Forums
Pages
Beliefs
Religion
Philosophy
News
Arguments
JOIN
LOGIN
Religious Beliefs > Christianity > Forum > ThreadAdd Christianity Content: Website | Article | Video | Fact | Quote | Image
  • Christianity
  • Forum
  • Videos
  • Websites (27)
Displaying all 6 Forum Posts
Forums> Christianity>    

Christianity Falls Short on Loving thy Neighbor

 
2010-09-27 09:49 AM

ChristyR
Denton, TX
Posts: 197
As far as loving thy neighbor is concerned, Christianity falls short compared to other world religions. Jainism, for example, includes a total vow of non-violence toward any living being. "Violence" even includes insults and lacking respect for others. Most importantly, there are no additional clauses to this vow that excuse harming (or stoning) people to death for insignificant crimes.

It's comical to me how most Christians believe that the bible is the only way to achieve morality in the world, when there are so many less violent religious or non-religious options.

Jainism proclaims, " Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being."

What would happen if the Bible had contained these words? Would the Crusades still have taken place?


2010-09-28 04:06 AM

archaeologist
Seoul, South Korea
Posts: 79
again you confuse many ideals with the reality. you falsely accuse the whole christian faith based upon what? a few people's example while ignoring those who sacrifice for their neighbors?  you also confuse the term 'violence' with 'punishment' and is an abused word in the manner it is often used. 

using corporal punishment is not violence or you would have to condemn all the states, who use secular ways, for their mistreatment of prisoners, their use of the death penalty and other 'violent' methods of punishment, thus you are not condemning christians or christianity but all of mankind.

since janism is a false religion, their definitions do not matter and are as subjective as anyone else's and are no greater than anyone else's save for the Bible's which is above all.

your idea of 'insignificant' doesn't mean a whole lot. you are not God and your view of the level of the offense is moot. you are more sinful than those being stoned to death so you cannot talk. who are you to judge and condemn what God ha sinstituted.

your use of the word 'comical' demonstrates your immaturity, and shows you have no idea what 'morality' means and confuses non-violence with it. one can be non-violent and lie which means non-violence does not bring morality nor defines it.

"Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being."

where do you think Janism got those words? 

in doing quick research, which you and zach refuse to do, one finds a 'religion' that begins withthe fanciful and that their religious writings really aren't divine nor infallible and current viewpoints can be used which means they do not have the truth at all and are very flexible and subjective in their beliefs.

you really do not think when you post. you would rather insult millions of people then take offense when someone supposedly insults you here. thatis hypocritical and a double standard. you and that zach have a lot to learn as neither of you really know anything.

you really do not grasp anything about the Bible do you/ those words are there if you took time to look. one such place is in the 10 commandments, written long before janism got started. another such place is in the Beatitudes. and throughout the pauline and petrine epistles.

you confuse free choice with actual teaching of christianity. just because someone calls themselves a christian doesn't mean they are. if they continue to practice sin, then they do not walk with God (read the book of 1 John)

if you look at Jesus and his life, He used violence only once, when He threw the moneychangers out of the temple. are you saying HE was NOT moral? He also taught--do unto others as ye would have them do unto you. kind of beats janism at the morality issue.

keep in mind there is no way to claim that the janism beliefs were written before Christ and the disicples wrote. there is no history of thsoe documents and their beliefs are flexible thus it stands to reason that the janists copied Christ's words when the disciple Thomas was in their country preaching.
2010-09-28 08:20 AM

Zach F
Denton, TX
Posts: 119
archaeologist Wrote: again you confuse many ideals with the reality. you falsely accuse the whole christian faith based upon what? a few people's example while ignoring those who sacrifice for their neighbors? you also confuse the term 'violence' with 'punishment' and is an abused word in the manner it is often used.

using corporal punishment is not violence or you would have to condemn all the states, who use secular ways, for their mistreatment of prisoners, their use of the death penalty and other 'violent' methods of punishment, thus you are not condemning christians or christianity but all of mankind.

since janism is a false religion, their definitions do not matter and are as subjective as anyone else's and are no greater than anyone else's save for the Bible's which is above all.

your idea of 'insignificant' doesn't mean a whole lot. you are not God and your view of the level of the offense is moot. you are more sinful than those being stoned to death so you cannot talk. who are you to judge and condemn what God ha sinstituted.

your use of the word 'comical' demonstrates your immaturity, and shows you have no idea what 'morality' means and confuses non-violence with it. one can be non-violent and lie which means non-violence does not bring morality nor defines it.

"Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being."

where do you think Janism got those words?

in doing quick research, which you and zach refuse to do, one finds a 'religion' that begins withthe fanciful and that their religious writings really aren't divine nor infallible and current viewpoints can be used which means they do not have the truth at all and are very flexible and subjective in their beliefs.

you really do not think when you post. you would rather insult millions of people then take offense when someone supposedly insults you here. thatis hypocritical and a double standard. you and that zach have a lot to learn as neither of you really know anything.

you really do not grasp anything about the Bible do you/ those words are there if you took time to look. one such place is in the 10 commandments, written long before janism got started. another such place is in the Beatitudes. and throughout the pauline and petrine epistles.

you confuse free choice with actual teaching of christianity. just because someone calls themselves a christian doesn't mean they are. if they continue to practice sin, then they do not walk with God (read the book of 1 John)

if you look at Jesus and his life, He used violence only once, when He threw the moneychangers out of the temple. are you saying HE was NOT moral? He also taught--do unto others as ye would have them do unto you. kind of beats janism at the morality issue.

keep in mind there is no way to claim that the janism beliefs were written before Christ and the disicples wrote. there is no history of thsoe documents and their beliefs are flexible thus it stands to reason that the janists copied Christ's words when the disciple Thomas was in their country preaching.

Did you bring me up in a forum that I hadn't even posted in yet? I find it sweet that you are thinking of me. And no, I have not taken offense to your insults. Sorry bud.

I have some bad news for you and your 'quick research' though. According to Biblical Scholars and Theologians, the current claim is that the 10 Commandments were scribed around 1400 B.C. Jainism got it's start roughly 1500 years before that.

I stopped reading there. I'll let you assume why.
2010-09-28 09:09 AM

ChristyR
Denton, TX
Posts: 197

archaeologist Wrote: again you confuse many ideals with the reality. you falsely accuse the whole christian faith based upon what? a few people's example while ignoring those who sacrifice for their neighbors?  you also confuse the term 'violence' with 'punishment' and is an abused word in the manner it is often used.
using corporal punishment is not violence or you would have to condemn all the states, who use secular ways, for their mistreatment of prisoners, their use of the death penalty and other 'violent' methods of punishment, thus you are not condemning christians or christianity but all of mankind.

First, my observation was a literary analysis of Jainism scripture vs. the Bible regarding violence. I wasn't speaking in regards to any one person or group of people's action in response to said scripture.

Second, I am not confusing the words violence and punishment. Punishment can still be violent. Corporal punishment is no longer used in the U.S. judicial system. Lethal injection is Capital Punishment. Stoning someone to death for a crime is MUCH more violent than lethal injection. Lethal injection is meant to be quick and relatively painless. 

archaeologist Wrote: one can be non-violent and lie which means non-violence does not bring morality nor defines it.


You are correct here. One can be non-violent and lie. Fortunately for Jains, they have a completely different vow aside from non-violence based on truthfulness.  Way to go on your research.

archaeologist Wrote: since janism is a false religion, their definitions do not matter and are as subjective as anyone else's and are no greater than anyone else's save for the Bible's which is above all.

your idea of 'insignificant' doesn't mean a whole lot. you are not God and your view of the level of the offense is moot. you are more sinful than those being stoned to death so you cannot talk. who are you to judge and condemn what God ha sinstituted.


This is exactly the type of behavior I was referring to. You and your insults in the name of your religion, based on your interpretation of the Bible. Thank you, for proving my point.

archaeologist Wrote: "Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being."

where do you think Janism got those words? 

in doing quick research, which you and zach refuse to do, one finds a 'religion' that begins withthe fanciful and that their religious writings really aren't divine nor infallible and current viewpoints can be used which means they do not have the truth at all and are very flexible and subjective in their beliefs.

you really do not think when you post. you would rather insult millions of people then take offense when someone supposedly insults you here. thatis hypocritical and a double standard. you and that zach have a lot to learn as neither of you really know anything.

you really do not grasp anything about the Bible do you/ those words are there if you took time to look. one such place is in the 10 commandments, written long before janism got started. another such place is in the Beatitudes. and throughout the pauline and petrine epistles.



Where did Jainism get those words? Since it's one of the oldest religions, it's hard to tell. But if I had to guess, I would say common human decency? (Which DOES exist without the existence of your God,)

And honestly, I wasn't insulting you. I was taking a two pieces of literature and comparing them. The Bible states that you should stone people to death for adultery, worshiping false gods, cursing the king, and losing your virginity before marriage... and Jainism states that you should not kill any living creature or being for any reason.

It is pretty obvious by this comparison alone, the Bible is the more violent of the two.

I'm not even sure why you are upset??? I am providing proof that there are more people in the world following a good moral doctrine than Christianity had originally anticipated. You are insulted and angry that, even though these people took a vow to be non-violent and truthful, they are not your kind of good? Because you believe you are superior to them?

And again, more insults. Thanks for proving my point over and over. If you were to take a vow of non-violence then you would cut out half of the content of all your posts.

BTW, you are wrong. Jainism and Hinduism were created about the same time, which was over 1500 years before Exodus was written. The 10 commandments didn't come until at least 50 years after that?

http://www.jainuniversity.org/origin-of-jainism.aspx

archaeologist Wrote:
you confuse free choice with actual teaching of christianity. just because someone calls themselves a christian doesn't mean they are. if they continue to practice sin, then they do not walk with God (read the book of 1 John)

if you look at Jesus and his life, He used violence only once, when He threw the moneychangers out of the temple. are you saying HE was NOT moral? He also taught--do unto others as ye would have them do unto you. kind of beats janism at the morality issue.

I am not taking free choice into this analysis at all. I am speaking only on what the bible commands you to do vs. what Jainism command you to do. The Bible commands you to stone people to death for petty crimes such as blasphemy. Jainism commands you to refrain from insulting (or killing) people for any reason, much less something and petty as challenging your views.


archaeologist Wrote: keep in mind there is no way to claim that the janism beliefs were written before Christ and the disicples wrote. there is no history of thsoe documents and their beliefs are flexible thus it stands to reason that the janists copied Christ's words when the disciple Thomas was in their country preaching.


....”Standing to reason” takes on a whole new meaning when in your hands. Take it up with the Jain Scholars.

http://jainology.blogspot.com/2010/07/rishabha-in-indus-valley-and-puranik.html

2010-09-28 04:25 PM

archaeologist
Seoul, South Korea
Posts: 79
"you are wrong. Jainism and Hinduism were created about the same time, which was over 1500 years before Exodus was written. The 10 commandments didn't come until at least 50 years after that? "

No I am not. from your own link:

"although its time of origin cannot be determined"

"First, my observation was a literary analysis of Jainism scripture vs. the Bible regarding violence. I wasn't speaking in regards to any one person or group of people's action in response to said scripture"

No it wasn't, it was a blatant insult and attack on christianity by one who doesn't know what they are talking about.  you do not know what the word 'violence' means and apply a distorted view of it to fit your sensibilities.

"Second, I am not confusing the words violence and punishment. Punishment can still be violent. Corporal punishment is no longer used in the U.S. judicial system. Lethal injection is Capital Punishment. Stoning someone to death for a crime is MUCH more violent than lethal injection. Lethal injection is meant to be quick and relatively painless.  "

Yes you are. God is free to punish His disobedient creation any way hHe sees fit, whether you approve or not and it is not labeled as 'violent'. according to yours and your acceptance of the janis definition lethal injection is as violent as stoning. your hypocrisy , double standard and ignorance are showing again. if you read anything about janism you would see that they oppose the taking of all life and lethal injection is taking a life thus it is violence.  

"Fortunately for Jains, they have a completely different vow aside from non-violence based on truthfulness.  Way to go on your research."

who said i didn't see it? christians are free to make vows as well so your point is moot. taking a vow doesn't mean they are moral, morality doesn't originate with those.

"This is exactly the type of behavior I was referring to. You and your insults in the name of your religion, based on your interpretation of the Bible. Thank you, for proving my point. "

didn't prove your point, just told you the truth,. there is only 1 truth and it is found in the Bible and christianity all other religious writings, sects, religions are false and lead people to destruction because they deceive people like you.

"I'm not even sure why you are upset??"

you really are ignorant aren't,just like your buddy zach. you insult people then lie about.

"I am providing proof that there are more people in the world following a good moral doctrine than Christianity had originally anticipated"

wrong again. such comments are based upon your subjective opinion and the ignorance of what morality and violence is.they are not more moral because they abuse their own bodies, live in sin, and reject Jesus as their savior. 

"I am not taking free choice into this analysis at all."

you have to because it is part of christianity. if you don't then you are just manipulating the data to fit your point and that is wrong and it shows you are not more moral than christians or christianity. you have to lie and distort to make your point.

you have proven that you and janis are not more moral than christianity because you also base your argument on 1 item, an item you do not like so instead of being honest, you are biased and operate from a dishonest perspective. (which is not moral) you cut out all information that disproves your opoint which is lying, so you are not moral nor is janis because they worship a false religion and teach lies.
2011-05-31 09:42 AM

MrWonder
Medium City, TX
Posts: 226
Religion for the sake of religion is useless.

This world is preparation for eternity. All religions will be represented in hell except genuine Christianity, which is trust/faith in Jesus Christ alone.

Yes, false believers will be there but they don't represent genuine Christianity.

There are no false religions in the heavenly state.


Historians date the foundation of organized or present form of Jainism to sometime between the 9th and the 6th centuries BC.

Judaism dates from about 15 or 16 centuries BC.

ABOUT US - CONTACT US - LINKS - TERMS & CONDITIONS - PRIVACY POLICY

ATHEIST FORUMS - CHRISTIAN FORUMS - ISLAM FORUMS - JEWISH FORUMS - HINDU FORUMS

© Copyright 2008-2012 The Religion Hub. All Rights Reserved.

PARTNER WEBSITES: LIBERAL FORUMS - ENGINEERING FORUMS - MEDICAL FORUMS - SCIENCE FORUMS - ENVIRONMENT FORUMS