Friday, October 05, 2007

The Ravana humbled

Labels: DMK Goons, Fascist DMK

3 Comments:

Anonymous said...: கிருட்டிணனை வணங்கும் டோண்டு தன்னுடய பதிவில் அதே கிருட்டிணனைப்பற்றிய ஆபாசமான, பதிவுக்கு சம்பந்தம் இல்லாத காமெண்ட்டுகளை அனுமதித்திருக்கிறார் (https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9067462&postID=8325676076343453350). எனவே, அவர் என்னுடைய கீழ்க்கண்ட பதிவையும் வெளியிடுவார் என்று நம்பி பின்னூட்டமிட்டிருக்கிறேன். இது மட்டுறுத்தலுக்காகக் காத்திருக்கிறது.

-----------------------------------

ஏசு ஒரு ஓரினச் சேர்க்கையாளர். அவரைச் சுற்றி 'நெருக்கமாக' இருந்த சீடர்கள் அனைவரும் ஆண்கள். அதனால்தான் சீடர்கள் சுற்றிச்சுற்றி வந்தனர்.

ஏசுவின் தாயான மேரி தச்சு வேலை செய்துவந்த தன்னுடைய கணவனை விட்டுவிட்டு பண்டெய்ரா என்கிற ஒரு க்ரேக்க அல்லது ரோமானிய வீரனுடன் தொடர்ந்த தொடர்பினால்

கொண்டுவரப்பட்ட ஒரு குழந்தைதான் ஏசு. ஏசு காலத்தில் எழுதப்பட்ட தால்முட் (Talmud) என்கிற புத்தகத்தில் இந்தக் உண்மைக்கதை இருக்கிறது.

பகுத்தறிவோடு சிந்தித்தால் மேலும் விளங்கும்...

தனக்குப் பிறக்காத ஒரு குழந்தையை ஏசுவின் தந்தையான யோசேப்பு ஏற்றுக்கொண்டதாக சொல்கிறார்கள்...

உண்மையை வெளியே தெரியாமல் மறைக்க ஊரை விட்டு குடும்பத்தோடு ஓடியபோது பிறந்த குழந்தைதான் ஏசு. தனக்குப் பிறக்காத ஒரு குழந்தையை அதே ஊரில் வைத்து வளர்க்க யோசேப்பு என்ன மாங்கா மடையனா?

ஏசு பிறந்தபோதும் ஏதும் ஆதாரம் இல்லை. ஏசு செருசலத்திற்கு 'கொண்டு வரப்பட்ட' ஒரு குழந்தை...

ஏசு ஓரினச்சேர்க்கையாளர் என்பதால் இயல்பாக இருந்த 'பெரிய' வாய் காரணமாக ஆண்கள் சுற்றி சுற்றி வந்தனர் என்கிறது ஒரு ரகசிய செப்பேடு.

டோண்டு சார் இதற்கு என்ன சொல்கிறார்?

ஆதாரங்கள் இதோ:

http://skeptically.org/newtestament/id5.html

Marks tells of Jesus Being GAY

Scholars have long wondered at a curious passage in the canonical Gospel of Mark (undisputedly the oldest of the canonical gospels) which seems to hint that a detail or two might have been left out: Then they came to Jericho. As he was leaving Jericho with his disciples (Mark 10:46). But what happened in Jericho on Jesus' whistle-stop tour of the provinces? Did Jesus simply pass through and then leave without doing or saying anything to anyone? If the visit was so irrelevant to Jesus' mission, why is it even mentioned? The gap suggests a mission portion of Marks Gospel. The Letter supplied
below--of Clements, who had access to the complete version of Marks gospel, places the events in Jericho.

Both what is missing and why were supplied by Morton Smith, the Columbia University professor scholar whose 1958 research expedition culminated in the discovery of a copy of a letter in the 1646 edition of letters of Ignatius of Antioch (a 2nd century
church writer) at the monastery of Mar Saba, twelve miles south of Jerusalem. This letter contains quotes from what Saint Clemens Bishop of Alexandria refers to as The Secret Gospel of Mark. (Based on this letter we can conclude that The Secret Gospel of Mark was the older and more complete, and the version we have is an edited version with the troubling passages left out by the Church fathers.) The portions supplied by Clements in this letter found by Professor Morton Smith fills in the gap at Mark 10:46.

Bishop Clemens of Alexandria wrote to a disciple named Theodore who had asked for advice regarding the Caprocratians, (a Gnostic Christian sect) use of the "Secret
Gospel of Mark." Clement not only confirmed the existence and authority of "Secret Mark" in his reply, but actually denounced Carpocrates for using black magic to steal a copy "Secret Mark" from the church library!

So scandalous was the Carpocratian "The Secret Gospel of Mark" that Clement advised Theodore never to admit that Mark even wrote it: "You did well in silencing the unspeakable teachings of the Carpocratians. For... priding themselves in knowledge, as they say, "of the deep things of Satan," they do not know that they are casting themselves away into "the nether world of darkness"... For even if they should say something true, one who loves the truth should not, even so, agree with them.... Now of the things they keep saying about the divinely inspired Gospel of Mark... even if they do contain some true elements, [these] are not reported truly...."

As for Mark then, during Peter's stay in Rome [Mark] wrote an account of the Lord's doings, not, however, declaring all of them, nor yet hinting at the secret ones, but selecting what he thought most useful for increasing the faith of those who were
instructed. But when Peter died a martyr, Mark came over to Alexandria, bringing both his own notes and those of Peter, from which he transferred to his former book the things suitable to whatever makes for progress towards knowledge. Thus he composed a more spiritual gospel for the use of those who were being perfected. Nevertheless, he [Mark] yet did not divulge the things not to be uttered, nor did he write down the hierophantic teaching of the Lord [and] he left his composition in the church in... Alexandria, where it is... most carefully guarded, being read only by those who are being initiated into
the great mysteries."

But since the foul demons are always devising destruction for the race of men, Carpocrates... using deceitful arts, so enslaved a certain presbyter in the church that he got from a copy of the secret gospel, which he interpreted according to his
blasphemous and carnal doctrine..."

To them, therefore, as I said above, one must never give way... [or] even concede that the secret gospel is by Mark... but deny it on oath. For, 'Not all true things are to be said to all men..."

This letter is strong evidence that the Secret Gospel of Mark was in fact the complete version of Mark, and what we have is the edited version by the Church fathers. Barnstone at 340 lists as being visible signs of this editing process Mark 4:ll; 9:25-27;

10:21, 32,38-39; 12:32-34; 14:51-52. What, then, were these "true things" that the Church fathers hoped to hide from the untutored eyes of the average Christian? What was the unspeakable?

St. Clement quotes from this complete, "Secret Gospel of Mark" at length towards the end of his letter. Clement in the last third of his letter to Theodore wrote: "To you, therefore I shall not hesitate to answer the questions you have asked refuting the falsifications by the very words of the [Secret] Gospel (Barnstone342). "And they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died was there. And she prostrated herself before Jesus and says to him, Son of David, have mercy on me. But the
disciples rebuked her. And Jesus, being angered, went off with her unto the garden where the tomb was, and straightway a great cry was heard from the tomb. And going near, Jesus rolled away the stone from the door of the tomb. And straightway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth came
to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he
returned to the other side of the Jordan."

After these words follows the text, And James and John come to him, and all that section. But naked man with naked man, and the other things about which you wrote, are not found."

And after the words, And he comes into Jericho, the secret Gospel adds only, And the sister of the youth whom Jesus loved, and his mother and Salome were there, and Jesus did not receive them. But many other things about which you wrote both seem to be and are falsifications. Now the true explanation and that which accords with the true
philosophy." [1] This passage quoted by Clemens from the Gospel, could be interpreted as an account of a baptism preformed by Jesus on this young ladand some dobut for 3

facts. One that Clements and the Church fathers not only suppressed the passage but found it scandalous. Second, the plain meaning of the words naked man with naked man and whom Jesus loved support the conclusion that Sexual union with a man as part of the sacrament was practiced. Third, that it was a practice of some Christian sects for to have (like in Tantra Yoga) to engage in sexual intercourse as part of a union with God. Such was said of some Christian communities. There are passages in the Pauline Epistles which admonishing certain unnamed sexual practices and there is a letter from a Roman
physician describing in detail this practice. Morton Smith, the discoverer of the letter writes: Freedom from the [Mosaic] law may have resulted in completion of the spiritual union by physical union.

This certainly occurred in many forms of Gnostic Christianity; how early it began there is no telling (Morton Smith, The Secret Gospel, p. 94, The Secret Gospel: The Discovery and Interpretation of the Secret Gospel according to Mark. New York: Harper & Row, 1973). From the tone of the letter of Clement, the fact that are present Gospel of Mark is incomplete in a way that indicates deliberate suppression of passages, and from the quoted passages of in the letter, and from the practices of early Christian communities it is quite reasonable to conclude that the Secret Gospel of Mark described the sexual union of Jesus with a young disciple.

This portrayal of the Messiah Jesus as partaking in sexual union fits well with the view of Jesus as a prophet, like Mohammed, Elijah, and others. Much has been written on the
meaning of the Messiah (anointed leader) and the meaning of the Son of God needs to be set in its proper context. A number of heroes were the son of god, including Hercales, Helen, and it was widely believed that Philip of Macedonia was not the real son of Alexander. Mark who was first, and whose Gospel was incorporated with aggrandizements embellishment by Matthew and Luke, and as meaning a prophet unto whom the spirit of god has enter Jesus.[2] This would not be necessary if Jesus
was already divine. Nor would God need to inform his son[3] that he is his son, unless son of God meant something like chosen one. Son of God, most scholars agree, is an ambiguous title at best, so too, is lord from the Aramaic mare, which could be interpreted in a spectrum of ways from the mundane sir to the divine lord.[4] As a mortal, having intercourse with women would be fitting, and to be celibate would to most be very
abnormal.

Would it be very abnormal for Jesus to take a young man and in the religious initiation have sex with him? The Greeks and Romans both approved such if done with the spirit of a mentor and that man also copulated with women. Three centuries of domination had
its effects. Mark had written in his fiction on the life of Jesus[5] things that were deemed proper in the Hellenized world? Could not Mark, who was most certainly not Mark of the disciples, had Jesus do that which Mark done? Modern research often proposes as the author an unknown Hellenistic Jewish Christian, possibly in Syria and perhaps shortly after the year 70.[6]

Clement of Alexandria in his letter acknowledges a complete and suppressed original edition of Marks Gospel, a copy in the Churchs library in Alexandria. Thus the most consistent explanation of the missing passages including the one concerning Jericho is that the Church Counsel was not as Hellenized as Mark, and that they upheld the Hebraic injunction against Greek love.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] The Secret Gospel of Mark, The Other Bible, Willis Barnstone, Editor, Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1984, pp. 339-342. This volume is still in

print. Each Work has a short introductory commentary.

[2] Mark finds nothing remarkable about he life of Jesus (unlike the embellishments of Luke and Matthew). Jesus doesnt become the revealer of the

secrets of heaven until he is called by god. On coming up out of the water he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit, like a dove,

descending upon him. Mark 1:10.

[3] "And a voice came from the heavens, You are my beloved Son: with you I am well pleased." Mark 1:11.

[4] Who Do Men Say That I Am? Kerry Temple, Notre Dame Magazine, Summer 1990, p. 12. This article is by the magazines managing editor, and is

published at the Catholic Notre Dame University. Kerry in this article on the historical and textual setting of the Bible has undermined the Bibles authority.

[5] Biblical scholars who are without the prejudice of faith have concluded that the Gospels are not historical. The most compelling reason is the Epistles, for they are without history or quotes of Jesus. Being early than the Gospels is strong evidence that what was missing was corrected first by Mark.

[6] The New American Bible, Catholic Bible Press, 1979, p. 1117.

பத்தாதா? இதோ இன்னும் கொஞ்சம்:

Indications that Jesus did have a homosexual orientation:

"In the Gospel of John, the disciple John frequently refers to himself in the third person as 'the disciple whom Jesus loved'." 4 One might argue that Jesus loved all of his followers in a non-sexual way. Thus to identify Jesus' love for John in a special way might indicate a sexual relationship. The
disciple was "the" beloved. He was in a class by himself.

During the Last Supper before Jesus' execution, the author(s) of the Gospel of John describes how the "beloved" disciple laid himself on Jesus' inner
tunic -- his undergarment. See John 13:25 and 21:20. Robert Goss, assistant professor of comparative religion at Webster University in St. Louis, LA, noted that Jesus and the beloved disciple: "... eat together, side by side. What's being portrayed here is a pederastic relationship between an older man and a younger man. A Greek reader would understand." 5 Jesus appears to have loved all of his male and female followers in a close, trusting, non-erotic manner.

On the other hand: Some commentators have suggested that it was a common practice in Judea at that time for heterosexual man to lay his head on another's undergarment. Such behavior was common between two heterosexuals in an emotionally close but non-erotic relationship during the first century CE. 6

Jenny Stokes, research director for Saltshakers, a conservative Christian group in Australia, said that there are five words for love in Greek (the language in which the Gospels were written: Agape: spiritual, unconditional love,
Eros: erotic love,
Philia: love between friends,
Storge: familial love.

The Gospel references to "the disciple whom Jesus loved" use the word "agape." 3 Whether the authors originally used "eros" and the word was subsequently changed is open to speculation.

"Jagannath" interprets the Gospels differently. He argues that Jesus may have been bisexual. He wrote:

"In the Book of John a word is used eight times that means 'is in love with' with the implication of sexual intimacy. Five times it is used with reference to Jesus' relationship with John. Once it is used to define Jesus' relationship with Lazarus. And it is also used to describe his relationship with Mary and with her sister Martha." 7

During the crucifixion, in John 19:26-28, Jesus is described as seeing his mother and an unidentified man: "the disciple standing by, whom he loved."

Again, Jesus probably loved all of his 12 or 70 disciples in a non-sexual manner. But this particular disciple is identified as "the" disciple who Jesus loved. That might indicate a special intimate relationship with one special disciple.

The late Morton Smith, of Columbia University reported in 1958 that he had found a fragment of a manuscript which at the Mar Saba monastery near Jerusalem. It contained the full text of Mark, chapter 10. Apparently the version that is in the Christian Scriptures is an edited version of the original.

Additional verses allegedly formed part of the full version of Mark, and were inserted after verse 34. It discusses how a young man, naked but for a linen covering, expressed his love for Jesus and stayed with him at his place all night.

"J Richards" suggested that Mark 7:14-16 shows that Jesus approves of homosexual acts. The critical phrase reads: "There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him..." Richards suggests that Jesus gave great emphasis to this teaching, directing it to everyone. Richards suggests that the sentence refers to dietary laws and also extends to "blood transfusions, medication, organ transplants, and artificial insemination" and to homosexual acts as well. 8

On the other hand, these words have historically been interpreted as overturning the Mosaic law about eating, Rollan McCleary, was awarded his doctorate from the University of Queensland in Australia during 2003-MAY for his work researching the sexual orientation of Jesus and his disciples.

He obtained about $33,000 US in funding from the government to finance his degree. He concluded that Jesus and at least three of his disciples were gay. He based this conclusion on excerpts from the Gospel of John and on Jesus' astrological chart based on the approximate year, month, day and
place where he was born. But not even the year of Jesus' birth is known. Many theologians have concluded that Jesus was born sometime in the Fall, between 4 and 7 BCE. Also, there is disagreement about where Jesus was born. Different theologians argue Bethlehem in Judea, Nazareth, and Bethlehem in the Galilee. The task of creating an astrological chart appears quite impossible. Dr. McCleary told Australian Broadcasting Commission radio that, in the past, "one or two queer theologians" had attempted to show Jesus was gay. "People haven't taken them very seriously because they don't have any evidence and they say things so sensationally that people are not really going to listen or just be very angry. What I'm doing is showing a much more theological and also astrological dimension on all this which will make a lot more sense to people." 9 He has written a book based on his doctoral thesis which was published in 2004. 18

An anonymous webmaster wrote about a revelation that he received during her/his daily prayer and meditation:

"Suddenly many aspects of the New Testament made sense. Jesus never married. He preached love, tolerance, and forgiveness of sins. He did not condemn and vilify as his so-called followers do today. He surrounded himself with men whom he loved. The Bible says nothing of Jesus' sexuality, yet we are taught that he was both divine and fully man. Why did he never marry? Why is the New Testament silent about his sexuality? It became so clear when I had the insight that Jesus was probably gay and that He understood hatred and bigotry first-hand." 10

Unfortunately, this webmaster merely described a type of vision that he/she had and did not provide any supporting evidence. It is unlikely to be convincing to others. Unfortunately, the statement is no longer online.

Mark 14:51-52 describes the incident when Jesus was arrested by the religious police. It describes how one of Jesus' followers was scantily dressed.

The King James Version says he had a linen cloth cast on his naked body; the size and location of the cloth is not defined. The New International Version says that he was "wearing nothing but a linen garment." When the police tried to seize him, they were able to grab only his cloth; the man ran away naked. Reverend Peter Murphy wrote: "We don't know from the sources what really was going on, but we do know that something was very peculiar between Jesus and young men." 11 (Emphasis in the original.)

Michael Kelly wrote of Jesus' attitude towards a same-sex couple as described in Matthew 8:5-13: and Luke 7:2: "One day a Roman Centurion asked him to heal his dying servant. Scholars of both Scripture and Ancient History tell us that Roman Centurions, who were not permitted to marry while in service, regularly chose a favorite male slave to be their personal assistant and sexual servant. Such liaisons were common in the Greco-Roman world and it was not unusual for them to deepen into loving partnerships....Jesus offered to go to the servant, but the centurion asked him simply to speak a word of healing, since he was not worthy to welcome this itinerant Jewish teacher under his roof. Jesus responded by healing the servant and proclaiming that even in Israel he had never found faith like this! So, in the one Gospel story where Jesus encountered people sharing what we would call a 'gay relationship,' we see him simply concerned about — and deeply moved by — their faith and love." Kelly implies that Jesus' sensitivity towards the gay couple might have arisen from his own bisexual or homosexual orientation. 1

Some commentators argue from silence. They note that there is no passage in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) that directly describes anything about Jesus' sexuality. There are many direct and indirect references to Jesus' sensuality. He was accused of being a "drunkard and a glutton" and of partying th "prostitutes and sinners." He apparently enjoyed a tender foot massage from a woman. Yet, neither Jesus' sexuality nor his celibacy is mentioned. Yet, sex is referred to, elsewhere in the Bible, quite often. One might argue that the books in the Christian Scriptures might have once described Jesus' sexual relationships, but that these passages have been vigorously censored by the later church because they were unconventional.

Other commentators have noted that Jesus is silent towards homosexuality in the Gospels. Yet, Paul's opinions and those of many other authors in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) are clearly stated. They conclude that Jesus might have been gay. Odler Jeanlouie speculated: "Is it
meaningful that, in the Sermon on the Mount, central to his teaching, he offered a one-way trip to the Kingdom of God, to anyone who is persecuted?"

12

Public reactions to the suggestion that Jesus was gay:

Some indications of the anger displayed by Americans on this topic include:

Bomb threats and a promise to "burn the place to the ground" sent to the Manhattan Theatre Club if they included the Terrance McNally play Corpus

Christi (The Body of Christ) in its 1998 schedule. It portrayed Jesus and his disciples as a group of gays. The American Society for the Defense of

Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) and the Family Research Council organized a demonstration of over 3,000 Roman Catholic and Protestant

Christians to protest the play being shown in New York City. 13 The theatre first cancelled the play, then reinstated it. In 1999-AUG, after being

staged in New York City, it completed a run at the Edinburgh Festival. Florida legislators threatened to cut off funding for the Florida Atlantic

University if this same play was shown there.

Sheik Omar Bakri Muhammad, judge of the Shari'ah Court of the UK -- an Islamic group -- issued a death fatwa against Terrence McNally. The fatwa

is not enforceable in the UK. However, "If he travels to an Islamic state, then he would risk arrest and execution." 14

The protests have continued. A Roman Catholic group, America Needs Fatima, a subgroup of TFP has distributed hundreds of signed, preprinted

postcards which protested the proposed 2004-MAR production of "Corpus Christi," in Madison, WI. The group had previously been successful in having

the play canceled at a community college in Grand Rapids, MI. 15

Over a million people wrote protest letters from 1984 to the end of 1985 against a non existent gay Jesus film. It was believed to have portrayed

Jesus as a bisexual who had an affair with Mary Magdalene. By late 1984, the office of the Attorney general of Illinois was receiving about 1,000

protest letters a week. The movie was a hoax -- a Christian urban legend. No trace of it was ever found. 16

On the other hand, a survey conducted by Talk Radio in London, UK, on 1997-DEC-14 found that:

51% said that revelations of Jesus being a homosexual would not affect their religious belief.
49% said it would.

References:

Michael B. Kelly, "Could Jesus Have Been Gay?," at: http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/

Peter Tatchell, "Was Jesus Gay?," at: http://www.petertatchell.net/

George Broadhead, "Jesus and Homosexuality," Gay and Lesbian Humanist quarterly, at: http://www.galha.freeserve.co.uk/

Patrick Goodenough, " 'Gay Jesus' Claim Draws Fire," Crosswalk.com, 2003-MAY-29, at: http://www.crosswalk.com/

Hank Hyena, "Was Jesus Gay: A search for the messiah's true sexuality leads to a snare of lusty theories," 1998-APR, Salon.com, at:

http://www.salon.com/

James Holding, "Leaning on a broken reed," Tektonics Apologetics Ministries, at: http://www.tektonics.org/

Jagannath, "Was Jesus Gay? Or: Can We Finally Let Him Out of the Closet?," at: http://www.geocities.com/

J Richards, "Jesus Speaks of Homosexual Acts," Rainbow Alliance, at: http://rainbowallianceopenfaith.homestead.com/

"Jesus was gay, says academic," smh.com.au, 2003-MAY-29, at: http://www.smh.com.au/

"Was Jesus gay?," at: http://www.angelfire.com/ct/gayjesus/

Reverend Peter Murphy, "The Sexuality of Jesus?," at: http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/

Odler Robert Jeanlouie, "Was Jesus Gay?," 2001-JUL-19 at: http://www.readnrun.com/

Bruce Sullivan, "3,000 Protest Gay Jesus Play," Conservative News Service, 1998-SEP-29, at: http://www.conservativenews.org/

"UK Fatwa for 'gay Jesus' writer," BBC News, 1999-OCT-29, at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/

Jacob Stockinger, "Group protests gay Jesus play," The Capital Times, Madison, WI, 2003-SEP-23, at: http://www.madison.com/

"Jesus will be portrayed as a homosexual in an upcoming film: False," http://www.snopes.com/

"Was Jesus gay?, Missing Fragments from St. Mark's Gospel," OutRage!, 1998-FEB-27, at: http://outrage.nabumedia.com/

Lesa Bellevie, "Mary Magdalene FAQ," at: http://www.magdalene.org/

அட இது குறித்து மேலும் தெரிந்துகொள்ள அமேசான் தளத்தில் போய் புத்தகம் வாங்க விரும்புகிறீர்களா?

இதோ புத்தகப் பட்டியல்:

Books about this topic:

Rollan McCleary, "A Special Illumination: Authority, Inspiration and Heresy in Gay Spirituality," David Brown Book Co., (2004). Read reviews or order
this book safely from Amazon.com online book store

Rollan McCleary, "Signs for a Messiah." Hazard Press, (2003). Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store

Theodore W. Jennings, Jr., "The Man Jesus Loved: Homoerotic Narratives from the New Testament," The Pilgrim Press, (2003-MAY). Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store

Morton Smith, "The Secret Gospel: The Discovery and Interpretation of the Secret Gospel according to Mark," Harper & Row, (1973). Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store

ஏசுவுக்கு நீரிழிவு நோய் ஏற்பட்டதால் 'பலகீனம்' அடைந்துவிட்டார் என்றும், அதனால் சீடர்கள் அவரை கடைசி நேரத்தில் கை விட்டுவிட்டார்கள் என்பது ஆராய்ச்சியாளர்கள் கூறுவது. அதற்கான ஆதாரங்களை அடுத்த பின்னூட்டத்தில் தருகிறேன்.

-----------------------------------; 11:43 AM, October 12, 2007
Anonymous said...: Further development about this Jesus issue is available at http://dondu.blogspot.com/2007/10/blog-post_16.html.; 6:03 AM, October 16, 2007
அரவிந்தன் நீலகண்டன் said...: Dear Mathumeham see my comment in Doondu blog:
Dear Mr.Dondu,

You say you accept Sri Krishna and also you respect jesus. This is ridiculous. Jesus (like Hitler) says clearly that he who is not with him is aginst him. Krishna says clearly that 'follow your own path chosen by discrimination and live happily'(BG 18:63)Sri Krishna says that he who thinks of him as born of high caste is a demonic person (BG 13:15) But followers of Jesus invented false genetic trees to claim that he was high born in the line of David. Sri Krishna says He resides in the heart of all people while Jesus asked his disciple to discriminate between people on such terms as 'swine and dogs'. Sri Krishna is a spiritual universal humanist whereas Jesus is a racist anti-human myth. You cannot compromise between Jesus and Sri Krishna. Sri Krishna as revealed by Bhagavath Gita is the manifestation of Universal Godhead in human form whereas Jesus is a pathological myth created as an artifice of aggression. That is why Ayya Vaikundar has shown us all Hindus, Christian scripture as 'vain scripture' (Veen Vetham) and 'cruel scripture' (Kodum Vetham) So donot hurt the feelings of Hindus by comparing the incompatibles. 'If you compromise between food and poison death alone will win.' - Ayn Rand; 11:45 PM, October 16, 2007

அகப்பயணம்

About Me

Friday, October 05, 2007

The Ravana humbled

3 Comments: