I see many saying no to this question on the internet. But the reasons they give are nonsense – derived from a poor understanding of what Hinduism consists of, usually equating it to polytheism or belief in different gods.
I would say the Christian religion is defined by the first agreement of the ecumenical council in Nicaea 325 AD and the later acceptance of the Bible as authoritative.
Unlike Judaism and Islam, there is no conflict in Hinduism with the Christian belief that Jesus is God, which I have claimed is the essence of the agreement in Nicaea.
However the one central unifying belief of Hinduism is reincarnation, so I think it comes down to whether you think a Christian can believe in this. I certainly do not (I am very much opposed to reincarnation, in fact). But I have encountered Christians who do, and I have to wonder if this is all that different than a belief in ghosts or UFOs. Do such beliefs really preclude being Christian?
Is there a conflict with the Bible? To be sure, I don’t see any such belief taught in the Bible. But then there are a lot of true things which are not taught in the Bible, so what does that matter?
BTW Doing some more fact checking… While reincarnation is considered a mainline teaching of Hinduism, apparently 60% of Hindus don’t believe in it. LOL Thus Hinduism remains pretty hard to nail down to specific beliefs. The Wikipedia article speaks of “dharma,” but to me this frankly sounds like a basic belief of all religion (that there is some cosmic/divine order for righteous living).
I have discussed with believers, including pastors, living and working in India. They tell that Hinduism has not much against believing in Jesus as one god among others. In fact, there are Hindu temples including images of Jesus (often with his mother Mary) among other images of gods. If a Hindu believes in Jesus as one god among others, the believers in India do not classify that person as a Christian.
For the believers living in India, the border between being a Hindu and a Christian is at baptism, when the person to be baptized needs to openly reject all the gods of Hinduism - there can be only one God and Lord for a Christian believer.
Gods of Hinduism are understood as idols or false gods, like Baal, Astarte and other gods of nations in the biblical scriptures. It was not ok to serve both Yahweh and Baal or Astarte.
Many of us accepts that the old testament is full of what we call accomondationism. That God reached out to Jews in a way that accomondated their worldview. So since they seemed to have mostly believed the world was flat, the Holy Spirit inspired a message of the world be a circle on pillars and so on. Many scholars also have shown work indicating that El and Yahweh were two separate gods that different sects worshipped and eventually was moved into one god and that even the angel of the lord may have been a different god at one time and was moved to being an angel. I doubt God’s name was actually either but those were merely names their language.
So to me if God accomondated them in all of those ways then why could he not also have accomondated them about the afterlife. After all we don’t see a singular belief in the Bible about the after life. We see somethings that indicate the dead sleep, some indicate the dead are some sort of shade in another realm and we see how Sadducees and Pharisees did not agree on resurrection. In the OT it says the new heaven and earth will have death and births and in the NT it says no more death and not given into marriage and presumably is indicating no more sex and so on. So I don’t think Christians know anymore about God or the afterlife than Hindus and I don’t think the Bible is systematic anymore where a single true doctrine on most things can be hammered out.
So while I don’t believe in reincarnation either. At least not reincarnation of someone being born again and able to tap into their past life and remember things. Could some kind of spiritual essence of us that can grow kinder or more wicked keep coming back. Maybe it’s something that has nothing to do with a personality, but just naturally how kind you are. There are some people who even brought up in the same household in the same circumstances are very different. One brother is a bully and another is far kinder. So could this kindness and compassion versus seemingly being more naturally hard hearted be some kind of karmic overflow and as you become more Christ like your soul is born again and that person is simply nicer and keeps going and going until they are very good I don’t know. No one does. It’s something that can be tested anymore than proving or disproving a soul is asleep or a spirit Is in another realm. But I don’t think either view is more true than another.
So I think that perhaps the same God that called themselves Yahweh and El is the same god that called themselves Vishnu. Omnism and syncretism. I have a hard time thinking that out of millions of years of humans and “protohumans” being here and out of billions of years of life that God decided to just reach out to one tribe of people on the face of earth and that the afterlife just happened to be something that was similar to their cultural understanding. I think he’s reached out to all nations, to random people, all across the world as hundreds of different gods with a story that elevates love and justice that accommodates their worldview. I think if there is intelligent alien life outs there among the billions of planets and possibly different universes that God will have reached out to them as well in a way that makes sense to them too.
From what I have heard, Hinduism is driving towards monotheism as opposed to polytheism and that would take them closer to Christianity. Their Scriptures have to be reimagined to reach this viewpoint and, as with the Bible, such an action is frowned upon by the old faithful.
It now boils down as to whether God has indeed revealed Himslef in accomodation of their cuture or whtehr He has left them alone out of some sort of disgust or rejection. How you view this will depend as much on your view of God as it does on your understanding of the Christian Scriptures. It would seem to me that the practicaities and necesities of religion would encourage exclusivity more than the practicalities or necesities of the Nature of God. Pragmatism would dictate the folly of accepting the possibilty of another faith.It is self defeating. But whether pragmatism should dicatate faith is another matter.
At the end of the day the prroof is in the actions of the believers. If the net result is not in conradiction with the percieved values of the faith, why should we care about the details, mnor or not?
I guess that debate will run riot whatever faith you have settled on. Condemning your family and hertage to Hell for their cultural and hisoric beliefs might be one step too far.for anyone. To claim tht God might demand it? Gives a very poor view of God.(and one I, for one, am reluctant to assign)
The question and the comments lifted up questions in my mind:
Why was it not allowed to serve both Yahweh and Baal?
If serving both was against the will of God during the ancient times, has something changed so that it would be now ok to believe and serve both Yahweh and the gods of Hinduism?
We are now living an era where there is public pressure to show acceptance to the diversity of beliefs and lifestyles. Should we maintain the unconditional attitude of the early Christians - they rather accepted torture and death than bowed to the idols of the other belief systems - or should we take a liberal attitude, think that we can accept anything that is not in contradiction with the perceived values of faith?
Although we are not party to the precise beliefs of the follwoers of Baal the indications of the confrontqtion with Elijah was thart they dealt in blood letting and probably other harmful practices. Also Baal was shown to be innert in terms of answering.
Whether e like it or not Himduism has persisted for at least as long as Judaism.As such, time would seem to validate it. The fact that it has not been wiped out by Christinity would also indicate a persiatance.
How far do we allow diversity of faith? Mormons? Moonies? Cults?
I doubt if we can lay doen specific s,ut take each at its own merit. I am pretty sure that within some of those relisgions are genuine beleivers who have been caught up and blindsided and that God would be aware of it.
It would seem that it is not our place to judge other’s beleifs, even against our own.History is full of examples of humans taking God’s judgement into their hands with cruel and ungodly resutts. Even if the Salam withch trials had justfication, their metods and results left a great deal to be desired.Crusades? Catholic v Protestants? Where do you draw the line?
The sheer numbers involved in non-christian religion would indicate that it is out of our hands.
And perhaps we need to bow to public opinion or risk being outcast ourselves (Scripural citstions excepted) Such a position would negate any sort of hope of fulfiling the Great Directive in any shape or form.
No, montheistic leaning and highly philisophical or not, they still serve the pagan gods of the Aryans in some form or another, and the Bible condemns the pagan gods as demons multiple times. You cannot drink from the cup of God and the cup of demons. This question should really be a no-brainer for Christians and i’m highly surprised that anyone gives any other answer than this.
Well, I am a Christian. This means that I believe that scripture is the Word of God. Just because I believe in evolution and interpret scripture (in a highly Orthodox way historically) in a manner different from Young Earth creationism doesn’t mean I don’t take scripture and the faith VERY seriously. That is, my mind is not so open that my brain falls out. My view of God comes from scripture because it’s how God has revealed himself to man. Hinduism and all kinds of paganism are banned by the scriptures. The pagan gods are condemned as demons and God says that he is a jealous God and to have no gods besides him. Those who do have gods besides him will not inherit eternal life and will go to hell. Thats what scripture says and I believe it. I am no liberal Christian whose faith exists on life support.
That does not mean it is dictated or God in written form. Scripture is written and verified by humans. as such it is subject to human understanding.
The understanding of God changes from Genesis to Revelation. Perhaps you are not seeing this.
God does not ignore 75% (or more) of His creation.
If you want to worship a selfish and egotistical God who only cars for those who are christian fair enough. i am a Christian because it is the most appropriate faith for me< I do not worship Him because it is the only oprtion avaialble or because He will send me to Hell if I dare to think differently.
Scripture is the words of God in the words of man, as the Catholic church says (i’m not Catholic.) Scripture itself claims to be God breathed. While the Bible often takes knowledge of the Ancient Near East, and logic to interpret, the interpretation is not multiple choice, there is a right, unchanging interpretation.
The understanding of God does not change from Genesis to Revelation. It’s the same God with the same morals. God is unchanging. Allegations of difference come from great exaggerations and misunderstandings.
God doesn’t ignore 75% of his creation, he sends his people out to spread the gospel to the ends of the earth.
As for me, I worship the God of the Bible. You call that God egotistical and who only cares for Christians. None of that is true, but if you think that of him, then you worship a different God than the God of Christianity and of scripture.
God may be unchanging, but He dos not reveal all of Himself, certainly not in one go.
If you cannot see the changin in undersanding of Scripture then you are not reading it right.
The Bible was neother dictated, nor revealed in one sitting.
Paul was not God, or privvy to anything that God does not reveal to us. Howeer PAulwas raised a Jew. Not only a jew but a pharisee. That is refelected in his theology.
I have been a Christian for near enough all of my sixty odd years. I know God. And what i know does not reflect the inflexible, selfish and exclusivity of Biblical theology/
No, iThis view comes from trying to interpret the Bible using the Bible. It fails eevery time. The Bible contradicts itself because it was not ritten by one eperson with one viewpoint.
You are joking! Do you honestly think God relies an the faithful few and ignores anyne who either does not hear or does not listen?
I know Scripture. And I know hard line Christianity.
There is only one God, but many views of Him. Do you really think you can box Him into the Bible?
I suggest you leave it here before someone says something the might regret.
The Bible is the beginning of faith, not the be all and end all…
Sure there are some gods specifically condemned in the Bible.
The Egyptian gods: Hapi, Osiris, Heqet, Apis, and Ra
Baal
Astarte
Asherah
Chemosh
Dagon
Moloch
Tammuz
So if it was about any of these I would grant you have a case.
But no I don’t see these names you call “Arian gods” mentioned anywhere.
Where does the Bible speak of these “Arian gods.”
Let’s have a list of names of God by which you condemn people.
Is Kamisama in Japanese ok?
Is Atua in Samoan ok?
Is Dios in Spanish ok?
I find your attitude a bit incoherent. Even the OT and the Jews have quite a few names for God… Elohim… Yahweh… Adonai… Immanuel…
Are all of these ok?
In any case… on this issue of whether one can be a Hindu and a Christian, I am not decided. And for me the biggest issue is reincarnation. But it does look to me like “Hinduism” is just our label for religion in India, and not really a particular religion at all. Certainly there is no commitment required to any of these so called “Aryan gods” as a part of being a Hindu, let alone accepting all of them. So to me it looks like your approach is little different than saying no speaker of the Hindi language can be a Christian, and your so called reasons for saying “no” really look a bit nonsensical to me.
Of course we are not talking about being saved but simply whether the label “Christian” is applicable. And a conflict of belief is a good reason to say no. So if you think reincarnation is incompatible, that would certainly make sense to me. But that would apply to a lot of people claiming to be Christian (whether they are Hindu or not). And apparently it wouldn’t even apply to 60% of those who are Hindu either.
PS… fact checking again. Apparently 24% of U.S. Christians believe in reincarnation… even 10% of born again Christians.
This is a really interesting topic Mitchel…I’m glad you brought this up as i haven’t looked into this question before and just placed hinduism in the same basket as other eastern religions.
I will add however, that there is at least one fundamental belief of Hinduism that is highly problematic for Christianity…
Google AI on the question “fundamentals of Hinduism”
Karma
The belief that actions and intentions determine a person’s current and future lives. Good actions lead to good outcomes, and bad actions lead to bad outcomes
Whilst i have no doubt that Karma is absolutely true even in Christianity, within the realms of Eastern religions it suggests a works-based model of salvation (which is a false belief in both Testaments of the Bible)
The bible very clearly explains that “our best efforts at righteousness are nothing but filthy rags” >
Isaiah 64:6
6 All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.
…it doesnt matter what we do we are still condemned to death. “The wages of sin are death” (romans 6:23) for all humanity…there isn’t anyone immune from that. Even Christ, who lived a sinless life still paid the price for the wages of sin (strangely enough).
Romans 10 tells us:
Of Filthy Rags and Transformed Hearts
That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your
heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it
is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it
is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. Romans 10: Of Filthy Rags and Transformed Hearts | Ray Noah
whether or not an individual believes in Young Earth Creationism, both of the major views on the age of the earth agree that humanity came out of either Africa or the middle east.
By some 70-50,000 years ago,[11][9][12][13] only a small group, possibly as few as 150 to 1,000 people, crossed the Red Sea.[14] The group that crossed the Red Sea travelled along the coastal route around the coast of Arabia and Persia until reaching India, which appears to be the first major settling point.[15] Geneticist Spencer Wells says that the early travellers followed the southern coastline of Asia, crossed about 250 kilometres (155 mi) of sea, and colonized Australia by around 50,000 years ago. The Aborigines of Australia, Wells says, are the descendants of the first wave of migrations. Peopling of India - Wikipedia
given the above, i think it highly unlikely that early humanity in those foundation regions were not religious…so the idea that Indian or Chineses religions could be older…that’s a heck of a stretch and it isn’t supported even by the evolutionary facts of the genetic orgins of modern mankind
Also, we have some significant historical support for the origins of written language that i think align with the bible timeline for early bible patriarchs and stories of the rise of heathen cultural and religious habits…the claimed biblical flood is an example of that…as well as Abraham being called out of Ur of the Chaldees (modern Iraq)
The above criticisms present` a significant problem for any notion that Hinduism can predate ancient biblical religion. Note I’m using the examples of Adam, Enoch and Noah in making that statement because my understanding is that even within the bounds of TEism, Adam is clearly the first man that God began to directly teach about Himself.
Given that, id suggest we have strong evidence that the biblical model of God is far more likely than any eastern religion model. That is not to say they do not have their own variants of the biblical belief…of that I’m certain there is a correlation (example…the wise men from the east who visited Christ…whilst not jewish, clearly had knowledge of Jewish prophecies)
There is nothing about salvation in the teaching of karma (which often has nothing to do with reincarnation, since so many don’t believe in reincarnation).
This is simply the basic law and judgement taught over and over again in the Bible, OT and NT, for example…
Romans 2:5 But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed. 6 For he will render to every man according to his works
This is no more incompatible with Christianity than Judaism, which is bizarre to say since all the early Christians were Jewish Christians and then there are even the Jews for Jesus today.
From the law and judgement (karma if you will), all will reap hell and death.
Salvation is a Christian good news addition to this basic law and judgement and yes salvation is by the grace of God. But frankly, what I think you are pushing is indulgence and entitlement, that because of your list of dogmas you get a free pass to sin all you want with no consequences – and so you complain whenever the law and judgement are mentioned.
So you are teaching that even Christ had original sin and was paying for it with death. Figures… since you condemn all unborn and new born infants for nothing they have done, then it makes sense that you condemn Christ also. Apparently you want to remove all meaning to what we actually do and make everything depend on only on what dogmas you believe in or have no knowledge of.
I think I want nothing to do with your very disturbed version of Christianity.
So you are claiming Google AI is wrong there Mitchel? (good luck with that)
If all you are doing is complaining about salvation…then you have completely missed my point.
Self enlightenment is a works based elevation to a better future. That is fundamentally at odds with the entire biblical model of belief. (whether or not you claim salvation is completely irrelevant)
note the highlighted part of the screenshot below…
To my way of thinking this is one of the heresies that also managed to influence the ancient catholic penance system, from which all modern Christianity came…the issue is, because of that similarity its very easy to fall into the trap of believing that the two models could be harmonious. however, those who had studied the reformation will appreciate exactly why they are different.
The biblical model is this…
We believe on the lord jesus christ
Through our belief we become changed and that the fruit of our faith is good works.
It is impossible for the Christian model to work the opposite way around (which is what all eastern religions propose)
The hindu model is highly problematic in that it claims that if we fail the first time, we can reincarnate and have another crack at it. This is 100% anti biblical…if not for the simple illustration of the Noahs flood story. People who were alive at the time were warned for 120 years through Noahs preaching…once the door of the Ark was closed, that was Kaput for them. Revelation proposes exactly the same model at the end of time.
