Jump to content

My God, Why Hast Thou Forsaken Me?

Into the Light

By Into the Light,
in WHAT'S HAPPENING?

 Share

Recommended Posts

ipledgeblue Grand Master

ipledgeblue

Posted
Posted
On 1/2/2023 at 5:59 AM, BhForce said:

First, I think you're assuming that Jesus did actually say that.

Maybe he did, in which case I don't know what it's supposed to mean.

see below, he was repeating scripture from Psalms:

On 11/3/2022 at 12:55 PM, GurjantGnostic said:

He was fulfilling the prophecy in Psalms 22. 

 

On 1/2/2023 at 5:59 AM, BhForce said:

The Gospel ascribed to Matthew is not necessarily written by the supposed Apostle Matthew. This is a later church tradition.

There are no full copies of the Bible books until hundreds of years later.

Given all of this, one wonders if Jesus said that.

Which suggests the possibility of going down rabbit holes which start off by what "someone said".
 

I heard this is true for all the gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Those names for the gospels still don't identify the actual authors!

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkvlondon Grand Master

jkvlondon

Posted
Posted
On 4/11/2008 at 12:41 PM, Into the Light said:

i believe you can take the message/teachings from other faiths and apply them to betters one own Sikhi...but i have a question which i know no one here is a Christian but maybe someone can help

When on the cross, Jesus Christ said 'My God, Why hast thou forsaken me'...does anyone have a deeper appreciation to what Jesus meant when he said this?

The reason i ask is, somethings unless understood in the context in which they were said, can be misunderstood (this includes Gurbani too).

if you believe that then you are saying Guru Sahiban left us with an incomplete doctrine and message , which is totally out of order to imply/say , get your head straight please , you are falling for the arguments non-sikhs have used to tried and convert us in the past .
As far as christian tradition states only one of the apostles were present for the matrydom that was John who brought the womenfolk of Jesus' household there . So any other gospels speaking of it should be taken with salt as it is hearsay.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BhForce Grand Master

BhForce

Posted
Posted
On 1/3/2023 at 10:14 AM, ipledgeblue said:

see below, he was repeating scripture from Psalms:

Bro, that's the entire point. Jesus didn't write anything.

Other people (anonymous) wrote stuff. They wrote that Jesus quoted from Psalms.

Whether he did or didn't we have no idea.

And we don't have to.

We just see Gurbani as complete. Anything else, if it is in accord with Gurbani, can be quoted as Maskeen ji used to. 

But we don't have to go around making truth claims for other scriptures.

0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ipledgeblue Grand Master

ipledgeblue

Posted
Posted
On 1/4/2023 at 2:32 PM, jkvlondon said:

if you believe that then you are saying Guru Sahiban left us with an incomplete doctrine and message , which is totally out of order to imply/say , get your head straight please , you are falling for the arguments non-sikhs have used to tried and convert us in the past .
As far as christian tradition states only one of the apostles were present for the matrydom that was John who brought the womenfolk of Jesus' household there . So any other gospels speaking of it should be taken with salt as it is hearsay.

Even the author for John gospel is unknown and disputed. there are some truths in other scriptures but we take Guru Granth Sahib as whole truths. Nirmala sampradaiye study various scriptures from different traditions and religions. Guru Gobind Singh uses pre-hindu (I stress on pre-hindu as everyone just calls it hindu) myth-itihaas/mythology in Dasam Bani to explain lessons and warrior mentalities. 

It is ok to use a familiar figure or story to strengthen something already within sikhi.

On 1/6/2023 at 4:46 AM, BhForce said:

Bro, that's the entire point. Jesus didn't write anything.

Other people (anonymous) wrote stuff. They wrote that Jesus quoted from Psalms.

Whether he did or didn't we have no idea.

And we don't have to.

We just see Gurbani as complete. Anything else, if it is in accord with Gurbani, can be quoted as Maskeen ji used to. 

But we don't have to go around making truth claims for other scriptures.

true we shouldn't.

 

and we definitely don't want Zakir Naik level nonsense claiming Guru nanak is mentioned in Quran 

 

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Dsinghd
      Gurbani Santhiya

      By Dsinghd · Posted

      I was searching igurbani.com which gives correct pronunciation of Gurbani. I can’t remember all of it at once. I guess it relies on more practice, like more Sehaj Paths. The meaning becomes clearer. I have noticed slight variants in it. This could be because it’s written in old Punjabi.  
    • BhForce
      Veer Manpreet Singh claims we shouldn't worship Guru Granth Sahib ji

      By BhForce · Posted

      Veer Manpreet Singh, a lay preacher, claims that -Sikhs aren't supposed to worship Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We are only supposed to worship God as is written in Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We only "revere" Guru Granth Sahib ji.     He says a lot of other things in this video, some are good refutations of Hindu superstitions, but the reformers often go too far. Anyways, what he is saying about not worshipping Guru Granth Sahib ji is totally wrong. The reason is Guru Granth Sahib ji is Guru. Guru is Satguru. Satguru is God. We worship God. Therefore, we also worship Satguru (Guru Granth Sahib ji).   There are innumerable verses in Gurbani equating God and Guru. ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਡੁਬਦਾ ਲਏ ਤਰਾਇ ॥੨॥ The Guru is the Supreme Lord and the Transcendent Master. The Guru floats (saves) the drowning one. p49   ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਏਕੋ ਜਾਣੁ ॥ Know the Guru and God as One. p864   ਗੁਰ ਨਾਲਿ ਤੁਲਿ ਨ ਲਗਈ ਖੋਜਿ ਡਿਠਾ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡੁ ॥ There is no one at par with the Guru. I have searched and seen the whole universe. p49 (If the Guru is the greatest in the whole universe, shouldn't we worship the Guru?)   I'd like to ask Manpreet Singh what is worship? Any reasonable definition would include obeisance, remembrance, and praise. Those are exactly the same things Gurbani says to do regarding Guru! Remembrance and obeisance: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਅਪਨਾ ਸਦ ਸਦਾ ਸਮ੍ਹਾਰੇ ॥ Ever, ever, I think of the True Guru, ਗੁਰ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਕੇਸ ਸੰਗਿ ਝਾਰੇ ॥੧॥ and the Guru's feet I brush with my head's hair. p387   Praise: ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਆਪਿ ॥ The Guru himself is the transcendent Lord and the supreme master. ਆਠ ਪਹਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰ ਜਾਪਿ ॥੪॥੧੬॥੬੭॥ Throughout the eight watches of the day, O Nanak meditate thou on the Guru. p387   In fact, Gurbani says the way to find God is to worship (puja) of Guru: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਧੋਇ ਧੋਇ ਪੂਜਹੁ ਇਨ ਬਿਧਿ ਮੇਰਾ ਹਰਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਲਹੁ ਰੇ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ Washing and bathing the True Guru's feet, worship thou them. In this way thou shall obtain my Lord Master. Pause. p1118   Could it be any clearer that we are to worship Guru ji?
    • BhForce
      Khalsa Secondary School (West London)

      By BhForce · Posted

      Bro, reciting a shorter Chaupai Sahib is hardly "anti-Dasam". It's fine to argue that the longer Chaupai is more traditional, but the short one isn't anti-Dasam. That's like claiming shorter Rehras is anti-Guru Granth Sahib ji just because there are fewer selections from Guru Granth Sahib. It might not be traditional, but it's not anti-Guru Granth Sahib. I prefer the longer versions, but let's not exaggerate. Every tradition has a slightly different Rehras version. Nanaksar vs Taksal vs Nihangs and so on. The basic template for Rehras is at the beginning of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Later, Chaupai Sahib was added and Anand Sahib always follows as the end of a process. Then some sangats added more saloks to start Rehras and others were added at the end. Some additional selections from Dasam Bani were also added, but it wasn't the same ones for every sangat. The important thing is to not hate on each other for these variations.
    • BhForce
      Khalsa Secondary School (West London)

      By BhForce · Posted

      Umm, so you're upset that this jatha did Chaupai the same way it's being done at Harimandar Sahib for 100 years? Shouldn't you be upset at the manager of Darbar Sahib? I'm not saying that Sikhs who are aware of certain issues shouldn't do the longer Chaupai, but there are only so many battles you can fight. Instead of calling some jatha traitors because they're doing the (for better or worse) "standard" Chauapai published by the SGPC, it would be better to change things from the central point. You can't fault the average Sikh for picking up the average Gutka and doing paath.
    • realist17
      Khalsa Secondary School (West London)

      By realist17 · Posted

      It's the same here in Toronto. Alot of the gudwaras here are political orientated and get tons of funding from the government-probably want them stay hush hush with all the BS that has been happening with India.  These guys are skewing gurbani. A complaint was sent to a ragi singh a couple of days ago in regards to a hukamnama. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use

  I accept