I read an interesting article in World Magazine about how Hindu tradition teaches that Saint Thomas went to preach the gospel in India, and much syncretism may have occurred over the years between Christianity and Hinduism. Two researchers are seeking to prove Christianity's influence on Hinduism, and they offer some compelling evidence.

One significant quote said "The Western church produced creeds and confessions that defined the church; the Indian church, as far as today's scholars know, did not. In the West, those who lost out in theological struggles (which were not wholly immune to power politics) yelled foul, and heresy-hunting created problems of its own. The absence of boundaries, though, often creates problems even greater, as today's Episcopalians have found out. In India, the absence of creeds probably underwrote the tendency to merge Christianity with Hindu worship rather than to maintain it in uniqueness."

I don't think the author or editor of the magazine intended this, but perhaps with my bias due to Protestant/Catholic study, I picked up on something. What implications does this have for Protestantism? How will our own cultural contexts allow Protestantism to change in, say, the next hundred or thousand years? What official teachings ("creeds and confessions") do Protestants have over Hindus, to say that our interpretation of the Christian story is superior to theirs? They have a text that they claim is a "bible" type book, with some parallels to our own Christian stories. What proof do Protestants have that theirs is wrong and Western Christianity is right?

Titled "Echoes of Christ," the article seeks to prove that Christ's coming was the "fulcrum of world history," not just Christian history.

God bless,

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), February 19, 2004

Answers

bump

-- (bump@bump.bump), February 19, 2004.

I don't see much evidence of any Christian traditions within Hinduism. The rumor that St. Thomas went to India seems to be kept alive by those who wish to attack Hinduism rather then by Hindus. However, Hinduism has the history of assimilating that which is deamed true in other religions. That is not true, typically, within the history of protestantism.

Don't fall into the fallicy of thinking that Hinduism is somehow an off-shoot of Christianity. It is not. It has an evolving tradition that is over a thousand years older than Christianity.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), February 19, 2004.

"I don't see much evidence of any Christian traditions within Hinduism."

Imho Bill, it's the influences of Hinduism what seems to be an attempted infiltration of several pagan eastern mysticisms that concerns me; in particular Lord Shiva and the nature of this particular thing or god, or whatever you want to call it. Again, only imho, one might see a glimpse of a dangerous reality here; the gods of the pagans are demons, and Shiva seems to keep popping up everywhere.

I took note of a few things visiting Our Lady of the Angels Cathedral on Temple Street in LA., one of which was the snake in the children's playground. The snake is a actually comprised of a path that runs through a garden area. I took some pictures:

Snake path

Snake's head

Here is one of the twelve triangles that are found along the snake path that correspond to the twelve animals found in the zodiac, representing natural, not supernatural, virtues. Each of twelve animals was also in the playground as a piece of playground equipment to climb on.

Here's the zodiac itself found nearby at the entry to the courtyard of the Cathedral.

My question is not so much whether we have influenced the eastern mystic pagans as much as whether we are going to allow them to influence us. Is what I'm seeing a snake let loose again into a garden of innocents? Who knows.

Are we going to assimilate them, or will we allow them to attempt to assimilate us? Not that they could.

If someone knows the answer to this question, I'm all ears.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 19, 2004.

Many Hinus, especially American and European ones, believe that Jesus was an avatar (incarnation) of Krishna. Hinduism has about a 6,000 year history of absorbing other religions, going back to when the Aryans brought their Vedic religion to India and it absorbed the pre- existing goddess-based religion (Shiva and Amida were origionally goddesses). That is one of the reasons Hinduism and Buddhism have lasted as long as they have: adaptability.

In the contest between the rock and the stream, the stream will win; not by srength, but by flexibility. The rock becomes engulfed in the stream dispite its steadfastness.

This concept has also helped Christianity flourish. Most Christians celebrate Christmas, Easter, and some form of Halloween. These Holidays all existed before the name Jesus was mentioned in Europe. Catholics count prayers on beads mimicking Buddhist prayer beads. The idea of the Trinity, seperateness and oneness simultaneously, is a very Eastern idea. Many of the practices of Christian monks are eerily similar to the pre-existing practices of Buddhist monks. Many Buddhists also believe that Jesus was a Buddha or a Bodhisattva (Buddhist Saint). Just as no man is an island, no religion is an island.

Christianity sprung out of Judaism, was nurtured by Greeks and Egyptians, popularized by partiarchal, hierarchical Romans, and adapted to countless European pagan cultures. It only makes since that some of this will show through.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), February 19, 2004.

How is it you have not mentioned God at all? Is your wisdom confined to self-improvement and/or satifying your craving for knowledge?

You never take note of an Omnipotent and Omniscient Creator; nor His Will. You seem to disregard any notion of genuine revelation.

You don't seem to know God is love. The way you refer to God, He might as well be a chess- piece on the board. Do you realise how shallow you seem here?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 19, 2004.

Eugene,

I'm not sure which of the above posts you were responding to. But you bring up a point that I am (among everything else) trying to reconsile. There seems to be two ways of looking at world religion, and for me Catholicism. That being from the point of view of our Catholic faith, ... our orientation as Christian believers, versus a more academic approach, which is difficult for many of us to ignore due to our years of schooling, scientific method, historical perspectives, drilled into us, (the Jesus Seminar) etc. When we discuss religion from an "academic" stance we sound rather cold and Godless. I don't think its intended. Its almost like there are two languages used to discuss beliefs. (I almost said "belief systems" ...see what I mean?) There is discussion that attempts to come from an objective point of view, which I think you may be reacting to. And there is the discussion of faith from within a Faith which seems to be an entirely different form of discourse.

It was the academic perspectives that seemed to drag me away from my Catholic roots, and still gets in the way as I try to make my way back. I'm not sure where I'm going with this post other than to say I know what you mean Eugene, but don't know any way to discuss beliefs unless you rule out one basis (academic) or the other ( faith,) as a starting point. I know faithful academics, and scientists,...I read them on this board. (Bill seems to have this ability) ... or a balance that I still struggle with.

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), February 19, 2004.

"However, Hinduism has the history of assimilating that which is deamed true in other religions." - Bill

Sort of sounds like the "Borg" on Star Trek: The Next Generation. They assimilated everything in their path too.

-- Gabo Gaviria (jkcap@hotmail.com), February 19, 2004.

The priest at the church where I received Confirmation often used sci- fi, especially Star Trek, to convey theological messages. He used one episode of Star Trek to explain transubstantiation.

What Hinduism does in India, Islam does in the Middle East, and Christianity does in the West. As I stated above, absorbing other religions is vital to the spread and survival of a religion.

I am sorry if my post above came off as godless. My wisdom is not only the result of a never satiated thirst for knowledge and self- improvement; I also have had many eye-opening spiritual experiences, but I try not to expose my specific beliefs in this forum. They may be offensive to Catholics and Christians, and it is not my intent to offend, but to learn.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), February 23, 2004.

My wisdom is not only the result of a never satiated thirst for knowledge and self- improvement;

That is yerning, not wisdom. Look if a message is Truth, you don't need to 'absorb' another religion to make it relavent or more truthful. God came to earth and died for your sins, He then rose again and told us all we can have eternal life if we followed His ways. That is the Good News of Jesus Christ. We don't need to muck it up with other religions. The Truth Jesus taught is universal. What Hinduism teachies is not truth but a continuing of a questioning without an answer. What the Buddha taught is escapism. What Mohammid taught was violence. Salvation comes from Christ the other major religions out there are distractions from that Truth.

In Christ,
Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), February 23, 2004.

"What the Buddha taught is escapism."

You are neglecting Pure Land Buddhism and Amidism. You are also neglecting the compassion and the Eightfold Path that Buddha (Gautama) taught.

"We don't need to muck it up with other religions."

I am afraid that "mucking it up" is what has carried Christianity this far. Yes, the message of Jesus is universal. But Christianity as a religion would not have flourished as it has if it weren't for the acceptance of pagan holidays, the exalting of Mary to replace the Sun Goddess, the many feasts of the saints to replace the many feasts of the polytheist gods, et cetera. I am not saying that the Messianic sect of Judaism would have died out if it were not for absorbtion. What I am saying is that it would not have taken hold as quickly, especially in places like Ireland, if not for a few concessions to the indigenous cultures.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), February 23, 2004.

With all due respect, we did not 'accept' pagan holidays. What we did was replace pagan holidays with Christian holidays. Which is better than ignoring them or accepting them, and has proven very good at eliminating them.

Yes, I did forget Pure Land Buddhism and Amidism. You are correct. However, the truth there is like the truth within the teaching forest monks of the Vedic period, slight and far between. Again, the Truth that Christ taught is universal and we don't need to 'absorb' anything within Pure Land Buddhism to find it.

This might sound elitist, but if someone if fumbling around trying to build a car without knowing anything about the internal combustion engine there is no point in Ford abandoning it's designs simply because that other person is fumbling out there. It is better to show them where they are going wrong and teach them how to build a car correctly. It may not be as 'cosmopolitan' but it is a heck of a lot more practical.

In Christ,
bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), February 23, 2004.

I am afraid that "mucking it up" is what has carried Christianity this far.

{I disagree, and have studied.See below.}

Yes, the message of Jesus is universal. But Christianity as a religion would not have flourished as it has if it weren't for the acceptance of pagan holidays, the exalting of Mary to replace the Sun Goddess, the many feasts of the saints to replace the many feasts of the polytheist gods, et cetera.

{For starters, its a sin goddess, little G. She isnt a proper noun, and isnt onthe same level as God.

Also, Mary didn't get exhaulted ot replace a sun goddess, in the Greeki-Roman world, the Sun was depicted as Masculine, not femenine. Durther, dispite many modern claims that Goddess worship was prevailant ,( Yes, cap as Goddess is a name to some)the truth is that the Pantheons of hte Anceitn Near East , as well as in Europe, where Male dominated. DFrom Zeus-Jupiter to the Dahgda, Male deities held the soverign place. There was no sun goddess. The only place there wss a sun goddess was in the far east, and in the oreint. Christainity had been praising Mary long before this was discovered.

The claim that Mary was a replacement for the sun goddess is simpley ridiculous and unfounded, and I wager you really cant find examples of her in a real myhtology book.

As tot he Holidays, well...explain why Chrisainity did so well, dispite all the killing of Christains on the fist three centuries? Indeed, the religion grew fast, dispite persecution. How is it hat this persecuted religion can actulaly grow even thoughit was outlawed and peopel where beign subjected to death quiet often? Which is another fact rejected by may whio want to revise hisotry so that women where given equality in pagan societies and pagans worshipped soem universal goddess. Sadly,the truht is the reverse, women wheretreated badly by Pagans, and CHristaisn where slughtered.Yet the religion thrived and survived.

Long before Christmas was first celebrated, and long before any Saint Dats where given ( Which many dont celebrate, by the way) Christainity thrived. It wa snot votal tot he religion to absorb Pagan holidays, they did htis to make the transition easier. hey didnt place Christmas on a pagan Holiday ad fool peopel into converting. Christmas was instead developed for FORMER pagans who wished the merriment of their old religion. The Chruch accomodated their desire to celebrate, it did NOT accomodate their religion. And it was not a means of conversion itsself, but a means of helpign a convert who had already joined. Please get the facts form rputable sources before beleiving the modernised crapola you are fed. }-Zarove

I am not saying that the Messianic sect of Judaism would have died out if it were not for absorbtion. What I am saying is that it would not have taken hold as quickly, especially in places like Ireland, if not for a few concessions to the indigenous cultures.

{Concessions which include what?The veneration of Mary ( Which as a protestant I disagree with) was well established logn before St.Patrick was Born. No Holidays where devedloped off of Irish Customs into Christain ones, excpet posibely Halloween. even that retains its Pagan roots. ( Easther by the way isnt Pagan in origin, rathr it is a form of a Jewish Holiday adapted to a chrisyain putpose, the Passover.) As any good Irishman will tell you, the spread of the Cross was peaceful in ireland. But as to culture, the only thing that adaptd was the liturgy, and cultural contect through which the truth was taught, no absorption needed.}-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), February 24, 2004.

Hi, Emerald:

I checked the significance of the Zodiac at LA Cathedral

to see its meaning.

One the security gurads who has been there since the beginning told me it reoresented the sky at the time the Cathedral was dedicated.

He also told me about the fountain where the message is Jesus words to the samaritan woman about living water. It is in many languages: I could read 7 of them.

Also about the fountain next to the snake which iare cut rocks broght from Israel. I read the Hebrew and compared it with the translation. The word translated divine teaching is Torah. The final word trasnslated lovingkindness is actually piety (hasidim).

About the animals:lion, hare, bear,....he told me that is a children's garden and each animal represents something from the Bible. He couldn't show me because they were repairing the Saint augustine grass.

He told me about the weight of the bulding and its total cost.

We talked for about 30 minutes.

Inside, you snese you are in a cathedral, but a modern one. The color inside and outsid is like adobe.

The outside of the cathedral looks like the skeleton of an armadillo.

To me, this cathedral created by a Spaniard, doesn't show much of a copying from other religions, mythology, as you said.

The Christian Yahwist.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), February 25, 2004.

Not much time, so I'll make it short.

Sorry, I was wrong. Our Lady of Guadalupe is Tonantzin, the moon goddess, not the sun goddess. She introduced herself to Juan Diego as Coatlaxopeuh ("Qwah-Tlah-Suh-Peh"), or One Who Crushes the Serpent. The Serpent God, Quetzalcoatl, had a fervent following in this area. The Virgin on his Tilma is standing atop a crescent moon. As a boy, Quauhtlatoatzin (Juan's pre-baptismal name) would have been exposed to Tonantzin's image frequently. The sighting was not far from a temple dedicated to the moon goddess, and this temple was converted into a church dedicated to Our Lady. This way, the locals could keep worshiping Tonantzin and be considered Christian.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), March 03, 2004.

Biscuit: The people did NOT continue in the old worship. And Mary the mother of Jesus (God) appeared to Juan Diego, not the moon goddess. This church is where most of the Indians were baptised. They are all Catholics to this day; not moon worshippers or heathens.,p> Nobody is ''considered Christian'' after baptism. We are born again to the faith of the holy apostles; whether Indian or European or any other race.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), March 03, 2004.

J. Biscuits,
Sorry, but you will have to provide proof of your accusations or retract them. An excuse of 'not enough time' simply makes you a troll, please don't be a troll.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@Hotmail.com), March 03, 2004.

I'm not sure why I am wasting my time with this, however:

Tonantzin was the goddess of earth and corn, by the way, not the mood goddess.

"The Goddess of Sustenance", "Honored Grandmother", "Snake": Aztec Goddess of the Earth. She brought the corn. Mother of the Corn. Her cult is ancient and as a goddess of fertility of the earth she was also regarded as a goddess of human fertility. Associated with the number 7, and was known as the Seven Serpent.

Appears in codices with a red face and body and holding ears of corn in both hands. Also known as the "Seven Serpent". Thought of as being a sister to the god of rain, Tlaloc.

Also refereed to as Chicomexochitl, or Chalchiuhcihuatl, meaning Seven flowers or "Woman of Precious Stone", and worshipped during the moveable feast called Xochilhuitl.

An idol attributed to this deity is described as being made of wood and in the image of a young woman of about twelve years. Her garments were red and well appointed. A tiara of red paper was on her head. Her neck was adorned with a necklace of corn and tied with a blue ribbon. Her hands held ears of corn and her arms were open. She had a special chamber atop the great pyramid in Tenochtitlan next to Huitzliopocttli(*26). This placement next to the revered patron god of the Mexica indicated the reverence and importance this deity held. A great festival to this deity was held each year near the fifteenth of September.

Source: AZTEC RELIGION - (C)1997-99 Thomas H. Frederiksen

Doesn't sound anything like Our Lady of Guadalupe to me.

Coyolxauhqui was the moon goddess according the Aztec mythology. Her name means "Golden Bells." She was the daughter of the earth goddess, Coatlicue and the sister of the sun god, Huitzilopochtli. Coyolxauhqui encouraged her four hundred sisters and brothers to kill their dishonored mother. Coatlicue gave birth to Huitzilopochtli after a ball of feathers fell into the temple where she was sweeping and touched her. Huitzilopochtli sprang out of her mother as an adult fully armed and slew Coyolxauhqui and his other star sisters and brothers. Coatlicue regretted such violence. Thus, Huitzilopochtli cut off Coyolxauhqui's head and threw it into the sky to form the moon. aglow with the golden color of her bells.

"Golden Bells". The earth and moon-goddess of the Aztecs. She is related to the four hundred star-deities Huitznauna, who is under her control. She possesses magical powers which with she can do great harm. Coyolxauhqui decapitated her own mother Coatlicue when she became pregnant in what her children deemed unseemly circumstances. Immediately the sun-god Huitzilopochtli sprang fully armed from Coatlicue's womb and slew Coyalxauhqui and many of her kin. According to one tradition, Huitzilopochtli tossed her head into the sky where it became the moon. (Encyclopedia Mythica online) .

I have no idea who this ‘Coatlaxopeuh’ you mention was.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson-nospam@hotmail.com), March 03, 2004.

J Biscuits is providing a secular interpretaion of history as the actual truth, the passing from moon goddess, etc, etc to Mary. Mary was no invention, is considered a most holy saint with considerable miraculous power, being close to Jesus in Heaven. She is not considered a goddess except by those who are still weak from their old goddess worship religions. But the church did not create a goddess where there was none to replace a pagan one. The church frowns on these practices but human nature is weak.

-- Joseph (bijoy_joseph@yahoo.com), May 08, 2004.