being a main stream christian and a main stream wikipedian i say that might be true and thus the text in the article should always stress according to the myth christianity is among other things about symbolology so the aforementioned general criticism shouldn't be regarded as a disclaimer against the validity of indian christendom just as a criticism against the bad habit of confusing historical facts with mythological stories indicating the spiritual heritage and spiritual orientation of indian christianity that should be regarded as a declaration of intent much more than a history lesson imho said bork