Total Posts:242|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Evil Karma

ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

The doctrine is called karma. Karma, as many readers will know, is the Sanskrit term for "action," and a belief in karma is the belief that at least some of the hardships, misfortunes or disadvantages that we suffer are consequences of sinful actions that we ourselves performed at some earlier time, often in a previous life.

Can you imagine a society built on the doctrine of karma? Here is what the M|80;nava DharmaW|80;stra (c. 200 CE), a lawbook of Brahmanical Hinduism, states;

"Some evil men become disfigured because of bad deeds committed in this world, and some because of deeds done in a previous life. ... In this way, as a result of the remnants of their past deeds ... are born individuals despised by good people: the mentally retarded, the mute, the blind, and the deaf, as well as those who are deformed. (Ch. 11, vv. 48"53, trans. Olivelle 2005, p. 217)

My God! Despised by good people!

For a believer in this doctrine, racism is OK, because the victim is the one responsible for his enslavement. Rape is OK, because it is the girl's past crime that causes her to be raped. Kill a human being over a cow? Correct, because the murder victim sinned in his past life.

This is Hinduism. This is karma.

The holding of certain people responsible for their own misfortunes, in the way that the doctrine of karma proposes, is seen not merely as mistaken, but as morally reprehensible.

Those who seek to defend the doctrine of karma often fail to see one of the deepest reasons why it can appear so morally unsettling. They assume that, provided one does not actively strive to worsen the practical situation of disadvantaged people, one does not do them any harm by attributing their situation to deeds done in previous lives.

This assumption overlooks the possibility that holding someone responsible for his own misfortune may itself constitute an injury, and hence blankly misses a central point of the contention that blaming the victim makes matters worse.

Now, go to the net and check out any society with Hindu karma as their doctrine. See if it matches what you'd think such a callous society would be.

https://www.google.com...

https://edition.cnn.com...

https://www.quora.com...

https://blogs.wsj.com...
Ludofl3x
Posts: 2,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2018 12:17:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.


Doesn't Christianity teach that sick babies are sick because god wants them to be, and that you as the parent of a sick baby should thank god for that sick baby, or at least not be mad at god for giving your baby cancer? That birth defects are also god's plan, that saddling some child with a disfigurement that will preclude that child from being discriminated against or made fun of, not to mention all the health issues around it (like, say spina bifida) that will eventually lead to a short and painful life, that the child should thank god for thinking of him in that plan? Does Christianity not teach that the atrocity of American slavery was in fact deemed necessary by god, and that all those kidnapped and enslaved, robbed of their families and their history, should be thankful to the planner of that atrocity?

Let's take it easy getting on our high horses about other religions and their explanations for the misfortunes in every life. All the answers are dumb, because the truth is simply "bad things happen, that's all."
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2018 1:14:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 12:17:01 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

Doesn't Christianity teach that sick babies are sick because god wants them to be,....

Quite the contrary. And that is reflected in Christians building hospitals all over the world.

..and that you as the parent of a sick baby should thank god for that sick baby,

No sir. Christianity tells us that evil things are not of God.

..or at least not be mad at god for giving your baby cancer?

Yes, because God doesn't give babies cancer.

That birth defects are also god's plan, that saddling some child with a disfigurement that will preclude that child from being discriminated against or made fun of, not to mention all the health issues around it (like, say spina bifida) that will eventually lead to a short and painful life, that the child should thank god for thinking of him in that plan?

Not at all. Are you sure you aren't confused?

Does Christianity not teach that the atrocity of American slavery was in fact deemed necessary by god, and that all those kidnapped and enslaved, robbed of their families and their history, should be thankful to the planner of that atrocity?

Not in the least. You certainly are confused.

Let's take it easy getting on our high horses about other religions and their explanations for the misfortunes in every life.

No high horse here. For even if you were right about Christianity, and you aren't, it would not excuse Hinduism, the topic of the thread, or that they teach that misfortune is self-inflicted and the unfortunate are to be disposed by "good people".

All the answers are dumb, because the truth is simply "bad things happen, that's all."

Yes, but an answer that makes you blame the victim for his misfortune is doubly evil. And this evil is evident in the society.

Rampant rape. Killing people over cows, religion as slavery, child rape in the temples, worship of demons. Incest. Corruption.

It doesn't matter if one believes the doctrine or not, the doctrine itself is morally repugnant. And that there are other bad things does not reduce its ugliness.
Ludofl3x
Posts: 2,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2018 2:07:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 1:14:18 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/3/2018 12:17:01 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

Doesn't Christianity teach that sick babies are sick because god wants them to be,....

Quite the contrary. And that is reflected in Christians building hospitals all over the world.

..and that you as the parent of a sick baby should thank god for that sick baby,

No sir. Christianity tells us that evil things are not of God.


This raises two questions: (1) is God not in fact the author of all things? Here your answer is clearly no. That means he didn't plan for evil, and I haven't even connected evil to sickness. Sickness just is, it isn't evil, in my view. You are the one making that connection, here. (2) Is the only recourse he has against babies being sick is to have imperfect humans build hospitals to treat only some of them, using imperfect techniques and incomplete medical information?

..or at least not be mad at god for giving your baby cancer?

Yes, because God doesn't give babies cancer.


See question 1.

That birth defects are also god's plan, that saddling some child with a disfigurement that will preclude that child from being discriminated against or made fun of, not to mention all the health issues around it (like, say spina bifida) that will eventually lead to a short and painful life, that the child should thank god for thinking of him in that plan?

Not at all. Are you sure you aren't confused?


Please explain your view on the matter.

Does Christianity not teach that the atrocity of American slavery was in fact deemed necessary by god, and that all those kidnapped and enslaved, robbed of their families and their history, should be thankful to the planner of that atrocity?

Not in the least. You certainly are confused.


How did slavery occur without God okaying it?

Let's take it easy getting on our high horses about other religions and their explanations for the misfortunes in every life.

No high horse here. For even if you were right about Christianity, and you aren't, it would not excuse Hinduism, the topic of the thread, or that they teach that misfortune is self-inflicted and the unfortunate are to be disposed by "good people".


How am I wrong about Christianity's view in general that (a) god is the author of all things, (b) he has complete control and foreknowledge of all events, and (c) all people are meant to worship and be thankful to him in spite of the misfortunes he either visits upon them, or somewhat contradicting (A), allows to be visited upon them? I know this thread is basically your version of et tu quoque, and baiting Hari, but your dueling rants bore everyone but you two.

All the answers are dumb, because the truth is simply "bad things happen, that's all."

Yes, but an answer that makes you blame the victim for his misfortune is doubly evil. And this evil is evident in the society.


I'll await your response to the first question, about how child sickness happens either without God's approval or because he can't stop it, before I address who's to blame. As it stands, it sounds to me like you want to let your god off the hook for bad things happening, and then say man's sin is ultimately to blame (again ignoring the god character's responsibility for that whole system, and how it's immoral to curse 10 generations of anything for one person's deeds, but we'll see how you actually respond).

It doesn't matter if one believes the doctrine or not, the doctrine itself is morally repugnant. And that there are other bad things does not reduce its ugliness.

Agreed. But glass houses.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2018 4:56:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 2:07:35 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:
At 7/3/2018 1:14:18 PM, ethang5 wrote:

Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

Doesn't Christianity teach that sick babies are sick because god wants them to be,....

Quite the contrary. And that is reflected in Christians building hospitals all over the world.

..and that you as the parent of a sick baby should thank god for that sick baby,

No sir. Christianity tells us that evil things are not of God.

This raises two questions: (1) is God not in fact the author of all things?

No. He did not author your post for example.

Here your answer is clearly no. That means he didn't plan for evil, and I haven't even connected evil to sickness.

I haven a clue how you leaped to that conclusion, but as it isn't my topic, OK.

Sickness just is, it isn't evil, in my view.

Your view was not the topic here.

You are the one making that connection, here.

No sir. Hindu doctrine does and it precedes me by 9,000 years.

(2) Is the only recourse he has against babies being sick is to have imperfect humans build hospitals to treat only some of them, using imperfect techniques and incomplete medical information?

Other than forcing you? Yes.

..or at least not be mad at god for giving your baby cancer?

Yes, because God doesn't give babies cancer.

See question 1.

Answered.

That birth defects are also god's plan, that saddling some child with a disfigurement that will preclude that child from being discriminated against or made fun of, not to mention all the health issues around it (like, say spina bifida) that will eventually lead to a short and painful life, that the child should thank god for thinking of him in that plan?

Not at all. Are you sure you aren't confused
Please explain your view on the matter.

My view is that blaming the victim is morally abhorrent.

Does Christianity not teach that the atrocity of American slavery was in fact deemed necessary by god, and that all those kidnapped and enslaved, robbed of their families and their history, should be thankful to the planner of that atrocity?

Not in the least. You certainly are confused.

How did slavery occur without God okaying it?

He give you free will and you decided to make yourself god.

Let's take it easy getting on our high horses about other religions and their explanations for the misfortunes in every life.

No high horse here. For even if you were right about Christianity, and you aren't, it would not excuse Hinduism, the topic of the thread, or that they teach that misfortune is self-inflicted and the unfortunate are to be dispised by "good people".

How am I wrong about Christianity's view in general that (a) god is the author of all things, (b) he has complete control and foreknowledge of all events, and (c) all people are meant to worship and be thankful to him in spite of the misfortunes he either visits upon them, or somewhat contradicting (A), allows to be visited upon them?

Sorry. You are wrong. What Christianity teaches is your responsibility to know. Either way, I cannot be expected to abandon my topic because you are, and remain ignorant.

I know this thread is basically your version of et tu quoque, and baiting Hari, but your dueling rants bore everyone but you two.

Hari has not been mentioned in this thread. Is Hinduism out of bounds to me? Please, hang your assumptions around your own neck.

All the answers are dumb, because the truth is simply "bad things happen, that's all."

Yes, but an answer that makes you blame the victim for his misfortune is doubly evil. And this evil is evident in the society.

I'll await your response to the first question, about how child sickness happens either without God's approval or because he can't stop it, before I address who's to blame.

Who you think is to blame is irrelevant. The topic is Hinduism and who it thinks is to blame. Notice that the OP did not ask your opinion.

As it stands, it sounds to me like you want to let your god off the hook for bad things happening, and then say man's sin is ultimately to blame (again ignoring the god character's responsibility for that whole system, and how it's immoral to curse 10 generations of anything for one person's deeds, but we'll see how you actually respond).

You don't know Christian doctrine. If you insist on holding on to your incorrect beliefs, there is nothing can do. Your ideas of it are wrong.

It doesn't matter if one believes the doctrine or not, the doctrine itself is morally repugnant. And that there are other bad things does not reduce its ugliness.

Agreed.

Thank you. And discussing such religious topics is the purpose of the board.

But glass houses.

Because you in your ignorance you think both houses are glass is really not relevant to me. While you may find what you think to be irresistibly interesting, the topic of the thread has already been set. Sorry.

Start a thread if you want to talk about yourself and your views.
Ludofl3x
Posts: 2,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2018 5:11:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 4:56:12 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/3/2018 2:07:35 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:


This raises two questions: (1) is God not in fact the author of all things?

No. He did not author your post for example.


Okay, so we're talking about a non-intervening, non-interacting deity with no plan or foreknowledge then?

Here your answer is clearly no. That means he didn't plan for evil, and I haven't even connected evil to sickness.

I haven a clue how you leaped to that conclusion, but as it isn't my topic, OK.


You just said he isn't the author of all things, clearly you understand and agree with my assessment about god and his inability to stop children being sick. Evil doesn't figure into it.

Sickness just is, it isn't evil, in my view.

Your view was not the topic here.


Can I ask what do you think is going to happen when you post here? People are going to voice their own views. Start a blog somewhere if you don't want to take responses and hear the views of others.

You are the one making that connection, here.

No sir. Hindu doctrine does and it precedes me by 9,000 years.


THe connection is between evil and sickness. You made it. It has nothing to do with Hindu doctrine.

(2) Is the only recourse he has against babies being sick is to have imperfect humans build hospitals to treat only some of them, using imperfect techniques and incomplete medical information?

Other than forcing you? Yes.


Forcing me to what? This response makes no sense.

..or at least not be mad at god for giving your baby cancer?

Yes, because God doesn't give babies cancer.


Right, because he didn't plan for cancer. Or make it possible. It's somehow connected to free will?

That birth defects are also god's plan, that saddling some child with a disfigurement that will preclude that child from being discriminated against or made fun of, not to mention all the health issues around it (like, say spina bifida) that will eventually lead to a short and painful life, that the child should thank god for thinking of him in that plan?

Not at all. Are you sure you aren't confused
Please explain your view on the matter.

My view is that blaming the victim is morally abhorrent.

Clearly your view on the hindu version is that it's abhorrent. What's your view on the Christian perspective on the same scenario?


How did slavery occur without God okaying it?

He give you free will and you decided to make yourself god.


I'm sure that's really comforting to all the enslaved Africans who lost LITERALLY everything they ever knew. Praise his name!


How am I wrong about Christianity's view in general that (a) god is the author of all things, (b) he has complete control and foreknowledge of all events, and (c) all people are meant to worship and be thankful to him in spite of the misfortunes he either visits upon them, or somewhat contradicting (A), allows to be visited upon them?

Sorry. You are wrong. What Christianity teaches is your responsibility to know. Either way, I cannot be expected to abandon my topic because you are, and remain ignorant.


You do this a lot: say "you're wrong," and then when someone asks "how am I wrong?" you don't explain it. You're a real doing the Lord's work according to 1 Peter 3:15, huh?

"But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect."

You refuse to explain your own religion or view in any way, while you take the piss out of other religions. That's exactly what I was hoping to demonstrate, thanks for helping!

All the answers are dumb, because the truth is simply "bad things happen, that's all."

Yes, but an answer that makes you blame the victim for his misfortune is doubly evil. And this evil is evident in the society.

I'll await your response to the first question, about how child sickness happens either without God's approval or because he can't stop it, before I address who's to blame. As it stands, it sounds to me like you want to let your god off the hook for bad things happening, and then say man's sin is ultimately to blame (again ignoring the god character's responsibility for that whole system, and how it's immoral to curse 10 generations of anything for one person's deeds, but we'll see how you actually respond).

You don't know Christian doctrine. If you insist on holding on to your incorrect beliefs, there is nothing can do. Your ideas of it are wrong.


Well, you could always explain how it's wrong.

It doesn't matter if one believes the doctrine or not, the doctrine itself is morally repugnant. And that there are other bad things does not reduce its ugliness.

Agreed.

Thank you. And discussing such religious topics is the purpose of the board.

But glass houses.

Because you in your ignorance you think both houses are glass is really not relevant to me. While you may find what you think to be irresistibly interesting, the topic of the thread has already been set. Sorry.

Start a thread if you want to talk about yourself and your views.

Thanks, I'll talk about what I want to where I want to, to whom I want to, as you always say. You're not the boss around here, and I don't buy your whack @$$ internet tough guy nonsense.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2018 7:23:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 5:11:11 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:
At 7/3/2018 4:56:12 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/3/2018 2:07:35 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

This raises two questions: (1) is God not in fact the author of all things?

No. He did not author your post for example.

Okay, so we're talking about a non-intervening, non-interacting deity with no plan or foreknowledge then?

No. We're talking about the Hindu doctrine of karma.

Here your answer is clearly no. That means he didn't plan for evil, and I haven't even connected evil to sickness.

I haven't a clue how you leaped to that conclusion, but as it isn't my topic, OK.

You just said he isn't the author of all things, clearly you understand and agree with my assessment about god and his inability to stop children being sick. Evil doesn't figure into it.

Poor thinking. God not doing something does not necessarily indicate inability.

Sickness just is, it isn't evil, in my view.

Your view was not the topic here.

Can I ask what do you think is going to happen when you post here?

Militant atheist with chips on their sholders will try to hijack the topic and make it "Christianity is evil". Why do you ask?

People are going to voice their own views. Start a blog somewhere if you don't want to take responses and hear the views of others.

I have listened and responded to you. I just wish you'd address the topic instead of doing exactly what you do in every other thread.

You are the one making that connection, here.

No sir. Hindu doctrine does and it precedes me by 9,000 years.

THe connection is between evil and sickness. You made it. It has nothing to do with Hindu doctrine.

I quoted Hindu doctrine from one of their holy books. They say sickness is the result of past evil. Pay attention.

(2) Is the only recourse he has against babies being sick is to have imperfect humans build hospitals to treat only some of them, using imperfect techniques and incomplete medical information?

Other than forcing you? Yes.

Forcing me to what? This response makes no sense.

Think. Other than forcing you to to what He prescribes would make a perfect world, what else can He do?

..or at least not be mad at god for giving your baby cancer?

Yes, because God doesn't give babies cancer.

Right, because he didn't plan for cancer. Or make it possible. It's somehow connected to free will?

Do you think your decisions affect only you?

That birth defects are also god's plan, that saddling some child with a disfigurement that will preclude that child from being discriminated against or made fun of, not to mention all the health issues around it (like, say spina bifida) that will eventually lead to a short and painful life, that the child should thank god for thinking of him in that plan?

Not at all. Are you sure you aren't confused.

Please explain your view on the matter.

My view is that blaming the victim is morally abhorrent.

Clearly your view on the hindu version is that it's abhorrent.

Version of what?

What's your view on the Christian perspective on the same scenario?

Christianity does not blame the unfortunate for their misfortune.

How did slavery occur without God okaying it?

He give you free will and you decided to make yourself god.

I'm sure that's really comforting to all the enslaved Africans who lost LITERALLY everything they ever knew. Praise his name!

I doubt it is. But that we are all responsible for evils like racism and bigotry is a fact. It isn't God, it is you and I.

How am I wrong about Christianity's view in general that (a) god is the author of all things, (b) he has complete control and foreknowledge of all events, and (c) all people are meant to worship and be thankful to him in spite of the misfortunes he either visits upon them, or somewhat contradicting (A), allows to be visited upon them?

Sorry. You are wrong. What Christianity teaches is your responsibility to know. Either way, I cannot be expected to abandon my topic because you are, and remain ignorant.

You do this a lot: say "you're wrong," and then when someone asks "how am I wrong?" you don't explain it.

Perhaps you should respect thread topics. I do not owe you. Nor do I have to address every question you ask regardless of relavance to the thread topic.

You're a real doing the Lord's work according to 1 Peter 3:15, huh?

Atheist citing scripture. Nice.

"But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect."

You have PM. My thread does not have to be derailed because you are ignorant.

You refuse to explain your own religion or view in any way, while you take the piss out of other religions. That's exactly what I was hoping to demonstrate, thanks for helping!

You're welcome.

All the answers are dumb, because the truth is simply "bad things happen, that's all.

Yes, but an answer that makes you blame the victim for his misfortune is doubly evil. And this evil is evident in the society.

I'll await your response to the first question, about how child sickness happens either without God's approval or because he can't stop it, before I address who's to blame. As it stands, it sounds to me like you want to let your god off the hook for bad things happening, and then say man's sin is ultimately to blame (again ignoring the god character's responsibility for that whole system, and how it's immoral to curse 10 generations of anything for one person's deeds, but we'll see how you actually respond).

You don't know Christian doctrine. If you insist on holding on to your incorrect beliefs, there is nothing can do. Your ideas of it are wrong.

Well, you could always explain how it's wrong.

And you could make a thread on that topic.

It doesn't matter if one believes the doctrine or not, the doctrine itself is morally repugnant. And that there are other bad things does not reduce its ugliness.

Agreed.

Thank you. And discussing such religious topics is the purpose of the board.

But glass houses.

Because you in your ignorance you think both houses are glass is really not relevant to me. While you may find what you think to be irresistibly interesting, the topic of the thread has already been set. Sorry.

Start a thread if you want to talk about yourself and your views.

Thanks, I'll talk about what I want to where I want to, to whom I want to, as you always say.

Then don't complain that people don't explain themselves. I stay on topic.

You're not the boss around here, and I don't buy your whack @$$ internet tough guy nonsense.

I don't care what you buy. If I was interested in you, I would have made you the topic of this thread. If you so need my attention, make a thread.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 6:19:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 9:34:41 PM, Polytheist_Witch wrote:

Believing in fate does not mean you can't feel empathy.

True.

But to the Hindu, karma isn't just fate, its much more.

I agree that bad behavior leads to bad things, by I do not think a deformed baby is to blame for his deformity, or is to be despised.

That is just heartlessly immoral.
keithprosser
Posts: 8,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 8:49:01 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 6:19:09 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/3/2018 9:34:41 PM, Polytheist_Witch wrote:

Believing in fate does not mean you can't feel empathy.

True.

But to the Hindu, karma isn't just fate, its much more.

I agree that bad behavior leads to bad things, by I do not think a deformed baby is to blame for his deformity, or is to be despised.

That is just heartlessly immoral.

An alternative view can be illustrated by considering someone who kills two people. They have only one life, so to fully atone their crime they must suffer in another life.

As I understand Hinduism, your soul has existed for ever and has already passed through many (some say millions) of physical bodies and countless cycles of life and death. The goal of a good Hindu is not to re-incarnate but to end the cycles and enter a state of non-being. That cannot be done if the soul has 'bad karma' so it is necessary that everyone - even wrongdoers - get the chance to atone.

In Christianity, after you are judged there is no second chance!
keithprosser
Posts: 8,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 8:54:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Put another way, a disabled child is not a new individual being punished for the sins of a predecessor - it is the new shell of the same soul.
Stronn
Posts: 683
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 9:46:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Karma is no less moral than the widely held belief among Christians that disease and suffering are a consequence of the Fall. In fact, one might argue that if one or the other were actually true, then karma would be the more moral paradigm. At least with karma, the suffering is the result of an individual's own actions and choices, not those of a distant ancestor over whom you had no control.
Willows
Posts: 11,684
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 9:51:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

The doctrine is called karma. Karma, as many readers will know, is the Sanskrit term for "action," and a belief in karma is the belief that at least some of the hardships, misfortunes or disadvantages that we suffer are consequences of sinful actions that we ourselves performed at some earlier time, often in a previous life.

Can you imagine a society built on the doctrine of karma? Here is what the M|80;nava DharmaW|80;stra (c. 200 CE), a lawbook of Brahmanical Hinduism, states;

"Some evil men become disfigured because of bad deeds committed in this world, and some because of deeds done in a previous life. ... In this way, as a result of the remnants of their past deeds ... are born individuals despised by good people: the mentally retarded, the mute, the blind, and the deaf, as well as those who are deformed. (Ch. 11, vv. 48"53, trans. Olivelle 2005, p. 217)

My God! Despised by good people!

For a believer in this doctrine, racism is OK, because the victim is the one responsible for his enslavement. Rape is OK, because it is the girl's past crime that causes her to be raped. Kill a human being over a cow? Correct, because the murder victim sinned in his past life.

This is Hinduism. This is karma.

The holding of certain people responsible for their own misfortunes, in the way that the doctrine of karma proposes, is seen not merely as mistaken, but as morally reprehensible.

Those who seek to defend the doctrine of karma often fail to see one of the deepest reasons why it can appear so morally unsettling. They assume that, provided one does not actively strive to worsen the practical situation of disadvantaged people, one does not do them any harm by attributing their situation to deeds done in previous lives.

This assumption overlooks the possibility that holding someone responsible for his own misfortune may itself constitute an injury, and hence blankly misses a central point of the contention that blaming the victim makes matters worse.

Now, go to the net and check out any society with Hindu karma as their doctrine. See if it matches what you'd think such a callous society would be.

https://www.google.com...

https://edition.cnn.com...

https://www.quora.com...

https://blogs.wsj.com...

Meanwhile, us normal people just stand back in wonder and watch bigoted theists at each others' necks, as usual, trying to prove who has the best imaginary friend.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 10:28:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 8:49:01 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 7/4/2018 6:19:09 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/3/2018 9:34:41 PM, Polytheist_Witch wrote:

Believing in fate does not mean you can't feel empathy.

True.

But to the Hindu, karma isn't just fate, its much more.

I agree that bad behavior leads to bad things, by I do not think a deformed baby is to blame for his deformity, or is to be despised.

That is just heartlessly immoral.

An alternative view can be illustrated by considering someone who kills two people. They have only one life, so to fully atone their crime they must suffer in another life.

But if the belief is that every misfortune is from past evil, there is incentive to be cruel. After all, karma is doing its righteous work and you did bring it on yourself. And this is directly why we see such bizarrely cruel acts in Hindu cultures so frequently.

As I understand Hinduism, your soul has existed for ever and has already passed through many (some say millions) of physical bodies and countless cycles of life and death. The goal of a good Hindu is not to re-incarnate but to end the cycles and enter a state of non-being. That cannot be done if the soul has 'bad karma' so it is necessary that everyone - even wrongdoers - get the chance to atone.

But what is a "good" Hindu? Does a "good" oppose karma by helping the sick who are justifiably being punished?

In Christianity, after you are judged there is no second chance!

That is how it is in life too.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 10:35:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 8:54:12 AM, keithprosser wrote:

Put another way, a disabled child is not a new individual being punished for the sins of a predecessor - it is the new shell of the same soul.

And the effects of that belief can be seen in the lack of empathy in Hindu culture.

It is vile. For why should you help the injured? Is not karma trying to teach a lesson? If I rape a 9 year old, is it me doing evil, or is it karma repaying her for evil in a past life? It is amazing to me that more people do not see the horror of this doctrine.

Most people in the west do not know how bad things are in countries with Hindu cultures.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 11:31:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 9:46:57 AM, Stronn wrote:

Karma is no less moral than the widely held belief among Christians that disease and suffering are a consequence of the Fall.

But that is not christian doctrine.

In fact, one might argue that if one or the other were actually true, then karma would be the more moral paradigm. At least with karma, the suffering is the result of an individual's own actions and choices, not those of a distant ancestor over whom you had no control.

There are 2 problems with that. First, karma allows you to blame the person suffering, and worse, justifies your lack of aid and empathy. In that way, it is certainly less moral.

Second, the poverty of the morality of karma can be seen in the difference between christian cultures and Hindu cultures.

So even if you were correct that christian doctrine says that disease and suffering are a consequence of the Fall, and you are not correct, the doctrine of karma would be demonstrably immoral.
Polytheist_Witch
Posts: 4,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 11:32:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 6:19:09 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/3/2018 9:34:41 PM, Polytheist_Witch wrote:

Believing in fate does not mean you can't feel empathy.

True.

But to the Hindu, karma isn't just fate, its much more.

I agree that bad behavior leads to bad things, by I do not think a deformed baby is to blame for his deformity, or is to be despised.

That is just heartlessly immoral.

Not at all the truth.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 11:43:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 9:51:08 AM, Willows wrote:
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

The doctrine is called karma. Karma, as many readers will know, is the Sanskrit term for "action," and a belief in karma is the belief that at least some of the hardships, misfortunes or disadvantages that we suffer are consequences of sinful actions that we ourselves performed at some earlier time, often in a previous life.

Can you imagine a society built on the doctrine of karma? Here is what the M|80;nava DharmaW|80;stra (c. 200 CE), a lawbook of Brahmanical Hinduism, states;

"Some evil men become disfigured because of bad deeds committed in this world, and some because of deeds done in a previous life. ... In this way, as a result of the remnants of their past deeds ... are born individuals despised by good people: the mentally retarded, the mute, the blind, and the deaf, as well as those who are deformed. (Ch. 11, vv. 48"53, trans. Olivelle 2005, p. 217)

My God! Despised by good people!

For a believer in this doctrine, racism is OK, because the victim is the one responsible for his enslavement. Rape is OK, because it is the girl's past crime that causes her to be raped. Kill a human being over a cow? Correct, because the murder victim sinned in his past life.

This is Hinduism. This is karma.

The holding of certain people responsible for their own misfortunes, in the way that the doctrine of karma proposes, is seen not merely as mistaken, but as morally reprehensible.

Those who seek to defend the doctrine of karma often fail to see one of the deepest reasons why it can appear so morally unsettling. They assume that, provided one does not actively strive to worsen the practical situation of disadvantaged people, one does not do them any harm by attributing their situation to deeds done in previous lives.

This assumption overlooks the possibility that holding someone responsible for his own misfortune may itself constitute an injury, and hence blankly misses a central point of the contention that blaming the victim makes matters worse.

Now, go to the net and check out any society with Hindu karma as their doctrine. See if it matches what you'd think such a callous society would be.

https://www.google.com...

https://edition.cnn.com...

https://www.quora.com...

https://blogs.wsj.com...

Meanwhile, us normal people just stand back in wonder and watch bigoted theists at each others' necks, as usual, trying to prove who has the best imaginary friend.

As you atheists always say, one does not need to be a theist to know what is moral. Well, in the face of such gross immorality, all you can do is try to score atheist points? Do you think blaming the suffering for their suffering is moral? Do you care?

But here is the funny bit. Hindus and I are theists. This board is explicitly for us to hash out religious differences.

You are an atheist, yet we normal theists stand back in wonder and watch your bigoted posts at the necks of theists trying to prove........... who knows what you're trying to prove? If God is imaginary, what are you trying to prove?

Your every thread is about theists as if you are obsessed with our imaginary friend. You post more about God than the most zealous theist here.

Please, you really should stick to your bigoted, obsessive posts. You have to make three hundred of them a day, aren't you behind?
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 11:50:15 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 11:32:14 AM, Polytheist_Witch wrote:
At 7/4/2018 6:19:09 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/3/2018 9:34:41 PM, Polytheist_Witch wrote:

Believing in fate does not mean you can't feel empathy.

True.

But to the Hindu, karma isn't just fate, its much more.

I agree that bad behavior leads to bad things, by I do not think a deformed baby is to blame for his deformity, or is to be despised.

That is just heartlessly immoral.

Not at all the truth.

Sure it is. If you believe karma is good, then it is good that I suffer for my past crimes. You then have no moral obligation to help me, as you think karma should do its work. And this is what we see in reality. The country with the largest Hindu culture regularly has crimes that would shock and sicken Hitler. And I mean regularly.

As a person thinks, so are they. TITO.
Anonymous
7/4/2018 11:59:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

The doctrine is called karma. Karma, as many readers will know, is the Sanskrit term for "action," and a belief in karma is the belief that at least some of the hardships, misfortunes or disadvantages that we suffer are consequences of sinful actions that we ourselves performed at some earlier time, often in a previous life.

Can you imagine a society built on the doctrine of karma? Here is what the M|80;nava DharmaW|80;stra (c. 200 CE), a lawbook of Brahmanical Hinduism, states;

"Some evil men become disfigured because of bad deeds committed in this world, and some because of deeds done in a previous life. ... In this way, as a result of the remnants of their past deeds ... are born individuals despised by good people: the mentally retarded, the mute, the blind, and the deaf, as well as those who are deformed. (Ch. 11, vv. 48"53, trans. Olivelle 2005, p. 217)

My God! Despised by good people!

For a believer in this doctrine, racism is OK, because the victim is the one responsible for his enslavement. Rape is OK, because it is the girl's past crime that causes her to be raped. Kill a human being over a cow? Correct, because the murder victim sinned in his past life.

This is Hinduism. This is karma.

The holding of certain people responsible for their own misfortunes, in the way that the doctrine of karma proposes, is seen not merely as mistaken, but as morally reprehensible.

Those who seek to defend the doctrine of karma often fail to see one of the deepest reasons why it can appear so morally unsettling. They assume that, provided one does not actively strive to worsen the practical situation of disadvantaged people, one does not do them any harm by attributing their situation to deeds done in previous lives.

This assumption overlooks the possibility that holding someone responsible for his own misfortune may itself constitute an injury, and hence blankly misses a central point of the contention that blaming the victim makes matters worse.

Now, go to the net and check out any society with Hindu karma as their doctrine. See if it matches what you'd think such a callous society would be.

https://www.google.com...

https://edition.cnn.com...

https://www.quora.com...

https://blogs.wsj.com...

Do the consequences of a belief matter more than whether the belief is true or not?
EtrnlVw
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 12:23:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
You're trying to conflate Karma with a lack of empathy or compassion and to be honest it's irrelevant what people do with spiritual facts, we reap what we sow and this is a cause and effect creation. Just because some have yet to accept the souls existence before the womb of mamma doesn't make it somehow the law immoral and I don't believe understanding Karma causes a person not to want to help them that doesn't really follow. We, as believers are always to feel compassion as we are in the same boat and under the same laws and principles in creation, so if we feel no empathy we get none, if we help no one we get none, if we give we get and if we give nothing we get nothing in return ect ect is the basic principle. These principles are Biblical, only other religions expand more on the reality of the soul before birth and Karma is associated with that as sowing and reaping do not end in a single lifetime rather it follows the soul and the soul learns from it through experiences. All souls come out of the heart of God and all souls are learning in creation no matter where they are, and we should have compassion for that and help soul in any way we can, if an individual does not have compassion for other souls it's their lesson to learn.

So if your reference to Karma is a guy like Hari, then rest assured the law will apply to him as well even though he believes his Karma cannot be affected. He thinks he's gong to reincarnate back to his homeland over and over as some wealthy Priest with people kissing his feet lol! not at all, he's coming back to reap all the things he does in this forum to mock the unfortunate and the suffering oh yeah, and now you know why you see suffering......look at a guy like Hari, how many lives of suffering or slavery do you think it would take to knock some sense into his head? while some Christians might be overly joyed that he may spend an eternity in hell the alternative for that is reincarnation and Karma, meaning a lifetime or several of unfortunate experiences if necessary. That's the souls chance at learning and surviving in the created worlds.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 12:23:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 11:59:03 AM, Fly wrote:
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

The doctrine is called karma. Karma, as many readers will know, is the Sanskrit term for "action," and a belief in karma is the belief that at least some of the hardships, misfortunes or disadvantages that we suffer are consequences of sinful actions that we ourselves performed at some earlier time, often in a previous life.

Can you imagine a society built on the doctrine of karma? Here is what the M|80;nava DharmaW|80;stra (c. 200 CE), a lawbook of Brahmanical Hinduism, states;

"Some evil men become disfigured because of bad deeds committed in this world, and some because of deeds done in a previous life. ... In this way, as a result of the remnants of their past deeds ... are born individuals despised by good people: the mentally retarded, the mute, the blind, and the deaf, as well as those who are deformed. (Ch. 11, vv. 48"53, trans. Olivelle 2005, p. 217)

My God! Despised by good people!

For a believer in this doctrine, racism is OK, because the victim is the one responsible for his enslavement. Rape is OK, because it is the girl's past crime that causes her to be raped. Kill a human being over a cow? Correct, because the murder victim sinned in his past life.

This is Hinduism. This is karma.

The holding of certain people responsible for their own misfortunes, in the way that the doctrine of karma proposes, is seen not merely as mistaken, but as morally reprehensible.

Those who seek to defend the doctrine of karma often fail to see one of the deepest reasons why it can appear so morally unsettling. They assume that, provided one does not actively strive to worsen the practical situation of disadvantaged people, one does not do them any harm by attributing their situation to deeds done in previous lives.

This assumption overlooks the possibility that holding someone responsible for his own misfortune may itself constitute an injury, and hence blankly misses a central point of the contention that blaming the victim makes matters worse.

Now, go to the net and check out any society with Hindu karma as their doctrine. See if it matches what you'd think such a callous society would be.

https://www.google.com...

https://edition.cnn.com...

https://www.quora.com...

https://blogs.wsj.com...

Do the consequences of a belief matter more than whether the belief is true or not?

I think it depends on the belief, but I certainly think that is possible.
bulproof
Posts: 36,669
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 12:38:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 11:31:18 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/4/2018 9:46:57 AM, Stronn wrote:

Karma is no less moral than the widely held belief among Christians that disease and suffering are a consequence of the Fall.

But that is not christian doctrine.
Yes it is.
keithprosser
Posts: 8,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 1:47:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

But, oddly, it was Christians, not Hindus, doing it.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 2:13:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 1:47:06 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:

Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

But, oddly, it was Christians, not Hindus, doing it.

True.

But thinking is required here. This is actually a critique of the idea, not the religion itself. Sure, the idea is wrapped up with the religion, but the problem comes from the idea of karma.

Now, this does not mean karma is the only bad idea. Those men taking others as slaves subscribed to an idea just as bad as karma. That some people were intrinsically superior to others.

So karma being an immoral idea does not mean there aren't other bad ideas.

Slavers were opposed by, and eventually overcome by Christians using their holy book. In Hinduism, karma is their orthodox idea. They cannot be opposed by Hindus using their religion.

And Hindus have enslaved more people, in a more profound way, than all the black people ever taken into slavery. The lower castes in India have been enslaved for more than 6,000 years, and are still slaves today, told that their station is ordained by god. Told that they were unworthy of even being touched. They are locked in to a cycle of poverty, kept there by the foul idea of karma.

Today blacks are free in Africa and the countries who took them in as slaves. Hindu slaves are still slaves, locked in slavery despite the laws enacted to relieve them. They are right now fighting and dying trying to be free of that sick idea.

Here is an objective view from the Financial Times.
https://www.google.com...
Harikrish
Posts: 29,686
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 2:48:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/3/2018 11:57:58 AM, ethang5 wrote:
Imagine you are in a large hospital room.

All around you are babies with birth defects and severe diseases. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Sorrow?

Imagine you are in a slave ship in 1790.

All around are sick and dying Africans abducted from their homes. As a human being, would you feel empathy? Anger?

Not if you are Hindu.

Hinduism teaches that sick babies are that way because of their own fault. That enslaved men are enslaved due to their own fault. Hinduism teaches that is the way it should be.

The doctrine is called karma. Karma, as many readers will know, is the Sanskrit term for "action," and a belief in karma is the belief that at least some of the hardships, misfortunes or disadvantages that we suffer are consequences of sinful actions that we ourselves performed at some earlier time, often in a previous life.

Can you imagine a society built on the doctrine of karma? Here is what the M|80;nava DharmaW|80;stra (c. 200 CE), a lawbook of Brahmanical Hinduism, states;

"Some evil men become disfigured because of bad deeds committed in this world, and some because of deeds done in a previous life. ... In this way, as a result of the remnants of their past deeds ... are born individuals despised by good people: the mentally retarded, the mute, the blind, and the deaf, as well as those who are deformed. (Ch. 11, vv. 48"53, trans. Olivelle 2005, p. 217)

My God! Despised by good people!

For a believer in this doctrine, racism is OK, because the victim is the one responsible for his enslavement. Rape is OK, because it is the girl's past crime that causes her to be raped. Kill a human being over a cow? Correct, because the murder victim sinned in his past life.

This is Hinduism. This is karma.

The holding of certain people responsible for their own misfortunes, in the way that the doctrine of karma proposes, is seen not merely as mistaken, but as morally reprehensible.

Those who seek to defend the doctrine of karma often fail to see one of the deepest reasons why it can appear so morally unsettling. They assume that, provided one does not actively strive to worsen the practical situation of disadvantaged people, one does not do them any harm by attributing their situation to deeds done in previous lives.

This assumption overlooks the possibility that holding someone responsible for his own misfortune may itself constitute an injury, and hence blankly misses a central point of the contention that blaming the victim makes matters worse.

Now, go to the net and check out any society with Hindu karma as their doctrine. See if it matches what you'd think such a callous society would be.

https://www.google.com...

https://edition.cnn.com...

https://www.quora.com...

https://blogs.wsj.com...

We have pictures of Bad Karma.

History of African slavery in pictures.

https://i.ytimg.com...
http://www.brh.org.uk...
http://4.bp.blogspot.com...
http://africanah.org...
http://www.anotherafrica.net...

Starving Africans.
https://paanluelwel2011.files.wordpress.com...
https://i.ytimg.com...
http://all-that-is-interesting.com...
http://i.dailymail.co.uk...
https://i.pinimg.com...

Why abusing cows bring Bad Karna.

https://youtu.be...

https://i.ytimg.com...

http://all-that-is-interesting.com...

http://www.thebirdman.org...

https://speedwealthy.com...

And how Evil Karma is earned.
https://static1.squarespace.com...

https://goo.gl...

http://all-that-is-interesting.com...

African drinking cows blood.
https://i.pinimg.com...

Indians believed it was bad karma to be born a Dalit.(low caste) . But today Dalits are becoming millionaires. Each Dalit millionaire can buy 2,500 Aftican slaves from Libya at $400 each. Now Dalits are pointing to Africans for having really Bad Karma.

Bad Karma has consequences. Trump calls all African countries shithole countries.

Trump shithole comments.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Inside the mind of Trump.
https://goo.gl...

Trump praises India...wants Indians to live in America
https://youtu.be...

Harikrish is a Brahmin and Brahmins belong to the highest caste the priestly caste. There is no downside to being born a Brahmin the most priveledged of all groups with boundless good karma showered on Brahmins for generations.

To improve your karma, go find the nearest Brahmin and kiss his feet. I invite you all to embrace the abundance of my aura.
You can also come and get your head slapped for free at the Harikrish Spiritual Shaming Detox Centre.

Harikrish biblical scholar spiritual leader.
ethang5
Posts: 19,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 3:09:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 12:23:37 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:

You're trying to conflate Karma with a lack of empathy or compassion and to be honest it's irrelevant what people do with spiritual facts, we reap what we sow and this is a cause and effect creation.

And if this was all the Hindu doctrine of karma said, the problem would be minimal. But the doctrine goes on to say that "good people" should despise suffering people.

Just because some have yet to accept the souls existence before the womb of mamma doesn't make it somehow the law immoral and I don't believe understanding Karma causes a person not to want to help them that doesn't really follow.

Perhaps you believe a different version of karma. Your character here has certainly been kind, understanding, and empathetic.

We, as believers are always to feel compassion as we are in the same boat and under the same laws and principles in creation, so if we feel no empathy we get none, if we help no one we get none, if we give we get and if we give nothing we get nothing in return ect ect is the basic principle.

Sounds good but one poster here told me that when he looks at blacks he feels revulsion because karma made them black because they had been evil in past lives. So maybe his karma is different than yours.

These principles are Biblical, only other religions expand more on the reality of the soul before birth and Karma is associated with that as sowing and reaping do not end in a single lifetime rather it follows the soul and the soul learns from it through experiences.

All souls come out of the heart of God and all souls are learning in creation no matter where they are, and we should have compassion for that and help soul in any way we can, if an individual does not have compassion for other souls it's their lesson to learn.

So if your reference to Karma is a guy like Hari, then rest assured the law will apply to him as well even though he believes his Karma cannot be affected. He thinks he's gong to reincarnate back to his homeland over and over as some wealthy Priest with people kissing his feet lol! not at all, he's coming back to reap all the things he does in this forum to mock the unfortunate and the suffering oh yeah, and now you know why you see suffering......look at a guy like Hari, how many lives of suffering or slavery do you think it would take to knock some sense into his head? while some Christians might be overly joyed that he may spend an eternity in hell the alternative for that is reincarnation and Karma, meaning a lifetime or several of unfortunate experiences if necessary. That's the souls chance at learning and surviving in the created worlds.

Sounds good, but if one doesn't take memory over to the next life, how will one ever learn?
EtrnlVw
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 3:26:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 3:09:00 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/4/2018 12:23:37 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:

You're trying to conflate Karma with a lack of empathy or compassion and to be honest it's irrelevant what people do with spiritual facts, we reap what we sow and this is a cause and effect creation.

And if this was all the Hindu doctrine of karma said, the problem would be minimal. But the doctrine goes on to say that "good people" should despise suffering people.

Just because some have yet to accept the souls existence before the womb of mamma doesn't make it somehow the law immoral and I don't believe understanding Karma causes a person not to want to help them that doesn't really follow.

Perhaps you believe a different version of karma. Your character here has certainly been kind, understanding, and empathetic.

We, as believers are always to feel compassion as we are in the same boat and under the same laws and principles in creation, so if we feel no empathy we get none, if we help no one we get none, if we give we get and if we give nothing we get nothing in return ect ect is the basic principle.

Sounds good but one poster here told me that when he looks at blacks he feels revulsion because karma made them black because they had been evil in past lives. So maybe his karma is different than yours.

These principles are Biblical, only other religions expand more on the reality of the soul before birth and Karma is associated with that as sowing and reaping do not end in a single lifetime rather it follows the soul and the soul learns from it through experiences.

All souls come out of the heart of God and all souls are learning in creation no matter where they are, and we should have compassion for that and help soul in any way we can, if an individual does not have compassion for other souls it's their lesson to learn.

So if your reference to Karma is a guy like Hari, then rest assured the law will apply to him as well even though he believes his Karma cannot be affected. He thinks he's gong to reincarnate back to his homeland over and over as some wealthy Priest with people kissing his feet lol! not at all, he's coming back to reap all the things he does in this forum to mock the unfortunate and the suffering oh yeah, and now you know why you see suffering......look at a guy like Hari, how many lives of suffering or slavery do you think it would take to knock some sense into his head? while some Christians might be overly joyed that he may spend an eternity in hell the alternative for that is reincarnation and Karma, meaning a lifetime or several of unfortunate experiences if necessary. That's the souls chance at learning and surviving in the created worlds.

Sounds good, but if one doesn't take memory over to the next life, how will one ever learn?
Because they don't really need past memories to learn just yet, they just need to experience it and when they wake up they can see it all as a whole. Actually, just experiencing helps more, because the souls experience is much more realistic. If they'd remember, it could interfere with the lesson and may not be as important to them. But, when the soul has matured, it is allowed to peek into the past, just depends upon where soul is in its journey.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 3:48:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/4/2018 3:09:00 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 7/4/2018 12:23:37 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:

You're trying to conflate Karma with a lack of empathy or compassion and to be honest it's irrelevant what people do with spiritual facts, we reap what we sow and this is a cause and effect creation.

And if this was all the Hindu doctrine of karma said, the problem would be minimal. But the doctrine goes on to say that "good people" should despise suffering people.

Just because some have yet to accept the souls existence before the womb of mamma doesn't make it somehow the law immoral and I don't believe understanding Karma causes a person not to want to help them that doesn't really follow.

Perhaps you believe a different version of karma. Your character here has certainly been kind, understanding, and empathetic.

We, as believers are always to feel compassion as we are in the same boat and under the same laws and principles in creation, so if we feel no empathy we get none, if we help no one we get none, if we give we get and if we give nothing we get nothing in return ect ect is the basic principle.

Sounds good but one poster here told me that when he looks at blacks he feels revulsion because karma made them black because they had been evil in past lives. So maybe his karma is different than yours.

Just like many spiritual principles get twisted in Christian teaching so the same with "Karma", you have idiots from the negative side trying to sow discord. It's a very simple thing really even though the nature and desires of soul can be complex, the reality of cause and effect is simple. If you witness someone using a spiritual law as a means to hurt people you are also witnessing a distorted person because while the universal laws are meant to keep harmony and balance we are to teach them in grace just like Jesus. "Blacks" are no different than any other beautiful variation in the Gods worlds, their beauty, culture and way of life commands respect. I can't relate to any other mentality beyond that so that's just pathetic what can I say? I know there is all kinds of misrepresentations of what Jesus teaches I mean we deal with that on a regular basis.
These principles are Biblical, only other religions expand more on the reality of the soul before birth and Karma is associated with that as sowing and reaping do not end in a single lifetime rather it follows the soul and the soul learns from it through experiences.

All souls come out of the heart of God and all souls are learning in creation no matter where they are, and we should have compassion for that and help soul in any way we can, if an individual does not have compassion for other souls it's their lesson to learn.

So if your reference to Karma is a guy like Hari, then rest assured the law will apply to him as well even though he believes his Karma cannot be affected. He thinks he's gong to reincarnate back to his homeland over and over as some wealthy Priest with people kissing his feet lol! not at all, he's coming back to reap all the things he does in this forum to mock the unfortunate and the suffering oh yeah, and now you know why you see suffering......look at a guy like Hari, how many lives of suffering or slavery do you think it would take to knock some sense into his head? while some Christians might be overly joyed that he may spend an eternity in hell the alternative for that is reincarnation and Karma, meaning a lifetime or several of unfortunate experiences if necessary. That's the souls chance at learning and surviving in the created worlds.

Sounds good, but if one doesn't take memory over to the next life, how will one ever learn?
EtrnlVw
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2018 3:49:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
If you don't at least consider Karma as a spiritual law, it will force you to either accept that God has either permitted things to exist or that God caused it to exist because there is nothing outside the Creator rather all things are within it and through it. But, without emotion, you can begin to accept Karma as a spiritual law (which the soul has full responsibility for) then you see quite clearly this is a sowing and reaping experience and has really nothing to with God per say at all because it's a give and take relationship between soul and law, as we are subject to a law of creation. Our experiences are dictated by our very own desires and actions and it plays out in this material world through lives and we are fully responsible for them, and...if we apply the correct principles laid out we can work our way to better experiences, or worse depending upon the soul.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.