[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?