Lord Jesus Christ - Abandon all varieties of religion

[RadheRade1657]

 

He existed, but was fictionalised. Do you not realise how close to the story of Buddha and Krishna this whole Jesus myth is? But the Krishna Story and Buddha Story themselves have no influences, so thus, they cannot be discounted.

 

 

 

In the gnostic gospels, Jesus talks about how the spirit, when it loses ignorance, can become wholly divine. This is crude advaita at best. He talks of how the Kingdom of God is everywhere, which sounds similar to the 'Buddha Nature' of Buddhists.

 

In the canonical gospels, he advocates worship and reverance of a God, and at times refers to himself as god, at other times, calling himself a son of god. Hence, going by the gnostic texts and the canonical gospels, his message is garbled and inconclusive.

 

There is ample evidence to suggest that Vedic thought had permeated into Judea by the time of the Old Testament itself. Consider the story when Yahweh tells Moses to refer to him as 'I am'. This reminds me of the opening hymns of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.

 

The OT is a tribal text, utterly devoid of spirituality. Yet, even it has some vedic influences, as evidenced by the above fact. Hence, by the time of the New Testament, there is no doubt that philosophies like Buddhism and Advaita (which existed even prior to the time of Gautama Buddha and Sankaracharya) had reached the west.

 

 

 

The original texts, given to us by Vyasa and Valmiki Bhagavan, are the Mahabharata and Ramayana. There are many, many versions of these books, but they can only be considered as genuine if they do not contradict the works of the two rishis mentioned before.

 

Kanya-Kumari Lila and all that stuff is simply a later product of humans. The original story is that Lord Krishna killed Narakasura, and this is affirmed by great sages. Anything that does not confirm to the testimony of the rishis is spurious and is rejected.

 

Similarly, I see a lot of unhealthy comparison going on. For instance, some christians tend to think the Vedas are talking about nonsensical stuff when they say that the world is held up by 7 elephants, etc. But these people do not understand that the Vedas have a profound inner meaning, always.

 

For instance, the Vedas say the sun is a chariot drawn by 7 snakes. This is explained as follows - The 7 snakes pertain to seven colors of light. And mordern science has found that light from sun travels in a curved fashion, hence it has been referred to as 'snakes' in the Vedas.

I guess you don't know Krishna's Lila in the slightest. His Lila has almost nothing in common with Jesus'. I guess people are just reading the websites that get their information from "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors" for information on Lord Krishna.

It's been shown that some Gnostic gospels came earlier than other ones. The Gospel of Thomas is one of the early ones. I was just showing that there are sources that talk about Jesus outside of the Canon.

I agree that the OT is a bunch of BS. It makes God look like an angry tyrant (hence the reason I like the Gnostics... they rejected it).

I agree that Vedic knowledge had reached Judea. I don't deny it. I don't see how that disproves Jesus, it just tells me that he listened to the teachers that spread the wisdom of the Vedas and Upanishads.

I see that you completely avoid the statement of the seven elephants holding up a flat earth by talking about the Vedic statements on the sun (which is interesting). Could you please explain the Vedic statements of the seven elephants holding up a flat earth, which is covered by a firmament that holds back water from the earth (so it doesn't flood, of course!)?

[Kulapavana]

 

Not so. There is a Nicene creed. There is a lot more concurence, certainly on the topic of salvation than you want to believe.

 

 

I do not know whether to laugh or to cry. Have you even read the Nicene creed lately? ANY version? This is what the original version of the creed says about salvation: ...who (God) for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man... THAT'S IT on the subject!

 

This is your "concurence" on the subject of salvation in a nutshell: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvation

[cbrahma]

 

I do not know whether to laugh or to cry. Have you even read the Nicene creed lately? ANY version? This is what the original version of the creed says about salvation: ...who (God) for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man... THAT'S IT on the subject!

 

This is your "concurence" on the subject of salvation in a nutshell: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvation

Of course I've read the creed. Everytime I pray it on Sunday.

The whole creed is the salvation theology, not just that line. Are you suggesting that's all there is, because it's the only line with the word salvation in it. I think I'll laugh.

Nevertheless,it is the formal declaration for the church but it is backed by a long theological teaching tradition.

[suchandra]

 

Of course I've read the creed. Everytime I pray it on Sunday.

The whole creed is the salvation theology, not just that line. Are you suggesting that's all there is, because it's the only line with the word salvation in it. I think I'll laugh.

Nevertheless,it is the formal declaration for the church but it is backed by a long theological teaching tradition.

Since ISKCON Europe became a place unhabitable for any sincere Vaishnava many devotees go to the Church again and like recently even have their marriage ceremony there. And this is backed up by Prabhupada. Even in India we read:

 

Devotee in Bombay having doubts ...

Oh my God - this shakes me up like anything.... I stay in Mumbai and everything seems so confusing now.. ************ dasa

[Amlesh]

The principle Trade Mark of Vaishnavism is NOT about confronting or get confronted with/by other religions. As a matter of fact, it's about harmonising all religions.

 

All that I've said comes not with Gyan but with ViGyan.

[Amlesh]

...and most importantly by the Grace of the Guru and Sriman Narayan.

[Dark Warrior]

 

I guess you don't know Krishna's Lila in the slightest. His Lila has almost nothing in common with Jesus'. I guess people are just reading the websites that get their information from "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors" for information on Lord Krishna.

 

Things are coming to a pretty pass if I am told by a Christian that I don't know Krishna Lila.

 

I am aware that those sites are bogus. But here are the true similarities:

 

1) The fact that a Star is used to herald the birth of a savior is certainly reminiscent of Janmashtami.

 

2) The whole shepherds bit is nothing more than the adaptation of a rumor about a cowherd savior that had come to the West.

 

3) Herod killing all those children is most definitely borrowed from the Kamsa episode.

 

Here are the similarities with Buddha:

 

1) The 3 wise men thing is taken from the Sage's visit in the story of Lord Buddha's birth.

 

2) The sage told Buddha's parents, 'your son will be a king or an ascetic'. Apparently, this was morphed into the Jesus story in which Simeon (I believe) called Jesus a 'King'.

 

Enough?

 

 

 

 

It's been shown that some Gnostic gospels came earlier than other ones. The Gospel of Thomas is one of the early ones. I was just showing that there are sources that talk about Jesus outside of the Canon.

 

If you agree with the Gnostic Gospels, that makes you an advaitin.

 

 

I agree that the OT is a bunch of BS. It makes God look like an angry tyrant (hence the reason I like the Gnostics... they rejected it).

I agree that Vedic knowledge had reached Judea. I don't deny it. I don't see how that disproves Jesus, it just tells me that he listened to the teachers that spread the wisdom of the Vedas and Upanishads.

 

It would appear then, that Jesus falls into the category of a billion other teachers who read the Upanishads and Vedas, but failed to realise that these scriptures talked about Sri Hari only.

 

In any case, what teachings are 'so similar' to the Vedas and Upanishads?

 

1) Jesus's morals are close to Buddhist scriptures like Dhammapada.

 

2) Jesus's ideals of renunciation can be found at a more developed level among Jains.

 

3) Jesus's teachings of devotion to god can be found among Shaivites, who are not regarded as Vedic by any acharya.

 

So, exactly what is left to make him Vedic?

 

In fact, I can point out some errors in Jesus's teachings. Like, when he said, 'Those who do not hate their parents cannot become my disciple'. Now, this is interpreted to mean that he required his disciples to renounce all attachments. Cool. But here is the problem - Some people are unable to renounce everything. So, are they forsaken by God simply because they are attached to material things?

 

No. Sri Krishna tells in the Gita, 'Those who seek material wealth, those who are distressed, those who are inquisitive, those who are devoted', they all approach Him and He accepts them. So, this kind of 'stipulation' that only renunciates get the favor of God is absurd.

 

 

I see that you completely avoid the statement of the seven elephants holding up a flat earth by talking about the Vedic statements on the sun (which is interesting). Could you please explain the Vedic statements of the seven elephants holding up a flat earth, which is covered by a firmament that holds back water from the earth (so it doesn't flood, of course!)?

 

I hate people who lack knowledge of the Vedas, but act like critics. Here is your explanation:

 

"The Vedic Scriptures say that the world to be supported upon twelve massive pillars, during the hours of darkness, the Sun passed underneath, somehow managing to thread its way between the pillars without hitting them. According to the Hindus, Earth stood on the back of four elephants, the elephants in turn rested upon the back of a huge tortoise, while the tortoise itself was supported by a serpent floating in a limitless ocean."

 

In fact, after the chaff is removed, the Puranas have a kernel and exhibits what may be termed a reverse symbolism. The twelve pillars that support the world are evidently the twelve months of the year, and they are specifically mentioned in the Vedic hymns. The four elephants on which Earth rests are the Dikarin, the sentinels of the four directions. These in turn rest, in turn, on a tortoise and a serpent. The tortoise is Vishnu's Kurma or tortoise avatar and symbolizes the fact that the Earth is supported in space in its annual orbit around the Sun. Finally, the coiled serpent represents Earth's rotation. Vishnu, or the Sun, himself rests upon a coiled snake - the Ananta, or Adisesha, which represents the rotation of the Sun on its own axis.

 

The Scriptures do not say that the Earth is flat. They only say that the Earth is flat at the poles.

 

These kinds of moronic statements clearly shows that you possess zero knowledge of the Vedas. The fact that you compare the apaurusheya Vedas to a two bit paperback best seller like the Bible shows that you lack even the basic knowledge of Sri Krishna.

 

And you possess what knowledge of the Vedas to talk nonsense like this, may I ask?

 

So, you know 'Krsna' is god. Have you even experienced one tithe of His auspicious attributes? Are you aware of His Swamitvam, Vatsalyam, Sousheelyam or Soulabhyam?

 

I am not claiming that I possess knowledge of Krishna. Because everything that I have, is by His grace only. If He wished, he could cast me into samsara and give you Moksha. But that does not make your path right.

 

These Christian Vaishnavas simply say, 'chant Krsna's name', but ultimately, they do not know Krishna properly, nor do they favor Him...their attention, rather goes to God's 'pure devotee', Jesus. And it is up to Vaishnavas themselves to correct these fools. But again, you have idiots like that Chuckleberry character who, calling himself a Vaishnava, spends his time disrespecting other Vaishnava Sampradayas without a hint of knowledge in his head, which explains why there is no unity among us.

 

Srila Prabhupada told you to chant Sri Krishna's name. Which means, chant His name, relish it, experience Him. Not Jesus.

[cbrahma]

 

The principle Trade Mark of Vaishnavism is NOT about confronting or get confronted with/by other religions. As a matter of fact, it's about harmonising all religions.

 

All that I've said comes not with Gyan but with ViGyan.

The great acaryas did not spend their time attacking major religions like Islam or Christianity. They knew better. The knew the truth was like there is only one God, there is only One religion - sanatana dharma.

[cbrahma]

 

I hate people who lack knowledge of the Vedas, but act like critics.

I'm not impressed with people who dismiss the Bible as a 'two-bit' paperback. That betrays ignorance of the source and importance of these writings, which serve two major world religions - Judaism and Christianity.

Are you attacking the length? Are you attacking the binding? This is an empty assault on a book that has inspired more than half the world.

[shvu]

 

The great acaryas did not spend their time attacking major religions like Islam or Christianity. They knew better. The knew the truth was like there is only one God, there is only One religion - sanatana dharma.

 

There did exist the concept of Mlechcha Dharma [Christianity, Islam, etc] and these religions were not favored in the least by any "Great Acharya". Not until some recent "Great Acharyas" had to go west in quest of US Dollars and global fame.

 

Cheers

[cbrahma]

 

There did exist the concept of Mlechcha Dharma [Christianity, Islam, etc] and these religions were not favored in the least by any "Great Acharya". Not until recent Gurus had to go west in quest of US Dollars and global fame.

 

Cheers

 

Certainly not Srila Bhaktivedanata Swami Prabhupada or those acaryas in his line.

[Kulapavana]

 

This is an empty assault on a book that has inspired more than half the world.

 

Inspired exactly WHAT? Religious hatred and religious violence? Bigotry and intolerance? Wholesale slaughter of millions of people in the name of their god and religion? Abuse of power by the clerics? The inspirational value of that book is decidedly mixed. Especially if you ask the "pagan" people who had to suffer the brunt of that "inspiration".

[suchandra]

 

Inspired exactly WHAT? Religious hatred and religious violence? Bigotry and intolerance? Wholesale slaughter of millions of people in the name of their god and religion? Abuse of power by the clerics? The inspirational value of that book is decidedly mixed. Especially if you ask the "pagan" people who had to suffer the brunt of that "inspiration".

 

 

Without Christianity and its offspring Islam there would be no Western civilization which could be used to spread the yuga-dharma. At least that much should be understood.

 

Prabhupāda: Then why, why she quotes Jesus? If she does not believe in Jesus, why she’s giving evidence from Jesus?

Pṛthu: She says like if she makes a comparison like if today there is a car crash, then all the people will say something different and the information will differ from the original car crash. So she says, in the same way, what Jesus did and said is now twisted around so nobody can actually give…

Prabhupāda: That means everyone has rejected Jesus.

Pṛthu: …that what Jesus said, this is all right, but what is now made of it, this one shouldn’t take wordly.

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Pṛthu: She says what Jesus said is all right, but what is now existing from that, one should not take wordly.

Haṁsadūta: Literally.

Prabhupāda: Hm? I do not follow.

Haṁsadūta: That which has been written down about his activities or his speaking cannot be accepted literally because who knows.

Prabhupāda: Then why do you quote?

Pṛthu: So she makes a difference what is true and what is not true.

Prabhupāda: But if you, if you cannot follow Bible literally, then where is the truth? …new truth.

Pṛthu: So she speaks of a fashion today, that there’s a fashion going on, and she says this fashion is all right, and this fashion is that one takes all the miracles and all the mythological things out of the Bible, and one causes…

Prabhupāda: So there is no truth. It is all hodge-podge.

Pṛthu: Yeah, so she agrees on your point that everyone takes what he likes, and that she says is what…

Prabhupāda: So it is a hodge-podge.

Pṛthu: So she again says that she cannot accept the points of the Bible where there is mention of miracles.

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Pṛthu: She again says that one cannot accept the portions of the Bible where there are statements…

Prabhupāda: Now, once she said that those things cannot be taken now literally.

Pṛthu: Yeah.

Prabhupāda: Then what is the use of taking Bible?

Pṛthu: …that one always has to take the truth from the untruth, also in Bible.

Prabhupāda: This is nonsense. From untruth, how there can be truth? (end)

 

Room Conversation

with German Women Philosophers

His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

June 17, 1974, Germany

[Kulapavana]

 

Without Christianity and its offspring Islam there would be no Western civilization which could be used to spread the yuga-dharma. At least that much should be understood.

 

The rise of Christianity quickly plunged the Western civilization into the abyss of Dark Ages lasting more than 12 centuries. It was the practical REJECTION of Christianity in science and social life that directly led to the current civilization in the West. It would be much easier to spread sanatana dharma in Imperial Rome then in Papal Rome - that is very, very obvious.

[cbrahma]

 

Inspired exactly WHAT? Religious hatred and religious violence? Bigotry and intolerance? Wholesale slaughter of millions of people in the name of their god and religion? Abuse of power by the clerics? The inspirational value of that book is decidedly mixed. Especially if you ask the "pagan" people who had to suffer the brunt of that "inspiration".

Oh please. The Mahabharata is full of wars. The Gita took place on a battle field.

Get off your bigotted hypocritcal sectarian high horse!

[Kulapavana]

 

Pṛthu: She again says that one cannot accept the portions of the Bible where there are statements…

Prabhupāda: Now, once she said that those things cannot be taken now literally.

Pṛthu: Yeah.

Prabhupāda: Then what is the use of taking Bible?

Pṛthu: …that one always has to take the truth from the untruth, also in Bible.

Prabhupāda: This is nonsense. From untruth, how there can be truth? (end)

 

 

Are you suggesting that Prabhupada accepted the Bible as nothing but the truth?

In this exchange he is simply criticizing a believer in the Bible who picks and choses what they want to accept. This is not an endorsement of the Bible as a source of truth for Vaishnavas. Prabhupada banned the books of Bon Maharaja and embraced the Bible? That is rich...

[shvu]

 

Oh please. The Mahabharata is full of wars. The Gita took place on a battle field.

Get off your bigotted hypocritcal sectarian high horse!

 

You were the one who said the Bible "inspired". How does pointing out the same problems in other religions make you correct? It only shows you are agreeing that the Bibile inspired violence.

 

Cheers

[cbrahma]

Read above 'eastern'

Not all Hindus take scriptures as literally as many GV's. There are hundreds of interpretations. In fact India has countless sects and varieties of religion all with their own special interpretations and translations, all believing their version is the 'authorized' one. There is no single reference book one can point to and say - this is the one true version.

Besides in this day and age, who is really following the Vedas, even in India?

[cbrahma]

 

You were the one who said the Bible "inspired". How does pointing out the same problems in other religions make you correct? It only shows you are agreeing that the Bibile inspired violence.

 

Cheers

I didn't say it inspired violence. I didn't even imply it. Your argument is that because it led to violence, then the violence is due to its inspiration. The same argument can be levied against all Vedanta with even greater force

It is fallacious.