[Reader-list] What Was Written in "Satyadarshini" Pamphlet

[A Jay]

Dear Chanchal,


I would like to address certain claims you have so confidently asserted
regarding Christianity's debt to Hinduism.  I am sure that the rest of the
members on this list are fully aware of the utterly nonsensical nature of
your claims.  However, I shudder to think that you may be spreading this
misinformation elsewhere.  I am, therefore, providing you with a few details
so that you may have a solid historical base from which to build any further
discussion on Christianity you may wish to engage in, on this list or
elsewhere.


I quote:

"Birth of Jesus is under doubt, as Dead Sea Scrolls have revealed existence
of old testament much before Jesus."

The Old Testament is in not related to the life of Jesus.  It is one of the
holy books of the Jewish faith, and was regarded as such long before the
birth of Jesus of Nazareth, whatever or whomever you may understand said
person to be.  Christianity grew out of Judaism; the Old Testament has,
therefore, remained a part of the Christian cannon as well.  However, the
scripture particular to Christians and connected with Jesus Christ is the
New Testament.


"The time mentioned for Jesus birth actually takes him in B.C."

Yes.  This is a widely recognized historical technicality.  Anno Domini
(literally 'the year of our lord'), from which we derive the signifier A.D.,
was developed as a dating system in the year 525 by a monk who began this
system at what he called Jesus' 'Incarnation,' rather than at his birth.
The available historical evidence does not allow for the determination of
the exact date of Jesus' birth, but it is generally understood to be several
years B.C.


"...the Kul Devta of Greece even today is 'Isus Chrisn' and not Jesus
Christ."

Perhaps you should check the Greek spelling and pronunciation of the name
'Jesus Christ.'  English speakers tend to impose their own strange
pronunciations on foreign names, and 'Jesus Christ' is just one more example
of this phenomenon.


"What is meant by X-Mas... no body knows."

Have you asked anybody?  Or have you simply taken it on faith that your
esteemed Oak sahib has undertaken a thorough survey of the world's
English-speaking population regarding the matter of 'Xmas'?  In fact, ' "Xmas"
and "X-mas" are common abbreviations of the word "Christmas". They are
sometimes pronounced "eksmas," but they, and variants such as "Xtemass,"
originated as handwriting abbreviations for the pronunciation "Christmas."
The "-mas" part came from the Latin-derived Old English word for "mass".'

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmas)


"'Mas' means month"

Not when it is derived from the Old English for 'mass' (see above), which in
turn is derived from 'the late-Latin word *missa* (dismissal), a word used
in the concluding formula of Mass in Latin: *"**Ite, missa est**"* ("Go; it
is the dismissal").'

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_mass)


"Oct is Eight (but October is 10th month), Nav is 9 (but November is 11th
month), Dec or Dus is 10th month (but December is 12th month)"

The reason for this apparent discrepancy is the retention of month names
from the previously used lunar calendar after the introduction of the
Gregorian calendar in 1582.  Because the Hindu calendar is also a lunar
calendar, the tenth month of both calendar systems (Hindu and pre-Gregorian
European) will, naturally, overlap.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar)


"Further.. what is meant by 'Isus' .. no one knows.. it is derived from
Hindi word Ishwar... and Christ is reformed shape of Chrisn."

Actually, someone does know.  'Isus' is the Greek word from which we derive
the English 'Jesus,' and which itself is derived from the Hebrew 'Yeshua,'
which means 'YHWH rescues.'  YHWH is the name of God in the Judeo-Christian
tradition.

'Christ' derives from the Greek 'christos,' meaning 'anointed one'-- a title
bestowed upon Jesus of Nazareth by his followers.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_christ)


If you have a legitimate critique of some practice, by all means, express
it-- but please be careful with your historical claims.  Your unfounded and
entirely illogical diatribe against Gregorian nomenclatural idiosyncrasies
and Greek names does nothing but propagate the kind of willful
misinterpretation that makes for unfruitful discussion.


Best,

AJ