[GanduHindu]

O
The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose . . . When the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. You would probably say Krishna was one of these, the record predating Abraham by several centuries.

That would be very interesting. I'd love to side with you (you=all you folks) on this. And believe me, I'm on your side. If you can throw intelligent arguments to debunk Hinduism, I will not shy from agreeing wherever you make sense.

Unfortunately that's not the case this time. But I will get there shortly. First, let me get the facts you got right, and you've shown some promise in becoming a good Hindu, even though you hate that prospect at this point. But facts are facts, yeah. I'm glad we both love them.

According to Hindu scripture, Krishna (a possible son of the Christian God, like you just said), did have an immaculate conception in the womb of Devaki (consider her India's version of Mary.)

Krishna was born immaculately in the circumstances of hardship, in a dark dungeon prison cell. Again we know this for a fact because the event is celebrated as the Janmashtami festival by Hindus worldwide, and has been corroborated in all Hindu scriptures. If you visit Mathura (consider it our Bethlehem) or Dwarka (similar to Cana or Galilee where Jesus performed miracles), there's enough evidence to concur Krishna was a real person, and his birth should not have happened because Devaki's husband, Vasudeva, was out of picture (mainly because of a Herod-like emperor named Kansa), being physically prevented from procreation. How? You'd ask. Well, that prison cell in Mathura still exists. Both Devaki and Vasudeva were chained to pillar posts, physically preventing them from cohabiting closely (under strict instructions of Kansa the emperor who was scared of a prophecy that Devaki's eighth infant (Krishna) would kill him in his teen years, which did happen some sixteen years after Krishna's birth.

Those pillars are at least 20 feet wide. With all the ancient knowledges of in-vitro (in their rudimentary phases), we have enough Vaishnavite evidence, and modern scientific evidence, that the natural procreation was impossible in those circumstances. So, an immaculate conception by God was the only way out.

Even if I agree with your pre-Abraham timelines, which is roughly 2000 BCE (Krishna's was more recent. The Mahabharata war, a historic event where Krishna delivered the Bhagavad Gita sermon, spans a confirmed historical timeline anywhere from 900 BCE to 3120 BCE. The exact date is not available because of a destruction of records.

I personally think Krishna's birth happened more recently around say, 950 BCE, but many Hindu scholars would disagree with me, so I'm again going to side with you to a pre-Abrahamaic timeline, ~3170 BCE. The Japheth migration theory is impossible because Krishna was born in the city of Mathura, India, which stands today.

All good so far. Well done.

But Krishna was not a "son of God." According to Hindu scriptures, he WAS God personified. Vishnu = God, so it's Vishnu who didn't exactly procreate with Devaki (she wasn't pregnant for nine months like Mary was with Jesus). Had Vishnu procreated with Devaki, she'd have to carry Krishna in her womb for nine months, and the evil despotic ruler, Kansa, who was scared of that infant due to his death prophecy, would have made attempts to kill the newborn in his mother's womb. That did not happen. Kansa had deployed armed sentries doing a round-the-clock vigil to prevent Devaki and Vasudeva from procreating (being chained to pillars didn't help their case.)

So the only way this divine child Krishna could be born was not through procreation (with God or a "son" of God according to your Genesis 5:32 and other Biblical references). The divine child could only be born through instant conception. In a flash. In fact Krishna's birth happened in extremely secretive circumstances. Kansa and his armed sentries were literally FOOLED by God (=Vishnu) and stolen away from the prison in miraculous conditions (again these facts have been corroborated hundreds of times in various Hindu references.)

When you say "The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives", it clearly hints to a procreation. For the record, Vishnu did not take Devaki as his wife, but just cloned himself into Krishna (who has all the powers that Vishnu does so we treat them both as same, interchangeable entities). I'm using the word "cloning" loosely but Hindu scriptures have more elaborate metaphors to describe that both Vishnu and Krishna are the same person. They both have blue complexions, carry a Sudarshan Chakra (it's like a divine frisbee except it delivers death to sinners).

So, to summarise your argument's rebuttal:

• Krishna could not have been conceived by a son of the Biblical God. In fact, he was not carried in a mother's womb for nine months. That process got fast-tracked under extenuating circumstances. Krishna just came into being immaculately and secretively.
• Since Krishna = Vishnu = God, Devaki could not have been a wife of any son of God according to your Biblical argument. Technically, yes, she did carry Vishnu in a womb for a flash of second, and Krishna/Vishnu needed a human birth address, so it would be more appropriate to describe Devaki as his earthly mother. But Krishna didn't care for his "mother" much as she was just a receptacle. Also, we Hindus are not like Catholics so we don't revere Devaki as the Mother of God. No, that's just stupidity. Devaki is not at all important here.

You did try very hard to subsume Krishna's birth under a Genesis theory. Unfortunately, this time you couldn't nail it. I do applaud your efforts.

Please try again. I'll be looking forward to it.

Now, instead of accepting defeat, if you wish to go back to the chicken-egg argument that Hinduism is nothing but fake stories, yadda yadda, then we'll move back to what I described previously as a stalemate. (On this very thread, do read one of my above posts.)

That will effectively make it pointless for me to bring more arguments to our discussion as we'll be moving in circles.

Hinduism = Fake stories = End of story

I can then use the exact same arguments to refute the entire Bible in the light of Hindu scripture which we know for absolute certainty, is the only truth worth bothering.

But in any case, I like and appreciate your best efforts so far.

Here's another hint from my side. Perhaps you should read Bhagavad Gita with an open mind (it will give you the ammunition to debunk Hinduism.)

For you (and that means your entire team), I'll waive off the requirements to learn Sanskrit to read Bhagavad Gita. The English translations are gross and fail to convey the exact meaning. That's an inferior language like English, a distant granddaughter of Sanskrit, lacks the precise vocabulary needed to convey the lofty ideas of Bhagavad Gita.)

Even you would agree by permitting you to quote from an English source of the Gita, I'm being more than generous here.

[GanduHindu]

Genesis 3:22


“And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:”


The ambition to "become God" IS the Original Sin. It was Satan's downfall, and then it became humanity's.

Just for the record. Hindus scripture doesn't agree with the idea of Original Sin. In fact, that concept has been ridiculed and debunked several times.

Instead, Hindus believe in Prayashchita, a Sanskrit word, and the English word "penance" might convey a similar idea, but doesn't cut it. Please look up the link I provided if you have more questions.

Also, for your knowledge, we Hindus consider Adam and Eve as fictional characters. Even if they existed, none of their spawns entered India. 😁😁 We managed to create an advanced civilization without borrowing ideas from those ancient beggar Jews.

But for the sake of this forum, let's go with what the Christians believe in. Don't just expect me to swallow it as the whole truth blindly.

[Johny Joe Hold]

The problem of Evil, every fallacy and paradox ever conceived by inferior Western minds.... According to Hindu beliefs, any human being who doesn't bother to learn Sanskrit is stupid. Yes, that too is stated very clearly in our beliefs.[*]Why Hindu scriptures are such an intellectual read. The nuances and philosophical outreach of the Bhagavad Gita far outscales the Bible or anything else conceived by Western minds.

The sins you committed in that post are the very reason we toil on here at Landover Baptist. Our calling is for you to recognize your sin, ask Jesus for forgiveness and avoid an eternity in hell.

The sin is pride. God hates it. Providence 16:18 is often summarized in conversational language as "Pride cometh before the fall." The actual text is often written as "Pride goes before destruction; a haughty spirit before the fall." This scripture is aimed directly at you.

We here at LBC are careful to avoid pride. We learn the Bible, then we humbly follow it. The Bible calls us to point out the sins of others, we don't reply with "We know more than you." We just follow the Bible which tells us to bring sinners home to Jesus where they belong.

To make progress in one's spiritual life the first step is to recognize one's sin. We are making progress here.

[GanduHindu]

The sins you committed in that post are the very reason we toil on here at Landover Baptist. Our calling is for you to recognize your sin, ask Jesus for forgiveness and avoid an eternity in hell.

The sin is pride. God hates it. Providence 16:18 is often summarized in conversational language as "Pride cometh before the fall." The actual text is often written as "Pride goes before destruction; a haughty spirit before the fall." This scripture is aimed directly at you.

We here at LBC are careful to avoid pride. We learn the Bible, then we humbly follow it. The Bible calls us to point out the sins of others, we don't reply with "We know more than you." We just follow the Bible which tells us to bring sinners home to Jesus where they belong.

To make progress in one's spiritual life the first step is to recognize one's sin. We are making progress here.

With due respect to you, I don't call it pride. I just call it a rebuttal.

You mentioned something about "war with Satan" on this very thread, attributing Satan to my creed.

As per the Bhagavad Gita, which I follow, it mandates me to counter a false allegation like that. Otherwise I'd be failing in my duty as a Brahmin-priest Hindu, which has strict negative consequences.

If you're interested, the precise Bhagavad Gita chapter and verse are Chapter 2, Verse 31. Link attached.

Any measured response in defence of God's righteousness, even if the tone which you say, is prideful, is well within our internal prescribed limits.

You know, Mayor, the shoe can be on the other foot..I think I like it the Anglo-Saxon proverb.

[Johny Joe Hold]

With due respect to you, I don't call it pride. I just call it a rebuttal.
You mentioned something about "war with Satan" on this very thread, attributing Satan to my creed.
As per the Bhagavad Gita, which I follow, it mandates me to counter a false allegation like that. Otherwise I'd be failing in my duty as a Brahmin-priest Hindu, which has strict negative consequences.
If you're interested, the precise Bhagavad Gita chapter and verse are Chapter 2, Verse 31. Link attached.
Any measured response in defence of God's righteousness, even if the tone which you say, is prideful, is well within our internal prescribed limits.
You know, Mayor, the shoe can be on the other foot..I think I like it the Anglo-Saxon proverb.

Thank you, my friend, for those thoughts. I need to apologize to you and my colleagues here at LBC for allowing our exchanges to veer off the point. The issues you raise like what Sanscript says, what some Hindu god says, what are the parallels are between the Bible and strange religions, etc., are not central to the great journey of life. It is as you feel you can hold your own in an advanced class after skipping the prerequisites.

You have avoided discussing the issue that is central to all others. That issue is SIN. It is sin that determines the entire path from birth through eternity. We need to deal with sin or our visits will be fruitless. Let's start by reviewing where you are with this issue. What does that god you refer to have to say about sin? What insight into sin does Sanscript provide? We here at Landover Baptist are experts in sin. We can help people understand when it is present and when it is not.

Romans 1: 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice.

[handmaiden]

With due respect to you, I don't call it pride. I just call it a rebuttal.

And a cat can birth kittens in the oven, but that don't make 'em biscuits.

[GanduHindu]

Thank you, my friend, for those thoughts. I need to apologize to you and my colleagues here at LBC for allowing our exchanges to veer off the point.

Likewise. Things may have escalated, and in the heat of the moment I may have spoken a few hurtful things to you, and a few others.

I would like to sincerely apologize to you. According to Hinduism, I'm obliged to do penance for my ill-mannered speech. Which I will.

What does that god you refer to have to say about sin? What insight into sin does Sanscript provide? .

I'll try to keep it brief.

Like it's with Jesus (for Christians), the Holy name of Vishnu (or Krishna) is enough to cleanse every sin you commit.

Let us remember Vishnu is God. He created this matrix we call our human existence and he alone has the power to erase all sins.

That is in a nutshell. Confirmed in the Bhagavad Gita a gazillion times.

"BG 18.66: Abandon all varieties of dharmas (eligions) and simply surrender unto Me alone. I shall liberate you from all sinful reactions; do not fear.'

Hope, that helps.

[GanduHindu]

Confirmed in the Bhagavad Gita a gazillion times.

"BG 18.66: Abandon all varieties of dharmas (religions) and simply surrender unto Me alone. I shall liberate you from all sinful reactions; do not fear.'

Apart from the Bhagavad Gita, Vishnu has been confirmed as the Supreme entity in Rig Veda 1.22.20

तद्विष्णोः परमं पदं सदा पश्यन्ति सूरयः। दिवीव चक्षुराततम्॥20॥

Meaning: The wise ever conceive that loftiest place in the Universe where Vishnu is, (looking into everything), as eye in Heaven.

So, in other words, wherever Vishnu resides is the highest realn of Heaven. Nothing further than that exists.

[MitzaLizalor]

Even if I agree with your pre-Abraham timelines, which is roughly 2000 BCE (Krishna's was more recent. The Mahabharata war, a historic event where Krishna delivered the Bhagavad Gita sermon, spans a confirmed historical timeline anywhere from 900 BCE to 3120 BCE. The exact date is not available because of a destruction of records.

Personally, I prefer records that have not been destroyed. There was something similar in China at one stage, accountancy themed, but we have plenty of objects from before helping us to understand what a life without Christ was like. Nevertheless, your time window fits well enough with my suggestion of approx. from the Ubaid period (end of) to the pre-Socratics (start of) with Pythagoras and Abraham being two better-known names which I cited.

Genesis 11:1-2, 10b 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there . . . Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood:

(Arphaxad)

(Salah)

(Eber)

(Peleg)

(Reu)

(Serug)

(Nahor)

(Terah)

(Abram) whom God renamed: Abraham

..bringing us to Ur, a post-Ubaid effort that was less durable although I believe they do now have a railway station. But the ziggurat has fallen down so "swings & roundabouts" as they say. Do you have that saying in India? Perhaps if I'd mentioned Thales and Serug my point would have been missed but the fact remains that Jesus died to set us free and the Japheth hypothesis is largely irrelevant. Wherever successive waves of migration to India came from, people are there now and do not adhere to God's Plan for Salvation, placing an obligation on Christians to remind them of The Good News, the best news anyone could ever hear.

Mark 16:15-16 [Jesus] said unto them† Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Part of the News is that way back, before the pre-Socratics, before the Ubaid period, before kiwis were reintroduced into New Zealand or the fer-de-lance made it back to Mexico, there was a vile species of human bred from God's grandsons. Although strong and capable, these and their revolting progeny had to be exterminated, the Bible explains. Happily for us, because God loves us and doesn't want us contaminated, all records of their research (for example whether they made flying saucers) and social development (only evil continually.†† is sufficient, according to God) are lost but efforts to rekindle their stuff, which would include blue persons with multiple arms as a sort of folk memory, got started. It could be that India, Ceylon, New Guinea, The Andamans and so on were repopulated by seafaring Africans I suppose (descended from Ham) but then we're back to the later immigrants who'd necessarily come from Shem or Japheth – in which case we do have records, outlined above. I hope this is helpful for you.


†
Salome
Mary (James's "her indoors") (plainly out-of-doors here)
Mary (related to Joses but may have gone home)
Mary Magdalene sans devils
Peter, if they had found him
Ten others (eleven if you don't count Peter)


††
Genesis 6:5

[Johny Joe Hold]

Having our new friend, Gandu, on our Forum has been good because it spurred my own research into the origins of different faiths. In the case of Hinduism, I've learned, there are gods different than God. Secular scientists tell us humans came to exist about 300,000 years ago. Now this is contrary to the Bible's timeline but let use it hypothetically. For most of that time there was no written word. For all of that time there would have been gods that were worshipped. These gods died out when the people who worshipped died. Then people would imagine yet another god and on and on.

The god our friend, Ganhu, worships is one of these gods that showed up recently in human history. It's shelf life has been extended by Sanskrit, the written word. That the god showed up in someone's writing makes it no more an actual god than the ones talked about and were thought to be real before there was writing.

Looking at religion objectively, without preference or bias, there is no rational conclusion other than God is the only real god. This conclusion comes from truths that have been revealed and historical personal encounters with God and Jesus. I hope this helps.

[GanduHindu]

Personally, I prefer records that have not been destroyed.

It doesn't matter what you prefer. We have to go with recorded history.

The reason many of these records got destroyed were due to the Islamic invasions of India between 10th to 18th centuries.

Moslems have no respect for any books or knowledge except that terror manual they call the Kooooran.

The sack of Nalanda University by Turko-Mongol Islamic invaders was a significant medieval event. It caused the destruction of 9 million books 📚 They just set all those records ablaze because they were nothing but illiterate marauders.

Another famous Indian university that lies in ruin is Takshashila University. It was like the Harvard of the ancient world, with students coming all the way from Greece and China for their higher education.

Unfortunately Takshila's ruins now lies in Pakistan. Moslems in that fake country have zero respect for any other book but the Koooooran.

Just because we amazing Hindus happen to share a planet with these cretin Moslems is not the reason you should blame us for not having sufficient records.

We're trying really hard to salvage all the good work that was destroyed. Men are at work as we speak.

For comparison there's the sack of Alexandria library by the Romans during the reign of Cleopatra.

[MitzaLizalor]

Thanks for your reply: I hope you had a good Christmas. The reason why I prefer records that have not been destroyed is because destroyed records are no longer records at all. They don't exist. Not even persons qualified under Foucault's definition of insanity would want non-existent records and in this case what they want and what I want not only matter but are in complete agreement.

What doesn't matter is the raving of someone who promotes chimerical records, whether they ever existed in the past or not. Perhaps that includes people who think records should be destroyed but they'd probably be deranged to start with and thus never qualify as insane per Michel Foucault.

On the other hand, there is material absolutely needing to be destroyed. A grimoire would qualify, it having only a single function namely to get people hooked on witchcraft. Satan uses so-called magical objects to so confuse his victims that they can't tell right from wrong. Next they'd start muttering spells, making charms by casting silver during some sort of ritual, summoning demons and stuff. Even if those things were not thought "real" (i.e. there are no demons to summon) the deluded mindset would still be destructive. Upon seeing something (a cast silver angel, say) the wretch would effectively hallucinate things that weren't there and make decisions on that basis.

Records that aren't there fall under much the same category. Christians of course appreciate that demons ARE real and swarming everywhere just waiting to occupy any vacuous dolt who'd happen along. Jesus knew that and arranged for material of supposed great value to be destroyed so that His message would not be contaminated by superstition, as exemplified in this failed exorcism by charlatans. The occupied man remained possessed. This is what happened next:

Acts 19:16-20 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them [the charlatans] and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. And this was known to all the Jews and Greeks also dwelling at Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified. And many that believed came, and confessed, and shewed their deeds. Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed.

The word of Mohammed did not prevail in India, despite the destruction, suggesting that theirs was not the word of God – regardless of what was actually in the libraries. Perhaps any knowledge is antithetical to their cause? Anyway, they were exiled to East & West Pakistan and immediately opened hostilities upon one another from what I can make out. You understand I don't have an opinion on this, rather am citing what the record suggests. The existent record - not the nonexistent records. The difference matters.

[GanduHindu]

What doesn't matter is the raving of someone who promotes chimerical records, whether they ever existed in the past or not. .

Records that aren't there fall under much the same category.

The existent record - not the nonexistent records. The difference matters.

Are you trying to call me a "raving" lunatic who promotes chimerical records? 😊 That's kind of a low blow.

Perhaps I didn't explain things very well. The sack of Nalanda library is an actual historical event that took place in the year 1193.

A Moslem marauder called Bakhtiyar Khilji was involved in its ransacking. Many Moslems destroy books, statues, and records all the time (the Bamiyan Buddha destruction in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan in 2001 is a recent episode incident).

I never said the destruction of those ancient Indian libraries has destroyed everything of importance to Hindu academia. You're misquoting me here. No, it hasn't. As a matter of fact, a large number of records have survived, mainly due to restorative efforts, but also because those pillagers couldn't destroy everything of value. We Hindus have always been smarter than those meathead Moslems. 😁

That's why we have the Rig Veda, Puranas, Upanishads, and every other mainstream book important to Hindus preserved in its entirety, no typos, no errors. Sanskrit has been preserved for thousands of years since God taught the first human how to speak Sanskrit. 😁 We also have records of Indo-Greek cultural exchanges (history was an important subject then as it is now).

Those Indian universities were well known elite institutions. Some of the subjects of importance to ancient world: Logic, Arts, Mathematics (Aryabhatta, an Indian mathematician who conceptualized "zero" and the decimal system), metallurgy (Indian temple designs were widely adopted in SE Asia, in Thailand, Indonesia, and the Indo-China region). Astronomy was another important subject. A lot of our modern day ideas of constellations come not from the Greeks but ancient Hindus, the original source. Even Algebra, erroneously named after some Arab Moslem, was a well-,established field of study in India. We have a continuous unbroken chain disseminating knowledge spanning thousands of years.

Buddhism spread from India to China and all the way to Japan. These elite universities like Nalanda and Takshila played a leading role in the dissemination of ideas to the Far-East.

A large number of records I'm medieval India were destroyed, sure, but a lot of them are being restored.

Vedic Mathematics is one such field being resurrected in our modern age. It teaches all the advanced concepts including calculus and matrices, and fast computing. It's not something that exists in my imagination. Vedic Mathematics is pretty much taught in modern Indian schools. It's also being used by Indian researchers in the U.S.

No amount of effort of Moslem invaders could wipe out any trace of Hindu civilization. They tried it for around a 1000 years. 😊

You think a bunch of Baptist preachers would succeed in destroying thousands of years of collective memory of the Hindus? When their 3rd century Christian counterparts couldn't destroy anything of substance in ancient Greek and Roman cultures.

And we Indians have been able to build a much superior civilization to the Greco-Romans, your chances of changing us over are simply laughable. Now before someone accuses me of being prideful, no I'm not. These are the facts I have before me.

Hindu civilization is pretty strong and resilient. And all those ancient records are making a comeback slowly. Even the ancient university rectors knew that human knowledge is paramount. There were backup records, verbal dissemination of ideas, and a lot more..

Even assuming your Jesus hypothetically wanted those Hindu records erased (why would he want that? In my eyes, he would then no longer qualify as a just "God"), he certainly did not succeed.

Thankfully my impression of Christianity is not colored by your forum alone. I count many actual Christians among my friends, and certainly put your creed way above Islam which is antithetical to knowledge. Modern Western Christianity is quite pro-knowledge and I am comfortable around Western Christians in general.

I don't have to provide any footnotes or references in all of this but I will link to an archives site.

These restoration of ancient Indic records are a current well-known fact. It's an ongoing process. The Indian government is spending a lot of money to resurrect those ideas which weren't really lost, but got temporarily inaccessible.

Also, it's not a very nice thing to cheer the destruction of knowledge no matter where it happens. If hypothetically your Christisn forum's servers were to be hacked and a large amount of backup data erased, that would horrify and pain me deeply even though I disagree with your views.

That's what sane, rational minds always do. We won't cheer in favor of vandalism. Moslems are the only exceptions. They're all pro-vandalism and pro-violence.

But I hold Americans and Europeans to a much higher standard.

Also, please use a bit of what is called "Google search", and verify everything I said for yourself. Don't expect me to spoonfeed all of this information. It's time-consuming and I have to feed and take care my cows at the Hindu temple. They're a strong cattle of the Brahman breed. Very beautiful animals.

The crux of the matter is that you think Western civilization is superior, and it just doesn't sit well with you that Hindu civilization has contributed more than the ancient Greeks and Romans. You're biased which is fine by me. But being intellectually dishonest is another thing.

I am still giving you the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't your real intention. You were genuinely ignorant which is acceptable to me.

You're entitled to remain ignorant and not learn new facts. The world will move forward just fine without you.

Please check the National Archives of India website (they have hundreds of modern libraries under them) to see how restorative conservation works. No one succeeded in erasing those ancient records. We're getting back to every bit of lost data. A lot of time and manhours is being spent on it. That's why I said "men are at work" in my previous post.

As I mostly celebrated Christmas with you folks, I had a good time. Thank you..😊🤚

[MitzaLizalor]

Are you trying to call me a "raving" lunatic who promotes chimerical records?

I don't know yet. If records (or anything else) are destroyed they don't exist. If they don't exist NOW, they can't be consulted NOW. I'm aware of islamic attempts to take over India but fortunately for your idols they were unsuccessful.

.

The sack of Nalanda library is an actual historical event that took place in the year 1193.

I'm not disputing that. What concerned me was that you may be consulting records that don't exist. Because they've been destroyed. Mental hospitals are full of people who read things that don't exist, have friends who don't exist, admire art that doesn't exist. They are deranged lunatics. Foucault distinguished insane persons from the mentally ill in that insane persons are rational, whereas the mentally ill (or those otherwise deranged) are not.

.

I never said the destruction of those ancient Indian libraries has destroyed everything of importance to Hindu academia. You're misquoting me here. No, it hasn't. As a matter of fact, a large number of records have survived

Oh, I see. Then they haven't been destroyed. Just damaged. Now it's important to understand about idols, especially in relation to islams. Hindus, I know, are quite happy to set them up, c'est la vie, but Mecca "says" she opposes idols. Yet sets up moon idols wherever she goes. On rooftops, necklaces, table décor, you name it, there's an idol for it. Almost always a moon idol but there are others (engravings of the kaaba for instance) which contravenes God's definition of an idol—they cite Moses here—in the same way that Rome does. There is no hope for Rome but maybe the Meccans are on a path to righteousness? Regardless of how you or I may define idols, according to the koran (which references Moses whose stuff is easy enough to read) Meccan ideology is clearly reducing them. "One," the moon, is too low a number I'd say (they say it isn't the moon but can't justify that claim – for example by saying what it is) but they do like gold plating Rolls-Royces.

III John 1:2-3 Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth. For I rejoiced greatly, when the brethren came and testified of the truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth.

Prosperity and Truth walk hand-in-hand suggesting to me that Mecca is more a bastion of Truth (deficient in some respects, obviously) than Delhi. I'm not sure about Amritsar though, rather tacky I thought. Have you been to Dubai? Arabian gold tends to be more of a matt finish, v.i., and Abu Dhabi has some quite nice outlets. Mostly it's made in England to suit their tastes; have you visited there at all?

[GanduHindu]

I
Oh, I see. Then they haven't been destroyed. Just damaged. Now it's important to understand about idols, especially in relation to islams. Hindus, I know, are quite happy to set them up, c'est la vie, but Mecca "says" she opposes idols. Yet sets up moon idols wherever she goes. On rooftops, necklaces, table décor, you name it, there's an idol for it. Almost always a moon idol but there are others (engravings of the kaaba for instance) which contravenes God's definition of an idol—they cite Moses here—in the same way that Rome does. There is no hope for Rome but maybe the Meccans are on a path to righteousness? Regardless of how you or I may define idols, according to the koran (which references Moses whose stuff is easy enough to read) Meccan ideology is clearly reducing them. "One," the moon, is too low a number I'd say (they say it isn't the moon but can't justify that claim – for example by saying what it is) but they do like gold plating Rolls-Royces.



Prosperity and Truth walk hand-in-hand suggesting to me that Mecca is more a bastion of Truth (deficient in some respects, obviously) than Delhi. I'm not sure about Amritsar though, rather tacky I thought.

, [

Jesus Christ (don't you all love it when I say that)

You've just used up all your arguments, and are just rotating around a pivot with no other intention but just to prove me wrong.

My truant nephew does the exact same thing.

Childish arguments aside, the key premise of your arguments are centered around the supposition that God blesses Moslems more than the Hindus because they're closer to the Moses' truth.

It's wrong on two levels. Firstly, as you correctly acknowledged, Moslems do indulge In large scale idol worship. They also visit graves, wear amulets, and in the Dubai that you speak of, beliefs in the "evil eye" are common. That evil eye thing is such a Stone Age belief even we know it's nonsense.

I already proved Hinduism is centrally monotheistic (you may say false gods and all but a difference in name based on the choice of language should not be a concern to a real God. I'm not going to waste anymore time on your Moses nonsense. We just know very well the ancient Heebs are not important enough for a study on monotheistic principles.)

As for Moslema countries and prosperity, I'm not gonna say something libelous to you such as accusing you of derangement, but clearly you're not even remotely informed on this subject. Some of the most war-torn, shockingly poor, destitute countries happen to be the Islamic ones. Have you considered Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Chechnya (not a proper country but absolutely train wreck of a place nevertheless).

In fact if you look it up, Winston Churchill has a famous quote about Moslems and penury, how they go hand in hand.

As for the Dubai where you had spent a vacation, yes they do have fancy gold plated cars. Good for them. If you had researched further, you'd realize it's an oil rich economy and India is crucial to its success. More than 70 percent of their population happens to be from the subcontinent. You're more likely to hear Hindi spoken on the streets (than Arabic).

UAE exports most of its petroleum products to India. In fact, those Trucial states have been a carryover burden for India since the end of British Raj. They even used Indian currency, called the "Gulf Rupees" which were minted in Delhi for the first 20 years of their existence (the Indian Navy recently rescued one of their drunken princesses who eloped with her lover because the Sheik daddy wanted her to marry a 70-year old man).

India plays a central role in the economies of all mini-Gulf nations except Saudi Arabia which has diversified interests and Qatar which has gone a bit rogue (thanks to its support for terrorism). Most Gulf states have very tiny populations of native citizens. Probably a lot of Indian Moslems living there adopted the Arab thawb (it's that tent-like dress the Sheiks wear) to fool you into thinking they were the real deal.

Whether you prefer the original Emiratis over Indian Hindus is your choice, and I get it, you don't like the latter. No one is forcing you to.

But you keep sticking to your guns just for the heck of it is kinda ruining my interest. Think of it as you driving away a potential Christian with your stubbornness (although that one I said that with a facepalm. I'm pretty convinced with facts on my side that siding with Krishna is a better choice for everyone).

It stopped being funny when you pinpointed one of the Magus all the way to Cornwall (that's historic revisionism ad nauseam), and now you want to defend Islamic beliefs just because you can't stand that Hinduism might be a better way of life (the Jesus Moslems believe in has nothing to do with Christianity..if you'd studied the Koran properly you'd know it's a superweird entity not your Gospel Jesus).

I have been to England and Devonshire in particular. As I strongly believe you have some connections to Aussie-English Commonwealth stuff, I think it would be appropriate for me to use a British/Cornish idiom, that you're not really trying to learn something new in our discussions. You're just taking the proverbial p*ss. Or "Giss on" in Cornish slang.

Well this forum is your home turf. This gives you the automatic right to say something to the effect of, "Run away, loser." 😁☺️

You clearly don't want me here so I'm wrapping it to you as a New Year gift. See you in Cornwall next autumn (I really like England. They're pretty Hindu vegan friendly nowadays)