuff are written symbolically for mere political reasons. What we have of Bible now, is not very much like it was we should prolly hack the Vatican tunnels to get the REAL deal.

Wow, that sounds fun xD whos in with me? 

[ViciouslyMe]

Does sound fun, but whos to say their old one doesn't have the same problem? You say the problem is symbols used for politics, and if memory serves me right, religion has always played a political role.

...er, okay. First and foremost, I'm not Christian, I'm an agnostic of... sorts. But anyway.

Does sound fun, but whos to say their old one doesn't have the same problem? You say the problem is symbols used for politics, and if memory serves me right, religion has always played a political role.

I believe when she said "for politics," she didn't mean it that way. I do know that Constantine and his mother sat together and picked out which books to start spreading out, and also incorporated religious rituals. Biblical Christianity is very different than ritualistic Christianity (in the modern day, ritualistic is all that is practiced, and throughout the middle ages, etc., it was strictly enforced). Seriously two different things.

Also - the "old one" of which you speak, if you're referring to the original text, is on a scroll that's been archaeologically dated, as with all other Biblical scrolls.

By political, she is referring to what I wrote here:

Many scholars believe it was written that way as, if it was publicly circulated otherwise (e.g. The End is coming, and this is how it's gonna be, and Lucifer did this, and Jesus was this, etc.) - at that time, its author, John, the apostle, would have been killed by the Romans. Just a historical tidbit.

This particular book was written around 95 AD, according to scientific data - around which time those who openly spoke of Christ's teachings in a way that did not condemn, or else did not worship the Roman emperor as a god, would be publicly executed. The Book was addressed to seven Churches in which contacts and the like resided, so that's why scholars believe it was written in code. If anyone intercepted it, they'd think it was full of ramblings of a crazy old fart.

That's just a theory, though, I mean. I don't know. I didn't live back then. :p

Yes, revelation is obviously comprised of religious symbolism. 
However, I am merely curious why I can't recall jesus ever setting a definitive deadline or sign when these times are supposedly arriving.

And I'd like to ask if you can recall a time when he becomes all symbolic using the dragon, the whore, and the beasts or possible analouges himself. Beause a lack of consistency makes revelation look like a good adrenaline pumping read, but not exactly a believable one.

Jesus was not the author. John, the apostle (one of the 12 disciples) was the author, so.... But hey. Revelation does have some crazy sh*t. I won't lie.

We must also understand that the bible was written around 300 years after Jesus' death (&resurrection )  So within that time frame, a bit might have been changed, as well as the fact that the ones who compiled the bible may have pulled a Disney on us. (no offense Walt. I Love YOUR SHOWS!)

Er....no. It was canonized around 300 years after his death - canonized means that the books that did not conflict with each other too much and were written by primary sources were compiled to form one main book, which is today known as The Bible.


Just for clarification purposes, for those who really need to know: I went to Catholic school for around 7 years, and I've studied Christianity from an objective point of view. Religious background is Hindu, but again, as I've stated, my beliefs are completely comprised of my personal experiences, and I wouldn't be able to properly peg it on any proper religions. Therefore, please don't believe that I'm defending Christianity or the Bible in any way (and by this I'm also not bashing it - I'd only bash the people who've f*cked it up, not the religion itself). I'm just providing information. :p