Your values as described here, are self defining. You say that some are "better" without actually defining objective good. You say these values are inversely proportional to violence without providing evidence that violence is in any way meaningful. Again, you are using human faculties to say...
Problem is, no one can prove that there's actually anything bad about the world. What makes something good or bad? A feeling you have? You being the product of a culture which has different values to other cultures? But different cultures having different values indicates that value isn't...
The name YHVH is a reference to "being; existence itself" while the name/title Elohim references power itself. In other words, without Elohim, nothing in the Universe would be able to do anything because there would be no energy, momentum, work, force, etc. If you like you can think of Elohim as...
I can't fully understand what you are getting at. Punctuation and such could help. Regardless, this doesn't seem to answer the question. If God is omniscient, then he wouldn't have to use trial and error as you have described.
Strong says the Hebrew yom can mean:
afternoon, age, all, always, amount (of time), battle, birthday, Chronicles, completely, continually, course, daily, day, day of the days, day that the period, days ago, each day, entire, eternity, evening, ever in your life, fate, first, forever...
Right, but there's always something lost in translation—even more so with divine mysteries. So, the argument here is about a word translated from Hebrew to Greek, again translated from Greek to an (purposefully) archaic form of Early Modern English, and being used by speakers of Modern English...
Indo-Aryans (or Aryans for short) were a linguistic group and the term can be more generally used to denote the culture of that linguistic group. They no longer exist. Modern Hindus may call themselves Aryas, but have no greater relationship to the historic Indo-Aryan than they do the indigenous...
This answers why Shiva & Visnu's forms continued to be venerated until today. My question is how Hindus who venerate these forms can consider themselves to be astika. Shouldn't they be venerating those who are extolled in the Vedas to be astika?
लिङ्ग literally mean "sign symbol or mark which denotes one's sex." While "penis worship" is probably inaccurate, it's no less so than any other assumption. Personally, I go for the idea that they were venerating the generative principle itself (as it is almost always linga + yoni).
Also, stone...
The genetic, linguistic, and archaeological evidence all agree that the Indo-Aryans entered around 1500 BCE. 4,000 years after that is still 500 years away.
Where did you get your information?
If your support is archaeology, please reference the paper. If it's a sacred text, please reference the śloka.
In my experience the evidence for Aryan migration is beyond enough. We have more evidence for this than most hypotheses in archaeology. So, for the purposes of this discussion I'm...
Regardless, everything with attributes (guṇas) is illusory. All is Brahman. Focusing on which illusory form is what version of which other illusory form is rajas.