Board index ‹ Hinduism

[Kannada]

Christian monotheism vs hindu Theism.why do Xtians say hindus are not monotheists

Saktism. shakti is the supersoul and ALL godess and gods are just her in different forms.one person.many forms.actually advaita shakti and the shaktism scripts say devi is the only existant.

vaisnavism-vishnu is the supersoul and is the only God.the rest of the gods are created jivas and angels that will be reborn after the yuga is done.they are helpers and have an end.

Shaivism-Shiva is the only God and all the other gods are created jivas that assist him as angelic hosts.created is a bad word because in both vaisnavism and shaivism and shaktism all beings are one in substance with diety emanated,but different in constitution,thats why he's a supersoul of sorts.trika shaivism and naths say shiva is only existant.we're all siva .

because consciousness cant be created.we always exist.

namaste

the trinity with three different persons but one substance as equal entities is more polytheistic.Xtian orthodox say that God is what he is and the three are who he is,but this makes little logical coherence .a system where God is one person with all the qualities of diety is more monotheistic.this is logical.

all forms of hinduism but advaita vedanta are thus fully monotheistic and have more Tawheed than Xtian doctrines.

judaism believes in a series of sefirot wich is also shirk.

http://hara-hara-mahadev.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2009-09-15T20:20:00-07:00&max-results=500

http://www.astrojyoti.com/devi-suktam.htm

http://www.aghori.it/devi_atharvashirsha_eng.htm

islam and hinduism are thus tawheed

compared to Xtianity,hinduism is pure one.one person is Diety.christianity believes in 3 persons

[jimwalton]

I think the reason we Christians don't view Hinduism as monotheistic is because within the various streams of Hindu thought there are multiple answers to the question, “Who or what is god?” Hindus can believe that there is one god, 330 million gods, or no god at all. The Vedas, the most ancient of Hindu scriptures, which are accepted by most Hindus as normative, teach that atman is Brahman, or “the soul is god,” meaning that god is in each of us and each of us is part of god, and therefore there are potentially many gods.

Besides that, there are Shiva, Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, and Brahman.

Even in your post you mention "ALL godesses and gods (plural)," "the only God.the rest of the gods...," implying more gods than Vishnu, and Shiva. So is Vishnu the only god, or is Shiva the only god (you said it about both)?

I'd love to talk more about it. I'll readily admit that I've learned about Hinduism as an outsider.

[Fan 101]

This places it in the same spot as Christianity. Things can be god, or angels, or demons, and if you’re catholic, also saints. The difference is just the use of the word god. Lesser Hindu gods and Christian angels and saints are basically the same, one just doesn’t use the word god to preserve the appearance of monotheism.

[jimwalton]

I'm glad to keep talking. It seems to me this is *not* the same as Christianity. In Christianity things can't be god. Only God is God, and there is only one God. Things can't be angels or demons. Only angels can be angels, and only demons can be demons. Angels don't turn into demons, or vice versa. There is an identity consistency. Humans don't become gods. Humans don't become angels. (Yeah, the Catholic *saint* thing is not a concept that you'll read anywhere in the Bible, so I discount it.)

> Lesser Hindu gods and Christian angels and saints are basically the same

See, this is where I need to learn. In Christianity, there are no lesser gods. There is only one God. Angels are not gods. They are spirit messengers. Humans saints are neither God, divine, or spirit beings. In Christianity, all believers are saints (it means "set apart" for God). And when we die we don't become divine or angels, we are humans who are now in heaven ("saints" just means those who belong to God). So it seems to me, with as little as I know, that lesser Hindu gods are *notI* the same as Christian angels and saints (Christian angels and saints aren't even the same).

So let's keep talking. I'm learning.

[Kannada]

you t hink im saying there is one substance,as if im defining diety ther way christianity does by refering to essence.im speaking of person and hypostasis not being.

I said shiva is the only God.visnu is a god,not God.though he is god since he is Shiva,but shiva is the source since hes awareness.shakti is his formless arising energetical essence,so shakti is the only existing being.

energy creates conscious experience.formless(female)to form conscious(male) .

shiva means auspicious.shakti means energy.energy creates pervading consciousness.

there are no multiple capital dietys.there is one .many forms and incarnations .ONE hypostasis.as a xtian u should know what a hypostasis is.chrsiotians have billions of hypostasis whereas we have 1

pranam

there is one godess,multiple gods.God,and gods.call them what you wish.the name is irrelevant.uuhm,god is not in us,he is us.big difference.one god.there is one supersoul.Just like jeebus has power to multiply himself in various corpereal entities,we believe Godess does that.

[jimwalton]

Please be patient with me. You must understand that Hinduism is very difficult for an outsider to understand. (I've heard it's even difficult for Hindus to understand.)

If Shiva is the only God, and vishnu is a god, then isn't that polytheism?

> as a xtian u should know what a hypostasis is.chrsiotians have billions of hypostasis whereas we have 1

What does this even mean? Are you talking about angels and demons? Please clarify.

> im speaking of person and hypostasis not being

Please clarify. Biblical theology posits Christ as of the same substance as the Father (Jn. 1.1; 10.30; Col. 1. 16), even though it doesn't use the term homoousias, as well as a plurality of hypostases (Heb. 1.3). Christianity never asserts polytheism, but always 3-in-1, trinitarian monotheism.

What do you mean Christianity has billions of hypostases?

> there is one godess,multiple gods.

How is this different from polytheism?

> god is not in us,he is us

You're saying we are all part of the divine essence, the divine being. One god, in all and through all. My logical problem with that is that if the universe is not the creation of a personal God, but is rather a sort of unconscious emanation from the divine, then we have no legitimate subject-object relationships, no particularity, but only a blank unity. In such a view there can be no foundation for knowledge, love, morality, or ethics. Without an absolute personality, there is no diversity or distinction basic to reality at all. Ultimate reality is a bare unity about which nothing may be said.

> Just like jeebus has power to multiply himself in various corpereal entities,we believe Godess does that.

Who's Jeebus? Do you mean Jesus? Hmm. He never multiplied Himself in various corporeal entities, so you'll have to clarify. But it sounds as if you're mistaken.

[Kill Us]

I am not a Hindu but I have some insight about how eastern religion sees god.

There is only one infinite universal consciousness and we are the the different manifestations of that consciousness. That universal consciousness is what monotheists call as God while Hindus sees the different manifestation of that universal consciousness as god themselves. The trinity is an explanation of this concept.

[jimwalton]

Thanks. I find Hinduism very complex and difficult to understand as an outsider.

> There is only one infinite universal consciousness and we are the the different manifestations of that consciousness.

Yeah, I get this, though it seems illogical to me. As I mentioned to the OP, if the universe is not the creation of a personal God, but is rather a sort of unconscious emanation from the divine, then we have no legitimate subject-object relationships, no particularity, but only a blank unity. In such a view there can be no foundation for knowledge, love, morality, or ethics. Without an absolute personality, there is no diversity or distinction basic to reality at all. Ultimate reality is a bare unity about which nothing may be said.

Hinduism, it seems, incorporates atheism, polytheism, theism, and much else all under the same umbrella of consciousness.

> That universal consciousness is what monotheists call as God while Hindus sees the different manifestation of that universal consciousness as god themselves.

But the defeater for the universal consciousness being what monotheists call God is that monism (all is god) denies any subject/object relationship, which in reality denies the existence of matter and a rejection of individual identity. There is ultimately no difference between good and evil, man and nature, or person to person. The logic and philosophy don't hold together for me.

In addition, it doesn't seem true at all that the Trinity is an explanation of this concept. The Trinity is a very different idea in Christianity than different manifestations of the universal consciousness. One early Christian heresy (Modalism; Sabellianism) was the idea that Jesus Christ was just a different manifestation of the one God. So if Hindus perceive it as the same thing, they are misunderstanding Christian theology (no surprise; I find it difficult to understand Hindu theology).

[Kill Us]

> Yeah, I get this, though it seems illogical to me.

It's illogical for outsiders but it starts to make sense once you understand it more. Think of the universe we are in as an ice sculpture including your own body and even personality. When all of that melts, how do you tell which is which in the puddle of water? What we call as personal god is basically you yourself as the manifestation of that consciousness. We are essentially god ourselves and we are talking to our different reflections when we talk to other people hence the golden rule and polytheism. Our manifestation as humans is of our own will and a product of eternal experience. Love is simply unity with the universal consciousness and hatred is separation hence why love bring people together while hatred drives us apart.

God is that monism (all is god) denies any subject/object relationship, which in reality denies the existence of matter and a rejection of individual identity.

They are speaking in terms of objective reality while Christians sees it in a subjective way which we are experiencing now. We have personalities because we hold on to it and the same with everyone we met. In reality, our sense of individuality is an illusion and isn't fixed. We can melt back to the source which is the universal consciousness if you want to but you can also separate from it and experience individuality. Good and evil is simply about wholeness and fragmentation respectively. God is good because god is whole.

> One early Christian heresy (Modalism; Sabellianism) was the idea that Jesus Christ was just a different manifestation of the one God.

That's the problem because some church leaders have their own interpretation and the idea of Jesus and God being the same doesn't sit well with them hence it is labeled as heresy. Modalism is actually very close to what Hindus believe with one universal consciousness having different manifestations.

[jimwalton]

> Think of the universe we are in as an ice sculpture including your own body and even personality.

See, even your analogy doesn't make sense to me. It's not in any way an accurate picture (even analogously) of the universe. You make it seem like all is one and one is all, with no differentiation and no subject/object relationships, and that's just not an accurate picture in any sense of reality.

> our sense of individuality is an illusion

I don't think it is. You're denying obvious reality, in my perspective. If all is one and one is all, and if I'm an illusion, you are denying the existence of matter and the objective reality of individual identity. When I evaluate a religion, one of the things I look for is its correspondence to reality, and none of what you are saying fills that.

> That's the problem because some church leaders have their own interpretation and the idea of Jesus and God being the same doesn't sit well with them hence it is labeled as heresy.

It's not a problem as far as Christian beliefs. We don't subscribe to every goofy idea just because someone has an idea. It has to comport with Christianity. It's not because it "doesn't sit well with them," but instead because it's just wrong. We dare not confuse the two.