Satan has created the non-christians religions!!!!

[sarabhanga]

The verbal root as is to be.

The active present participle of as is sat, which indicates being or existence.

The plural genitive of sat is satAm, which is the nature of beings and existences.

And the singular nominative shatam is a hundred.

shiva is santam and rudra is shatam, and name of the beast is Existence itself.

oM tat sat

[Janissary]

People, perhaps you should try to understand the stance from a Christian perspective. If you want to understand a certain aspect of a religion or its adherence, you have to view it from the perspective of their worldview. Not take an isolated facet and plot it against your worldview.

The thing with Christians is, well, it is a rather common belief among them that those who die as anything but Christians will go straight to Hell. Based on this, it is not hard to see that they think all other (read: competing) religions are inherently bad, even though most of them can admit that the other religions have some good morals to them.

[Sagefrakrobatik]

There are a handful of passages from the bible that seem to promote the idea of exclusivity; "No one gets to the father except through me"

"the path to the father is narrow whereas the road to destruction is wide"

There are also other parts of the bible that warn about false prophets like Baal. So christians look at other religions and see them as modern adaptations of these false religions. It is up to adherents of these other faith systems to challenge this dogma.

[Gotam]

Namaste,

as a European having had a Christian (catholic) education, I am aware of the existence of a Christian idea according to which non-christian religions are satanic. I am sometimes told that in the Americas, such beliefs are still widespread - I do not know. Here in Europe, such an idea makes people fall off their chairs with laughter. When I was a child, four decades ago, most people in my home country (Belgium) were still believing Christians, but even then, the idea of satan being at the origin of "foreign" religions would have seemed very old-fashioned, if not ridiculous to them. Nowadays, without being practiced by a majority of people, yoga has gained general acceptance and recognition all over Europe, and the idea that "the others belong to the devil" just makes Europeans laugh or shrug their shoulders. The Italian website you were referring to will only be taken seriously by rather marginal Italians, I suppose. So I would not worry too much about a prejudice that belongs to a world-view which most Europeans no longer understand.

The difference with Hindus is that modern Europeans will treat the old ideas with contempt, whereas you Hindus are more willing to understand other people even though they are wrong, and I have to congratulate you for that; I am considering advising the members of a Belgian website to visit your site in order to learn to behave, even when anonymous.

[rcscwc]

Buddhism rejects god and satan both. So, all abrahmic religions are not even spiritual.

Hmmm. Hindus classify them as mlechcha dharmas, created by Brihspati to waylay them. So they are groping in darkness.

[jaggin]

Buddhism rejects god and satan both. So, all abrahmic religions are not even spiritual.

Hmmm. Hindus classify them as mlechcha dharmas, created by Brihspati to waylay them. So they are groping in darkness.

What kind of logic is that? Buddhism isn't an Abrahamic religion.

How then does one account for the verse "God is a spirit and must be worshipped in spirit and truth?"

Jesus says "I am the light of the world." How then can Christianity be groping in darkness?

[rcscwc]

Sarbhanga has been trying very hard to prove that Shiva and satan are the same. From that onwards, xian can make all sorts of claims.

[jaggin]

Sarbhanga has been trying very hard to prove that Shiva and satan are the same. From that onwards, xian can make all sorts of claims.

I don't buy into the language game. Obviously similar words most often have different meanings. For instance the meaning of satan is adversary. That is obviously not the same meaning as existence. In Hebrew existence is "Jah" which doesn't even come close to the word satan. Satan isn't even a name but simply a reference to the fact that there is a being who opposes God. Iran calls the US "the Great Satan" and the US returns the favor by saying that Iran is a member of an axis of evil.

[rcscwc]

What kind of logic is that? Buddhism isn't an Abrahamic religion.

How then does one account for the verse "God is a spirit and must be worshipped in spirit and truth?"

Jesus says "I am the light of the world." How then can Christianity be groping in darkness?

Krishna too says I am the light, so how can Hinduism be satanic?

Originally Posted by rcscwc
Sarbhanga has been trying very hard to prove that Shiva and satan are the same. From that onwards, xian can make all sorts of claims.
I don't buy into the language game. Obviously similar words most often have different meanings. For instance the meaning of satan is adversary. That is obviously not the same meaning as existence. In Hebrew existence is "Jah" which doesn't even come close to the word satan. Satan isn't even a name but simply a reference to the fact that there is a being who opposes God. Iran calls the US "the Great Satan" and the US returns the favor by saying that Iran is a member of an axis of evil.

Yeah, language can be negative return game.

A sequence of letters may mean something in one language but entirely another in another.

[sanjaya]

I don't buy into the language game. Obviously similar words most often have different meanings. For instance the meaning of satan is adversary. That is obviously not the same meaning as existence. In Hebrew existence is "Jah" which doesn't even come close to the word satan. Satan isn't even a name but simply a reference to the fact that there is a being who opposes God. Iran calls the US "the Great Satan" and the US returns the favor by saying that Iran is a member of an axis of evil.

Yes, I think we can all agree that the language game is silly. It's no different than the Hindus who try to say that Jesus Christ and Sri Krishna are the same person. They make some kind of play on "Chrishna" if I recall correctly. It involves a rather circuitous path of translating "Krishna" to Latin, then Spanish, then English. People from every religion do weird things like this.

However, behind all of the word games is an underlying Biblical teaching concerning the Satanic nature of other religions.

I mean then that a sacrifice offered to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. (1 Corinthians 10:19-20)

Evangelical Christians that I know typically base their belief concering other religions on this passage. Here Hindus would be classified as "pagans."