Did Jesus travel to India?

Originally posted by Jan Ardena

Originally posted by Randolfo
Why would Jesus need to go to India to get enlightened?

Who said he went there to get enlightened?
Jesus was most compassionate, he went there to enlighten souls.
Click to expand...
I think he sent his disciples there, Saint Thomas it seems, by the evidence of the Mar Toma church there


2) that Jesus, as a Jew needed to go to India to be 'enlightened' as a 'Hindu' &/or 'Buddhist'

Jesus may have been born into a jewish family and community which would technically designate him a jew, but he "himself" was not jewish. "Jew" is a human concept.
Click to expand...
Jew is how he lived, it was up to his disciples to send that message forward, as in "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations" Matthew 28:19



3) that ancient Palestine was not cosmopolitan enough to have world class ideas or thoughts

Where does being cosmopolitan come into it? :confused:
Click to expand...
Having lived in two of the biggest US cities, Chicago & LA, & now in a mid-level one (Fresno), I feel that a lot of people equate small towns as not sophisticated or cosmopolitan enough to have major "ideas" or "thoughts", that’s why New York, London & Paris have an "aura" & are centers of gravity for arts, music & philosophy. You can test that out, by asking yourself where you would go for a taste of "culture", LA or Fresno?

4) that India is the center of 'advanced thinking’ & /or 'religious enlightenment'

Hmmm???
I don't buy it!

Where is then? :) Love Jan Ardena.
Click to expand...
that center is where ever the human soul dreams, lives & hopes. Which makes that everywhere, even in towns like Nazareth & Fresno.
 
Originally posted by Randolfo
Jew is how he lived, it was up to his disciples to send that message forward, as in "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations" Matthew 28:19

No spiritual master would ask his disciples to perform something he would not do himself.
I don’t think he lived like a jew, I think he wanted the jews to follow in the footsteps of Abraham or Moses, if they were going to continue the jewish tradition, as opposed to gambling and the likes, in the house of God, and stoneing prostitutes.

I feel that a lot of people equate small towns as not sophisticated or cosmopolitan enough to have major "ideas" or "thoughts", that’s why New York, London & Paris have an "aura" & are centers of gravity for arts, music & philosophy. You can test that out, by asking yourself where you would go for a taste of "culture", LA or Fresno?

In my experience the best art, music and philosophy, comes from outside such centres.
I find that the expression which tends to come directly from these places, pretentious and shallow, but skilful and polished, of course this is just my oppinion.
I find that people from such environments are usually good at exploiting real talents.
The atmosphere in these big cities, are not conducive to spiritual meditation, or real down to earth thinking. The inhabitants usually spend their time worrying about money and vanity.

that center is where ever the human soul dreams, lives & hopes. Which makes that everywhere, even in towns like Nazareth & Fresno.

Some places are more akin to spiritual awareness than others, for example serenity, quiet, calm, naturally beautiful places tend to soothe and calm the soul, but in India (although becoming more secular with each passing second) the science of God is more known than anywhere else, there are thousands of temples dedicated to God, and I’m not talking about demi-gods either. It has the biggest Christian and Islamic population, it is the birth place of the vedas (knowledge), most of the worlds greatest saints and religious scholars were born there, if ever you go there, you will see what I mean.
And she churns out doctors and scientists, like the US churns out TV programmes. :p

Love

Jan Ardena.
Click to expand...
 
The idea that Jesus came to India and studied in a Buddhist monastery as a boy, or, alternatively, married a princess of Kashmir and died at a great old age, tickles the romantic imagination of Western travelers and quite a few Indians too. The story originates in a piece of fiction by the Russian forger Nicholas Notovich which was published in Paris in 1894. It cannot possibly be true _ and if it is, it destroys completely the special claims of Christian doctrine, of the sacrifice on the cross and the resurrection and the vicarious salvation of mankind. The Buddhist monastery where Jesus is said to have studied did not exist until the 16th century and the Srinagar tomb where Jesus is allegedly buried is the tomb of a Mogul ambassador to Egypt who converted to Christianity while on tour there. The key to unraveling this tale is to study the activities of 10th century Nestorian missionaries who passed through Kashmir on their way to China and left crosses on rocks and a plethora of children and biblical names in their wake. (Swami Devananda Saraswati )


??
 
Originally posted by Randolfo
I think he sent his disciples there, Saint Thomas it seems, by the evidence of the Mar Toma church there [
Click to expand...

The original rationale for the St. Thomas story was to give the first 4th century Christian immigrants in Malabar a local patron saint. The story also gave them caste status which was important in integrating them into Hindu society. There is nothing unusal in a refugee community creating this kind of mythology of identity and it is part of the process of getting established in a new land.

The St. Thomas legend which they brought with them from Syria was easy enough to adopt to India. St. Thomas was already the patron saint of "India". "India" being not the subcontinent but a synonym for Asia and all those lands that lay east of the Roman Empire’s borders. "India" even included Egypt and Ethiopia in some geographies, and China and Japan in others. The Syrian Christian refugees had been led to India by a merchant who is known to history as Thomas of Cana, ie:Canaan but is also known as Thomas of Jerusalem. Over time is was natural enough for the Syrian Christian community to identify their 1st century patron apostle St. Thomas with their 4th c Canaan

The establishment of the Christian church in India as we know it today was intrinsically part of the European colonial experience. Its history is shocking for its violence and duplicity. Read the diary of Anand Ranga Pillai or the letters St. Francis Xavier sent from India to Rome. The Indian church today is not so much different from the original 17th century church. It is wealthy and corrupt and politically ambitious. But it has learned the propaganda value of social service and is make a great effort to disassociate itself from its colonial origins. This involves a lot of deceit, of course, and a massive cover-up of past deeds. But as the late Archibishop Arulappa of Madras would say, the means justifies the end even if that is not exactly what Jesus taught.

The Christian church uses the St. Thomas legend to claim a 1st century origin for itself and a martyr at the hands of a fanatic Hindu priest and king. Better still, Christianity becomes the “original” Indian religion as it would be older than many of the Hindu cults practiced in the country today.

The whole idea is a gross perversion of truth and a grave injustice to the Hindu community who has offered refuge to persecuted Christians. It is Hindus who have been martyred by these same Christian refugees starting in the 8th and 9th centuries when Syrian and Persian immigrants in Malabar destroyed temples to build their St. Thomas churches. It is Hindus who were martyred in Goa by Catholic inquisitors and in Madras by Jesuit, Franciscan, and Dominican priests who operated under the full protection of the Portuguese. And it is Hindus who are martyred today by the Christian churches and the secular press who support them, both of whom have mounted a base campaign of vilificaiton and calumny against Hindu religion and society. (Swami Devananda Saraswati)
 
Originally posted by spookz
The original rationale for the St. Thomas story was to give the first 4th century Christian immigrants in Malabar a local patron saint. The story also gave them caste status which was important in integrating them into Hindu society. There is nothing unusal in a refugee community creating this kind of mythology of identity and it is part of the process of getting established in a new land.

The St. Thomas legend which they brought with them from Syria was easy enough to adopt to India. St. Thomas was already the patron saint of "India". "India" being not the subcontinent but a synonym for Asia and all those lands that lay east of the Roman Empire’s borders. "India" even included Egypt and Ethiopia in some geographies, and China and Japan in others. The Syrian Christian refugees had been led to India by a merchant who is known to history as Thomas of Cana, ie:Canaan but is also known as Thomas of Jerusalem. Over time is was natural enough for the Syrian Christian community to identify their 1st century patron apostle St. Thomas with their 4th c Canaan

The establishment of the Christian church in India as we know it today was intrinsically part of the European colonial experience. Its history is shocking for its violence and duplicity. Read the diary of Anand Ranga Pillai or the letters St. Francis Xavier sent from India to Rome. The Indian church today is not so much different from the original 17th century church. It is wealthy and corrupt and politically ambitious. But it has learned the propaganda value of social service and is make a great effort to disassociate itself from its colonial origins. This involves a lot of deceit, of course, and a massive cover-up of past deeds. But as the late Archibishop Arulappa of Madras would say, the means justifies the end even if that is not exactly what Jesus taught.

The Christian church uses the St. Thomas legend to claim a 1st century origin for itself and a martyr at the hands of a fanatic Hindu priest and king. Better still, Christianity becomes the “original” Indian religion as it would be older than many of the Hindu cults practiced in the country today.

The whole idea is a gross perversion of truth and a grave injustice to the Hindu community who has offered refuge to persecuted Christians. It is Hindus who have been martyred by these same Christian refugees starting in the 8th and 9th centuries when Syrian and Persian immigrants in Malabar destroyed temples to build their St. Thomas churches. It is Hindus who were martyred in Goa by Catholic inquisitors and in Madras by Jesuit, Franciscan, and Dominican priests who operated under the full protection of the Portuguese. And it is Hindus who are martyred today by the Christian churches and the secular press who support them, both of whom have mounted a base campaign of vilificaiton and calumny against Hindu religion and society. (Swami Devananda Saraswati)
Click to expand...

Interesting that you would use a swami's counter-claim to early christianity in India, most use swamis' words to say that Jesus was in India to learn his mission, while this swami states that Christianity is the result of colonial European oppression on the hindu natives.
http://www.religion-online.org/cgi-bin/relsearchd.dll/showchapter?chapter_id=1364
The Origins of Christianity in India
All historians agree that the Indian church is very ancient but they differ as to how early the Gospel had been brought to India and who or what agency brought it and to which part of India. No book or inscription or monument of the first two centuries exist to enlighten us on the origin of Christianity until the third century when the ancient Christian writers began to mention the church in India. The historians of the origins of Christianity in India have to depend mainly upon traditions both within India and outside and occasional references here and there in later writers.
Broadly speaking there are two views among the historians as to the origins of Christianity in India. One view is that the Indian church has an apostolic foundation arising out of the apostolic activity of St. Thomas in the first century. The other view is that the church was founded in India at a very early date (during the course of the first three centuries) by Christians from East Syria. The more general view is that the church had its origin in the first century in the apostolic activity of St. Thomas. The St. Thomas community (Syrian Christians) in South India hold the apostolic foundation of their church as an article of faith. This view is based mainly on two traditions, one existing among the St. Thomas Christians in Kerala and the other among the East Syrians. There are some references in early Church Fathers, both the western and Syrian, supporting the view that St. Thomas’s activity was in India.
The tradition current among the St. Thomas Christians in India is as follows: St. Thomas, after visiting Socotora (an island in the Arabian Sea off the north-east coast of Africa) came to Muziris (Cranganore or Kodungallur) on the Periyar estuary north of Cochin in about AD 52. He is said to have preached to the Jewish colony settled there and to have made converts. He traveled south and converted high caste Hindus and established churches in seven places (Maliankara, Palayur, Parur Gokamangalam, Niranam, Chayal and Quilon) in four of which places Syrian churches still exist. Then he went to the eastern coast where he died as a martyr in AD 72. There is a tomb in Maylapore (near Madras) which is believed to be that of St. Thomas. This tradition has been persistent among the St. Thomas Christians for centuries and the community entertains little doubt as to the truth of the tradition. There are a number of different versions of the tradition expressed in songs and stories, all of them of later dates. But it is important to note that there is no other rival tradition in the church with regard to its origin and there is no other country in the world that claims that St. Thomas died there.
Similar to the Indian tradition, the East Syrian church holds a strong tradition of the apostolic activity of St. Thomas in India. This tradition is found in the writings of the Syrian fathers from the third century onwards. About this Mingana writes, "It is the constant tradition in the Eastern church that the Apostle Thomas evangelized India, and there is no historian, no poet, no breviary, no liturgy, and no writer of any kind who, having the opportunity of speaking of Thomas, does not associate his name with India. Some writers mention also Parthia and Persia among the lands evangelized by him, but all of them are unanimous in the matter of India. The name of Thomas can never be disassociated from that of India. To refer to all the Syrian and Christian Arab authors who speak of India in connection with Thomas would therefore be equivalent to referring to all who have made mention of the name of St. Thomas. Thomas and India are in this respect synonymous." (Mingana, Early Spread of Christianity in India, p. 301.) Among the non-East Syrian writers, while Gregory of Nazianzus, Ambrose and Jerome (fathers of the fourth century) held to the Indian apostolate of St. Thomas, Origen, Clementine Recognition, Eusebius of Caesarea, Rufinus of Aquileia and Socrates say that Thomas worked in Parthia. Here we are not to see any contradiction as the Parthian empire extended up to North India at that time. "The Parthian empire had spread into India and in the middle of the first century BC, a new Parthian kingdom, centered on Taxila, had been founded in northwestern India. Orosius in the fifth century said that generally the country (from the Indus to the Tigris) was called Parthia." (L. W. Brown, op. cit.. p. 46.) By the end of the fourth century the western sources are more or less unanimous that Thomas worked in India. Some writers have pointed out that the name ‘India’ has been very loosely used by some early writers. A few western writers might have used the name, India, as a convenient term for the lands of the East. But we need to remember, as we have already pointed out, that India was well known in the West because of the vigorous commercial activities that went on between India and the Mediterranean world. This was specially true with regard to East Syrians. "For them," says Mingana, "India is nearly always our modern India." (Ibid., p. 47.)
 
christians go home!

The answer to this criticism by one truly pluralist was obvious: that announcing the Gospel was redundant, that it was even arrogant, that other people do not need a Christian Gospel and probably many of them have a Gospel of their own as good as the Bible. But Dr Knitter’s answer was different. “We are not saying outreach evangelisation should only consist of action of human welfare but we are saying that working for human welfare, is an essential part of the work.... It is essential to the Gospel of Christ,” he said. Missionary strategist will have no difficulty in agreeing with this view. They already know that ‘social work’ is a great aid to proselytisation. (Catholic Ashrams, Voice of India, 1994, p 181.)

For Mother (Teresa), it was the spiritual well-being of the poor that mattered most. Material aid was a means of reaching their souls, of showing the poor that God loved them. In the homes for the dying, Mother taught the sisters how to secretly baptize those who were dying. Sisters were to ask each person in danger of death if he wanted a ‘ticket to heaven’. An affirmative reply was to mean consent to baptism. The sister was then to pretend she was just cooling the person’s forehead with a wet cloth, while in fact she was baptizing him, saying quietly the necessary words. Secrecy was important so that it would not come to be known that Mother Teresa’s sisters were baptizing Hindus and Moslems.” (Verso, London, p 48.)

The type of abuses which missionaries hurled against the Indian Gods and Goddesses, if you read today, would be outrageous to any Hindu believer. Krishna is lecherous person, Shiva is some demonic force. All sorts of sexual abuses (are hurled) against Kali Durga. (Rajiv Gandhi Institute for Contemporary Studies, Project Nr 14, 1996, p 60.)

When I was working in a Mumbai newspaper, I noticed a foreign missionary addressing a crowd at Azad Maidan. He was extolling the virtues of Christianity, which was legitimate, but then he went on to dissuade his audience from following Lord Krishna saying that ‘even as a child Krishna stole butter churned by his own mother and later he was surrounded by women of loose morals’. I protested at his remarks at which he asked his aides to throw me out. Not one Hindu in the audience stood for me. I went to lodge a complaint with the police where I was told to put the news in my own paper. I gave the story to may chief reporter who asked me ‘what’s the news in it?’ and did not publish it. (?)

Hindu philosophy is basically one that encourages withdrawal from the world to the detriment of social commitment. (Pravrutti-Nivruttin.) Hindu spirituality also fosters individuality at the expense of community. The sadhu is preoccupied with his prayer, asceticism and other spiritual endeavours in order to accumulate spiritual capital for his own salvation. This attitude is also encouraged in the life of the ordinary Hindu who is expected to work for his own individual salvation. As a result there is hardly any communitarian or social consciousness. To be freed from suffering the individual has to go through the whole cycle of rebirth to overcome his karma or fate. The community cannot redeem from this suffering. (Fr Francis D’Britto, Theology of Involvement, The Examiner, May 2, 1998.)

hindus build temples where there are hindus, christians build churches where there are no christians!
pardon me if i digressed!

:D
 
Last edited:
apology wanted from christians!

In a letter dated June 10, 1994, to both the Roman Catholic Archbishops of Delhi and Mumbai, the President of the VHP, Shri Vishnu Hari Dalmia, wrote: “It will be in the fitness of things if the Church in India recognises its unsavoury role in the past and while admitting the same, assures the population of India that it will desist from such prejudicial activities in all parts of the country. Such a proclamation from the Church will not only pave the way for amity between these two great religions, but will also set an example for other religionists to emulate.”

A reminder was sent on August 5 to both the persons. The secretary of the Archbishop of Mumbai merely acknowledged the receipt of the letter. The Archbishop of Delhi was in a combative mood that often reflects the thinking of the hierarchy in India. He wrote in a letter dated October 3, “I don’t think any useful purpose will be served by going backwards into the past and especially trying to point out mistakes committed by various communities and members of the various religions who are living together in harmony in India. Our country has the unique record of harbouring the world’s greatest religions whose followers, by and large, live together in peace, in tolerance. We Indians should do our best to preserve this heritage which in my belief is a great gift of God.”

On October 14, Shri Dalmia wrote: “In recognising the past, the intention is to inform the present generation of the history as it is. It will also be a beacon for the manner of the interaction for nowadays. Just like the Germans and the others of today are not being blamed for the crimes of the Nazis, the apology that has been tendered is a clear indication that they do not associate with the philosophy of the Nazis. This is the way for living together in harmony in India. I would very much like to have your views on the points that I have raised.”

This is where the correspondence rests - that is, there is no need to engage in a sincere dialogue. Subsequently the VHP pointed out the hypocrisy of the Roman Catholic Church in apologising to the Jews and the South American Indians, while refusing to even consider a similar act towards the Hindus. The office of the Archbishop of Mumbai said, “It is categorically denied that prejudicial activities were resorted by Roman Catholic missionaries in the centuries gone by nor has Dalmia made mention of a single such instance.” (The Indian Express, April 24, 1996, “Negation of history is the best way to frustrate a dialogue”)



i will accept apologies from the christians on this board on behalf of the indian nation and peoples! apologize! for the vandalism! for the forced conversions! for murder! for political inteference! for whatnot!
 
Last edited:
spookz, christianism and catholiscism are two different religions. The catholics have to apologize, not the christians.

edit: and they didn't murder anyone. In fact, hindus and other religions murdered them (catholics).
 
persol
if you mean 'offer apologies for whatnot" then i accept! india and her folks thank you!

who is next?

truthseeker
your distinctions b/w the two mystifies me. isnt jesus still present in both? the trinity? how dare you try to turn this around? did hindus pillage christian lands?
should i drag out some infamous massacres by the followers of jesus?
 
Re: christians go home!

Originally posted by spookz
Re: christians go home!

The answer to this criticism by one truly pluralist was obvious: that announcing the Gospel was redundant, that it was even arrogant, that other people do not need a Christian Gospel and probably many of them have a Gospel of their own as good as the Bible.
Click to expand...

Christians are home in India, we are at home in all of God's creation, the stars are our destiny, the earth our home. I think Hindus need to re-examine their claims of tolerance (seems we are ok, as long as we follow hinduism or give it preeminence in things).
Please read these:
http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/19990204/ige04097.html
http://www.caribbeanhindu.com/Swamiji_Conversion.htm
http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/01122002/0112200277.htm
http://swamiagnivesh.virtualave.net/SWASTIK TEMPLES.HTM
http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/jun/23oris.htm
http://www.stopfundinghate.org/sacw/appendixf.html
http://www.dalitstan.org/christian/releases/uc280800.html
http://www.subcontinent.com/sapra/internal/n_1999_01_31.html
http://www.nzz.ch/english/background/background1999/background9901/bg990130india.html
http://www.mcjonline.com/news/news3586.htm
 
Re: apology wanted from christians!

Originally posted by spookz
i will accept apologies from the christians on this board on behalf of the indian nation and peoples! apologize!
Click to expand...
Who are you? that YOU can accept apologies for a whole nation? And what makes you think you are owed an apology?

for the vandalism!
Click to expand...
Of christian church buildings? You owe us an apology

for the forced conversions!
Click to expand...
History? Name your sources? When, who, where?


for murder!
Click to expand...
Why should the victims apologize for stopping bullits? Spookz stop shooting!!!

for political inteference!
Click to expand...
Are you still crying about the Brittish? Or are you talking about the CIA? BTW, stop building a-bombs, OOPS! is that polital interference? Shame on me!!!


for whatnot!
Click to expand...

The most dangerous accusation & one that I freely admit to, I'm sorry!!! So sorry!!!

:D :D :D



OK, I'm not really sorry, I am a convicted, armed & dangerous 'whatnotter', so watch out!!!

:cool: :cool: :cool:
 
total subservience first! then walk into the sea en masse!

Originally posted by Randolfo
Who are you? that YOU can accept apologies for a whole nation? And what makes you think you are owed an apology?
Click to expand...

i am spookz! first name spook, surname z! i appointed myself since these indians were getting nowhere! why do you think i want an apology? havent i made it clear that this is for the poor indian folks that want some closure after centuries of torment?

Originally posted by Randolfo

Of christian church buildings? You owe us an apology
Click to expand...

i am not authorized to apologize! how ever i am sympathetic towards the current plight of christians in india!

Originally posted by Randolfo
History? Name your sources? When, who, where?
Click to expand...

pythagoras and sinbad!

http://www.goacom.com/culture/history/cuncolim.html
http://hamsa.org/StThomas_Chapt_3.htm
http://forumhub.com/tnhistory/26044.4446.11.04.49.html

what a doubting thomas thou art! shame!

Originally posted by Randolfo
Are you still crying about the Brittish? Or are you talking about the CIA? BTW, stop building a-bombs, OOPS! is that polital interference? Shame on me!!!
Click to expand...

are you hiding behind your pristine church? so pure?just doing the lords work? is that what you imagine the church to be like? wake up! your church is your state!

Originally posted by Randolfo
The most dangerous accusation & one that I freely admit to, I'm sorry!!! So sorry!!!
Click to expand...

accepted! thats the spirit!
i am glad that we see eye to eye!. it is the christian thing to do!
next!
 
The Myth of Saint Thomas and the Mylapore Shiva Temple

According to Christian leaders in India, the apostle Thomas came to India in 52 A.D., founded the Syrian Christian Church, and was killed by the fanatical Brahmins in 72 A.D. Near the site of his martyrdom, the St. Thomas Church was built.

In fact this apostle never came to India. The Christian community in South India was founded by a merchant Thomas Cananeus in 345 A.D. (a name which readily explains the Thomas legend).

In Catholic universities in Europe, the myth of the apostle Thomas going to India is no longer taught as history, but in India it is still considered useful.

Hamsa.org explores how the myth of Saint Thomas in India arose and why it has been perpetuated despite the absence of any historical basis in truth.

http://hamsa.org/index.htm
 
spookz,

truthseeker
your distinctions b/w the two mystifies me. isnt jesus still present in both? the trinity?
Click to expand...
Trinity is a catholic concept. Anywhere in the Bible you can find about the Catholic trinity. Trinity is one of the doctrines of men. It is written:

Matthew 15:7-9
7 "You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you:
8 'THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS,
BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
9 'BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME,
TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'"

PS: This was adressed to the pharisees in the beginning of the chapter. The Catholic church is the "pharisees".

Also, they don't believe in grace:
Acts 15:11
"11 But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are."

Romans 8:1
"1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. "

Jude 1:4
"4 For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. "

Also, catholics are condemning, but it is written:

Colossians 3:8-14
"8 But now you also, put them all aside: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and abusive speech from your mouth.
9 Do not lie to one another, since you laid aside the old self with its evil practices,
10 and have put on the new self who is being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him--
11 a renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all.
12 So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience;
13 bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you.
14 Beyond all these things put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity. "

This proves all the points. Catholics are NOT Christians.

how dare you try to turn this around? did hindus pillage christian lands?
Click to expand...
http://indianterrorism.mybravenet.com/militant hinduism.htm
http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/world99/ind-christ.htm
http://www.worthynews.com/news-features/india-attacks.html
http://www.dalitstan.org/journal/rights/106/070299.html

That is more then enough evidence.

should i drag out some infamous massacres by the followers of jesus?
Click to expand...
Do you agree that a follower of Jesus MUST follow His statments, His commendament, His will for us? Then what about when Jesus said:
John 15:12
"12 This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you."

Whoever doesn't follow His commandament is NOT one of His followers.
 
Re: total subservience first! then walk into the sea en masse!

Originally posted by spookz
i am spookz! first name spook, surname z! i appointed myself since these indians were getting nowhere! why do you think i want an apology? havent i made it clear that this is for the poor indian folks that want some closure after centuries of torment?
Click to expand...
You got a big ego spookz, you're gonna need it in that insane asylum they put you in, next thing you know, you're gonna self-appoint yourself as Napoleon, "non". BTW, what are you gonna do when satan torments your people? There will be closure, since it's for eternity. Hindu gods can't save, only confuse


pythagoras and sinbad!
Click to expand...
There not even Indians, don't be a name dropper!


what a doubting thomas thou art! shame!
Click to expand...
That's my job! Why should I believe a biased anti-christian?


are you hiding behind your pristine church? so pure?just doing the lords work? is that what you imagine the church to be like? wake up! your church is your state!
Click to expand...
Coming from someone that supposedly lives in LA, you sure are absurd & nonsensical. Are you accusing the US of tormenting foreigners because its a christian state?


accepted! thats the spirit!
i am glad that we see eye to eye!. it is the christian thing to do!
next!
Click to expand...
You mean i2i joker!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top