As I understand it from a muslim friend, Hindus take their mythical writings literally. I guess the question is how much we need to buy into the idea that there was once human beings who could do things that seem to defy reason. In today's world the real miracle would be for people to stop trying to convince one another that his or her religion / belief system trumps that of their neighbours. That would be something.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > To All: > > > > Siddhis are not restricted to the vedic literature. We find > > similar feats in the gospels and stories of Christian saints. > > The conclusion is inescapable. Because stories of > siddhis exist in these books, siddhis must exist. > > Similarly, stories of not only siddhis but fantastic > creatures like dragons, trolls, etc. exist in other > books. These books are often referred to as "fairytales" > or "myths." Presumably these stories should be given > EXACTLY the same credence as the stories in the "vedic > literature" or in the "gospels." > > After all, there is EXACTLY the same amount of > evidence that the stories in the myths and fairytales > are true as there is that any of the stories in the > "vedic literature" or "gospels" are true. Therefore > what I think you're trying to make is that if it's > a story in a book, it's true. > > Or did I get that wrong, John? Were you suggesting > instead that something is true only if it's a story > in *some* books? > > :-) > > Just funnin' wit ya, John. > > But seriously, if you feel like it (or if *anyone* > here feels like it), please present a reason why > we should consider the Bible or the gospels or the > "vedic literature" any different from myths and > fairytales -- or for that matter from any other > form of fiction -- in terms of their credence or > accuracy. > > A reason other than "Because I believe they are," > that is. > > I'll wait. >
