[Isabella White]

Madam Isabella,

I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience. An honest mistake. The Hindu religion strictly prohibits proselytization. Like the Jews, we genuinely do not seek converts.

If my religion has offended you or anyone else, please feel free to point it out. Proselytization is never the aim of any sincere Hindu. I hope I don't have to provide these links as I don't understand their purpose.

In any case, to appease you, I have provided one of my favorite Bible verses in that signature link.

While we're on the topic of honest mistakes, the one you're committing right now stems from a blatant ignorance about Hinduism and a rather incorrect allegation. I do not wish to correct you on this, as you are entitled to your erroneous judgment.

I can only plead with you to become better informed about Hinduism. However, I can do no more than that. It's up to you whether or not you choose to heed my request.

Dear Miss Hindu: Your apology is noted and appreciated. However, your comment about how I am "entitled to [my] erroneous judgment" is not appreciated — simply because we are followers of the , here at . As such, we have no interest in any false doctrines, scurrilous teachings, heresies, what-have-you. In short, if your beliefs do not align with the life-saving teachings that are found within the glorious , then we have no intention of learning anything about them.

Goodness knows that the dear has given us more than enough to learn within the blessed pages of Holy Word! And, with that in mind, I might suggest that you take a very serious interest in reading that blessed Book — and reading it studiously, with great thought as to how you can please Almighty ! Clearly, it is high time that you abandoned any religious belief that does not match the teachings of the , .

Psalm 119:105 "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path."

John 8:12 "Then spake again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life."

Now, then, what you must consider is that having in your life (and having no other religion) means that you will have escaped the eternal fires of . Surely, you do not want to take a chance by finding yourself in the fiery furnace for all of eternity, and all because you insisted on worshipping a Hindu "god" — multiple arms, or no multiple arms!

Matthew 25:41 "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:"

Revelation 14:11 "And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name."

I shall place your name at the top of my prayer list, Dear, for next week's McGill Street Ladies' Wednesday Afternoon Bible Study, Prayer Meeting and Tea & Social (which will be held at Sister Lulubelle's lovely home; my, how she does serve a very tasty afternoon tea — and served on best bone Wedgwood china!)

May bless you, as you seek — here, at .

[Johny Joe Hold]

Thank you, Sister Isabella, for setting the record straight. It is easy to see how much potential our Hindu friend, Gradu, has. There is the opportunity for life everlasting. Why would a smart person throw away that opportunity in order to worship gods that do not appear in the Bible? Just baffling.

[MitzaLizalor]

I thought Catholics were . . . the original Christians until [various heretics] decided to part ways.

Hi Welcome to the forum!

So-called Romish Catholics have always been outside anything to do with Christ and therefore outside of Christianity. From time to time assorted crackpots have sought to have themselves included under the umbrella of catholicism: many brought idols along or did bizarre hand movements as though waggling their fingers could influence events on a celestial scale. I gather there is no prohibition of statues (whether described as idols or not) under Hinduism but from the outset, such objects have been absent from Christianity.

What constitutes an "idol" is defined very clearly and even making one (such as a statue of a horse) was prohibited by God.

God is Jesus, so it's easy to see that promoting things He calls abominations has nothing to do with Him. The idea of a "universal" or inclusive belief system had become necessary a few centuries before Caesar because the obviously ridiculous idea that gods lived on top of a nearby mountain was debunked – presumably by climbing up and having a look. There were plenty of temples operating, possibly providing services but mainly serving as money machines for the priests and priestesses. To keep everyone interested, some very dubious activities were available which I won't describe but almost certainly toadstools and suchlike were involved together with overstuffed mattresses and under-clothed maniacs rolling around probably covered in oil (and certainly if still there at sunrise) it's just too revolting. Anyway, some of their philosophers—the preSocratics—proposed ideas that would undermine the priesthood if adopted. As a result, the priests & priestesses invented catholicism where all the statues could exist under one roof with a single universal priesthood, one administration and a single combined bank account. It worked. Interestingly, when the philosophers' ideas were rediscovered BANG! the cult of Rome with all its statues gathered under one umbrella was unable to sustain its lugubrious reign, beyond a few diehards and brainwashed crackpots, which is where we are today.

But the hiving off of Protestants was not the first "schism" all the way back for eighteen hundred years. Early popish records are few and far between, nevertheless by the time you mentioned minutes were being taken so we know what happened from then on. Before that, other than assorted lunatics trying to muscle their way in with ludicrous claims about how many gods there were or who their mothers were, we don't know much. Some of them went their own way, setting up in Africa and whatnot. What exists now in Rome is simply one of many orthodox traditions and itself a splinter group. From the earliest days, when John the Baptist announced who Jesus was, there's a single unbroken line with a simple understanding of Christ's teachings (easy to understand because they're written down) and a raucous cacophony of dissent on all sides.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/presocratics/

[GanduHindu]

Hi Welcome to the forum!

So-called Romish Catholics have always been outside anything to do with Christ and therefore outside of Christianity. From time to time assorted crackpots have sought to have themselves included under the umbrella of catholicism: many brought idols along or did bizarre hand movements as though waggling their fingers could influence events on a celestial scale. I gather there is no prohibition of statues (whether described as idols or not) under Hinduism but from the outset, such objects have been absent from Christianity.

I have attended many Catholic Masses. As I mentioned in my introduction post, I find the interior and surroundings of a Catholic church to be a visual treat—some of the most beautiful buildings in the world. Each one had a Bible that was integral to the service.

Catholics do use a Bible for their prayers, so how does that not make them Christians, technically?

What constitutes an "idol" is defined very clearly and even making one (such as a statue of a horse) was prohibited by God.

Fair enough.

God is Jesus,

Many would dispute that claim, especially Muslims. I am not like that; I keep an open mind. If Jesus is indeed the 'God,' why not? But I have my doubts. Until those doubts are resolved, I won't be able to believe what you folks believe in. No offense, but everyone has their own path in life when it comes to forming belief systems. Feel free to proselytize to me all you want, but it takes time for beliefs to sink in. You cannot expect a commitment from someone with an alternate belief system.

Wasn't the Pharaoh still in doubt about the God of Moses even after the ten plagues of Egypt? That's mentioned in the Bible. Clearly, the God of the Bible gives you many chances to believe, as stated in Exodus and other chapters.

But you and many others here are not God. You're really coming across like sneaky car salesmen, rushing me to accept this limited-time offer before the discount is gone. Please, slow down. I have a God-given mind, and whether or not I accept the Bible as the ultimate truth of life is up to me.

From the earliest days, when John the Baptist announced who Jesus was, there's a single unbroken line with a simple understanding of Christ's teachings (easy to understand because they're written down) and a raucous cacophony of dissent on all sides.

If there is a continuous, unbroken chain from John the Baptist's time that can be traced back to your church, and there's confirmed evidence of that, let's see it. You can't just say the Bible is the evidence when 'Landover' is not mentioned anywhere in it. I checked BibleGateway and found no reference to your church. Did your church have a Latin or Aramaic name in the 1st century AD that I might have missed using the search button?

Objectively, many reputed Bible scholars believe the New Testament in its present form wasn't fully compiled until the 2nd century AD. I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt that the Books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were passed down verbally from the time of Jesus for centuries. That would be very interesting to me—to know exactly how the verbal traditions were handed down. How did the scribes avoid making any errors?

[Johny Joe Hold]

What is the matter with this new Pope? He says he is not going to focus on sexual issues. Sexual issues are the greatest sins. Homers, trans and shacking up are the sins Jesus most hates. This Pope needs to read the Bible.

Pope Leo signals shift away from Catholic Church's focus on sex

[MitzaLizalor]

Pope Leo signals shift etc.

[Picture Of People Swimming in what looks like a sewer NOT INCLUDED]

It said:

"The unity or division of the Church should not revolve around [such] matters," Leo, the first U.S. pope, said in a press conference on his flight home on Thursday

"Revolve" is cast in a strange light here. He calls his outfit a church, THE church in fact, and its divisions revolve around who should be head honcho. Leo thinks it's him. Kirill thinks otherwise. Luther had a third opinion while Ignatius and Tawadros (Syriac and Coptic honchos respectively) think something else altogether. And the major flagpole generating so much dissent is the very question singled out by Leo.

God went out the window centuries ago, if He was ever a factor at all, replaced by odious clergymen who contribute nothing and get paid for it. It's simple to verify this: read The Bible: trot along to one of their churches: see for yourself. The central figure is the priest. Vatican commands prevent him from marrying. What about the orthodoxes? There's too many of them to look up but in this* summary I noticed in section F subsections 1 & 2,
.

F. Marriage and Clergy

1. Deacons and Presbyters may marry before ordination, but if their spouse dies or if there is a divorce they are prohibited from any further marriage, unless they leave the priesthood.

2. Bishops are not to marry under any condition.

Popes generally do not marry and Anglican vicars, who generally do, upon converting to catholicism may keep their wives as priests. Lutherans never bought into such nonsense – but all in all, since churches revolve around their priests, the question addressed by Leo seems VERY MUCH central to their dogma.




* https://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/03/prohibited-marriages-in-orthodox-church.html

[Madame Frottage]

Thank you for inviting us. I know we Catholics can be difficult. Our priests, our cardinals, go through altar boys like chain smoking cigarettes, but we are a good people, has the best taste in decour and wine.

[MitzaLizalor]

The question of wine is important, of course. Shortage of wine was the reason for Christ's first miracle.

John 2:1-11 précis - read full passage in link

[There was a wedding at Cana]

And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, woman, what have I to do with thee: mine hour is not yet come . . .

[There were some water pots nearby]

Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, [he remarked] Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now. This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana

There are a number of comments made about this. Firstly, that such a shortage was sufficient to jolt Jesus into action ahead of time: wine is important. Secondly, whose wedding was it? Jesus was called "Rabbi" e.g. John 6:25 and a single man can't be a rabbi, it is suggested. In any event, single persons shouldn't be giving marital advice, one would imagine. How could they? Frippery, so far. Thirdly, and most importantly because there is explicit instruction in Scripture, the wine should not be red. There are many examples of red wine made from everything imaginable but none of these would ever be consumed by a Christian. Chilli? Blood oranges? You bet! Anything to mock God!!

‘‘Ha ha, God,’’ they say.
‘‘Look at me drinking this raspberry wine (you fool)!!!’’
‘‘Ha, ha & ha again.’’

God does see and God knows there are alternatives, which He didn't list when He forbade red wines because there are so many. I found five in as many minutes. Here are some examples*

green	blue	yellow	brown	pink
_	_	_	_	_

Five lovely wines, none of them red, to accompany Christian meals. What sort of wine do you drink, Mrs Frottage?


* BRAND NAMES & TRADEMARKS REDACTED AS APPROPRIATE

[Madame Frottage]

Even more than wine, I really love a Armagnac from a crystal decanter.

[Isabella White]

Even more than wine, I really love a Armagnac from a crystal decanter.

Well, it sounds to me like the devil has you right where he wants you, Mrs. Frottage. The first part of the act of sinning is the temptation. Clearly, you are easily enticed by things that make sinning seem so enjoyable!



Oh, how I pray that you will find and abandon your sinful, intoxicated lifestyle! May today be the day when you seek the and beg for forgiveness from your detestable sins!

Isaiah 5:22 "Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:"

Galatians 5:19-21:
¹⁹ Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

²⁰ Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

²¹ Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of .