Strategy for defeating a weak atheist

[Guest guest]

> > That was a joke mainly for Jahnu P. 8) These are aikido

> techniques.

>

> Aha, ok Yes, these techniques most be very helpfull in preaching

>

 

They are. The idea of aikido is using aggressor's energy against him

while stepping away from the line of an attack, deflecting it. Can be

successfully applied against ad hominem attacks, physical or verbal.

 

> Yes, there are some Christian traditions which are quite good. As

> far as I know some of the gnostic traditions have nice philosophy -

> at least better than atheism. But protestant so called Christian

> philosophy is exstremly poor in my view - that's what we have in

> Denmark.

 

This is a vast topic but pertinent here since we talk about the

origins of atheism.

 

My understanding is that Gnosticism to a devotional Christianity (like

Catholicism) is like Advaitistm to devotional Vedic traditions (like

Vaishnavism).

 

Gnosticism could be derived from Buddhism which was spreading around

beginning of the common era in Near East. The Eastern influence is

very prominent: Although Gnosticism supported ahimsa, vegetarianism,

reincarnation, etc. (which makes it attractive to devotees in ISKCON),

at the same time it was monistic, opposing monotheism. An extensive

Western anti-monotheistic (mainly anti-Christian, later anti-Catholic)

agenda continued with groups like Rosicrucians, Theosophists, various

pseudochristian, esoteric and occult groups up to recent exponents of

New Age like E. Cayce, L. Rampa or Dan Brown ("Da Vinci Code" etc.).

 

The schism of Christianity was a part of this influence, leading to an

appearance of nondevotional Protestantism, a theological and practical

dilution, an apasampradya.

 

The Roman Catholic Church, as the strongest Catholic force, was

constantly battling whichever form the Gnosticism took (Cathars,

templars, freemasons, etc.) but couldn't eradicate it and in the

process also destroyed countless innocent lives (e.g. 'witches'). This

was an ammunition for the opponents.

 

One could say there is a common 4-step pattern:

 

1. theism > 2. its degradation > 3. monism > 4. atheism

 

examples:

Hinduism > Buddhism

devotional Buddhism > atheistic Buddhism

Catholicism > Protestantism > liberalism

Orthodox Judaism > liberal Judaism

 

In ISKCON we already have the history of step 2. and the monist

influences (3.) can be seen in the form of New Age ideas. Srila

Prabhupada few times quoted sources like Aquarian Gospel but

unfortunately some devotees took it as a full support of them and the

path to negative influences of nirvisesa/sunyavada of New Age was

open. Allegiance to these sources, again mainly with Gnostic origin,

minimizes our academic and spiritual credibility and preaching

potential since scholars and knowledgeable Christians are aware of the

nature of these works. I had an exchange with Satyaraja P. about this

when we were translating his Hidden Glory of India. He insisted to

have there a info on Jesus in India, another such discredited issue

(although in toned down wording). This could minimize the stature of

that valuable book when it comes under academic scrutiny as well as

undermine the credit of Srila Prabhupada and ISKCON when disciples of

Srila Prabhupada back such sources with their authority. Considering

all of this, my understanding is that the benefit is vastly lesser

than the risk.

 

> Yes, it's too bad. It's really bad what happened, also very much for

> the preaching. And it's difficult to not answer these things in a

> debate, especially if they start to blaspheme ISKCON, the Vedic

> striptures and Prabhupada. But if you answer you are dragged into an

> endless debate over all the bad things that happened in ISKCON plus

> all the bad things that did'nt happen in ISKCON, and what could

> happen, and what maybe happened etc.

 

I usually just provide some links with plenty of academic resources

like http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/iskcon.html

 

ys Jan