is jesus actually hindu god "LORD KRISHNA"?

Is jesus.. lord krishna?

Is "jesus" another name of "lord krishna"

it looks those who are worshipping jesus are actually worshipping hindu god:lord krishna".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

1)jesus and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.
2)Both was sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man.
3)Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.
4)for both adoptive human father was a carpenter.
5)A spirit or ghost was their actual father.
6)Krishna and Jesus were of royal descent.
7)Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star.
8)Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna's parents stayed in Mathura.
9) Both claimed: "I am the Resurrection."
10)Both referred to themselves having existed before their birth on earth.
11)Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine.
12)They were both considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.
13)Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole. Each cured "all manner of diseases."
14)Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead.
15)Both selected disciples to spread his teachings.
16)Both were meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners.
17)Both encountered a Gentile woman at a well.
18)Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies.
19)Both descended into Hell, and were resurrected. Many people witnessed their ascensions into heaven.
20)Jesus' and Krishna's mothers had similar names: Miriam (Mary) and Maia
21)Jesus' and Krishna's mothers were holy virgins.

All these points of there life history force us to believe that jesus is actually another name given to hindu god krishna....and our JESUS is actually hindu LORD KRISHNA.
and maybe bible was actually copied from hindu holly books with some changes because of large time gap between krishna (3000 B.C.) and date when bible was written.

EVEN THERE NAMES ARE SO SIMILAR......CHRIS..T AND CHRIS...NA

so it means we all are "hindus"?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Interesting post and welcome. As to the conclusion I think it means we are all "humans" and religion has it's roots in prehistoric mythology. :m:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

thanks path.....we all are humans.....
after studying "hinduism" deeply now i am forced to believe that all religions have emerged from "hinduism" but it is still same and original....thats why it has an impression of most spritual way of life on earth.....what u think?? is jesus actually lord krishna?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hi RS nice to make your acquintance. I have seen this list too on religious tolerance.org

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr1.htm

The orignianl researcher they give the credit too was a Quaker in America named Kersey Graves who died in 1883. (religioustolerance.org).

The site also points out similarities between JC and

Another close comparision commonly done with Christ is Mithaism which is even older. I found this site that talks about some of those similarites

http://www.vetssweatshop.net/dogma.htm

The trangression from Hinduism to the Islamic religion which is much newer than Christianty is the trangression from polythiesm to monothiesm with Christanity inbetween as it has the trinity or belief in one-in-three God of God, Son and Holy spirt.

Vedism is the religiously accepted predicator of the Hindu religion brought about by invadors

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hinduism2.htm

and

http://www.usao.edu/~usao-ids3313/ids/html/vedism.html

There is an undeniable link between the two as you pointed out in your original post but the real question is how much of Jesus life was fabricated, or mis-intrepreted and how much is true.

I have read other theories that Jesus was a mason (not divine but a man) (knight and Lomas, "The Hiram Key"), that he was a space alien (sorry forgot source) and the Islamic religion sees him as a profit. Really with all these conflicting stories we don't know who the fella was...or maybe Medicine Woman does...Without first determining what is true and untrue about Jesus it would be hard to move forward and say he was without a doubt Krishna. For a man who lived 2000 years ago that is going to be really next to impossible.

The more important lesson of linking religions as that we are all brothers and sisters on this earth and to kill harm and hate one another over small details after seeing all the similarities of the various religions is the greatest tragedy and irony of the modern era.

 

Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is a complete mix of other religious belief due to the many wars that went on in that region in those days. People from all over at one time had a piece of the Middle East in those days. With various cultures moving in and out of the area from those wars, obviously religious beliefs would be integrated as well. Judaism is a combination of Canaanite religion and also the Yahweh religion which the Hebrews learned from the Midianites. And then the Midianites are remnants from the Hyksos who at one time controlled Egypt while the Canaanites are a combination of various Semetic tribes who at one time conquered the Babylons so there goes even more integrated belief which the Babylon got their beliefs from the Sumerians.

And that's not even taking into account the Hittites, Persians, barbarians, or other groups that owned much of the Middle East at one time nor where those people got their integrated religious beliefs from. Persians would have been influenced by Hinduism as they're next to each other and they came up with Zoroastrianism which has similar beliefs to them but it also has similar belief to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam which would have influenced some of those religions.

Everything is just a chain of integrated beliefs from various regions. The more recent a religion may be, the further from the truth it is since it's all jumbled up and integrates. The older a religion may be, the closer to the truth it gets as it's more pure and original, not integrated from other civilizations. You just have to trace who conquered who until you find those originators.

And by the way, yeah, Hinduism is my favorite religion to read about as well.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

- N

 

this...thread is moving in a right direction......"we are many , still one"....if jesus is krishna...then he is definately not a man..but god ...also....that will bring both "quran" and "bible" under one roof of "Hinduism"....and more shocking is that...hindus even today recognise christanity and islam as religions ....

its really very complex connections.....but definately if we want to unite all religions without loosing their identity...we can do it under an umbrella called "Hinduism"

 

Wouldn't this 'evidence' make you think that Ramakrishna was right when he said that all religions are different paths to the one god, rather than stating that all christians are actually hindus?

 

Don't ignore that stories of Krishna may have been created in light of Christianity. Where are the Hindu documents predating Christ that would lend credibility to these stories?

 

Hi Sharma,

I once had a Guru whose best devotee was named Sharma. Wonderful name.

Regarding your post, Krishna and Christ are not simple copies of each other. Krishna was not Crucified, and Christ didn't precide over a huge War that destroyed a Civilization.

But, yes, Christ and Krishna were both valid Avatars. The proof we have for that is that both the Cults of Krishna and of Christ have been productive of Genuine Supernatual Saints, which would be impossible without the actual sponsorship of a True Avatar.

One remarkable parallel between Christ and Krishna is the devotional aspect which worships the Avatar as Divine Infant. And what is more remarkable is that these separate Cults developed almost simultaneousnly, as though following a synchronicity decided by Heaven. We have Bhakti Devotions of Shri Chaitanya arising at the same time as Christendom showed Saints such as Anthony carrying the Infant Jesus and the Virgin Mary began to appear in Apparition carrying the Infant Jesus. We have devotion to the Infant de Prague, which, if it were Blue and wore a peacock feather, would be mistakeable for a Baby Krishna.

But there are other differences I can think of. Sharma, are you familiar with the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception? Catholic Doctrine is that Mary Mother of Christ was both Virgin and Perfect. She has assumed a Queenship over the Heavenly Angels and over the Earth. But I honestly can't remember the name of the Mother of Krishna. But Hinduism certainly does not lack its Goddesses.

But different temperaments require different devotions. The Infant Christ and the Infant Krishna appeal to those who have been opened to the susceptabilites of Parental Love for The Child. But the Love for the Divine Mother returns us each to that time in our lives when our love for our Mother must have been almost absolute.

 

18)Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies.

Krishna celebrating a last supper? I don't recall that at all.

 

Oh yeah, when did Krishna forgive His enemies.

I read the Mahabharatha. The Armies that stood against Krishna were completely annihilated. Even old friends and relatives that sided against Krishna were assigned the same Fate. It was Defeat, not Forgiveness.

Which reminds me. If you read the Bhagavad Gita which are the Teachings of Krishna -- they are primarily Stoic, that is, how to arrive at Peace of Mind and non-attachment. How to kill your enemies and not be worried by moral scruples... that kind of thing. The Teaching was basically LIFE IS A DIRTY JOB BUT SOMEBODY HAS TO DO IT. Not very uplifting.

The Teachings of Christ, on the otherhand, were a moral Revolution over Stoicism. Remember, Stoicism was rife in the Greco-Roman World. The Theologies of Paganism may have been Polytheistic, but the Moral Doctrines were Stoical -- they could have come directly out of the Bhagavad Gita. Christ's concern that Peace of Mind should be sacrificed to the demands of Giving and Caring was the Moral Innovation which made Higher Religion possible. It is the difference between being a Republican and being a Democrat. The one teaches the Rich and Powerful to accept and enjoy their success with no pangs of social guilt; while the other teaches a Higher Moral Collective Responsibility. This Moral Reform would come to the Sanskrit Tradition via Mahayana Buddhism which WAS influenced by Christian Apostolic Missionaries. However, Hinduism is still largely Stoical in outlook. The Caste System, which is still largely upheld, attests to that.

 

You got it reverse. The greatest hindu epic Ramayana, mostly moralistic, predates Buddhism itself ; and also the emergence of mahayana buddhism happened before Christ.

I find it tough to belive Christ & Krishna are the same though there were several resemblance in their legends. Krishna did not forgive. He reaffirmed the karma theory - reap what you sow; his divine grace would reduce the burden of sin but would not wipe out completely, etc.

 

There are historical documents about kings and emperors of india building temples for Krishna, with sculptures depicting his life events, centuries before Christ.

Very conservative estimates put Krishna-Mahabharata-Gita period several centuries before Christ.

 

lord krishna didnt forgave and jesus forgave......i think this is the main diff. out of all similarities has emerged...and even i support this.
but we also have to understand there was 3000years of gap between lord krishna and when bible was written....and this diff. can be accepted because of two reasons...1) gap of 3000 years and 2) transfer of knowledge from india to other places which bought these diff. inspite of huge similarities.

also , law of forgiveness is something , which is not practical and diff. to agree....it gives a sense of feeling that what ever sin we do....we will be forgived and hence there will be no punishment for us.
sometimes i hear from people...it doesnt matter we are doing these sins....jesus has already died for us...god will not punish us....it is really very illlogical and against law of nature....and only krishnas law of karma can give us logical answers at that time....or should i say jesus law of karma...these huge similarities between gods of two major religions ...cannt be ignored and can'nt be considered ..by chance.

after studying deeply life study of both lord krishna and jesus ...and seeing time gap of 3000 years between krishna and bible....it surely gives me a strong feeling that they are not two but one....

 

You would have to show that the stories, not Krishna, predate Christ. I'm aware that Hinduism has changed significantly in the last two-thousand years. What historical documents are you speaking of?

 

I read the Ramayana. What morals? We have the usual doctrines of Peace of Mind by adhering to ones Duty. We have obedience to Authority. We have some strange instructions regarding sexual morality. But there is no Moral Concern for the Collective... no Teachings on Charity.

Then there is how we date the Ramayana... and the Mahabharata. The Hindus love to claim great antiquity for all their Sanskrit Literatures. But take a look at the Archelogical Evidence. The Aryans -- the Speakers of Sanskrit -- are relative latecomers to the Indian Subcontinent. They were the Iron-Age invaders. The Old Indus Civilizations were still going strong at 1500B.C. and the Sanskrit Invaders, of which Rama was one of the Kings had not happened before 1200 B.C.

An interesting aside, the Aryans were so racist that when they came to the Indus Valley and discovered People with dark skin, they were called "Monkeys" and if you read the Ramayana today you will see that the Monkey Civilizations are described in rich detail. The India People who are thus described do not suspect the insult, and suppose that the Monkeys who could once walk and and talk and conduct political affairs had somehow just faded back into speechless aping in the Jungle. The 'Monkeys' are drawn as literal monkeys with hairy bodies and tails, and not as the Aryans saw truly saw them, as people of dark skin who were considered sub-human in order to give the Aryan Race an automatic Political Ascendency. In regards to the Hindu 'Chaste' System, the word 'chaste' can be translated as "colour".

So, anyway, both the Ramayana and Mahabaratha, which contains the Bhagavad Gita, could not possibly be as ancient as claimed, and they are seen largely as fictional Epic Legends. And, as I said, you can comb them up and down and not see the first hint of a Social Morality. That would come Post-Christ.

 

Huh? Are you saying that Krishna WAS NOT an Aryan... that Krishna was not part of Sanskrit Civilization. There were civilizations in India prior to the Aryan Iron Age Invasion, but it can hardly be guessed that the Aryans were influenced much by them. The Major Cities of that Civilization were destroyed and bi-passed. Often Civilizations that undergo Barbarian Invasion are in a good position to convert their Invaders, as Catholic Europe civilized the Norman and Viking Invaders, and as China civilized its Mogols. But this only occurs when the invaders don't burn everything to the ground, as the Aryans seemed to do in India.

But it IS possible that the Aryans could eventually have succomb to strong local legends from the Pre-Aryan Pre-Sanskrit Civilization. However, the Brahmins, the descendents of the Ancient Aryans rather insist that Rama and Krishna were Aryan, but it would not be the first time a Powerful Elite had advanced its political position with lies.

 

The Hindus don't like to hear it, but Lord Krishna may be of rather recent invention.

But that might not matter... not ultimately... not spiritually. You see, so much devotion focussed on one objective point will tend to create its Object if it was not there already.

I've been reading about the Astral Plane. Entire realms can be spun up simply on the force of a Collective Envisioning of them. And then, once Created, who is to say they cannot be infused with Power.

The Proof that there is something to Krishna is that the Krishna Devotion (commensed in Southern India in reaction to expansions of Aryan/Sanskrit influences since the 16th Century A.D.... just recently) has been the source of some very Powerful Saints. If it Touches the Divine, it must be Real, in some sense.

 

Purpose is the ultimate meaning. Christ had authority not power. He could call upon his works but he is human as we all are. There are great misguided beliefs in Christ which are not bad, but none the less incorrect. Jesus was royalty, but not by blood. He was never called "God" by his followers, but by accusers whom where trying to make Jesus look like a liar.

But of course the true purpose is us...why do men believe in what they cannot understand. It is that what is not understandable is changed into something that is. God could have done it any way he wanted to use Jesus, but since he knows the outcomes of every actions. He knows that the process would need to be simular to other beliefs for people to believe. God could call upon anything he wants. Grand and small. Doesnt mean people will believe. The ultimate meaning is that were are meant to believe it happened this way by chance, but it has been planed this whole time.

 

now some here ....are trying to run from the reality...by talking rubbish and illlogical things...about krishna and ramanaya.....no sane person can say ramanaya is not moralistic , no sane person can say krishna is a latest invention....(atleast if u r educated u will will not say).

go to india and see temples of lord krishna ....built around 3000 years ago....india is full of them....i am not saying ....historians worldwide proved that...which proves that jesus is a latest invention based on life story of krishna..

but really it doesnt matter to that supreme god.....even if we call him jesus instead of krishna.

yes krishana was aryan and aryans produced vedas.....vedas produced sprituality ...and with additions we produced new religions...but the fact is hinduism is our mother.....we all are included in it by one way or another....weather we like or not.....(am i sure spritual persons will definately love there connection with most pure form of sprituality)

in short....love jesus , love krishna......love krishna, love jesus.....they are not different but same.