Posts Tagged ‘comparative study’

Atheism: leap in the dark

April 17, 2014

The viewers should access the following link to know the context of the discussion; and only then one should form one’s own sincere and independent opinion.

http://maasaiboys.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/an-address-to-friends/comment-page-1/#comment-13706

paarsurrey says:
April 17, 2014 at 20:05

@ makagutu with love
You were born as Christian and everybody around you was a Christian. Yet for some good or bad reasons you became disgruntled with Christianity, Bible and Church; not necessarily with Jesus or Moses.

I think it was a blind and or unreasonable decision; in other words it was not a scientific decision.*

“Whenever I read the bible, I find it full of absurdities that I can’t ignore.”

So:

1. You never finished reading Bible from cover to cover; hence your knowledge of what got revealed on Moses and Jesus remained, sorry to describe it, as shallow.
2. It did not occur to you that the denomination in which you were in; might be wrong; hence you should make a comparative study of the denominations of Christianity to find the truthful denomination from them.
3. You generalized the bitter experience you had of your specific denomination; to other denominations and in haste jumped out of it altogether.

I think yours was a leap in the dark.

Wasn’t it?

Regards

* Systematic approach to collecting facts and applying logical decision making techniques, instead of generalizing from experience, intuition (guessing), or trial and error.
Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/scientific-decision-making.html#ixzz2zA7jRXHz

How to make a comparative study of Religion?

March 25, 2014

Please click the following link to get the context of the discussion.

http://www.is-there-a-god.info/blog/comments/belief/#comment-8876

paarsurrey
MAR 25, 2014 @ 23:05:55

@unkleE :MAR 21, 2014 @ 03:22:18
Quote : “Hi paarsurrey, how are you going?
You have built this comment around the statement that to know God, we need a revealed book. What you say raises three questions in my mind:
1. Must God reveal himself through a book? Could he ever do it some other way?
2. How do we know which book is the truest revelation of God?
3. How would you propose to discuss these things? If, for example, you simply quoted the Koran and I quoted the Bible, we would get nowhere. So how else can we discuss?
Thanks.” Unquote

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friend
I am fine.

“The statement that to know God, we need a revealed book”

I think I did not literally make that statement. Well, I don’t object if one has got that understanding from the post.

unkleE : “to know God, we need a revealed book”
Paarsurrey: To know God and as to how his attributes work; His Word is most useful for that purpose.

I think you also agree with me on this point.

Don’t you?

I try to answer to your other questions below:

1. unkleE :“Must God reveal himself through a book?

Paarsurrey: I think you agree that God revealed Himself on Moses and Jesus; and a Jew or Christian cannot deny that.

Perhaps you want to know from me as to why He did manifest in this way.

Since the One-True-God (Allah Yahweh Ahura-Mazda Parmeshawara Eshawara) is only attributive; He is not a physical or spiritual being that we could see Him with our physical eyes; though we can see his attributes working behind everything in Nature, in silence.

Yet it has always been primarily His communication or Converse through which He had manifested to human beings. Hence the importance of the spoken Word of Revelation which is verbal when revealed and also secured in writing, in the book form, is the most important source of guidance that leads to Him; it can never be over-emphasized.

Nature manifests Him silently but the Word speaks of Him loudly.

unkleE : “Could he ever do it some other way?”

Paarsurrey: Yes; He could manifest Himself in diverse ways; and nobody could limit the ways of his manifestations; yet He cannot be limited by anybody or forced by anybody to change His ways:

[35:44] …………………………….. But thou wilt never find any change in the way of Allah; nor wilt thou ever find any alteration in the way of Allah.

http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?submitCh=Read+from+verse%3A&ch=35&verse=43

For one; all truthful revelation from the One-True-God is to be believed; be it of the past, present and or future; be it on Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad etc; all is to be believed; being from the same source of one God.

2. unkleE: How do we know which book is the truest revelation of God?

Paarsurrey:
a. By comparative study

b. And the reasonable inner-evidence of the Word Revealed according to the attributes of the One-True-God. We could do that; not at all difficult to discern.

3. unkleE: How would you propose to discuss these things? If, for example, you simply quoted the Koran and I quoted the Bible, we would get nowhere.

Paarsurrey: I think you have observed me quoting from the revelations of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad in this connection; I don’t think it will pose a problem even now.

These quotes should not depict simply the authority of God; but the reason/wisdom content in the same must reflect the attribute of God being All-Wise. The quotes must therefore be full of evident reason and wisdom. The gist of the reason must exist there.

It is not a perfect Book if it needs external reasons to be provided; that portion which is devoid of reason must not be from Him.

Nobody is entitled to put words into God’s mouth; He is all-knowing.

Does it help?

What is your thinking on your three questions?

Regards

http://www.is-there-a-god.info/blog/comments/belief/#comment-8878

paarsurrey
MAR 26, 2014 @ 11:53:30
@unkleE: MAR 26, 2014 @ 06:54:25

“if we discuss the revelations we each believe in, how can we draw any conclusions? ”

I think I said that I believe all truthful Word revealed from the One-True-God on His prophets messengers; I even mentioned names of some of them.

I don’t see any problem.

“unless we already have some truth outside the books by which to judge their truth”

If the revelation is truthful; it would have inner truthful evidences also.

“We would need some criteria by which to make our comparisons”

I mentioned reasonable criteria.

“I was using historical and scientific learning”

People write history differently; it is not 100% correct. There was a period when there existed no written history; Truth existed even then.

Science is only a child of the yesterday and works in the things physical and material; Religion guides in ethical, moral and spiritual realms; both work in different spheres. Science cannot prove or disprove important subjects of religion like existence of God.

This is what I think; others could think differently

Regard

No wisdom in leaving a revealed religion to join Atheism, just for convenience

February 26, 2014

Please view paarsurrey’s comments: blog, topic, link below:

“The Calladus Blog” topic “What I believe”
http://calladus.blogspot.ca/

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5736821&postID=1351504333661851099&page=1&token=1393453221002

Paarsurrey says: (still awaiting moderation from the blog owner)

@Calladus : 25/2/14 9:21 PM: 26/2/14 8:07 AM

I was not even implying to that. I know that you are an atheist, not a Christian. My point was that though you studied Christianity intensively and other religions not up-to that level; yet your study of or research of revealed religions was impaired only because you did not have a right tool or principle of comparative study of religions ; and then you all of a sudden decided to become an Atheist, just for convenience.

I had suggested you to read a book “THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE TEACHINGS OF ISLAM” by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908- the Promised Messiah; I again give its link below:

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Philosophy-of-Teachings-of-Islam.pdf

This was an essay written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 read at a conference of great religions held at Lahore in the then British India, in the year 1896.

The very first sentence of the essay reads “It is necessary that a claim and the reasons in support of it must be set forth from a revealed book.”

I use to describe it as a “Golden rule for comparative study of revealed religions”; and this principle is explained in the next two pages by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad:

Quote:

“In this auspicious Conference the purpose of which is that those who have been invited to participate in it should expound the merits of their respective religions with reference to the questions that have been formulated. I shall today set forth the merits of Islam. Before I proceed to do so I deem it proper to announce that I have made it obligatory upon myself that whatever I state will be based upon the Holy Quran which is the Word of God Almighty.

I consider it essential that everyone who follows a book, believing it to be revealed, should base his exposition upon that book and should not so extend the scope of his advocacy of his faith as if he is compiling a new book.

As it is my purpose today to establish the merits of the Holy Quran and to demonstrate its excellence, it is incumbent upon me not to state anything which is not comprehended in the Quran and to set forth everything on the basis of its verses and in accord with their meaning and that which might be inferred from them, so that those attending the Conference should encounter no difficulty in carrying out a comparison between the teachings of different religions.

As all those who believe in a revealed book will also confine themselves to statements comprised in their respective revealed books, I shall not make any reference to the traditions of the Holy Prophet, inasmuch as all true traditions are only derived from the Holy Quran which is a perfect book comprehending all other books.

In short this is the day of the manifestation of the glory of the Holy Quran and I humbly beseech God Almighty to assist me in this undertaking. Amin. “ Unquote

Had one known this principle before; I think one’s decision would have been different.

One is welcome to try it now; if one pleases.

What is the correct criterion of comparative study of religions?

February 23, 2014

I wrote following post on the blog: “THE CALLADUS BLOG”: topic “What I believe”:
Link:

http://calladus.blogspot.ca/2010/05/what-i-believe.html
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5736821&postID=1351504333661851099&page=1&token=1393172192320

paarsurrey said…
Calladus said:19/2/14 4:13 PM

“I started a self-guided course of comparative religion at the age of 32, in 1995.” Unquote

Thanks for your reply.

I appreciate your search for truth; for which you started a self-guided course of comparative religion/s. Naturally, you would have not included Atheism in your study as they (the Atheists) don’t consider that they are a “religion” in any meaning of the world.

Please confirm that you did not include Atheism in your comparative study. Did you? Please.

The second point is ; what principle did you adopt for your comparative study of religions (excluding Atheism)?

What religions did you study, intensively, and from what sources?

I think all above are very reasonable questions.
20/2/14 9:16 AM

Paarsurrey said: (posted but awaiting moderation from Calladus before it is exhibited on that blog)

@Calladus : 22/2/14 7:48 PM

“The “principle” that I started out with in my course of study was that God was real and Jesus is his son.”

We will first discuss you first principle that you have mentioned in you post.

We find that this principle is not valid for other religions; Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses did not mention that Jesus was son of God. So this sentence is not valid as a principle of research or criteria of search into the religion in the absolute sense.

I think with your study of Christianity you would have found that Jesus did not mention that he was a son of God in literal and physical terms in unequivocal words.

So, even Jesus never agreed with this statement or principle. Your study of religions notwithstanding, I think, it is not valid as a measure/standard/criteria of search or research of truth in religion/s.

So, I think, your comparative study of religions does not make a comparison of them, not at all, to find the Truth.

It was a wrong principle so it has in fact no bearing on religion.

Am I reasonable? Please

Discerning a Living Religion from the Dead Religions

June 29, 2013

 

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

The advent of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was an epoch making event towards the end of the nineteenth century in the history of comparative religions in the present era.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, The Guided One (1835-1908), made it convenient for the human beings be of any race, color or creed to make comparative study of the Revealed Religions of the world and to accept the truth wherever one finds it. He set out many unbiased, neutral and full of wisdom principles for that purpose, the foremost among these is “The claim of a Religion on any topic as well as the logical argumentation should be from its Revealed Book”.

There may be a religion whose followers claim (e.g. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism, Zoroastrianism or any other religion) that their religion or its teachings are for the whole world. ( i.e. it is universal), but the others may demand the followers of that religion to prove if this claim is explicitly mentioned in your Revealed Book and that if that claim has been supported by divine arguments in your Revealed Book.

This could be easily checked by anyone sincerely searching for the truth or guidance. If a religion on any of the important topics or human problems does not contain the relevant claim or argumentation / reasoning then that religion could be pronounced as a Dead Religion for all practical purposes. (One may remember here that all revealed religions in its origin were truthful; this fact has been highlighted by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad many a times and with great emphases).

We are more concerned with the present era – a dynamic scientific era; where we live in. The humanity is facing very complex problems which must be addressed by the Living Religion of the world if there is any utility in the religion worth the name; any denomination. The religion is for the common as also for the highly literate and since it is claimed to be divine, it should satisfy the common man as also the very literate special man.

The followers of a religion might be very clever and cunning that they could advocate for their religion and could attribute claims to a religion which re not explicitly found in its Revealed Book or they could provide arguments in its favor which are only man-made and not provided by the Divine.

In that case such a religion could be pronounced on its merit, at the most, to be a man-made religion, definitely not sent by God. This could be a litmus test. Verify your religion of your choice on these two simple but wise counts; you might be stunned to realize that many a religion are just myths and its followers are following it only blindfolded.

On his own part Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad set out this epoch making principle in an Inter-Religions Conference in the year 1896 and then he proved that the religion of his choice has claim and arguments on the five basic questions facing by humanity:

  • The Physical, Moral, and SpiritualStates of Man.
  • What is the State of Man After Death?
  • The Object of Man’s Life and the Means of its Attainment.
  • The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.
  • Sources of Divine Knowledge.

The conference had given these questions on which the participant speakers had to speak.

I leave the solutions to the respected readers. Try for the Religion of your choice. Best of luck!

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

The Highest Catholic Clergy terms spoon feeding to the Bible as an act of purifying Bible with reason. Is it purification with reason or interpolation of meanings? One wonders!

May 10, 2009

Hi

Catholicism is one amongst the most mythical religions on the globe; yet one wonders the Highest Catholic Priest has the heart to say, please access the link:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1897119,00.html

Pope Benedict’s Latest Take on Islam

“Faith is in fact necessary in a world in which reason alone can become a form of extremism.” “When human reason humbly allows itself to be purified by faith… it is strengthened to resist presumption and reach beyond its own limitations.” I think with this he was perhaps hinting toward the Atheists and the Agnostics who are also called sometimes as Secularists or Humanists.

The Catholics are quitting Church, rather fleeing it to join Atheism Agnosticism, one may like to access in this connection the link:
http://www.bustedhalo.com/features/busted-review-quitting-church-why-the-faithful-are-fleeing-and-what-to-do-about-it-by-julia-duin/, also reproduced in the CathNewsUSA : http://www.cathnewsusa.com/article.aspx?aeid=13312

He further added: “Christians describe God, among other ways, as creative Reason, which orders and guides the world,” the Pope said. “Muslims worship God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, who has spoken to humanity.” The Pope seems to still believe that this distinction — between Christian faith that is “purified” by human reason, and Muslim faith that is simply received from God.

Paarsurrey says:

The Highest Catholic Clergy is a dignitary; and our faith enjoins us to respect dignitaries of all faiths/religions. As an individual he is entitled to free thinking and opinion; and I respect his faith.

So the Catholic faith as incorporated in the Catholic Bible is purified by reason, as he claims, yet it is completely lacking of any reasons, at least I could not find any reasonable, rational, and logical reasons for any theological assertions/expressions made or claimed in it. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood anything he said.

I would like any Catholics friends viewing this post to present the basic creeds of Catholicism quoting straightforward claims to the essential creeds as also the reasons given, very much there in the context put plainly without their own spoon feeding, which the Clergy might have expressed as purification of the text of the Bible or perhaps a sort of an effort of an interpolation of meaning in the text and the context, yet the world is made to believe that it is very much there or it is a part of the same; while truly speaking it is neither implicitly nor explicitly there.

We Muslims and this humble Ahmadi peaceful Muslim servant in particular, would welcome such a fruitful effort by any Catholic friend who loves the Bible and his faith.

This would afford us to have a comparative study of Catholicism with other faiths for our guidance and would be useful in bridging gaps and understanding between the faiths and denominations.

I may add here that Quran, as I humbly find it, is the most pristine and secure Word of God on the face of this globe. Quran is the Word of God and the Universe is the Work of God. One who finds systematic Laws, generated from Wisdom in the Work of All-Wise the Creator, which appeal to reason of a person; he would find the similar wisdom incorporated in the verses of Quran right there in the usual context with the text. The usual context is, as I find it, of five verses preceding and five verses following.

I think it is opportune time for the Catholics to take benefit from it. They are most welcome here, in this blog, to express them in a reasonable way.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran not the mythical ones presented by sinful Paul and the sinful scribes.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim