Rajs Emailed Me

[Guest grandcannon]

WJKK WJKF

First of all, let me say that alot some people have said that people should post about Christianity on this forum. I agree that Sikhism should be our first priority, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss other religions. We have to realize that we live in a world where Christians are everywhere. Sikhs are converting to Christianity because they don't know the facts, and people are making comments about Christianity that are not true. Sikhs should learn about other faiths both to strengthen there faith and so that they can help others learn the truth. With that in mind, I make this post.

On February the second, Rajs, who posted some anti-Sikh/pro-Christian remarks on the forum recently emailed me and said:

Grandcannon,

It seems that your post which raised few questions have been removed. Anyway, I was on vaccation and could not post a reply staright away. So, I decided to send you an email.

----------------------------

Your claim, “I was a devoted Christian my whole life,” is bewildering in light of the fact that you have taken few verses from the Bible without checking the context and accuse God for being gender bias. I am not sure what your extent of devotion to Christianity was but one should judge himself/ herself with a sober mind. Peter, too, thought of himself as a devout follower of Jesus eventually denying the Lord three times before the Holy Spirit revealed the true nature of Christ to him. The lesson from this is to trust in God with humility and not rely on self-righteousness.

The Bible does not make man superior to woman, and clearly states that -

“God created man in his own image … male and female he created them.” (Genesis 1:27) God does not discriminate against woman, whom He created. Furthermore, in the Ten Commandments, God commanded to “honour thy father and mother.” (Exodus 20:12) In God’s eyes - man and woman are equal; father and mother are equal; husband and wife are equal. “… God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality…” (Exodus 10:17)

Jesus, God incognito, did not only have women followers, along with the 12 disciples, but in fact, they were equally important to spread his message to the world. From a Samarian woman (John 4:39) to Mary Magdalene (John 20:17) who was the first to witness Jesus’ resurrection.

There were women prophets, such as Miriam; Moses and Aaron’s sister (Exodus 15:20), Deborah (Judges 4:4), and Huldah (2Kings 22:14).

Women, along with men, were equally involved in early establishment of the church, which is obvious from Paul’s letters, where he states, “… help those women which laboured with me in the gospel…” (Philippians 4:2) Also, “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church …, receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints … she has been a great help to many people, including me.” (Romans 16:1)

Now, getting back to the verses you quoted from 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy. Foremost, consider the context in which 1 Corinthian 11:3 and 1 Timothy 2:11 are written. They are instructions on congregational worship or propriety in worship. Paul is laying down an orderly worship conduct, NOT putting women down. If you take time to read little further, in verse 16, Paul says, “if anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice – nor do the churches of God.” An e.g. of this would be something like women sitting on one side and men sitting on the other in most of the Gurdwaras. Or, eating Langer whilst seated on ground, etc.

God did not give men authority over women but in a family unit, He did allow Husband authority over his Wife. In Genesis 3:16, God said to Eve, “… your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” To rule does not mean to oppress but to have authority in the parameter of family life over wife and children. In return, the Bible tells husbands to “love your wives, just as Christ loved the Church…” (Ephesians 5:25) What was Christ’ love for the church (i.e., believers) like - He died on the cross to redeem the sinful humanity. What it means is that Husbands should love their wives even unto death.

{ Look at the actions of the God that you believe in. He told the Israelites to systematically destroy all the nations that surrounded them so that they could dominate the area. Instead of trying to convert them to the truth and accept them with love, he killed, banished, and destroyed entire civilazations,. Where is your God's love? }

God destroyed civilizations because of their paganism and evil among them. In Deuteronomy 9:4, Moses tells the Israelites, “… it is on account of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord is going to drive them out before you. It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations.” You ask where is God‘s love? God, Himself, is love. (1John 4:16) and “This is how God showed his love among us … sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.” (1John 4:9)

The Bible says God’s “love endures forever” (Psalm 139), however, If you are of opinion that somehow you know more about love than God, our Creator does, then I must leave you to your inflated imagination.

Finally, I have nothing to say about the Catholic Church or Roman emperor Constantine. Salvation, according to the Bible, is through faith in Jesus Christ alone, not the Catholic Church or any emperor. Whatever the Bible teaches has stood the test of time for nearly two thousand years. People are free to accept the grace of God or reject Him. Even on the cross, just like today, there were people hurling abuses at Jesus, spitting at him and taunting him to get down from the cross. It was the unfathomable love of God, which restrained Him, from destroying humanity there and then. As a result, there are people from all races, colours, ethnicities, creeds, tribes, and nations in the world, who have accepted Jesus Christ as their Saviour. When the Bible says, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16), the word “whoever” includes Indian, Chinese, American, Russian, African, Japanese, a person with or without hairs, with or without turban, etc. etc.

God allows freedom to choose Him or reject Him but “it is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.” (Hebrews 6:4)

The Bible does not confuse people, but people get confused when their ego does not allow them accept the gift of God’s grace as revealed in Jesus Christ. There is no greater revelation from God other than an understanding that, it is sin, which separates us from God (We are NOT stuck in some re-birth cycle of 8.4 million species awaiting liberation,)

and Jesus’ atoning sacrifice on the cross, paid the penalty for our sins.

Kind regards

Rajs

The next day, I emailed him back and said:

Dear Rajs,

Hello! It's good to here from you! First of all, let me apologize. When I read your email, you seemed a little angry. I am deeply sorry if I in anyway offended you or your beliefs. I am simply saying what I believe, just as you are. I did not in anyway wish to offend you. I am and will continue to try to listen to you, as I hope you do. I don't think I have all the answers, and I think we both can learn a lot from talking to each other. I know I can.

I believe you misunderstood what I said about women in Christianity. I don't believe that the Bible states that God loves men more than women, or that the bible 'puts down' women. I don't believe that the bible doesn't command men to be loving and caring with their wives, or that women where not important and instrumental in the Early Church. I don't believe that the Bible is some sort of chauvinist, wife-beating, women suppressing book. I do believe that the Bible tells women to be humble and submissive towards men, and that the Bible puts them in a lower place in the home and church, and thus in a secondary place in the community. I apologize if my statements where not clear enough.

If God destroyed the others groups in the Old Testament because of there evil, why didn't he first try to help them, and give them a chance to change? If he loved the other groups as much as the Israelites, why not give them a chance to enter into His love? Isn't that what a loving, caring, compassionate God would do? Why jump to the killing? Doesn't that sound like the type of fable that an empirical, conquering society would create to support their actions? I agree that the Bible says God is loving, but I'm saying that that idea is not consistent with all of the Biblical God's actions.

I'm not saying that Biblical salvation is through the Catholic Church. What I am saying is that the composition of the Bible and the doctrine of Christianity has been strongly influence by Emperor Constantine and The Catholic Church. If you look at the effects that such events as The Council of Nicea, (which was organized and controlled by Emperor Constantine), have had on Christianity, it seems obvious to me.

Once again, I apologize if I offended you or was not clear enough in my statements. I am glad to talk to you, and hope to continue this conversation. I think it would be great if you talked more on the forum, and instead of making a post and never responding to questions, coming back. Some people think of you as a 'hit and run' poster, and I don't think you want to have that reputation. If you'd like, I think it would be great to post your email and this email on the forum, as it would help everybody to better understand our positions.

A fellow brother in the search for the truth

Grandcannon

PS Just to let you know, my topic on Christianity has not been removed. It simply was moved to another section of the forum because like 40 people where asking questions and it was taking up to much room.

The day after that, he replied and said:

Dear Grandcannon,

Thank you for the email. To begin with, let me assure you that I am neither angry nor offended, either with you, or any body else on the forum. If Jesus can accept the beating, spitting, scourging, all other manners of insult and even death for the sake of love for mankind – least I could do is listen to others’ views without getting upset. If I sounded angry in my reply to your questions then it was unintentional and more to do with my lack of command on English language (third language for me) rather than, representing my angry feelings.

You charge that “the Bible tells women to be humble and submissive towards men, and that the Bible puts them in a lower place in the home and church, and thus in a secondary place in the community”. I beg to differ.

1. The Bible tells everyone to be humble - men, women, and children, not just women.

* Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. (Ephesians 4:2)

* Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. (1Peter 5:6)

2. The Bible commands wives to be submissive to their husbands, not women at large, to submit to men as you allege. Now, the valid question would be to ask, why does the Bible command wife to submit to their husband?

To get an understanding of that, we must go back in history to dawn of mankind. God created Adam and Eve as equal beings, Genesis 1:27 – “male and female He created them.” Also in Genesis 5:2, we read, “He created them male and female and blessed them. And when they were created, he called them "man."” In fact, God called both of them “man” making them equal in every moral and spiritual sense of the word except, in physique. However, Eve acted independently and was first to disobey God by eating fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 3:6). Adam followed Eve and shared her disobedience to God’s command stated in Genesis 2:17. For this reason alone, because Eve, wife of Adam, took the lead in disobeying God, was told “… your husband … will rule over you." (Genesis 3:16)

The command "to be submissive to her husband" to wife, is not because husband is superior to her wife, but to avoid acting independently. Can you imagine a family with no one acting as a head? Everyone will be doing their own thing with total disregard to respect, order, manners, and care for others. Adam and Eve are the biological parents of entire humanity. Their behaviour and character were to directly influence us. That is why, God wanted to place a divine order in a family unit, which is a represented of divine family, where God is the Father of us all. Moreover, wife’s submission to husband is compared to the Church (i.e. Christians) submitting to the authority of Jesus Christ, see Ephesians 5:24. The submission is out of love, with a willing heart, and out of reverence for Christ! Nowhere does the Bible tell a husband to throw out her wife if she does not submit to him. In return, the Bible tells husband to love her wife as Christ loved the Church and died for it! (Ephesians 5:25) So, if on one hand, the wife is asked to submit, then on the other hand, husband is asked to love her to death! Now, in what context, may I ask, is women assigned a lower place at home?

3. I stated in my previous email, as per 1 Corinthians 12:3 and 1 Timothy 2:11 apostle Paul is laying down a congregational worship order, or propriety in worship. If you kindly take the time out to read, a little farther in 1 Timothy 12-15, you will see the reason stated is as per God’s command in Genesis 3:16. Furthermore, in what context should a woman be silent at worship gathering? So that not to display authority over man, i.e. her husband. May I please ask you to focus on the next few sentences? Jesus Christ represents both, the head and husband, of the Church. The Church is seen as the bride of Christ (Luke 5:35, John 3:29). The Church can never have authority over Christ, in the same context, wife cannot have authority over her husband. Woman’s silence in the Church is symbolic of Church’s submission to Christ as the head. The submission is voluntary and depicts a virtue such as beauty in a woman. Finally, consider the verse 5, in 1 Corinthians 12, which says “… woman who prays or prophesies …” clearly indicates that women are not explicitly prohibited to speak but do have a place equal to that of men in the Church, so much so that a woman can prophesy.

“If God destroyed the others groups in the Old Testament because of there evil, why didn't he first try to help them, and give them a chance to change?”

I find it extraordinary that you feel God somehow gave the other groups, such as Canaanites, no opportunity to change.

In contrast to the New Testament, the Old Testament in the Bible was written from a Jewish perspective. It mostly deals with the Jewish people and their inability to trust God in every aspect of their lives. The Jewish people of the Old Testament are a prototype, of a sinful mankind, which is unable to redeem itself. In hindsight, God’s destruction of other groups does not simply reflect God’s punishment on them, but destruction of sin. It portrays how God, who is Holy, hates sin and cannot tolerate sin of idol worship specifically in this case.

Allow me to give you some examples that would put in perspective God’s stand, concerning other groups, whom Israelites destroyed according to God’s command.

To begin with, consider the Egyptians. God, through Moses, repeatedly warn the Pharaoh and in fact, gave ten clear-cut warnings, before destroying them. In the same way, others groups knew that Almighty God is with the Israelites and they knew what God is capable of doing. For e.g., in Joshua 2:8, Rahab said to the Israelite spies, "I know that the LORD has given this land to you and that a great fear of you has fallen on us, so that all who live in this country are melting in fear because of you. We have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red Sea for you when you came out of Egypt, and what you did to Sihon and Og, the two kings of the Amorites east of the Jordan, whom you completely destroyed. When we heard of it, our hearts melted and everyone's courage failed because of you, for the LORD your God is God in heaven above and on the earth below.” How did Rehab come to know “LORD your God is God in heaven above and on the earth below” despite no mention of it to her? Who told her? Why did the dread of the Lord came into the heart of Jericho’s citizens? From the bible’s point of view, we don’t know how, but they did come to know about God in heaven above and earth below. However, instead of turning to this awesome God, citizen of Jericho decided to resist Him.

God is impartial when it comes to sin. The proof of this fact lies in God’s dealings with the Israelites. God did not only punish the other groups, but Israelites too, received punishment for their evil and wicked ways. For e.g.,

* God punished revellers who build the golden calf as an idol to worship. (Exodus 32:27)

*God destroyed the rebels among the Israelites when they quarrelled with Moses and attempted to setup a rival authority. (Numbers 16:25)

If you study the entire history of Jewish people you will see that God had them attacked, killed, taken as captives to foreign lands, and suffer many times over and over because of their sins. Read the books from Isaiah to Malachi in the Old Testament and you will see how God does not show partiality when it comes to sin, even punishing His chosen people, who were to be the priests of God among the people of all nations.

God is consistent throughout the Bible, particularly, regarding sin. To see the extent of this consistency, you need to look at the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross. Why do you think God bothered with Jesus sacrifice to forgive our sins? In Jesus, God punished Himself for our sins. God, in a sense, through Jesus punished Himself; just like He punished all others who sinned and you claim “I agree that the Bible says God is loving, but I'm saying that that idea is not consistent with all of the Biblical God's actions.” My friend, God went as far as to punish his very own Son to die a horrible death for the sins of the world, and yet you consider God’s action inconsistent!

“What I am saying is that the composition of the Bible and the doctrine of Christianity has been strongly influence by Emperor Constantine and The Catholic Church.”

Here again, I am afraid, you are sadly mistaken. Firstly, most of the Old Testament existed long before the Catholic Church and Constantine even existed. You can read through the Jewish history to get a proper perspective. Secondly, at least 20 of the 27 books of the New Testament were accepted as early as AD 180 and the four Gospels even earlier. Now, Constantine did not become emperor until AD 306. How on earth could he have influenced the Bible? The consistency of the message in the entire Bible, despite encompassing thousands of years, confirms only God’s influence and none other. Jesus’ messianic and divine status predates his birth and death, so the question of human influence on the Bible is very absurd. For nearly two thousand years, people have been trying to discredit the Bible, some even discounting that Jesus ever existed. The original message of redemption and forgiveness of sins through the blood of Jesus Christ dates back to BC 8-7 to Prophet Isaiah, who proclaimed about Jesus “… For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.” (Isaiah 53:12)

David, the reason I do not answer some of the questions on the forum is that they do not relate to my original post and veer off to completely different path. As an ex-Sikh, I only try to show the difference I found in Christian faith and, what I found wrong with Sikhism theology. I am more than happy to discuss Christianity, but on a Sikhism forum I try not to post Christian message in its entirety. The moderators tend to delete the post if only Christian theology is mentioned with no relevance or comparison to Sikhism.

You are more than welcome to submit the contents of my email to the forum. I have no problem with that at all.

Kind regards

Rajs

On February the 8th, I emailed him and said:

Dear Rajs,

I'm glad that you're not angry. It was definitely not my intention to offend you. If English is your third language, then the profiiciency with shich you speak it (or at least write it) is amazing. Once again, let me say that I am glad that we are having this conversation, as we can both learn a lot from our discussion.

I agree that the Bible tells everyone to be humble. However, it also tells women to be sumbissive to their husbands, which I take issue with. Yes, I can imagine a family with no one person as its head. Not only can I imagine a family where the husband and wife treat each other as equals, I know some. With mutual respect and love, two people, especially spouses, can work together as equals. You claimed that if a husband loves his wife to the death, then even if she submits to him, the she is not in a secondary position. I disagree. even if a husband attempts to act in his wife's best interest, she still must differ to him. This implies that women are somehow less able to make intelligent decisions than men.

I believe I understand Paul's reasoning behind his command for women to not speak in church, but I disagree with it (both the reasoning and the command). I know of man churches that have women as pastors, and that women speak in regularly, and they are not disorderly or undevout. Women being treated as equals does not prevent a church from loving God and serving him.

Just because the people of Jericho had heard about God deos not mean that the where given an equal chance. God had already chosen the Israel ites and with the exception of perhaps the Egyptians and almost certainly the Ninehvites, he destroyed many nations who's only understanding of God was as some sort of pagan-like deity of the Israelites. He did not explain to them the situation, and left them to be destroyed in ignorance. While I agree that God punished the Israelites as well, and that if jesus truly was God's son it was a great sacrifice for Him to do, that does not mean that the ruthless destruction of entire civilizations was ok.

As to constantine and the Catholics, I did not mean that the original texts where somehow influenced, but that overtime, sidbars and commentaries could of easily slipped into the text when control like that is held by such corrupt people. While I understand that you hesitation to post, I thinky that you should respond more to people's question if you really want to help them to understand. I think that answering questions and using the Socratic method helps people find the truth, whatever it is

Grandcannon

[S1ngh]

Edited.. after reading the post above

[buddasingh]

Edited.. after reading the post above :TH:

[Sabre Sword]

found in Christian faith and, what I found wrong with Sikhism theology

What did he find wrong with sikh theology?

1 post we read was a load of, what looks like the same kinda filth, groups like the RSS churn out, warped, distorted and serious misinterpretations of sikhi.

if he posts things like that then he hasnt a clue about sikh theology to begin with.

also, i m also guesing he didnt read a singlr post written by every1 else on dat certain thread.

if thats the case then its his loss.

[WGJKKWGJKF]

WAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA WAHEGURU JI KI FATEH

Its defnetly RajS's loss,

by the way i think taht it was a Christian missionary that actually has misled him further about Sikhi. I noticed that he talked about this is getting close to its nasdikh (end of life)- which is what the missionarys use to scare followers to Christianity.

And half the things that he said was proved wrong and he never answered all my questions.- he contradicted himself aswell!

So im gonna PM hopefully God willing and ask him since he still goes on the net and ill hopefully post that here if he replies.

By the way i just noticed that none of the topics that he posted went off track!

If you read them topics again you will see that what Rajs had questioned Sikhs was answered too with the quotes using the Bible and Siri Guru Granth Sahib!!!- relating to the topic he had started!

WAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA WAHEGURU JI KI FATEH.

[Lion(LK)King]

Now, getting back to the verses you quoted from 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy. Foremost, consider the context in which 1 Corinthian 11:3 and 1 Timothy 2:11 are written. They are instructions on congregational worship or propriety in worship. Paul is laying down an orderly worship conduct, NOT putting women down. If you take time to read little further, in verse 16, Paul says, “if anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice – nor do the churches of God.” An e.g. of this would be something like women sitting on one side and men sitting on the other in most of the Gurdwaras. Or, eating Langer whilst seated on ground, etc.

Which, as a matter of fact, is something Sikhs have recieved from the British. If we go to historical Gurdwaras such as Harimandir Sahib, we will see that everyone sits together in a chunk, without distinguishing caste, creed, gender, skin color etc.. This is definetly a Christian influence coming from the British. Most historical Gurdwarey don't have it that way. Just as British infuence influenced some Gurdware in India, Canadian, and British influence is bringing in Chair into langar hall - does it mean it's acceptable? uh-uh

God did not give men authority over women but in a family unit, He did allow Husband authority over his Wife. In Genesis 3:16, God said to Eve, “… your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” To rule does not mean to oppress but to have authority in the parameter of family life over wife and children.

Seems pretty old fashion and sexist to me. most scientists agree that ohysically, men are stronger, but mentally females are "smarter", and mroe mature in making decisions, just tha men have oppressed women for so long, that it doesn't seem like it any more.

You quote Genesis 3:16 - WHy did you quote out of context. let's read what Genesis 3:15--17 says -

New International Version

15 And I will put enmity

between you and the woman,

and between your offspring [a] and hers;

he will crush your head,

and you will strike his heel."

16 To the woman he said,

"I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;

with pain you will give birth to children.

Your desire will be for your husband,

and he will rule over you."

17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,'

"Cursed is the ground because of you;

through painful toil you will eat of it

all the days of your life.

http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesea...A15&version1=31

http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesea...A16&version1=31

http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesea...A17&version1=31

King James

16Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Feel free to use any other translation, as they don't vary too much.

You are indeed a dubious character, coming to a SIkh forum trying to convince people that 'SanjaRa' can't be found through his Bani, which essentially is HIM

kih rivdws hwQ pY nyrY shjy hoie su hoeI ]4]1]

Says Ravi Daas, the Lord is nearer than our own hands and feet. Whatever will be, will be. ||4||1||

http://www.sikhitothemax.com/Page.asp?Sour...D=2517&Format=2

Sikhs don't search for God, because Sikhs are aware tha he's within us. Mind you he IS US. WE are his Children, He is our Parent, He is us (humans, not Sikhs haha)

In return, the Bible tells husbands to “love your wives, just as Christ loved the Church…” (Ephesians 5:25) What was Christ’ love for the church (i.e., believers) like - He died on the cross to redeem the sinful humanity. What it means is that Husbands should love their wives even unto death.

Which reminds me, wat's your opinion on the gnostics, which clearly state that Christ Loved Mary magdalena as well (accordiing to non-bible versions, his wife)

What's so wrong with Christ getting married? Would it be against the law of nature? it would be following law of God..

God destroyed civilizations because of their paganism and evil among them. In Deuteronomy 9:4, Moses tells the Israelites, “… it is on account of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord is going to drive them out before you. It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations.” You ask where is God‘s love? God, Himself, is love. (1John 4:16) and “This is how God showed his love among us … sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.” (1John 4:9)

You seem to enjoy quoting out of context.

If God IS LOVE, and send his son as a sacrifise - WHY could he not have saved them instead of destroying them? Is this not being vengeful?

"Listen up- I'm God, and If you don't listen to me, then you're going to hell" - Is THAT the love? is THAT SanjanRa? Seems liek wrath to me...

The Bible says God’s “love endures forever” (Psalm 139), however, If you are of opinion that somehow you know more about love than God, our Creator does, then I must leave you to your inflated imagination.

That's EXACTLY where it should end. You have your opinion about God, Sikhs have their own. You go listen to what they have to say allow Sikhs to experience for them self. Just because you converted doesn't mean you need to drag others with you...

Finally, I have nothing to say about the Catholic Church or Roman emperor Constantine. Salvation, according to the Bible, is through faith in Jesus Christ alone, not the Catholic Church or any emperor. Whatever the Bible teaches has stood the test of time for nearly two thousand years.

Ofcourse you don't, since most historians concur that it was through emperor Constantine, that the Bible was made like it was, conllected like it is today, rejecting gospels not previewing Jesus as a Messiah....

Due to a VOTE - a CLOSE Vote.

It is evident from history that the only reason emporer Constantine joined Christianity is because of political reasons, as Christians were increasing exponentially. Ofcourse you don't have anything to comment about something that challanges the very root of Christianity being a separate religion. You talk a lot of pagenism. Just ask yourself where the "halo" seeen on every Jesus picture comes from, or perhaps where the Sunday being Sabath comes from. or Why Christmas is celebrated in December, when Jesus wasn't born then? Are not all of these pagan elements in Christianity? Where did they come from? Why did they come? most historians agree that they came from the very Constantine you refuse to comment about. The very Constantine who made it easier for the pagans to accept Christianity, as they wouldn't have to change their life style way to much, as the new Christianity was adjusted for pagans, with Pagan elements - for PAGANS!!!

Even on the cross, just like today, there were people hurling abuses at Jesus, spitting at him and taunting him to get down from the cross.

No-one is abusing Jesus, most people consider him as a good person trying to put people on the path of God, unforuntatly that Path is long gone, as soon as power-hungry people came in and started doing what they did (i.e Constantine)

It was the unfathomable love of God, which restrained Him, from destroying humanity there and then. As a result, there are people from all races, colours, ethnicities, creeds, tribes, and nations in the world, who have accepted Jesus Christ as their Saviour. When the Bible says, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16), the word “whoever” includes Indian, Chinese, American, Russian, African, Japanese, a person with or without hairs, with or without turban, etc. etc.

Does it include the "cursed" women?

God allows freedom to choose Him or reject Him but “it is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.” (Hebrews 6:4)

The Bible does not confuse people, but people get confused when their ego does not allow them accept the gift of God’s grace as revealed in Jesus Christ. There is no greater revelation from God other than an understanding that, it is sin, which separates us from God (We are NOT stuck in some re-birth cycle of 8.4 million species awaiting liberation,)

and Jesus’ atoning sacrifice on the cross, paid the penalty for our sins.

Kind regards

Rajs

I ahve no doubt whatsoever that you have brought in concepts from Sikhi into Christianity, just like Constantine brought in pagan elements into Christianity. SOME of your views have a touch of Sikhi in them.

I encourage you to live the life of a True Christian, following the teachings of Jesus, and if you need to know anything more about how to becomre a true Christian please dontact ms514 bhaji (like he told you in the other thread :nihungsmile: )

If Jesus can accept the beating, spitting, scourging, all other manners of insult and even death for the sake of love for mankind – least I could do is listen to others’ views without getting upset.

I am however sure that Jesus did not come around with the attitude of "mai na mano" - I will listen, but throw it out as soon as I've heard it. You've listened, yet you fail to act. A lot of people have requested you to stay as a true Christian, and keep your faith personal.

However, Eve acted independently and was first to disobey God by eating fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 3:6). Adam followed Eve and shared her disobedience to God’s command stated in Genesis 2:17. For this reason alone, because Eve, wife of Adam, took the lead in disobeying God, was told “… your husband … will rule over you." (Genesis 3:16)

Is tha all he told her -

16 To the woman he said,

"I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;

with pain you will give birth to children.

Your desire will be for your husband,

and he will rule over you."

Quoted above. If you are a true Christian then be proud of what you believe, don't quote out of context..

The command "to be submissive to her husband" to wife, is not because husband is superior to her wife, but to avoid acting independently. Can you imagine a family with no one acting as a head? Everyone will be doing their own thing with total disregard to respect, order, manners, and care for others.

So why was the man made the leader- was the women not already oppressed tha she too should feel the glow of freedom?

Adam and Eve are the biological parents of entire humanity. Their behaviour and character were to directly influence us. That is why, God wanted to place a divine order in a family unit, which is a represented of divine family, where God is the Father of us all. Moreover, wife’s submission to husband is compared to the Church (i.e. Christians) submitting to the authority of Jesus Christ, see Ephesians 5:24. The submission is out of love, with a willing heart, and out of reverence for Christ! Nowhere does the Bible tell a husband to throw out her wife if she does not submit to him. In return, the Bible tells husband to love her wife as Christ loved the Church and died for it! (Ephesians 5:25) So, if on one hand, the wife is asked to submit, then on the other hand, husband is asked to love her to death! Now, in what context, may I ask, is women assigned a lower place at home?

1 - Fi you seriously believe tha Adam and Even are the biological parents, then I do sense a touch of danger in your belief,

If you stop quoting out of context, you'll certainly find such places.

When speaking of humility, the Guru did not preach sometihng and do something else, he did not live in duality -

ਕਿਆ ਹਮ ਕਿਰਮ ਨਾਨ੍ਹ੍ਹ ਨਿਕ ਕੀਰੇ ਤੁਮ੍ਹ੍ਹ ਵਡ ਪੁਰਖ ਵਡਾਗੀ ॥ki-aa ham kiram naanH nik keeray tumH vad purakh vadaagee.

What are we? Tiny worms, and microscopic germs. You are our great and glorious Lord and Master.

Guru Sahib calls himself a "keRa", Vaheguru.

ਹਮ ਕੀਰੇ ਕਿਰਮ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਸਰਣਾਈ ਕਰਿ ਦਇਆ ਨਾਮੁ ਪਰਗਾਸਿ ॥੧॥ham keeray kiram satgur sarnaa-ee kar da-i-aa naam pargaas. ||1||

I am a mere insect, a worm. O True Guru, I seek Your Sanctuary. Please be merciful, and bless me with the Light of the Naam, the Name of the Lord. ||1||

ਦਾਸਨ ਦਾਸ ਰੇਣੁ ਦਾਸਨ ਕੀ ਜਨ ਕੀ ਟਹਲ ਕਮਾਵਉ ॥daasan daas rayn daasan kee jan kee tahal kamaava-o.

I am the slave of His slaves; becoming the dust of the feet of his slaves, I serve His humble servants.

ਹਰਿ ਦਾਸਨ ਦਾਸ ਦਾਸ ਹਮ ਕਰੀਅਹੁ ਜਨ ਨਾਨਕ ਦਾਸ ਦਾਸੰਨਾ ॥੪॥੧॥

har daasan daas daas ham karee-ahu jan naanak daas daasannaa. ||4||1||

O Lord, make me the slave of the slave of Your slaves; servant Nanak is the slave of Your slaves. ||4||1||

The Guru himself calls him a "kiRa" (Worm, insect), "the slave of the slaves"

I tihnk that if your discussion started on a forum, it should end on a forum, and not go on to emailing people you think you can and want to respond to.

Please forgive me if I have offended anybody or made any mistakes.

Bhull chukk maaf