Bhagavad Gita - Prosetylizing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And this is why those of us raised in traditionally Hindu find the Hare Krishna approach jarring.

Yep. Krishna doesn't need to win souls to Vrindavan. Krishna is Yahweh, Allah, and every other deity collapsed into One Formless Source. Part of being a Hindu is realizing that how God approaches other people is none of our business.

I'm the interfaith Minister that sometimes posts in religious threads. My personal faith is progressive Christianity (Unity Church). I work as a Hospice Chaplain and spend time with people from many faiths every day. I love the statement "...how God approaches other people is none of our business". I'm going to use that in my next training. One of the biggest challenges I face is getting volunteers (especially the Southern Baptists) to understand that we don't try to "save" patients by "winning them to Christ".

I believe people find God (whatever that means to them) in their own time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm the interfaith Minister that sometimes posts in religious threads. My personal faith is progressive Christianity (Unity Church). I work as a Hospice Chaplain and spend time with people from many faiths every day. I love the statement "...how God approaches other people is none of our business". I'm going to use that in my next training. One of the biggest challenges I face is getting volunteers (especially the Southern Baptists) to understand that we don't try to "save" patients by "winning them to Christ".

I believe people find God (whatever that means to them) in their own time.

I've always liked your posts. You're one of the few sane people on this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It''s not "atheist is sacred" it's "not believing in god is perfectly acceptable" and the difference is in the minds of religious believers who confuse an atheist speaking up with proselytizing. People are so used to atheists being quiet that it seems like a threat when they express themselves openly.

Lol no, the atheists who "express themselves openly" are secular humanists. I'm a theist and I've attended meditation sessions with secular humanists and gone out for beers afterwards. Secular humanists express themselves openly whenever a philosophical discussion comes up. If you think Richard Dawkins is merely saying, "not believing in god is perfectly acceptable" instead of saying, "Of course you can have an opinion about Islam without having read Qur'an. You don't have to read Mein Kampf to have an opinion about nazism" or that forcing religion on kids is child abuse (these are actual things he has said, and that quote about Islam is what he actually tweeted, and he does this constantly), you are completely delusional.

Well, you formed an opinion of atheism based on a couple of comments by one well-kown atheist, so apparently you think such behavior is OK.

You've also formed an opinion that an anonymous poster who feels differently about Richard Dawkins is "completely delusional."That's quite a strong reaction based on a difference of opinion about one man. Plus, think about it, people form opinions about a lot of things without having studied them thoroughly. Such behavior is not inherently wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And this is why those of us raised in traditionally Hindu find the Hare Krishna approach jarring.

Yep. Krishna doesn't need to win souls to Vrindavan. Krishna is Yahweh, Allah, and every other deity collapsed into One Formless Source. Part of being a Hindu is realizing that how God approaches other people is none of our business.

I'm the interfaith Minister that sometimes posts in religious threads. My personal faith is progressive Christianity (Unity Church). I work as a Hospice Chaplain and spend time with people from many faiths every day. I love the statement "...how God approaches other people is none of our business". I'm going to use that in my next training. One of the biggest challenges I face is getting volunteers (especially the Southern Baptists) to understand that we don't try to "save" patients by "winning them to Christ".

I believe people find God (whatever that means to them) in their own time.

Good luck with the Southern Baptists, because getting saved by Christ is an inherent part of their religious beliefs. They could see a hospice, where they have a captive audience soon to meet their maker, as a prime opportunity for saving souls.

[Anonymous]

Well, you formed an opinion of atheism based on a couple of comments by one well-kown atheist, so apparently you think such behavior is OK.

No you idiot, I formed an opinion of evangelical atheists based on Richard Dawkins, all the while stating my different opinion of secular humanists, aka atheists who are actually intelligent, rational human beings. Some atheists aren't rational, and apparently don't have much reading comprehension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And this is why those of us raised in traditionally Hindu find the Hare Krishna approach jarring.

Yep. Krishna doesn't need to win souls to Vrindavan. Krishna is Yahweh, Allah, and every other deity collapsed into One Formless Source. Part of being a Hindu is realizing that how God approaches other people is none of our business.

I'm the interfaith Minister that sometimes posts in religious threads. My personal faith is progressive Christianity (Unity Church). I work as a Hospice Chaplain and spend time with people from many faiths every day. I love the statement "...how God approaches other people is none of our business". I'm going to use that in my next training. One of the biggest challenges I face is getting volunteers (especially the Southern Baptists) to understand that we don't try to "save" patients by "winning them to Christ".

I believe people find God (whatever that means to them) in their own time.

Thanks, this is nice. I come from a family with no huge religious affiliation but a history of religious upbringing and belief. My DH is atheist and my dad is agnostic like me and my mom clings to Christian beliefs which helps her deal with a lot of things. I like remaining open to "something" without having to practice or commit or observe. I think there are so many ways to live a good life and so many possible outcomes for meaning and afterlife, and hearing open minded clergy like you makes me feel safe in that state of wishy-washiness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Well, you formed an opinion of atheism based on a couple of comments by one well-kown atheist, so apparently you think such behavior is OK.

No you idiot, I formed an opinion of evangelical atheists based on Richard Dawkins, all the while stating my different opinion of secular humanists, aka atheists who are actually intelligent, rational human beings. Some atheists aren't rational, and apparently don't have much reading comprehension.

So, you agree that you formed an opinion about atheists -- not every single atheist, but some atheists -- based on the comments of one atheist. Then you called someone an idiot based on one not completely clear (but still not incorrect) sentence.

Could you tell us what religion you are, so people posting here can determine if they'd like to avoid people of that religion who call certain kinds of atheists "idiots" and "delusional"?

[Anonymous]

I'm a Hindu, and agree that Hare Krishnas have some weird cult-like behavior, but I also have a shrugging attitude toward prosteltizing. Hinduism is weird -- so is any religion really, but I'll agree an elephant god is weird, so how are some religions cults and others are not? I'm nice to the Jehovah's Witnesses and always respectful when others try to engage me about their religion. I'll say, just smile and move along if you don't like what they're saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think there is any reason at all to get judgy or unkind. Someone approached you to share something that improved their life. You said you were not interested. The end. Try to view their act as one of kindness. Wish them well, and go about your day. No matter what words you use to refer to your higher power, kindness and compassion are almost always the appropriate response.

+1. Other than saying "Hindus don't like it," that PP doesn't explain what's so awful. I personally think it's kinda sweet when Hare Krishnas or Mormons or whoever have approached me. They truly believe and want to share. They don't chase me down the street screaming or anything. Not that anyone has ever convinced me, but I'm happy to talk to a "stranger." I'm not one of those people wearing ear buds everywhere I go trying to block out the world. Try being friendly, people!

I suppose you love when panhandlers ask you for money, too?

I do not find it sweet when religious people interrupt whatever I am doing to try to convince me that their worldview takes precedence over my own. I've gone to Hari Krishna restaurants (good food and cheap) - and in that case, I take as part of the experience that there will be a conversation. But, no, I don't find it "sweet" when religious people approach me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And this is why those of us raised in traditionally Hindu find the Hare Krishna approach jarring.

Yep. Krishna doesn't need to win souls to Vrindavan. Krishna is Yahweh, Allah, and every other deity collapsed into One Formless Source. Part of being a Hindu is realizing that how God approaches other people is none of our business.

I'm the interfaith Minister that sometimes posts in religious threads. My personal faith is progressive Christianity (Unity Church). I work as a Hospice Chaplain and spend time with people from many faiths every day. I love the statement "...how God approaches other people is none of our business". I'm going to use that in my next training. One of the biggest challenges I face is getting volunteers (especially the Southern Baptists) to understand that we don't try to "save" patients by "winning them to Christ".

I believe people find God (whatever that means to them) in their own time.

Thanks, this is nice. I come from a family with no huge religious affiliation but a history of religious upbringing and belief. My DH is atheist and my dad is agnostic like me and my mom clings to Christian beliefs which helps her deal with a lot of things. I like remaining open to "something" without having to practice or commit or observe. I think there are so many ways to live a good life and so many possible outcomes for meaning and afterlife, and hearing open minded clergy like you makes me feel safe in that state of wishy-washiness.

What do you mean by this? Safe from what?

What do you mean

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
So, you agree that you formed an opinion about atheists -- not every single atheist, but some atheists -- based on the comments of one atheist. Then you called someone an idiot based on one not completely clear (but still not incorrect) sentence.

Let me tell you what I believe: that you have a reading comprehension problem. Like, at this point what you're writing about has nothing to do with anything I said. All I'm going to say is that if you repeatedly misconstrue every argument I make then yeah, I'm going to call you an idiot. What do you want me to call you, an adorable 5-year old?

Could you tell us what religion you are, so people posting here can determine if they'd like to avoid people of that religion who call certain kinds of atheists "idiots" and "delusional"?

Why does it matter? I'm actually fascinated that you think my religion matters. While I'm a theist, the only thing you need to know about my religious affiliation is that I worship the God of Reading Comprehension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Hindu, and agree that Hare Krishnas have some weird cult-like behavior, but I also have a shrugging attitude toward prosteltizing. Hinduism is weird -- so is any religion really, but I'll agree an elephant god is weird, so how are some religions cults and others are not? I'm nice to the Jehovah's Witnesses and always respectful when others try to engage me about their religion. I'll say, just smile and move along if you don't like what they're saying.

I think a cult mentality is more like, "the in-group is awesome, the out-group is scary. You can't talk to family members who aren't in the in-group." You could say cults form in every religion, but religions themselves aren't always cults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So, you agree that you formed an opinion about atheists -- not every single atheist, but some atheists -- based on the comments of one atheist. Then you called someone an idiot based on one not completely clear (but still not incorrect) sentence.

Let me tell you what I believe: that you have a reading comprehension problem. Like, at this point what you're writing about has nothing to do with anything I said. All I'm going to say is that if you repeatedly misconstrue every argument I make then yeah, I'm going to call you an idiot. What do you want me to call you, an adorable 5-year old?

Could you tell us what religion you are, so people posting here can determine if they'd like to avoid people of that religion who call certain kinds of atheists "idiots" and "delusional"?

Why does it matter? I'm actually fascinated that you think my religion matters. While I'm a theist, the only thing you need to know about my religious affiliation is that I worship the God of Reading Comprehension.

More like the God of Internet Insults

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I do not find it sweet when religious people interrupt whatever I am doing to try to convince me that their worldview takes precedence over my own. I've gone to Hari Krishna restaurants (good food and cheap) - and in that case, I take as part of the experience that there will be a conversation. But, no, I don't find it "sweet" when religious people approach me.

+1

I think I found it "sweet" when it happened very, very rarely. Like once or twice over the span of a decade. It's easier to not feel harassed when it happens once in a blue moon. The past 3-4 years I am proselytized to more frequently, and at that point it becomes annoying. I do think the frequency with which you are exposed to certain behavior affects how much you are willing to tolerate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I do not find it sweet when religious people interrupt whatever I am doing to try to convince me that their worldview takes precedence over my own. I've gone to Hari Krishna restaurants (good food and cheap) - and in that case, I take as part of the experience that there will be a conversation. But, no, I don't find it "sweet" when religious people approach me.

+1

I think I found it "sweet" when it happened very, very rarely. Like once or twice over the span of a decade. It's easier to not feel harassed when it happens once in a blue moon. The past 3-4 years I am proselytized to more frequently, and at that point it becomes annoying. I do think the frequency with which you are exposed to certain behavior affects how much you are willing to tolerate it.

+1 I had a friend (notice past tense) who once in a while would invite me to her proselytizing church or to bible study. I politely declined, and the friendship continued. Then she picked up the pace, and, with her husband, used every single get-together as an opportunity to discuss Jesus, the NT, how the only way "we" can get to G-d is through Jesus, what will happen to me in the end times, etc., etc. I asked her, after every single get-together, to please respect my religious choices, and she said OK - but then right back to it, to the point of harrassment. I ended the friendship over it, but now, from a distance, I can see that they were so indoctrinated with the belief that their religion is the only true one that they could not control themselves.

My only regret is that I did not end the friendship sooner.