|
Author
|
Topic: Gandhi & Jesus?
|
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
"Lord, you know."
This is the statement that saves me from too much introspection when the Lord asks me a question concerning the strength of my faith. My humanness yells from one side "You bet!" and from the other, "Under certain conditions...". Always too sure or too ready to make concessions to save my own skin.
"Lord, you know."
He does. And, if I am found wanting, He will lead me to places where my faith is exercised. For He knows the very thing that is required of me and He sets out to make me ready for the trial.
quote:
Revelation 12:7-11 "And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, 8 but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for *them in heaven any longer. 9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, "Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down. 11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death.
I know, if I should be alive at the time this occurs, I will be made ready. For the saints *will* overcome the enemy by the blood of the Lamb and by their testimony. Oh, what a work He must do in the saints to make them ready! To not fear death at the hands of aggressors?! Incredible! I often wonder what profound things will we go through to be made ready for this...to hold to the Lamb even unto death!
Lord, you know.
Amen.
God Bless you,
Aaron
IP: Logged | 
|
|
ahar
Advanced Member
Member # 5810
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by helpforhomeschoolers:
Some people, like Dalit leader Dr. Ambedkar believe that Ghandi's teaching on passive resistance actually kept the Dalits from obtaining real equality in India.
<snip>
Many in India today, see that this is indicative of Ghandi's true agenda, which was a self serving one.
<snip>
What is really ironic to me is that today, the caste system has been abolished in India Constitutionally for I think some 50 years, but it is still very much alive in practice among the people. It seems that Ambedkar, was wrong in that it is not man's politics that determins his treatment of his fellow man, but something deeper... something even deeper than both Hinduism and Buhdism... it is AGAPE... which can only come from the ONE TRUE GOD.
It's also thought by many that Ghandi's campaign for independence pushed events too far too fast, and was one of the contributing factors to the war and slaughter that followed independence and partition into India and Pakistan.
India is a broken society. The caste system is very much alive in some parts of India (more rural than urban areas) but not all. I have a friend who works for a charity that focuses on practical help for dalits and also pushes for social change. He has some very interesting tales to tell.
--------------------
Cheers
Andy
Posts: 290 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
|
|
helpforhomeschoolers
Advanced Member
Member # 15
|
posted
Wow, yesterday, I was driving home and it was late and I had been thinking about an article I read recently about the unspeakable horrors that the women of the Congo are going through. And how faith is the only thing that they have, and in spite of the brutality that they are experiencing they are still praising GOD. (I dont know if you know what the women of the Congo are going through, but I find that it is so horrific that I cannot even type the words myself to explain if you dont, and I wanted to post the article because we all need to know, but I have yet had the courage to even post it. It is unspeakable horror to me... speaking as a woman.
The particular article that I read, the dr in one of the small hospitals where these woman are being treated is not a man of faith and he was saying how he did not understand their faith for he felt that God had forgotten the women of the Congo long ago. I was thinking of the things that I whine or complain about and it all seems so totally insignificant that I have to beg forgivness for my sin. I was thinking just as you... Am I ready for that kind of trial? I think we must be ready for that kind of trial. I am not afraid to die. I am ready to die rather than deny HIM. But... I am afraid of living through the kind of brutality these women have lived through. It makes me physically ill to think of the tortures that they have been through. I think that we must be ready for that kind of trial, but I also think that we must know that we cannot prepare oursleves... we cannnot make ourselves that ready, we cannot hope to of ourselves be that strong. We must REST in HIM... we must lose ourselves... let our lives be hid in him... it is HE that will be ready for that kind of trial or we will not be able to endure. I dont think that Jesus willed himself through Gethsemene and up the hill to Golgotha. I think he must have just let go and let the Father GOD carry all that burden... surrendered himself completely to the will and want and leading of the Father that He.. the man... was not the one forging on, but GOD was going and the man was hid in the father... FAITH... the JUST walk and live by faith. The substance of things hope for the evidence of thigns NOT seen. Ughhhh, I dont know if you can understand what I am trying to say. Somehow, I think that while we must be ready for that kind of trial, it cant be us that is ready at all... it must be HIM in us that is ready and faithful and true and will endure... perhaps it is even only HE in us that can endure such things as this.
Posts: 4684 | From: Southern Black Hills of South Dakota | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
Interesting stuff.
It prompted me to think of the Afghans who remain oppressed by the fear of the Taliban retribution if they should show agreement with the Western forces.
I said to Jenny, as we were watching the coverage, "You know, no amount of security provided by the army will save the Afghans from the Taliban oppression. Guns, tanks, soldiers, who cares...they cannot protect the people from the IED's and the opportunistic assassins."
She said, "But employing the one thing that will save the men from fear (she meant Christ and the gospel) will get you killed."
"Indeed," I said, "But men cannot wrest the hand of God and His Christ from those who trust in Him. Even if they should die they would live."
We just agreed together in a moment of silence.
I couldn't help but hear the quiet voice in my heart that asked, "Are you ready for such a trial?"
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
helpforhomeschoolers
Advanced Member
Member # 15
|
posted
Some people, like Dalit leader Dr. Ambedkar believe that Ghandi's teaching on passive resistance actually kept the Dalits from obtaining real equality in India.
When the issue of giving the Dalits full equality in the political system came to the table, Ghandi actually spoke against that. The truth is that Hinduism needs the caste system to keep the priestly castes superior. 6 million Dalits with full equality was not something that Ghandi wanted to see. He wanted to see them remain Dalits and be treated better. He did not want to see the caste system done away with, but reformed.
Many in India today, see that this is indicative of Ghandi's true agenda, which was a self serving one.
Ambedkar, left Hinduism teaching that this was the only way to really bring equality to the Dalits,and other oppressed caste of Hinduism sadly however, while Ambedkar said that there were only 2 religions even worthy of consideration those being Buhdism and Christianity, he chose Buhdism. He did this because he saw that there was no place in Christianity for politics and he did not see that you could leave politics out of the picture and obtain equality for the oppressed.
I think that you are correct Aaron, about Ghandi's following in the west, and I think that it is important to know that his standing in the west is not exactly echoed in the rest of the world, particularly in India when you measure it in numbers of people that exalt him. In many ways the upper castes felt that he went too far and the priestly caste felt that he should have consulted more with them, and the subcastes whose numbers far outnumber the higher castes saw him as continuing to forward their oppression.
What is really ironic to me is that today, the caste system has been abolished in India Constitutionally for I think some 50 years, but it is still very much alive in practice among the people. It seems that Ambedkar, was wrong in that it is not man's politics that determins his treatment of his fellow man, but something deeper... something even deeper than both Hinduism and Buhdism... it is AGAPE... which can only come from the ONE TRUE GOD.
It is only the change of heart that occurs through Christ and the working of the HOLY spirit within man that can change man's heart in such a way that he truly LOVES his brother the way Christ loved us.
Posts: 4684 | From: Southern Black Hills of South Dakota | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
I heard someone from India say that although we regard Ghandi as a great man in the West his "reviews" are actually mixed in India. Many people were killed following his empty cause...what was promised was never realized.
I think the West's fondness for him is based upon more myth than reality.
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
WKUHilltopper
Advanced Member
Member # 5472
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by NLP:
I did a little research on this man and he’s quite the character (for lack of a better term).
He read the entire Bible as a promise to a friend, so he was familiar w/God’s Word.
And this is what he said about Jesus:
“I cannot say that Jesus was uniquely divine. He was as much God as Krishna, or Rama, or Mohammed, or Zoroaster."
"I regard Jesus as a great teacher of humanity, but I do not regard him as the only begotten son of God. That epithet in its material interpretation is quite unacceptable. Metaphorically we are all sons of God, but for each of us there may be different sons of God in a special sense. Thus for me Chaitanya may be the only begotten son of God … God cannot be the exclusive Father and I cannot ascribe exclusive divinity to Jesus."
(When asked if he was a Hindu) “Yes I am, I am also a Muslim, a Christian, a Buddhist, and a Jew.”
Andy also touched on him saying “I like your Christ……(key word here is your)
DEFINETLY NOT someone I would want my daughter and son to associate w/the Living God.
(It appears the same church would also embrace a saying like the following; that clearly says whether someone is “pure or not” should be left for God to decide right?)
The judgment whether a people is virtuous or not virtuous can hardly be passed by a human being. That should be left to God.
(Too bad the person who stated this, felt he should send them to God for that judgment about 6 + million of ‘em. So if you haven’t figured it out already the quote above was by none other than Adolph Hitler)
I guess in the end what I have learned by this; is that I as a Christian have to ask the question. Should I care more about the WHAT the message is than WHO the messenger is? I don’t think one without the other is anything more than quicksand.
Where we would be had Jesus just preached, but never died and rose. Or if He came and just died and rose without saying a word? As a Christian I would never attempt to separate the two. So why are some “Christians” constantly trying to look at man and his wisdom to equate Christ like living to, instead of the source (Christ himself) and HIS Words?
Gandhi “words” may sound “good” however “who” he is and what his motive is (your posts brought me to understand that ![[Smile]](smile.gif) ), is just someone who denied Christ as Lord and in doing such is an enemy of God, right? ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
32.Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
33.But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
This Church's name really fits them "New Hope" because they no longer look to Christ for hope, but to someone new. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Thanks for taking to time to reply,
Nina
Interesting post. So he really was a "wishy washy, try to appeal to everyone" type of guy, eh? Sounds almost like a TV preacher...or at least, someone out of the Clinton White House.
Posts: 259 | From: KY | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
|
NLP
Advanced Member
Member # 5870
|
posted
I did a little research on this man and he’s quite the character (for lack of a better term).
He read the entire Bible as a promise to a friend, so he was familiar w/God’s Word.
And this is what he said about Jesus:
“I cannot say that Jesus was uniquely divine. He was as much God as Krishna, or Rama, or Mohammed, or Zoroaster."
"I regard Jesus as a great teacher of humanity, but I do not regard him as the only begotten son of God. That epithet in its material interpretation is quite unacceptable. Metaphorically we are all sons of God, but for each of us there may be different sons of God in a special sense. Thus for me Chaitanya may be the only begotten son of God … God cannot be the exclusive Father and I cannot ascribe exclusive divinity to Jesus."
(When asked if he was a Hindu) “Yes I am, I am also a Muslim, a Christian, a Buddhist, and a Jew.”
Andy also touched on him saying “I like your Christ……(key word here is your)
DEFINETLY NOT someone I would want my daughter and son to associate w/the Living God.
(It appears the same church would also embrace a saying like the following; that clearly says whether someone is “pure or not” should be left for God to decide right?)
The judgment whether a people is virtuous or not virtuous can hardly be passed by a human being. That should be left to God.
(Too bad the person who stated this, felt he should send them to God for that judgment about 6 + million of ‘em. So if you haven’t figured it out already the quote above was by none other than Adolph Hitler)
I guess in the end what I have learned by this; is that I as a Christian have to ask the question. Should I care more about the WHAT the message is than WHO the messenger is? I don’t think one without the other is anything more than quicksand.
Where we would be had Jesus just preached, but never died and rose. Or if He came and just died and rose without saying a word? As a Christian I would never attempt to separate the two. So why are some “Christians” constantly trying to look at man and his wisdom to equate Christ like living to, instead of the source (Christ himself) and HIS Words?
Gandhi “words” may sound “good” however “who” he is and what his motive is (your posts brought me to understand that ), is just someone who denied Christ as Lord and in doing such is an enemy of God, right?
32.Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
33.But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
This Church's name really fits them "New Hope" because they no longer look to Christ for hope, but to someone new.
Thanks for taking to time to reply,
Nina
Posts: 45 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
|
WKUHilltopper
Advanced Member
Member # 5472
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Aaron:
"Non-violence" (for the sake of political gain) may be the ultimate manipulative tool. The practice of it, especially to counter the violent, will often elicit a sympathetic response from the observer no matter what the agenda of the “victim”. Often it only produces “sympathy”… gathering support from the otherwise uninterested, a worthwhile endeavor if one’s goal is political gain. But, if one is concerned with “what is right” or “what is true” he should guard himself from manipulation lest he should rubber-stamp the non-violent protestor’s agenda as “worthwhile” without first examining its merit.
Aaron
Yep, you're absolutely right, Aaron. People tend to be much more sympathetic to a "cause", irrespective of it's intent, if they are witnessing some guy get pounded on and sitting there just taking it.
Posts: 259 | From: KY | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
"Non-violence" (for the sake of political gain) may be the ultimate manipulative tool. The practice of it, especially to counter the violent, will often elicit a sympathetic response from the observer no matter what the agenda of the “victim”. Often it only produces “sympathy”… gathering support from the otherwise uninterested, a worthwhile endeavor if one’s goal is political gain. But, if one is concerned with “what is right” or “what is true” he should guard himself from manipulation lest he should rubber-stamp the non-violent protestor’s agenda as “worthwhile” without first examining its merit.
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
WKUHilltopper
Advanced Member
Member # 5472
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by helpforhomeschoolers:
If Ghandi had known Christ he would not have liked him. Ghandi can make a statement like this only because he views Christ as a good moral teacher and not as the Son of the living GOD.. much less GOD the Almighty creator of heaven and earth manifest in the flesh.
Helpforhomeschoolers, excellent, excellent point.
NLP, to answer your question, Gandhi was just a hindu guy who promoted civil disobedience as a means to gain India's independence from Great Britian in the 20s, 30's and 40's. He advocated a peaceful means of protest--in that he allowed himself to be beaten, etc, to get his point across and would not engage in violent actions. I guess you might call him the "modern inventor" of this form of civil disobedience, except that Christ was certainly more forward thinking than he. It's only that the world recognizes Gandhi's "sacrifice" as something special, and not the sacrifice of Jesus.
Anyway, NLP, that's sort of the nutshell on Ganhdi. Also what's interesting is Gandhi was assassinated by a muslim (you know, that reglion of peace and love) from "state" of Pakistan, which at the time was attempting to secede from India and form a separate muslim nation.
Posts: 259 | From: KY | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
|
|
ahar
Advanced Member
Member # 5810
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eden:
Eden: The fact that Ghandi said “it's your Christians I don't like" shows that Ghandi did not understand how Christians are saved.
Eden: Bornagain Christians are only sinners saved by grace and by mercy and because of their earthly human background, bornagain Christians will always be somewhat hypocritical.
The quote from Mahatma Ghandi was in relation to the actions of some of the British colonial leaders who called themselves Christians, but did some nasty things while in charge of India, like ordering troops to open fire on unarmed protesters.
It's an interesting quote to use in a discussion about hipocracy harming the image of christians and turning people away from the gospel.
--------------------
Cheers
Andy
Posts: 290 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
|
|
helpforhomeschoolers
Advanced Member
Member # 15
|
posted
If Ghandi had known Christ he would not have liked him. Ghandi can make a statement like this only because he views Christ as a good moral teacher and not as the Son of the living GOD.. much less GOD the Almighty creator of heaven and earth manifest in the flesh.
Christ would have have challenged his worship of the many Hindu God's. Christ would have challenged the hipocracy of his cries for a more human treatment of the untouchables while supporting the Varna system that created the castes in the first place. Christ would have challenged the racism of Ghandi against blacks and dark skinned Indians. Christ would not have seen Ghandi as much different than the Pharisee of Israel, but worse because Ghandi worshipped gods that were no gods.
His writings have no place in the Christian church.
Posts: 4684 | From: Southern Black Hills of South Dakota | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
Hi, Ahar
Ahar: Ghandi said, "Your christ, I like your christ. It is your christians I don't like"
Ahar: This can be used as an interesting discussion point around how christians can be more like Christ and the damage it can do to evangelism efforts when christians are hypocritical. Not one to put on a billboard though.
Eden: The fact that Ghandi said “it's your Christians I don't like" shows that Ghandi did not understand how Christians are saved.
Eden: Bornagain Christians are only sinners saved by grace and by mercy and because of their earthly human background, bornagain Christians will always be somewhat hypocritical.
Eden: But a bornagain Christian does not gain or lose salvation because of hypocritical behavior.
Eden: We are only saved by accepting the work that Jesus Christ suffered for us on the cross and also that Jesus rose again after that, and believing those two things alone immediately and unequivocably makes us a bornagain Christian.
Acceptance of the death and resurrection of Jesus alone saves us, and nothing else. People are not bornagain Christians because they behave well or badly but because they have accepted the free gift of eternal life acquired for sinners by Jesus.
Only that acceptance makes us bornagain Christians, not our hypocritical behavior. Ghandi had his eyes on us when he should have had his eyes on Jesus.
But then you may say, “But on the other hand, faith without works is dead.”
Be blessed.
Eden
IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
Hi, NLP, thank you for that wonderful sharing. You wrote that Ghandi said, “You must be the change you want to see in the world!
I believe the Ghandi referred to here is the Ghandi of India who was the "inventor" of "peaceful resistance" in India, and was instrumental in India become independent from England in the 1950s or whenever.??
To yoke Jesus Christ of Israel with Ghandi is a blasphemy in the sense that Ghandi was from the earth, and the Lord Jesus Christ was from above and not from below. He said, You are from the earth, but I am from heaven. Ghandi was an earthling. The closest thing to Christianity in terms of sayings is probably New Age talk.
I asked a New Age man tonight two questions, First question: Do you believe that Jesus rose from the dead? Yes, he believed that Jesus rose from the dead. Second question, Do you believe that Jesus died for your sins on the cross, and that was the part that he could not handle. He got the first part right, but did not (yet) believe the for his sins part. And both parts are crucial for salvation.
Anyway, to have such a statement on a church marquee is not that unusual when one considers that the church merely reflects what the people are like inside the church with their lives.
The world is mixed up with the church, but the church is also mixed up with the world, and it is not surprising when one considers what non-Christian activities bornagain Christians participate in regularly of the world.
Bornagain Christians watch the earth’s films and listen to the earth’s music and read the earth’s books and watch the earth’s television, and many read at least some of the Word of God, and even those who read a lot of the Word of God are also still doing the same activities above.
It is little wonder then that a worldly quote would appear on the marquee of that church, in this case a New Age quote from Ghandi which cannot save, You must be the change you want to see in the world! That’s typical for the devil to talk that way. Be somebody!
But Jesus said, “you are all sinners” and “Salvation is only of the Jews”.
A church should therefore never use words which are generated by the earth which words can never save because only the words that Jesus rose from the dead and that Jesus died for my sins, can save. Ghandi’s words can never save. It is New Age type of talk.
Be blessed.
Eden
IP: Logged |
|
|
ahar
Advanced Member
Member # 5810
|
posted
To me, I suppose it depends on the context in which the quote is used. Depending on the quote from scripture, it may not be a good example to place on a notice board outside church (e.g. those verses in the old testament that simply go "whatsit begat thingy" etc). If non-bible quotes are continually used, the message can be watered down. However, quotes from non-christians can be useful. For example, Ghandi gave another interesting quote:
"Your christ, I like your christ. It is your christians I don't like"
This can be used as an interesting dicussion point around how christians can be more like Christ and the damage it can do to evangelism efforts when christians are hypocritical. Not one to put on a billboard though.
--------------------
Cheers
Andy
Posts: 290 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
|
|
NLP
Advanced Member
Member # 5870
|
posted
I was driving down a "very heavily traveled" parkway in my city, (which I drive daily) and I always pass this one particular church it's name is "New Hope Presbyterian Church" and they always having different sayings on their board outside, some biblical, some welcoming the students, some with just sayings like "all are welcome", etc. Well today they put up a new saying and it really took me back because it said the following:
You must be the change you want to see in the world! Gandhi
I have to be totally honest in that I do not know this "guy" very well, I have heard of him but he always gave me a creepy feeling whenever I would hear or see something about him, so I choose to just close my ears 'so to speak' whenever anything came up about him. So for me to see it on a "Church" sign, took me back a bit. I guess I spiritually think about unequally yoked "Jesus and Gandhi?" ![[Frown]](frown.gif) and my mind thinks Duh! That's like a Jewish Community Center posting a saying quoted by Hitler. Doesn't seem quite right to me. If anyone knows if this "guy" is a false teacher you guys would so I hope you don't mind me asking these questions:
Could you share any scripture and/or thoughts you have this? What message do you think this sends to the unsaved world?
PS: The reason why I put the name of the church is because I thought you might ask if I didn't.
God Bless,
Nina
Posts: 45 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
