[GanduHindu]

It is not the job of Landover Baptist to prove Hinduism is about real gods. It is your job to prove those gods actually exist and are not just something in your imagination. That is what I have done in our visits here. I have pointed to historical visits of God and Jesus with known human beings. If you cannot match that with any of your Hindu gods you need to convert to Christianity,

Here is evidence of the power and truthfulness of Christianity. It is the money and symbols of power the influence held exclusively by Christianity. Our beloved Pastor Zeke will soon own a giant Airbus, the largest aircraft owned by any religious group in the world. Other Christian preacher cris cross the globe in their privately owned jets. I've never heard of a Hindu preacher who owned anything. Don't they just walk around barefoot wrapped in sheets like Gandhi?

If we are going to keep this discussion going, let's agree on some ground rules. Let's agree to discuss only factual encounters of humans with gods like God and Jesus.

Oh, Mayor.

Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat – the burden of proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies. You're the one trying to convince me to accept your position, not the other way around.

Please note, I'm not your enemy. I don't wish to put you in a spot by disproving you. If you can just lay off the frequent unnecessary jibes on Hinduism, we will have no beef. Pun unintended—of course, we Hindus don't eat beef.

I have zero desire to discuss Hinduism here. I'm actually here to learn about the views of fundamental Christians from the United States. You just need to stop bringing it up every single sentence. That's my ground rules. Deal?

Let's call it a day. I'm out of this thread now.

Speaking of Mahatma Gandhi, he wasn't weak. He used to regularly beat his wife and other females with a cane. Yet, no one accused him of domestic violence.

[GanduHindu]

I doubt that you will something similar in your Hindu writings. And, if you do find something relatively close..

Hah hah, Gotcha. Scared of a challenge?

There's actually a lot more where it came from. But I don't want to drag this. As long as you can lay off bringing Hindus in every discussion, I will keep my end of the deal, and not respond in kind.

[Isabella White]

Hah hah, Gotcha. Scared of a challenge?

There's actually a lot more where it came from. But I don't want to drag this. As long as you can lay off bringing Hindus in every discussion, I will keep my end of the deal, and not respond in kind.

Dear, we are here for the sole purpose of letting the newcomer know about the glorious gift of Grace, given freely through the shed of . Whether or not you read from other books is your business, but I am here to declare that it is ONLY the Gospel of that will get anybody forgiven of their horrid sins, and then given a mortgage-free home in Heaven. ( paid the price when He died on the cross.) It is all promised within the blessed Scriptures.

John 14:2 "In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you."

This is not a pleasant topic, dear Miss Hindu, but if you were to die tonight (and I hope you will live for many long years, just as I have), then would your soul be in a safe place from accepting the , or would you hear these dreaded words?

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:"

It is my most sincere prayer that you will be with those of us who shall find ourselves living in mansions on streets of gold, and not burning in for all of eternity. Kindly read the following scriptures from the very carefully. Please remember two very simple facts:

1) is too hot;
2) Eternity is forever.

Revelation 21:3,6,8,10,21:
³ And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
⁶ And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
⁸ But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
¹⁰ And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
²¹ And the twelve gates were twelve pearls: every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.

May the draw you unto bosom, assuring you of eternal safety through precious .

[Johny Joe Hold]

Dear, we are here for the sole purpose of letting the newcomer know about the glorious gift of Grace, given freely through the shed of . Whether or not you read from other books is your business, but I am here to declare that it is ONLY the Gospel of that will get anybody forgiven of their horrid sins, and then given a mortgage-free home in Heaven. ( paid the price when He died on the cross.) It is all promised within the blessed Scriptures.


It is my most sincere prayer that you will be with those of us who shall find ourselves living in mansions on streets of gold, and not burning in for all of eternity. Kindly read the following scriptures from the very carefully. Please remember two very simple facts:

[/ATTACH]

Well done, Sister Isabella. Barefoot Hindu says she is here to "learn about Baptists," not to argue. We taught her about our faith: Landover Baptist is right. Hinduism is wrong.

I hope she is writing this down so we can continue to teach the truth.

[GanduHindu]

Hey, it's your forum, your rules, yeah? I'm all about being a good sport.

Of course I won't defend Hinduism here if that's the rule. Cheers.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Gandu... I'm trying to grasp your logic... give me a minute.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Just a few points:

Hinduism predates anything the Greeks had to offer.

Antiquity does not equate to truth.

Hinduism is monotheistic.

What happens when the monotheist chooses the wrong god?

The first of these three concepts is called the Brahman, (which means the Ultimate Triuth),

And just who decided to give that god that name? Do you seriously think that anyone would name their god "He Who gets it right most of the Time"? This is simply a marketing ploy by the less than honest.

The second is Para-matma (which means Supreme Soul),

See above.

And there's So-ham (Which literally means "I AM THAT I AM"" the same as Exodus 3:14

This would seem to imply some collusion. What do you conclude from that?

Clearly, Hindu belief systems are far superior to anything the ancient Greeks could conceive.

I don't think that says much. Their gods live at the top of Mount Olympus, and Olympus is not hard to climb

So, you need to improve your benchmarking if you want to prove Hinduism as false.

and that from someone who has an elephant god and some woman with 8 arms - have you ever considered the biology of those characters? They are more like something out of DC Comics.

So far I haven't disputed anything the Bible says.

It's quite simple: the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. There is nothing to dispute.

I'm just saying so far you've not been able to provide a single shred of logical evidence that would prove Hinduism as false.

See above.

Based on the Bible alone, I know what you're saying cannot be correct. I have evidence.

Lies fed to you by Satan and his henchmen.

Hinduism is not mentioned in the Bible by name

You might argue that Hinduism wasn't important enough for Middle Eastern Jews, but the truth is, India was impenetrable like a fortress.

You cannot link the lack of Hinduism to people going there. What about people coming from there?

The Bible says India belongs to the eastern end of the Persian Empire. ... I am not saying the Bible is incorrect but the English language translations of Esther 1:1

I'm glad you're not saying that.
Es:1:1: Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus, (this is Ahasuerus which reigned, from India even unto Ethiopia, over an hundred and seven and twenty provinces.
If I ask you to walk from the Pentagon to the White House, I do not expect you to start in the center of the Pentagon and end in the Oval Office.

and Esther 9:9 require further scrutiny.

Easton's Bible Dictionary states of Shushan: "Once a magnificent city, it is now an immense mass of ruins." Sounds like India, doesn't it?

[GanduHindu]

Just a few points:Antiquity does not equate to truth.What happens when the monotheist chooses the wrong god?

And just who decided to give that god that name? Do you seriously think that anyone would name their god "He Who gets it right most of the Time"? This is simply a marketing ploy by the less than honest.
See above.This would seem to imply some collusion. What do you conclude from that?
I don't think that says much. Their gods live at the top of Mount Olympus, and Olympus is not hard to climb and that from someone who has an elephant god and some woman with 8 arms - have you ever considered the biology of those characters? They are more like something out of DC Comics.

It's quite simple: the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. There is nothing to dispute.See above. Lies fed to you by Satan and his henchmen.

You cannot link the lack of Hinduism to people going there. What about people coming from there?
I'm glad you're not saying that.
Es:1:1: Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus, (this is Ahasuerus which reigned, from India even unto Ethiopia, over an hundred and seven and twenty provinces.
If I ask you to walk from the Pentagon to the White House, I do not expect you to start in the center of the Pentagon and end in the Oval Office.
Easton's Bible Dictionary states of Shushan: "Once a magnificent city, it is now an immense mass of ruins." Sounds like India, doesn't it?

Many of your points seem to rely on the logical fallacy known as argumentum ad ignorantiam. For instance, claiming that the Bible is true simply because no one has demonstrated it to be false.

However, let's set those logical nuances aside and focus on faith. The Bible frequently emphasizes that faith in God should transcend human reasoning. Similarly, we hold the Bhagavad Gita in equally high regard. While you may see our religion as flawed, we don't perceive it that way.

One reason I find it difficult to relate to you is because of my family's traditions. My priestly lineage holds significant influence in Hinduism, and my family are custodians of an important Hindu temple.

You might be aware of the four Veda books which are fundamental to Hinduism: Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Atharva Veda, and Sam Veda. One of my direct ancestors compiled one of these Vedas thousands of years ago, and it holds elite status in Hinduism. That's quite a substantial family legacy.

And these aren't what you might call 'fairy tales.' The Vedas are composed in Sanskrit, the origin of all Indo-European languages, including English. Not only am I well-versed in Sanskrit, but I also know many Vedic hymns. Although I learned much of it reluctantly, fearing beatings and starvation at my religious school, I endured significant pain and sacrifice to reach my current understanding of Hinduism.

How do I know? In Hinduism, we have a system called "gotra" that signifies lineage. My new friend, the Mayor on this forum, keeps asking me for direct evidence of the Hindu God. Well, all such testimonies are contained within the four Vedas and the Bhagavad Gita, which can be seen as a fulfillment of the Vedas.

You claim I'm believing in false gods, but why should I trust the words of Internet posters like Ezekiel Bathfire or Mr. Johnny Joe Hold over thousands of years of continuous, unbroken family tradition? No offense to either of you —I love you both and the USA—but believing two random individuals I just met online over a direct family inheritance spanning thousands of years is quite challenging.

Please note that I accept my family lineage and the burden of Vedic responsibility with all due humility. Being born into a priestly family is not an achievement I earned, and no one should boast about their ancestry. However, it is an unchangeable part of who I am.

--

If the Christian God were the only true deity and all others were false, why would He have placed me in such a priestly Hindu environment? I understand the argument that the God of the Bible tests everyone, yadda yadda. But still.

From my perspective, as inspiring and beautiful as the Bible is, it doesn't even come close to matching the intellectual depth and clarity of the Bhagavad Gita. No offense to Jesus, but if he were so powerful, he could have prevented the Gita from being so much more impressive than the Bible

[GanduHindu]

What happens when the monotheist chooses the wrong god?

How can monotheism be wrong? Why would the Creator of all human beings concern Himself with the specific names or languages used to address Him? If I were to create an ant farm, feeding and sustaining the ants without them having any direct awareness of my presence, and if I chose to punish the disruptive ants, my role would indeed be god-like to them.

Why would their chosen name for me matter, as long as they acknowledge my sustenance and express gratitude? I would continue to provide for them.

As long as they behave well, refrain from stealing from each other, and avoid harming one another for selfish reasons, I would be benevolent towards them.


Also, in trying to disprove Hinduism, you’re invoking Occam's Razor, which suggests that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. However, this principle cannot be applied universally in all situations.

For instance, if you have a headache and attribute, it with a simple explanation solely to stress, taking an aspirin alone might not help. A minor headache could be a symptom of a more serious condition such as meningitis, blood vessel disorders, or a brain tumor, any of it requires a medical diagnosis to confirm. The simplest explanation is always true theory doesn't always work: complexities can arise from time to time.

If you aim to refute and debunk the Gita, I would need more than an overly simplified explanation. That journey begins with thoroughly reading and understanding it.

Consider this: I have read both the Bible and the Gita, while you have only read one of the two. Your expertise in the Bible, no matter how extensive, is irrelevant to me if you don't know the first thing about the Gita. If you want to debunk Hinduism, you need to try harder than your current approach.

Lies fed to you by Satan and his henchmen.

You please decide first whether you want to continue our discussion based on logic alone, or faith.

It's like how you say it in American, can't paddle on two boats simultaneously.

You cannot link the lack of Hinduism to people going there. What about people coming from there?

That's not true. People have been visiting India for thousands of years as born witness in historical records. India had extensive maritime trade with Mesopotamia, and further down, even with the Greek-Roman Empires. Hint: Spices.

Es:1:1: Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus, (this is Ahasuerus which reigned, from India even unto Ethiopia, over an hundred and seven and twenty provinces.
If I ask you to walk from the Pentagon to the White House, I do not expect you to start in the center of the Pentagon and end in the Oval Office.
Easton's Bible Dictionary states of Shushan: "Once a magnificent city, it is now an immense mass of ruins." Sounds like India, doesn't it?

Still looks like a bona fide translation error in English.

Saying Ahaseurus who reigned from India, is entirely different in meaning from Ahaseurus's empire bordering India.

Surely the 13th century BCE Jews had full awareness of property rights. Saying India was a property of the Persian Empire would have been libelous was factually incorrect. While they were living too far for Indians to sue them for libel, I consider the Jews very smart. They wouldn't have made this fundamental legal error.

I'm very certain it was the lazy, beer-swilling English-speaking scribes under King James I responsible for this major typo. They had never travelled to India, and didn't care about such a basic legal error which was liable for suing even in medieval courts.

And that's what you're reading in the King James Bible.

Now tell me, why should I trust your English language Bible when it gets one of the only things it mentions about India factually wrong.

[MitzaLizalor]

It's worth mentioning that many will read The Bible in it's original form.

You've mentioned Alexander and Mesopotamia and the Indo-European language group and highlighted one or two equivalent ideas from a few different sources, whether in Sanskrit or Greek or English.

There had been some competition with Dutch traders, most of whom operated in The East Indies [approx. modern Indonesia], resulting in an English Royal Charter and a focus on India for spices, among other things. This was before King James, during the reign of Elizabeth; during that period similarities between language groups was of academic interest and various solutions were proposed. The translators would have been aware of these discussions since it was precisely within their field of study.

Movement of languages parallels movement of culture, and between these languages a common origin was discerned. That suggests an early culture—the Proto-Indo-European as it's called—and since culture consists of objects and ideas, there'd be such elements disseminated along with the language, or languages, as they became. Are you suggesting for instance that Brahma & Sarasvati is one such idea, having a parallel in Abraham & Sarah? (Those were not their original names, of course.) Or that Christ and Krishna are divergent forms of a much earlier idea, migrating hither and thither along with the evolving languages? This would make them allegories.

Galatians 4:22-25 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

We glean from the Vedic hymns that inward trade existed from the earliest incursions into India, suggesting that some commodities critical for cultural cohesion did not exist in the new territories. During this period there'd be ample opportunity for ideas to flow back and forth – but difficult at this distance to determine where any one idea originated.

Is the Bhagavad Gita of any help here?

[GanduHindu]

It's worth mentioning that many will read The Bible in it's original form.

In other words, you seem to be acknowledging that the King James Version Bible may not be entirely "inerrant." It is possible that some translation errors could have crept in from the original sources, whatever they may be.

While God's Word in the Bible is perfect, human translators can sometimes make mistakes. This also applies to the King James Version (KJV) Bible. It's good that we can agree on this point

You've mentioned Alexander and Mesopotamia and the Indo-European language group and highlighted one or two equivalent ideas from a few different sources, whether in Sanskrit or Greek or English.

Many of you have learned history primarily from a Western perspective. While it's true that Europe has been a central figure since the 16th century, this hasn't always been the case.

Countries like India and China have had continuous, unbroken civilizations for thousands of years, with records that date back much further.

For example, my family temple in India maintains a registry that records the names of my direct male ancestors, dating back to around 300-400 BCE. One of my ancestors before that record was even the compiler of one of the Vedas, although the exact date of this event is unknown.

Books like Mahabharata and the Ramayana, in their original forms in Sanskrit, contain the exact names of each and every ruler and their progeny, the number of years they ruled, when they died. Knowing Sanskrit is essential for a debate on Hindu civilizations just like knowing Latin might be necessary for uncovering the original sources in Bible.

It's quite amusing when someone on this forum claims that Jesus' revelations in the 1st century AD supposedly changed everything we know about human existence. Just my family records alone challenge that notion. 😊

There had been some competition with Dutch traders...... English Royal Charter ......spices,....The translators would have been aware of these discussions

Vasco daGama was the first modern European to visit India, 1498.
Ralph Fitch was the first Englishman to show up at an Indian capital city, 1600.

But the spice trade goes many, many centuries before that. The Moslem Arabs (and later, Turks) were protective of the trade routes to India, as they could demand higher prices from Europeans.

In fact, India was known for its spices even during the times of Queen Cleopatra (whose government had extensive trade with India).

It's not like some drunken Englishman showed up on India's shores, and suddenly, everything was known to the West. That's the history taught to you in a Eurocentric education system. That doesn't make it true.

. Are you suggesting for instance that Brahma & Sarasvati is one such idea, having a parallel in Abraham & Sarah? ...Christ and Krishna

I've come across those theories before, but they sound unfamiliar and like modern-day Internet fabrications to me. We have YouTube creators to thank for spreading misinformation to masses who lack critical thinking skills.

Abraham and Jesus were initially relevant only to Middle-Eastern Jews living in the Levant. However, their teachings eventually took hold in the form of Christianity, spreading to Europe and subsequently, to America.

They were largely unheard of in my country, as well as in China and much of Southeast Asia.

We glean from the Vedic hymns that inward trade existed from the earliest incursions into India, suggesting that some commodities critical for cultural cohesion did not exist in the new territories. During this period there'd be ample opportunity for ideas to flow back and forth – but difficult at this distance to determine where any one idea originated.

Some ideas may have flowed back and forth. But India was largely insulated from whatever the Levant Jews were up to in and around Israel.

That's the reason I mentioned Alexander of Macedon. He was the earliest common link between the East and the West in antiquity. He traveled deep inside India, and brought historians with him.

Is the Bhagavad Gita of any help here?

Unlikely. The Gita predates Alexander, and even Buddha who lived c.500 BCE. That's why there are no references to any of them.

There are also no references to Middle-Eastern Jews in the Vedas, and in Gita. The likely explanation is that they were irrelevant to the Indians.

[GanduHindu]

They were largely unheard of in my country, as well as in China and much of Southeast Asia.

"I must mention, though, that Thomas, one of the Twelve Apostles, did arrive in India. However, his missionary activities were primarily restricted to the state of Kerala in the extreme southwest. In fact, Christianity didn't really spread throughout India for another fifteen centuries, until the arrival of Portuguese and Spanish Jesuit missionaries, especially Saint Francis Xavier.

The first substantial Christian presence in India emerged with the British soldiers who emigrated en masse in the latter half of the 18th century

[Johny Joe Hold]

The first substantial Christian presence in India emerged with the British soldiers who emigrated en masse in the latter half of the 18th century

Fool-you-with-Hindu, we here at Landover Baptist understand something that seems out of reach to you. It is that The Holy Bible, written by God whom we know to exist, is more reliable than sans scribble. Some critical thinking about sans scribble would help you.

[GanduHindu]

Fool-you-with-Hindu, we here at Landover Baptist understand something that seems out of reach to you. It is that The Holy Bible, written by God whom we know to exist, is more reliable than sans scribble. Some critical thinking about sans scribble would help you.

Noted it down. I will literally heed your advice, friend.

Literally.

[GanduHindu]

Fool-you-with-Hindu, we here at Landover Baptist understand something that seems out of reach to you. It is that The Holy Bible, written by God whom we know to exist, is more reliable than sans scribble. Some critical thinking about sans scribble would help you.

Noted it down. I will literally heed your advice, friend.

Literally.