godmen like Jesus

[scorpius]

is it possible that xians borrowed the idea for their Savior Jesus from other mythologies which existed long before xianity?
this one in particular seems suspiciously simmilar
from
http://www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/godmen.html

Krishna of India

The similarities between the Christian character and the Indian messiah Krishna number in the hundreds, particularly when the early Christian texts now considered apocrypha are factored in. It should be noted that a common earlier English spelling of Krishna was “Christna,” which reveals its relation to “Christ.” Also, in Bengali, Krishna is reputedly “Christos,” which is the same as the Greek for “Christ” and which the soldiers of Alexander the Great called Krishna. It should be further noted that, as with Jesus, Buddha and Osiris, many people have believed and continue to believe in a historical Krishna. The following is a partial list of the correspondences between Jesus and Krishna:
--Krishna was born of the Virgin Devaki (“Divine One”) on December 25.
--His earthly father was a carpenter, who was off in the city paying tax while Krishna was born.
--His birth was signaled by a star in the east and attended by angels and shepherds, at which time he was presented with spices.
--The heavenly hosts danced and sang at his birth.
--He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
--Krishna was anointed on the head with oil by a woman whom he healed.
--He is depicted as having his foot on the head of a serpent.
--He worked miracles and wonders, raising the dead and healing lepers, the deaf and the blind.
--Krishna used parables to teach the people about charity and love, and he “lived poor and he loved the poor.”
--He castigated the clergy, charging them with “ambition and hypocrisy . . . Tradition says he fell victim to their vengeance.”
--Krishna’s “beloved disciple” was Arjuina or Ar-jouan (Jouhn).
--He was transfigured in front of his disciples.
--He gave his disciples the ability to work miracles.
--His path was “strewn with branches.”
--In some traditions he died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves.
--Krishna was killed around the age of 30, and the sun darkened at his death.
--He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven “in the sight of all men.”
--He was depicted on a cross with nail-holes in his feet, as well as having a heart emblem on his clothing.
--Krishna is the “lion of the tribe of Saki.”
--He was called the “Shepherd of God” and considered the “Redeemer,” “Firstborn,” “Sin-Bearer,” “Liberator,” “Universal Word.”
--He was deemed the “Son of God” and “our Lord and Savior,” who came to earth to die for man’s salvation.
--He was the second person of the Trinity.
--His disciples purportedly bestowed upon him the title “Jezeus,” or “Jeseus,” meaning “pure essence.”
--Krishna is to return to judge the dead, riding on a white horse, and to do battle with the “Prince of Evil,” who will desolate the earth.

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

[VitalOne]

No its not possible, the site is false atheistic propaganda, Krishna is never known to be born of a virgin, the similarities are cherry-picked and inaccurate

Although Jesus and Krishna say very similar things, they were clearly physically different people, though the truth is the same

[spidergoat]

The similarity is due to the spiritual advancement which some people manifest. Most of the signs you mention are irrelevent, except for the teaching and healing, and being said to transcend death.

[Exhumed]

I've always heard Arjuna pronounced like R-June-ah, so I doubt the John connection.

--He was deemed the “Son of God” and “our Lord and Savior,” who came to earth to die for man’s salvation.

I'm not sure if he was ever called the "son" of god. He was an incarnation of Vishnu, though that is similar to Jesus as well. I also don't think he came to die for man's salvation. I think he came to preserve dharma and he was willing to let a lot of men die for it. Not at all like I understand Jesus sacrificing himself so that other men are washed free of sins or whatever.

--He was the second person of the Trinity.

A different type of trinity, and not really part of it (Vishnu is, not Krishna).

[lightgigantic]

is it possible that xians borrowed the idea for their Savior Jesus from other mythologies which existed long before xianity?
this one in particular seems suspiciously simmilar
from
http://www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/godmen.html
there is a

Krishna of India

The similarities between the Christian character and the Indian messiah Krishna number in the hundreds, particularly when the early Christian texts now considered apocrypha are factored in. It should be noted that a common earlier English spelling of Krishna was “Christna,” which reveals its relation to “Christ.” Also, in Bengali, Krishna is reputedly “Christos,” which is the same as the Greek for “Christ” and which the soldiers of Alexander the Great called Krishna. It should be further noted that, as with Jesus, Buddha and Osiris, many people have believed and continue to believe in a historical Krishna. The following is a partial list of the correspondences between Jesus and Krishna:

--His earthly father was a carpenter, who was off in the city paying tax while Krishna was born.
I don't know where the author pulled this from
Krishna's father was a king (Vasudeva)
Krishna step father was a merchant ruler (Nanda)

--His birth was signaled by a star in the east and attended by angels and shepherds, at which time he was presented with spices.
according to vedic astrology, everyone is born according to certain arrangements of stars and planets - and according to vedic custom, any child born, particularly if they belong to affluent parents, is presented with an arrangement of "spices" (if that's what you want to call it) - and since there are numerous incidents of great personalities being born in vedic literature, its not uncommon for there to be descriptions of gandharvas and apsaras (residents from the lower heavenly systems) to be present

--The heavenly hosts danced and sang at his birth.
well, thats what gandharvas and apsaras are famous for

--He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
--Krishna was anointed on the head with oil by a woman whom he healed.
actually she offered krsna sandalwood pulp - once again, its a common vedic custom - even today you can get anointed with sandalwood pulp simply for walking through the doors of a temple, holding a public discourse on scripture, attending a marriage, etc etc

--He is depicted as having his foot on the head of a serpent.
somehow I don't think jesus is attributed with dancing on the hoods of kaliya

--He worked miracles and wonders, raising the dead and healing lepers, the deaf and the blind.
once again, krsna is not unique in such regards
actually these are minor mystic perfections and have even been performed by great atheists in vedic history - IOW they bear no direct correlation to actual religious principles

--Krishna used parables to teach the people about charity and love, and he “lived poor and he loved the poor.”
Once again, I don't know where the author gets his reference material from - BG 11.53 The form you are seeing with your transcendental eyes cannot be understood simply by studying the Vedas, nor by undergoing serious penances, nor by charity, nor by worship. It is not by these means that one can see Me as I am.


--He castigated the clergy, charging them with “ambition and hypocrisy . . . Tradition says he fell victim to their vengeance.”
I can't see how this is related to Krishna
"My Lord (Krishna), You are the well-wisher of the cows and the brahmanas (priests), and You are the well-wisher of the entire human society and world." (Visnu Puräna 1.19.65)

--Krishna’s “beloved disciple” was Arjuina or Ar-jouan (Jouhn).
Ar-Joo-Na
Jon
:confused:


--He was transfigured in front of his disciples.
more strange suggestions from god knows where
????

--He gave his disciples the ability to work miracles.
Once again, even atheists had gurus in vedic custom and even they got a few mystic capabilties

--His path was “strewn with branches.”
I got no idea what this is supposed to mean, much less how it applies to Krsna

--In some traditions he died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves.
erm
references please


--Krishna was killed around the age of 30, and the sun darkened at his death.
Krsna left his manifest pastimes when he was 120 years old and never appeared older than a 16 year old youth

--He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven “in the sight of all men.”
Krsna's departure is elaborately detailed in http://vedabase.net/sb/11/31/en

and if you ever find the author of this article, you might want to direct them to http://www.krsnabook.com/contents/ to clear up a few issues

--He was depicted on a cross with nail-holes in his feet, as well as having a heart emblem on his clothing.
another strange suggestion

--Krishna is the “lion of the tribe of Saki.”
the metaphor "lion" is used quite often
in one instance krishna is called simha nara loka (lion amongst men)
other persons are also called lions in similar metaphorical ways
as for the tribe of Saki, I've never heard of it - perhaps the author got muddled up with the Yadu dynasty

--He was called the “Shepherd of God” and considered the “Redeemer,” “Firstborn,” “Sin-Bearer,” “Liberator,” “Universal Word.”
Krishna has thousands of names - "Shepherd of God" is not one of them however

--He was deemed the “Son of God” and “our Lord and Savior,” who came to earth to die for man’s salvation.
He was not deemed as the son of God - he was deemed as an incarnation of God, or more specifically god himself
In the vedas there is a distinction between visaya bhagavan (god coming down to exhibit his potencies of ownership of the universe) and asraya bhagavan (god's representative coming down, who displays the path of surrender to god) - Krishna clearly belongs to the former - jesus clearly belongs to the latter

--He was the second person of the Trinity.
Krishna is accepted as the cause of all causes by Brahma and Siva (the other two parts of the "trinity") - and even then that is a trinity for the creation, maintenance and destruction of the phenomenal world, and doesn't seem to bear much of a relationship to the holy ghost, etc (the holy ghost etc does bear a relationship with the paramatma expansions of Narayana however)

--His disciples purportedly bestowed upon him the title “Jezeus,” or “Jeseus,” meaning “pure essence.”
How that bears a connection to Krsna is not clear

--Krishna is to return to judge the dead, riding on a white horse, and to do battle with the “Prince of Evil,” who will desolate the earth.
actually Kalki is a plenary expansion of narayana - and even then it is a lila avatar (IOW Kalki appears at the end of every kali yuga) - and not to desolate the earth but to re-establish the new cycle (satya yuga) in which we eventually wind down again into Kali yuga some millions of years later, which brings kalki in for another incarnation to establish satya yuga etc etc

In short - jesus and Krishna are distinct

[Medicine*Woman]

No its not possible, the site is false atheistic propaganda, Krishna is never known to be born of a virgin, the similarities are cherry-picked and inaccurate

Although Jesus and Krishna say very similar things, they were clearly physically different people, though the truth is the same
*************
M*W: I don't know where you get your information on Krishna, but you are wrong. See as follows:

"Crishna was born of oa chaste virgin, called Devaki, who, on account of her purity, was selected to become the "mother of God."

~ Doane, Bible Myths and Their Parallels in Other Religions (1882), Health Research, WA, 1985.

According to Acharya S., "A recurring theme in ancient religion revolves around the manner of the sun god's birth, as well as the chastity of his mother."

Acharya S. goes on to say: "As demonstrated, much of the world had its virgin births of gods and heroes; thus, discovering the motif in India--that ancient and vast repository of knowledge and religious concepts of all sorts--is not terribly surprising. Indeed, we have already addressed it in the discussing regarding the Indian sun god's brth, in which his mother, the dawn, was considered inviolable and chaste. Further evidence of this contention can be found in the epithet of Indian gods, ayonija, as related by Dr. Thomas Inman in Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism, Book Tree, CA, 2002. Dr. Inman states... "Under the word Ayonija (vagina) appear the following examples of individuals "not born from the yoni," viz..." Draupadi, who at a sacrifice of her father Drupada, arose out of the sacrifician ground." "Sita," who sprange into existence in the same manner as Draupadi. The same Ayonija is also an epithet of Vishnu or Krishna (as having not been born through the vagina).

The term Ayonija implies that Krishna was "born of a virgin."

~ Acharya S., Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled, Adventures Unlimited Press, 2004.

Interestingly, Krishna's birthday is also celebrated on December 25th.

M*W's Friendly Atheist Fact for the Day:

"Millions long for immortality who don't know what to dowith themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon." ~ Susan Ertz

[Wisdom_Seeker]

It annoys me when someone makes up stuff for their personal agenda, or to prove a stupid point. To tell lies is not helping anyone.
Krishna´s "born of a virgin" story is made up, and specially for the purpose of discrediting Jesus birth.
First off, Krishna was born in July, and he was born to the princess Devaki, and her husband Vasudeva. Man and wife, not virgin birth, there was more action included (prison sex).

http://www.sanatan.org/en/campaigns/KJ/birth.htm
http://www.vedanta-atlanta.org/stories/Krishna2.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna
http://www.experiencefestival.com/krishna_-_birth_and_childhood

But to give some credit to the story, Krishna was considered a deity, and still is by many Eastern traditions.

And he had many girlfriends, and he used to sing and dance very often; I don´t think Christians would be very happy to "approve" a deity that was singing and dacing with his girlfriends while Jesus was being tortured on the cross.

[SnakeLord]

Well, if they have nothing else in common.. they're still both fictional beings.

[lightgigantic]

Well, if they have nothing else in common.. they're still both fictional beings.
get back to us when you have a premise for your opinions

- thanks in advance

[audible]

scorpius: this was posted up some time ago, it also tried to get your point across, http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=40933

Nearly all religions be they old and new have a mythical godhead, each with some or all the traits of jesus, some at least 4000 years earlier then jesus, the stories of jesus are just fictional accounts handed down, from person to person over eons. Since man first stood up, he has been looking for ways to explain his surrounding, the mythology of religion was one of the first ways, now man has grown he can see the universe a little better and is now putting aside these childish beliefs, for the more rational.

[Grantywanty]

scorpius: this was posted up some time ago, it also tried to get your point across, http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=40933

Nearly all religions be they old and new have a mythical godhead...

REally. Do you think Joseph Smith never existed? How about Rumi?

[audible]

REally. Do you think Joseph Smith never existed? How about Rumi?
jesus is the godhead for the book of mormon, not j smith, the godhead is something like vishnu or zeus, mithra, not the prophets, not the buddhas, twit.
Godhead: the diety, a diety.

[Grantywanty]

jesus is the godhead for the book of mormon, not j smith, the godhead is something like vishnu or zeus, mithra, not the prophets, not the buddhas, twit.
Godhead: the diety, a diety.

Well, since for no reason you called me a twit, I'll point out that you misspelled deity, twice.

Most historians accept that there was a historical Jesus and even that he was crucified. From there it gets controversial.

Nearly all religions be they old and new have a mythical godhead, each with some or all the traits of jesus,

If you take a look at the above quote you will see that you are responsible for the confusion. Islam for example has a god that either really isn't like Jesus at all - did not walk around teaching people, or having a body, etc. - or you somehow were referring to Muhammed who does share some traits with Jesus, but is also considered to have existed by most historians. You get what I mean here. Don't blame me for the sloppiness of your own writing. Perhaps you meant 'fictional accounts' to only be aimed at Gods, but it sure sounded like you were referring to profets also.

Further profets tend to become dieties. Religions have appeared where we know there was a person who got it going. I see no reason to assume religions, like say Buddhism, are not based at least indirectly on the ideas of a historical person. Muhammed is also accepted as being

None of this proves any of the religions, obviously. But to assume that the stories are only fiction is naive.

I will not read your response, I expect more bile and sloppy thinking.

[SnakeLord]

get back to us when you have a premise for your opinions


Umm.. lol ok.. :bugeye:

Most historians accept that there was a historical Jesus and even that he was crucified.

What "most historians" are those?

[audible]

Well, since for no reason you called me a twit, I'll point out that you misspelled deity, twice.

Most historians accept that there was a historical Jesus and even that he was crucified. From there it gets controversial.by most you mean next to none, there is no historicity for a jesus.
these all show the myth of jesus, it been done to death.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=52294
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=64654
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=44410

If you take a look at the above quote you will see that you are responsible for the confusion. Islam for example has a god that either really isn't like Jesus at all - did not walk around teaching people, or having a body, etc. - or you somehow were referring to Muhammed who does share some traits with Jesus, but is also considered to have existed by most historians. You get what I mean here. no you still seem to remain a twit. according to christians jesus is God, but I dont think muhammed is allah. Don't blame me for the sloppiness of your own writing. Perhaps you meant 'fictional accounts' to only be aimed at Gods, but it sure sounded like you were referring to profets also. twit, using the word godhead refers to gods, so obviously it's you own ignorance that caused the confusion for you. and there prophets, not profets, mine was a typo, was yours.
Further profets tend to become dieties. thats prophets again, not profets, and do they where.

[lightgigantic]

Umm.. lol ok.. :bugeye:


that's your premise?
:shrug:

[Why?]

Is it so hard to believe that Jesus lived?

[shichimenshyo]

Is it so hard to believe that Jesus lived?

Is it so hard not to?

[lightgigantic]

Is it so hard not to?

yes

taking an affirmative stance about the non-existence of something requires more ground work

[shichimenshyo]

yes

taking an affirmative stance about the non-existence of something requires more ground work

Why is that so? If there is no definitive proof either way?

[geeser]

Is it so hard to believe that Jesus lived?not at all, your imagination can conjour anything you wish, I believe that giant giraffe like creatures live on the dark side moon.

[SnakeLord]

that's your premise?


No, that was me politely shrugging you off because I don't have time for you.

[lightgigantic]

No, that was me politely shrugging you off because I don't have time for you.
good luck in finding more suitable persons who are willing to overlook your lack of premises
:D

perhaps you should only try engaging in intelligent discussion with people who agree with you
;)

[lightgigantic]

Why is that so? If there is no definitive proof either way?
if you are arguing that there is no definitive proof you are not arguing that jesus never existed

[lightgigantic]

not at all, your imagination can conjour anything you wish, I believe that giant giraffe like creatures live on the dark side moon.
using this logic ("some people get things wrong therefore you are getting this wrong") provides for a very strange world view since there are examples of people getting practically anything wrong ...

[MZ3Boy84]

Attention all Christians:

Please do your research before posting.

A VAST majority of Christian traditions and beliefs were taken from many polytheistic beliefs. Thats right!!! Your religion is the brainchild of the pagan religions that worshiped planets and eight armed gods.