The weird thing is, despite all the evidence I present him, he still maintains Hindus don't believe in reincarnating into animals.
Despite all these points presented previously showing that Hindus do indeed believe in animal reincarnation, he still claims he's right. How odd? Bad comprehension must be in play here? He won't even say, 'I need to look into this further'. Farhan's adamant he's 'evidential' and 'logical'. He's accusing me of ">Bad hermeneutics my friend, bad hermeneutics'
The weird thing is, he has not provided any real evidence to show otherwise. Can he bring forward a load of Hindu scholars saying all these Hindus are misrepresenting Hinduism in believing animal reincarnation? That all these commentators and translators of Hindu scriptures are wrong? That all these websites about Hinduism are wrong? That Washington State Uni is wrong? That Hindu teachers of Hinduism are wrong?
My advice to Farhan (who happens to be non-Hindu), rather than wasting time with me (I've simply ran with what translations of Hindu scripture, commentaries, Hindus, Hindu websites, teachers and academic websites have said - namely Hindus believe in animal reincarnation), if you truly believe this is not what Hindus believe then why not go to the translators, writers of commentaries, Hindu teachers, Hindu websites and academic sources to TELL them you think they are misrepresenting Hinduism?!
Why not start with Krishna.com which states::
What you remember at death results from the actions, thoughts, and desires of your entire lifetime. According to the Vedic literature there are 8,400,000 species of life, and you, the spirit soul, have to accept the body of a particular species according to the activities and desires of your present life.
Q:But I couldn’t take an animal body!
A:Why not? Reincarnation is not limited to the human species. The difference between an animal and a human being is only the body. There is no difference between a soul in a human body and a soul in a dog’s body. [Source]
Farhan, please focus on more important matters now. If you really believe all these Hindus are misreading their scriptures that's your choice but this dialogue started with you taking exception to Dr Naik stating Hindus believe they could become animals through reincarnation. My point of the dialogue is to show that Naik was not making stuff up (as you intimated) - Hindus DO believe what Naik stated. Our discussion is over as it's clear Naik was correct. Whether you think these Hindus are misrepresenting Hinduism is not the discussion here. If you want to discuss or debate that then isn't it better for you to actually go to the Hindu websites, translators (etc) to dialogue with them?
I really don't have much more time to spend on this. I ask you for sincerity, understanding, comprehension, respect and humility.
I invite Farhan to drop his baggage and come to Islam.
Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com
yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
2 comments:
Part 2:
From Minoria:
THE CHRISTIAN GROUP THAT REJECTS HELL
They are the 7th-Day Adventists.
Where being "consumed by the fire" and "eternal punishment"(as stated be Jesus in Matthew) is non-existence.Where the punishment that lasts forever is precisely to be annihilated.Another evangelical,who leans toward annihilation is GREG BOYD,the great Christian scholar.Just go to youtube and write:"Greg Boyd:Thoughts on Eternal Punishment".
ABOUT A BELIEVER IN HELL WHO IS NOW FOR CONDITIONAL IMMORTALITY
Francis Chan and Dr. Preston Sprinkle wrote a book against annihilationism called "Erasing Hell".But now Preston Sprinkle is against hell as real,for technical reasons,read:
http://www.christianuniversalism.com/2013/03/co-author-of-erasing-hell-changing-his-position-on-hell/
AGAINST THE ARGUMENT THAT HELL IS TRUE BECAUSE IT WAS BELIEVED BY THE EARLY CHRISTIANS
1.Ok,first Paul wrote that false doctrines would appear(Romans 16:17)
2.Now the documentary evidence(as Catholics point out)is the early Christian scholars(at least from the year 110) believed in TRANSUBSTANTIATION(that in the Eucharist the bread and wine become the LITERAL BODY and BLOOD of JESUS).Reading the NT they were wrong,but it's true THAT belief appeared early.How is it so many experts got it wrong?Just because something is EARLY doesn't mean it is correct.Read:
http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/transubstantiation-from-stumbling-block-to-cornerstone.html
3.In the SAME WAY those same or similar Christian experts believed in never-ending,literal fire burning hell.
BUT THE QMRAN DOCUMENTS SHOW THE ESSENES BELIEVED IN ANNIHILATIONISM OF THE EVIL ONES(NO HELL)
That was pointed out by Preston Sprinkler,and the Essene beliefs were similar to that of Jesus and John-Baptist,as all scholars know.And some of their expressions are similar to that of Jesus,yet they didn't believe in hell.
IN ADDITION THE BOOK OF DANIEL TALKS ABOUT THE PUNISHMENT OF THE EVIL AT THE LAST JUDGEMENT
First,the last chapter says the exact meaning of the book will become apparent in the last days,Daniel 12:8-9:
"I(Daniel) heard, but I did not understand. So I asked, "My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?"
He(God) replied, "Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end."
HERE IS WHAT REFERS TO THE FATE OF THE EVIL
It is just a few verses before:
Daniel 12:2-4:
"And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever.
But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”
ABOUT ANGELICA ZAMBRANO
She is an Ecuadoran girl who in 2011(then 18 years old) said she was dead for 23 hrs and was taken on tour of a literal,burning hell(she saw Michael Jackson and Pope John Paul II there).
And then after that she went on 2 more tours of hell(3 trips by 2014).However some of the things she has said contradict the NT(even for those who believe in a burning hell).So it has to be rejected as proof.
Post a Comment