111 replies to this topic

[badeskov]

Arbitran, on 09 April 2012 - 03:14 AM, said:

That is your narrow, misinformed Western view. The West has a history of misunderstanding the East. "Heavens", as you say, in the ancient languages is outer space. If you understood the original language we would not be having this futile conversation.

Again, for the umpteenth time, please do educate me - source this claim. Until you do that, I will go with the orthodox view of this and regard your view as the uneducated perspective.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Arbitran]

badeskov, on 09 April 2012 - 03:22 AM, said:

Again, for the umpteenth time, please do educate me - source this claim. Until you do that, I will go with the orthodox view of this and regard your view as the uneducated perspective.

Cheers,
Badeskov

I have explained repeatedly: for the most part, the Western view does not grasp the ancient cultures. It may like to make a distinction between "heavens" and "outer space", when in fact there is no demarcation whatsoever. As for sources: asking me to source a Western reference to a word it doesn't fully comprehend is like asking a child who only knows about a "car" to differentiate between a Hyundai, a Volvo, and a Ferrari. As long as Western civilization insists that the ancients only knew about "sky", it won't be able to learn all that they knew about the universe that they were talking about all along.

[badeskov]

Arbitran, on 09 April 2012 - 03:37 AM, said:

I have explained repeatedly: for the most part, the Western view does not grasp the ancient cultures. It may like to make a distinction between "heavens" and "outer space", when in fact there is no demarcation whatsoever. As for sources: asking me to source a Western reference to a word it doesn't fully comprehend is like asking a child who only knows about a "car" to differentiate between a Hyundai, a Volvo, and a Ferrari. As long as Western civilization insists that the ancients only knew about "sky", it won't be able to learn all that they knew about the universe that they were talking about all along.

By all means of respect, but what is so hard to grasp? I am apparently an ignoramus, so please source some peer reviewed scientific literature so I can educate myself. Can you do that?

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Arbitran]

badeskov, on 09 April 2012 - 03:39 AM, said:

By all means of respect, but what is so hard to grasp? I am apparently an ignoramus, so please source some peer reviewed scientific literature so I can educate myself. Can you do that?

Cheers,
Badeskov

You are by no means an ignoramus; but please understand that unless you learn Sanskrit, from a Hindu sage, or something of the like, you can't understand the original meaning of the words. As I've said, the peer-reviewed scientific literature can only go so far--after all, we are not dealing with true science, we are dealing with history. History does not deal in direct evidence--only circumstantial. Only the speakers of the language, as it was spoken in the ancient times, would grasp that meaning. I myself am not fluent in it, but I am learning from my uncle's colleague, who is an expert, and is fluent. And he has been most adamant as to the meaning of the word deva: "one who comes from outer space". Or, as he described it, the direct English synonym might be "extraterrestrial".

[badeskov]

Arbitran, on 09 April 2012 - 03:49 AM, said:

You are by no means an ignoramus; but please understand that unless you learn Sanskrit, from a Hindu sage, or something of the like, you can't understand the original meaning of the words. As I've said, the peer-reviewed scientific literature can only go so far--after all, we are not dealing with true science, we are dealing with history. History does not deal in direct evidence--only circumstantial. Only the speakers of the language, as it was spoken in the ancient times, would grasp that meaning. I myself am not fluent in it, but I am learning from my uncle's colleague, who is an expert, and is fluent. And he has been most adamant as to the meaning of the word deva: "one who comes from outer space". Or, as he described it, the direct English synonym might be "extraterrestrial".

In other words, you can not source your hypothesis. Duly noted.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Arbitran]

badeskov, on 09 April 2012 - 03:56 AM, said:

In other words, you can not source your hypothesis. Duly noted.

Cheers,
Badeskov

I can, and have. You merely insist that there is some distinction between "heavens" and "outer space". There isn't.

[badeskov]

Arbitran, on 09 April 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

I can, and have. You merely insist that there is some distinction between "heavens" and "outer space". There isn't.

There is and you have yet to source that claim of yours.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Arbitran]

badeskov, on 09 April 2012 - 04:04 AM, said:

There is and you have yet to source that claim of yours.

Cheers,
Badeskov

What do you propose that the distinction between "heavens" and "outer space" is?

[badeskov]

Arbitran, on 09 April 2012 - 04:09 AM, said:

What do you propose that the distinction between "heavens" and "outer space" is?

If you do not understand that distinction, I suddenly understand the confusions here. "Outer space" infers knowledge of the depth of the Universe we live in whereas the "Heavens" is a religious term.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Karlis]

Arbitran, on 09 April 2012 - 03:49 AM, said:

~~~ ...

... unless you learn Sanskrit, from a Hindu sage, or something of the like, you can't understand the original meaning of the words.

... Only the speakers of the language, as it was spoken in the ancient times, would grasp that meaning.


I myself am not fluent in it, but I am learning from my uncle's colleague, who is an expert, and is fluent.

Arbitran, may I ask if your uncle's colleague is a Hindu sage? If so, from whom did he learn?

Or, to be more direct; from whom did he gain the knowledge to be regarded as one of the, "speakers of the language, as it was spoken in the ancient times"?

Thanks in advance,
Karlis

[Arbitran]

badeskov, on 09 April 2012 - 04:18 AM, said:

If you do not understand that distinction, I suddenly understand the confusions here. "Outer space" infers knowledge of the depth of the Universe we live in whereas the "Heavens" is a religious term.

Cheers,
Badeskov

In Christianity, "Heaven" is a religious term. "Heavens" refers to the sky, or the realm in which the sun, planets, and stars exist.
There is no "Heaven" in Hinduism--any argument to the contrary is a thorough misunderstanding of Hindu culture. Whether the translator chooses to say "heavens", "the universe", or "outer space", the meaning of the word intended in the Sanskrit is undeniable.

[Arbitran]

Karlis, on 09 April 2012 - 04:21 AM, said:

Arbitran, may I ask if your uncle's colleague is a Hindu sage? If so, from whom did he learn?

Or, to be more direct; from whom did he gain the knowledge to be regarded as one of the, "speakers of the language, as it was spoken in the ancient times"?

Thanks in advance,
Karlis

My uncle's colleague is an expert on ancient languages, and specializes in Sanskrit. From what I know, he learned it in India, from indigenous tradition-holders and sages. I asked him a similar question when we first started speaking about it: I asked how he knew that it was "outer space" being discussed, and not "Heaven", in the sense used in the Western world. He replied that he had wondered the same thing: until his tutor explained that it was an expanding void, in which the stars, and planets when about in their orbits, by the force of gravity. It became quite clear then that the devas, described as beings coming in flying machines from other planets, orbiting other stars, were extraterrestrial beings--and not merely religious imaginings.

[badeskov]

Arbitran, on 09 April 2012 - 04:22 AM, said:

In Christianity, "Heaven" is a religious term. "Heavens" refers to the sky, or the realm in which the sun, planets, and stars exist.
There is no "Heaven" in Hinduism--any argument to the contrary is a thorough misunderstanding of Hindu culture. Whether the translator chooses to say "heavens", "the universe", or "outer space", the meaning of the word intended in the Sanskrit is undeniable.

OK, now I know that you have no idea of which you speak, by all means of respect. In Hindu you have 6 planes of heaven, in which the second Deva resides (if memory serves). Call it religious or philosophical, but It has nothing whatsoever with outer space or any knowledge of the Universe in general to do.

Seriously dude.


Cheers,
Badeskov

[DieChecker]

kmt_sesh, on 08 April 2012 - 05:15 AM, said:

I was raised Roman Catholic and had to go through all of the religious schooling all Roman Catholic kids experience. I no longer practice the faith but understand it well. Christians do not view the Trinity as three different deities but as aspects of one God. God can indeed exist as his own son: Jesus was both the son of God and an aspect of God when he walked the earth, as the teaching goes. Jesus was God in mortal form, in other words. It's complicated and sounds odd to those not familiar with Christianity, and of course in the earliest days of the Church this was hotly debated among the bishops before the New Testament was canonized. The main question was: Was Jesus merely mortal or was he divine? Most agreed, of course, on Jesus' divinity.

Bear in mind this philosophical concept was not developed from outside the faith. It was developed, explored, and internalized by Christians for Christians. This isn't really a gray area to most of us who were raised Christian, and certainly not to Roman Catholics (from which all other versions of Christianity sprang). No legitimate Catholic would view the Trinity as three different and separate deities, nor would any legitimate Catholic view the religion as polytheistic. The mere idea would be heretical. Ask a priest.

I stress again that Christianity emerged from Judaism. And well before Christianity, Judaism had become definitively monotheistic. This certainly was not the case for all of the history of Judaism, and indeed monotheism in Judaism doesn't seem to have taken solid form till the post-exilic period, but by the period of Late Antiquity monotheism was most certainly the rule for Judaism. Christianity took it from there. Had it not been for certain circumstances, in fact, Christianity may have remained one of the minor sects of Judaism that eventually died out, as happened with the Zealots and Essenes. Christians of the earliest times certainly didn't take the monotheistic Yahweh and turn him into a polytheistic deity.

Earlier you mentioned the Hebrew term elohim, Arbitran. You're correct that this can refer to more than one god, but in most cases in the Old Testament it does not. The meaning of elohim and whether it is plural or singular is determined by grammatical contexts in the Hebrew language. I'm struggling to think of an English parallel and for some reason the only thing that comes to mind is "pants." I know, it's a silly example, but the hour is late and it's all I can think of at the moment. In any case, although this is plural in form, it still refers to only one thing.

I'm going to agree with kmt_sesh on this. My father in law is a Pastor with a Master's degree and he says the same thing. That the idea of there being 3 deities is absolutely rejected. The 3 are aspects of the One.

Arbitran, on 08 April 2012 - 05:47 AM, said:

As a note, I will firstly mention that I actually speak Hebrew: elohim does not, at any time, refer to a single deity. The -im is the masculine plural suffix. Indeed, much of Hebrew can be read only based on grammatical context, however there is no context to make a singular word out of elohim. There are a few scant examples of a singular variant appearing (el or eloah), however elohim is the primary word used. I was raised a Christian as well: Roman Catholic on my father's side, and Presbyterian on my mother's side. One of the first notions that made me question my faith was the abject absurdity of the "three-gods-in-one" farce. As I'm sure you all know by now, I am currently an atheist Hindu--with smatterings of Buddhism, as the teachings of Buddha do not conflict with the principles of Hinduism.

Quote

**Babylon English Download this dictionary

Elohim
n. God, one of the main names by which God is designated in the Old Testament

**Wikipedia English - The Free Encyclopedia Download this dictionary

Elohim
Elohim is a plural formation of eloah, an expanded form of the Northwest Semitic noun il (, ʾēl ). It is the usual word for "god" in the Hebrew Bible, referring both to pagan deities and to the God of Israel, usually with a singular meaning despite its plural form, but is also used as a true plural with the meanings "spirits, angels, demons," and the like. The singular forms eloah and el are used as proper names or as generics, in which case they are interchangeable with elohim. Gods can be referred to collectively as bene elim, bene elyon, or bene elohim.

See more at Wikipedia.org...

**Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) Download this dictionary

Elohim
(n.)
One of the principal names by which God is designated in the Hebrew Scriptures.
  
**Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913), edited by Noah Porter. About
Encyclopedia Mythica Download this dictionary

Elohim
[Judaic] Hebrew: "God". One of the names of God. It is the name used by the author of one of the sources of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible).

http://www.babylon.c...Dictionary.html

You'd better get busy and tell EVERY SINGLE internet site, dictionary, encyclopedia, translator and University in the world that they are all wrong.

Wikipedia says it is singlur and plural. Like fish or elk or deer or sheep.

Quote

Elohim (אֱלֹהִ֔ים) is a grammatically singular or plural noun for "god" or "gods" in both modern and ancient Hebrew language. When used with singular verbs and adjectives elohim is usually singular, "god" or especially, the God. When used with plural verbs and adjectives elohim is usually plural, "gods" or "powers".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim

If that is wrong, or and fix it on Wiki, and I will check again in a couple days.

Edited by DieChecker, 09 April 2012 - 04:39 AM.

[Arbitran]

badeskov, on 09 April 2012 - 04:29 AM, said:

OK, now I know that you have no idea of which you speak, by all means of respect. In Hindu you have 6 planes of heaven, in which the second Deva resides (if memory serves). Call it religious or philosophical, but It has nothing whatsoever with outer space or any knowledge of the Universe in general to do.

Seriously dude.


Cheers,
Badeskov

You have greatly misunderstood the six lokas. If you were a Hindu perhaps you might know what you were talking about. Oh, but, let me guess--you learned about this from Wikipedia?