For people who are brainwashed by antchristian rhetoric, who are told that Christianity was a religion mad eup by Roman emperor Constantine:
Carius Cornelius Tacitus (many of his writings were about 100 A. D.). Tacitus was a Roman historian who reportedly hated Christians. In writing about the life of Nero and the accusation that he burned the city of Rome and blamed it on the Christians, Tacitus says:

"???Nero procured others to be accused, and inflicted exquisite punishment upon those people, who were in abhorrence for their crimes, and were commonly known by the name of Christians. They had their denomination from Christus (Christ, dm.), who in the reign of Tibertius was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate???.At first they were only apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards a vast multitude discovered by them, all of which were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as for their enmity to mankind. Their executions were so contrived as to expose them to derision and contempt. Some were covered with the skins of wild beasts, and torn to pieces by dogs; some were crucified; others having been daubed over with combustible materials, were set up as lights in the night time, and thus burned to death???" (Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44).

Notice that while Tacitus had no regard for the Christians of whom he wrote, he does mention Christ as being the founder of their belief.

Suetonius (Roman historian, born about 88 A. D.). While Suetonius does not mention Christ by name, he does refer to Christianity. This reference and many more that could be supplied proves the early origin of Christianity and details that are congruous with the biblical account. Hear his brief statement in also writing about the life of Nero whose reign began in 54 and ended in 68 A. D.:

"Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief" (Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars, pg. 197).

Pliny the younger, born in 61 A. D. Pliny was sent by the Emperor Trajan to Bithynia in 112 as propraetor. Having found a large number of Christians there, he wrote back to Trajan to get information on how to deal with them. Pliny says to Trajan:

"It is my rule, Sire, to refer to you in matters where I am uncertain. For who can better direct my hesitation or instruct my ignorance? I was never present at any trial of Christians; therefore I do not know what are the customary penalties or investigations, and what limits are observed???." Under specific item number five of his letter, Pliny wrote: "???All who denied that they were or had been Christians I considered should be discharged, because they called upon the gods at my dictation and did reverence, with incense and wine, to your image which I had ordered to be brought forward for this purpose, together with the statutes of the deities; and especially because they cur

For people who are brainwashed by antchristian rhetoric, who are told that Christianity was a religion mad eup by Roman emperor Constantine:
"13: When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14: And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 15: He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16: And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17: And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18: And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19: And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 16).

THIS IS JUST ONE PART; THERE WAS A BIGGER GROUP OF EASTERN CHRISTIANS WITH HISTORY STARTING FROM THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES THEMSELVES. MOST OF THIS GROUP WAS VANQUISHED BY ISLAMIC CONQUEST. BUT THAT DOE SNOT TAKE AWAY HISTORY, EVEN IF YOU TRY. THERE IS A REASON MULSIMS ALSO BELIEVE THAT JESUS EXISTED AND THAT HE WAS SUCH A GREAT PROPHET (WHO COULD NOT DIE, BEING SO GREAT) THAT HE IS ONLY SECOND TO MUHAMMED. (IN THE BEGIINNING OF ISLAM, HE WAS MORE PROMINENT THAT MUHAMMED, BUT THEN THE ARABS DECIDED THAT THEIR GUY IS THE MAIN ONE.

the one place whch was "supposedly" said to be changed is "He was the Christ".. This is because nobody beleives that Jospehus though a bad Jew (He sided with Romans), will write Jesus was the Christ.

WAS THERE DEMOCRACY IN ANCIENT INDIA?
The so-called Republics in ancient India were not democratic governments. Even the word ???Republic??? was coined by William Jones in his eagerness to identify the Aryans with the European race. As Nehru says that ???"his democracy was more or less confined to the Aryans themselves. Their slaves, or those whom they placed in low castes, had no democracy or freedom." The sabha and samiti were a council of the ruling class to make decisions how to enforce caste regulations on the Shudras and other lower castes. It was like the military junta of Myanmar where they made severe caste rules. The word ???Republic??? itself is a misnomer, for the head of the samiti was a king, raja or rajan. These samitis and sabhas were mere folk assemblies that we see in all ancient civilizations. Even today such assemblies exist among tribes, where the proceedings are conducted by the tribal chieftain, as rajan conducted the proceedings in the samiti. The word ???proceedings??? should not be identified with the proceedings of a modern assembly. ???Proceedings??? in those days were orders given by a strong tribal chief to his subordinates to carry out his orders. There was no discipline or order. It was almost like a gathering of muscle-flexing rowdies to force the subjugated people to obey their cruel orders.The moral code in such assemblies was ???might is right??? and the mighty controlled the affairs of the State. Sabha and Samiti were exclusively reserved for Brahmins and the common people had no voice. Arrogant Brahmins assisted by armed kshatriyas controlled the affairs of the state. Non-Brahmins and other castes who formed the majority were treated as laborers and slaves. Even kings were selected and controlled by crafty Brahmins who were supported by able-bodied rowdy Brahmins and assisted by armed bands of Kshatriyas. Crafty Brahmin Chanakya plotted to destroy the Nandas and with rowdy Brahmins and assisted by Kshatriya armed gang he overthrew the Nanda dynasty and placed Chandragupta on the throne. It is foolish to say that there was self government in India. In those days of oppressive Brahmin tyranny, when 89% of Indians were branded as lower castes, and below the lower castes there were untouchables and unseeables who were segregated and forced to live in far-off areas to avoid touch and sight pollution, how could there be self government in ancient India? Only after the coming of the British, Indians were for the first time tasted the sweetness of self government in India. In 1833 Macaulay introduced English education which led to Indians getting European knowledge and European institutions. The India Act of 1784 brought the affairs of India under the supervision of British parliament, and from that time onwards Indians were privileged to enjoy equality spurning the dominance of Brahmins based on the oppressive code of Sanatana dharma (apartheid).

WAS THERE DEMOCRACY IN ANCIENT INDIA?
The so-called Republics in ancient India were not democratic governments. Even the word ???Republic??? was coined by William Jones in his eagerness to identify the Aryans with the European race. As Nehru says that "his democracy was more or less confined to the Aryans themselves. Their slaves, or those whom they placed in low castes, had no democracy or freedom." The sabha and samiti were a council of the ruling class to make decisions how to enforce caste regulations on the Shudras and other lower castes. It was like the military junta of Myanmar where they made severe caste rules. The word 'Republic' itself is a misnomer, for the head of the samiti was a king, raja or rajan. These samitis and sabhas were mere folk assemblies that we see in all ancient civilizations. Even today such assemblies exist among tribes, where the proceedings are conducted by the tribal chieftain, as rajan conducted the proceedings in the samiti. The word 'proceedings' should not be identified with the proceedings of a modern assembly.'Proceedings' in those days were orders given by a strong tribal chief to his subordinates to carry out his orders. There was no discipline or order. It was almost like a gathering of muscle-flexing rowdies to force the subjugated people to obey their cruel orders.The moral code in such assemblies was 'might is right' and the mighty controlled the affairs of the State. Sabha and Samiti were exclusively reserved for Brahmins and the common people had no voice. Arrogant Brahmins assisted by armed kshatriyas controlled the affairs of the state. Non-Brahmins and other castes who formed the majority were treated as laborers and slaves. Even kings were selected and controlled by crafty Brahmins who were supported by able-bodied rowdy Brahmins and assisted by armed bands of Kshatriyas. Crafty Brahmin Chanakya plotted to destroy the Nandas and with rowdy Brahmins and assisted by Kshatriya armed gang he overthrew the Nanda dynasty and placed Chandragupta on the throne. It is foolish to say that there was self government in India. In those days of oppressive Brahmin tyranny, when 89% of Indians were branded as lower castes, and below the lower castes there were untouchables and unseeables who were segregated and forced to live in far-off areas to avoid touch and sight pollution, how could there be self government in ancient India? Only after the coming of the British, Indians were for the first time tasted the sweetness of self government in India. In 1833 Macaulay introduced English education which led to Indians getting European knowledge and European institutions. The India Act of 1784 brought the affairs of India under the supervision of British parliament, and from that time onwards Indians were privileged to enjoy equality spurning the dominance of Brahmins based on the oppressive code of Sanatana dharma (apartheid).

i went to mass this past sunday evening, actually i was dragged there somewhat against my will by my dad...i only half-heartedly wanted to go, but didnt want to say no to my dad's invitation...in the last few years i have been swayed by the belief that one can do it all on one's own, just by reading the Bible or praying in ones own manner, no need of any intermediaries, externals, whatever...no doubt studying the Bible and praying are good things, and should be done...anyways, i went there with my dad and after sitting down in the pew, in a pew which was way too close for my comfort, i felt that like i have the several times ive been to mass in the last few months: that i dont really belong in church, not b/c i dont need to go, but b/c a sinner like me shouldnt be in the company of people that do not think the thoughts i do or do the things i do...well, an acute feeling of discomfort plagued me and i could hardly look anyone in the eye, afraid they might see my scornful or ugly glance, so i just buried my head in the missal...i cannot account for what happened afterwards...i cannot account for the fact that sometime during the mass my evil glance of darting arrows at the priest softened enough that i could look at him while he spoke...i cannot account for the fact that all the disgusting rot which was inside me, all the noxious poison, and the sickening, nauseating feeling of being a cracked egg shell inside...began to subside...i dont know how it happened, i dont know how it was taken away, i will leave this all up to God and the mystery of grace...i dont know how He managed to wipe the frown that i was wearing both inside and outside off of me...all i know is that He did...and now there is no way for me to deny that grace exists, and if grace exists, then Jesus Christ must too, and everything that is said about Him is true... only me being the most shameless Judas would deny it now...i have felt this action of grace before, but something about what He did for me this past sunday, on all saints day, told me how ungrateful i have been to Him and how many times He has reached out for me when i was heading towards certain destruction...

...all i could say when i got home after having dinner with my dad, a dinner which was unusual b/c we actually had a decent conversation, is "thank you" to Him...i couldnt stop saying "thank you"....if i could buy the feeling He gave me and sell it to others i would, i know id be rich, if i would just give it to others, i know id be rich too, b/c they would give me everything for it....all i know is that i said i want to do whatever i can to keep this feeling...ive never ever thought i would want to go to mass on a daily basis, but i am seriously contemplating doing such a thing, though the priests will probably say im crazy and need to get a real job...i took a picture of Jesus from beside my bed, the famous one that warner sallman painted, and i could not stop looking at how beautiful Jesus is, how much of a man He is, how strong, how calm, how intelligent, how determined, how perfect He is...and it occured to me that for those who might see too strong a man in this portrait, there are others which portray his meekness...all i wanted to say here is that God gave me His grace...and i dont want to lose it...and i want to try and do everything i can to ramify that grace within myself from now on and be able to share it with others..

pt. 2 of 3.

...the devil came into my life ten years ago and ripped my psyche into two, thank God that Jesus never left my side and as the closer i got towards death, the more He made Himself available to me through His word and through others, esp. through His Word which i was practically deaf to before, and through the sacrifice of the mass..."where sin aboundeth, grace aboundeth all the more"...i pray for all those whom the devil is now attacking and whose lives He has gained entrance to and through whom hIs voice of rebellion and contempt for christianity is speaking through...i have been there, i know what that voice sounds like...i cannot participate in these forums anymore, b/c to watch all the hurtful comments that people say about Christ or just towards each other, it makes my heart feel like its being scourged and begins to depress my heart and mind again...this became painfully clear as i watched all the comments after Jerry Adler's article in newsweek about dinesh d'souza's new book...i think the pleasure of debate in these forums is (at least for me now) a gulity pleasure...i need to obey God more and to make sure i know what Hes calling me to do with my life, if it leads me back to arguing for Him, then great, b/c there does seem to be a great need for a very clear-minded, sharply intelligent, and strong defender of the faith against all the stuff that people are putting out there today...but first i must make sure that He indwells fully within me...and i must make sure that i am speaking with His love and in His name too...i read last night that knoweldge is not the highest goal for human beings, but love, and after experiencing what His grace felt like, i cannot help but agree with that...i will always love to learn and discuss what i know with others, but i do not want to betray the Law of Love...the temptation towards a fierce anger is too great for me when im in these forums, and i feel the anger (though righteous sometimes) is perhaps destroying other graces within me, which in turn is preventing me from sharing His grace with others
pt. 3

conclusion:
...thank you everyone for what youve said which has helped my understanding of God, i wont be responding anymore, forgive me if ive hurt anyone's feelings or misled them...im sure ive said many stupid things mixed in with a few wise comments...and if the devil is listening and no doubt he has his army of angels too, i just want to say that i know how jealous you are of Jesus and i know that you are raging b/c you know that the day will be coming soon when st. michael's sword will be upon you...i let you come into my life out of ignorance, letting you tempt me with all the things that i thought i wanted, but which ended up killing me inside the more i succumbed to them...Jesus Christ is great, b/c He can erase all the work youve done over the years in an instant with His grace...Jesus Christ conquers you, death...all of those who want to live again, please pray to Jesus...please get out of the devil's clutches, you know that you are in them if you feel sick and hijacked inside and are unable to relate anymore towards those around you...He is a liar, and makes you lie to yourself about who you are and what you want and need...May God bless you and everyone and keep you safe...

descretion - blogs need a spell checker

where is the proof for Ram?
Have we found siva dancing in mount Kailas?

"With us, doctrine has nothing whatever to do with salvation. Each one may believe in whatever doctrine he likes or in no doctrine"
What is Hindu "Dharma" anyway? can you define it? Don't switch over to Budhist and Jainist stand, stay in your Vedic Brahminic realm. I want specific answer, not some BS like "it is the eternal rule" etc, but need to know what is the rule?

GIRLS TO EXPOSE THEIR BREASTS
. Nadars were originally a ruling caste, descendants of the Pandyan royal family. They were brave, intelligent and industrious. But, unfortunately, when the fierce Brahmins invaded South India in the eighth century, Nadars were defeated by a cunning strategy with the help of Kshatriya fighters brought from Rajasthan. Nadars were outnumbered by these marauding Brahmins and Kshatriyas and Nadars had to surrender and were made prisoners of war. Nadars were forced to do menial work. As a form of punishment, Nadars were forced to climb palmyra trees to get toddy and jaggery for Brahmins. The law was extremely cruel toward Nadars . Nadars were subject to death penalty for offenses like refusal to climb Palmyra trees, entering public places, wearing ornaments using slippers and wearing dress. Capital punishment took the forms of being trampled to death under an elephant, being blown from the mouth of cannon, by hanging which lasted three days (citravadham) and by mutilation. Accordingly, Nadars were not allowed to wear fine clothes, live in tiled houses, use metal utensils, wear gold or silver ornaments, wear slippers, use umbrellas and use tanks and wells. Nadars were declared outcastes by the ruling Brahmin clique, and all public roads, lanes and village markets were forbidden, and any Nadar polluting these places or not standing 32 feet from a Brahmin (unapproachability) would be cut to pieces immediately. But the most horrible atrocity of the Brahmins was to force young girls and women not to cover their breasts. , Nadar women had to go half naked, exposing their breasts. Just imagine teenage girls going topless, to satisfy the sadistic- sex mania of Brahmins.
When missionaries came to India, they were horrified to see the sufferings and agony of Nadar caste. Schools and colleges were opened. Young Nadar girls were asked to cover their naked breasts by giving them jackets and blouses. . This aroused the fury of higher castes. Whenever they saw Nadar women wearing jackets to cover their breasts, higher caste rowdies would tear the jackets in public places. This led to a violent agitation. Many Nadar houses were burnt and thousands were murdered in cold blood. Government of the Maharajah and Police supported the higher castes. Nadars became helpless and hundreds of those who protected their wives and daughters from the assaults of higher caste rowdies were beaten and arrested. Missionaries appealed to British Government. They sent a clay model of a Nadar girl exposing her breasts without a jacket to the ruling Queen Victoria, England. She was shocked. She at once issued orders from London to the British government in India to allow Nadar women to wear jackets to cover their breasts. So by a Royal proclamation of July 26, 1859 Nadar women (both Hindus and Christians) were given full freedom to wear blouses and jackets.

Thank you mythoughts123. I'm glad we had a free and frank dsicussion. I appreciate your novel ideas. Thank you.
Bye.

GIRLS TO EXPOSE THEIR BREASTS
. Nadars were originally a ruling caste, descendants of the Pandyan royal family. They were brave, intelligent and industrious. But, unfortunately, when the fierce Brahmins invaded South India in the eighth century, Nadars were defeated by a cunning strategy with the help of Kshatriya fighters brought from Rajasthan. Nadars were outnumbered by these marauding Brahmins and Kshatriyas and Nadars had to surrender and were made prisoners of war. Nadars were forced to do menial work. As a form of punishment, Nadars were forced to climb palmyra trees to get toddy and jaggery for Brahmins. The law was extremely cruel toward Nadars . Nadars were subject to death penalty for offenses like refusal to climb Palmyra trees, entering public places, wearing ornaments using slippers and wearing dress. Capital punishment took the forms of being trampled to death under an elephant, being blown from the mouth of cannon, by hanging which lasted three days (citravadham) and by mutilation. Accordingly, Nadars were not allowed to wear fine clothes, live in tiled houses, use metal utensils, wear gold or silver ornaments, wear slippers, use umbrellas and use tanks and wells. Nadars were declared outcastes by the ruling Brahmin clique, and all public roads, lanes and village markets were forbidden, and any Nadar polluting these places or not standing 32 feet from a Brahmin (unapproachability) would be cut to pieces immediately. But the most horrible atrocity of the Brahmins was to force young girls and women not to cover their breasts. , Nadar women had to go half naked, exposing their breasts. Just imagine teenage girls going topless, to satisfy the sadistic- sex mania of Brahmins.
When missionaries came to India, they were horrified to see the sufferings and agony of Nadar caste. Schools and colleges were opened. Young Nadar girls were asked to cover their naked breasts by giving them jackets and blouses. . This aroused the fury of higher castes. Whenever they saw Nadar women wearing jackets to cover their breasts, higher caste rowdies would tear the jackets in public places. This led to a violent agitation. Many Nadar houses were burnt and thousands were murdered in cold blood. Government of the Maharajah and Police supported the higher castes. Nadars became helpless and hundreds of those who protected their wives and daughters from the assaults of higher caste rowdies were beaten and arrested. Missionaries appealed to British Government. They sent a clay model of a Nadar girl exposing her breasts without a jacket to the ruling Queen Victoria, England. She was shocked. She at once issued orders from London to the British government in India to allow Nadar women to wear jackets to cover their breasts. So by a Royal proclamation of July 26, 1859 Nadar women (both Hindus and Christians) were given full freedom to wear blouses and jackets.