BhForce

Yeah, that's kind of a like a popular Punjabi actress who supposedly became a Christian. She actually posted on social media that that's not true because she's still a Punjabi!

You should tell them they're going to hell unless they take Amrit. Let us know on this forum how the ensuing discussion goes. That'll probably throw them for a loop (they're used to telling others that they are going to hell).

This could be a blessing in disguise as, to the extent that people leave their social systems intact, there's the possibility of flipping them back. I would hope that a lot of people just view "Christianity" as another dera that they attend. And people switch up deras over their lifetime. Also, keeping their physical form (kes) is a devious ploy that the missionaries are using, but we could flip it back on them. Also, I wanted to ask you what the usefulness of the arguments that Western ex-Christians use would be? You know, the ones that you get on a standard google search like Dan Barker, Bart Ehrman, and Richard Carrier and others. I.e., that the Bible wasn't written by the claimed authors, it was a document cobbled together hundreds of years later, there are many inconsistencies in the Bible and the gospels, and so on.

Do you think it might be useful for some our people to forego the 10 bedroom houses, and maybe downgrade to 8 bedrooms, and use the rest of the money to help people out?

Do you think it would be good to tell our missionaries to just sort of relax and allow some of our sants to do "exorcisms"? At least that way, our people would remain in the faith so they can be further reached later for real Sikhism.

Good point. We're kind of in a vicious circle. The Christians in the UK (and other countries) are losing attendance fast. To make up for it, they send money abroad, where their dollars go much further, educating (or propagandizing) dozens of children for the price of one in the West. On a side note, I propose a temporary truce in all of the fights that we Sikhs like to engage in. Stop hating on Nihang, missionary, Taksal, AKJ, SGPC, sants, and whatever else. Stop arguing about the length of reharas. Even if a fellow Sikh is doing a shorter or longer Rehras than you, at least he's doing Reharas! Yeah, I think there's that, too. I'm sure the missionaries must be saying "Well, obviously God's on the side of Christianity because all the Western countries are rich." Which works on our people. The question that they should ask is: "If Christianity is so great, why are Westerners leaving it in droves?" But our people don't know that (Westerners are leaving the Church) because they don't live in the West. Missionaries prey on their ignorance. Despicable.

Agreed. And also regarding our pampered religious/political class. Except in the case of Jatt Sikhs. They are not converting because of caste oppression. There is something else going on there, which is that the missionaries have managed to bamboozle a few Jatt Sikhs that Christianity is the one true religion and everyone else is going to an everlasting hell. And then when they have that one guy, he goes on to convert a whole bunch more. Because our gianis certainly haven't told people why we should be Sikhs.

ਪੁਛਨਿ ਫੋਲਿ ਕਿਤਾਬ ਨੋ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਵਡਾ ਕਿ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨੋਈ। They asked Baba Nanak to open and search in his book whether Hindu is great or the Muslim. ਬਾਬਾ ਆਖੇ ਹਾਜੀਆ, ਸੁਭਿ ਅਮਲਾ ਬਾਝਹੁ ਦੋਨੋ ਰੋਈ। Baba replied to the pilgrim hajis, that, without good deeds both will have to weep and wail. ਵਾਰਾਂ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ : ਵਾਰ ੧ ਪਉੜੀ ੩੩

Good summary. The problem with other religions is that they have permanent hellfire for merely not believing in Christianity. As opposed to us believing in temporary hell for bad deeds.

Got it. Of course, I agree that we should not have different types of amrit sanchars. When Guru Gobind Singh ji first reveal the khanda-bata amrit, there was only one rehit.

Funniest comment in the thread. Seriously, though, I have to laugh at people crying about 5000 camels being killed out of one million! Meanwhile, no one cares about at least 3000 Sikhs being killed in New Delhi, not to mention the other cities. It brings to mind Madho Daas crying about Guru Gobind Singh ji having one of his goats killed at his aashram. Guru ji asked why he didn't cry at human blood being spilled all across India?

Well, it seems the Daily Mail did a little better than the Cumbria Mail in that they only spoke of 3 Sikh victims, and not perpetrators. Oops, I guess I spoke too soon because it looks like the initial headline in the Daily Mail referenced "Sikh gangs": "3 killed in Sikh gang bloodbath" That makes it look like Sikhs do nothing but roam around all day looking for people to kill. Thankfully the Mail wised up and changed the headline to " Three Sikh men found stabbed to death in street were 'builders rowing with bosses over not being paid' ". This is accurate, but much damage was already done. Kudos to the Sikh Press Association. They should follow up with an article about the Daily Mail reporters Vivek Chaudhary and Joe Middleton, including photos, family background, where they went to school, whether they or any family/friends have ever been in any kind of trouble. And the same for their editors. Also report on their religions, and any violence done by members of those religions (Hindu and Christian).

Why is it that when Muslims do something bad, they're called "Asians". When Sikhs do so, they're called Sikhs?

I fail to understand the problem, bro. Let's say that you believe in wearing Nihang bana, doing 5 banis, full Chapai Sahib, long Reharas, etc. Then you walk into an Amrit Sanchar and they tell you the exact opposite of that because you didn't know it was being done by the SGPC. Because @ipledgeblue banned putting jathebandi names on Amrit Sanchar posters. Now do you get it?

Totally, bro! That's exactly it. All these ex-Muslims (like Sara Haidar and Ayan Hirsi Ali) have to walk around with huge security arrangements. Meanwhile, this joker is free to walk in and around Gurdwaras and Sikh community. That in itself tells you all you need to know. Not that I'm saying Sikhs should kill him. Just saying that Sikhs should realize he's a fool. What's weird is that he's made it clear he doesn't want to be a Sikh (calls himself an atheist and married a non-Sikh). But he still wants to tell Sikhs what to do. He desperately doesn't want young Sikhs to be Sikhs. Because that invalidates his choices. And he also wants to suck up to the atheist white liberal establishment.

There's a world of difference in engaging in sexuality being married vs. not. It's like saying "haha, I wouldn't expect amritdharis to eat". Well, you wouldn't expect amritdharis to eat food they stole. It's OK to eat food you bought.

1. So you disagree with @Dsinghdp 's definition of Dharam being "eternal law of conduct."? 2. In the line, "ਆਪਣਾ ਧਰਮੁ ਗਵਾਵਹਿ ਬੂਝਹਿ ਨਾਹੀ ਅਨਦਿਨੁ ਦੁਖਿ ਵਿਹਾਣੀ ॥" it would seem that dharam could only mean "duty". Do you agree? Note: Prof. Sahib Singh and Giani Harbans Singh translate dharam as "farz" (duty) here. 3. Do you see a difference between "dharam" and "mazhab"?

OK, a lot of Christians don't like Yoga because they think that it has to do with Hinduism (they might be right). But that has nothing to do with our discussion. So, when you say "Great to see that", does that mean you now say that Christianity is "Dharmic", according to your own definition which you gave?

For me it means eternal law of conduct. Well, how is that different from Christianity? Don't they believe in an "eternal law of conduct"? Luke 16:17 - And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

Faiths from the Indian subcontinent. OK, well, why not say that? "Indian faiths" What are you trying to get at by saying "Dharmic"? What does Dharmic mean? (Before you say "relating to Dharma", what would you mean by "dharma"?)

What do you mean by "dharmic faiths"?

What is that supposed to mean? They are married. What's the problem?

It's OK to share all sorts of stuff with your female coworkers, but it's not OK for a married couple to do so?

This is so crazy! PTC should be paying SGPC, not the other way around. Badals are pure evil.

What would the Khalsa have done? Really, bro? They killed the camels because they were having a really hard time in Australia with little water resources. Are you saying that Khalsa would have let the camels live so that humans could die? There's nothing that says you can't kill an animal to save a human.