Jesus and Krishna

[Tirisilex]

I had a major realization last night.. I know it may not seem like much to others but I finaly see the truth in Jesus in relation to Krishna. For a long time I loathed Christianty because when I was a believer what the Christians taught me really screwed me up. Last night I was thinking about Buddha and Krishna and Kabbalah and their similarities.. and Galatians 5: 16-25 and how it's very similar to Bhagavad Gita chapter 16. and Kabbalahs view on Satan. (Not the accepted Christian View of a Evil being trying to rip people into Hell)

I saw how Todays Christians dont understand real Jesus's truth.. How the Bible isn't Infallible and I can point out major mistakes in it's teachings that are accepted today. And I realized Jesus is in union with Krishna. I'm so happy.. I dont have the rising doubt that being a Krishna Devotee is going to send me to Hell because of what Todays Christians preach. And that is a BIG thing..

[cbrahma]

 

I had a major realization last night.. I know it may not seem like much to others but I finaly see the truth in Jesus in relation to Krishna. For a long time I loathed Christianty because when I was a believer what the Christians taught me really screwed me up. Last night I was thinking about Buddha and Krishna and Kabbalah and their similarities.. and Galatians 5: 16-25 and how it's very similar to Bhagavad Gita chapter 16. and Kabbalahs view on Satan. (Not the accepted Christian View of a Evil being trying to rip people into Hell)

I saw how Todays Christians dont understand real Jesus's truth.. How the Bible isn't Infallible and I can point out major mistakes in it's teachings that are accepted today. And I realized Jesus is in union with Krishna. I'm so happy.. I dont have the rising doubt that being a Krishna Devotee is going to send me to Hell because of what Todays Christians preach. And that is a BIG thing..

I'm not sure where you got the idea that 'believing' in Krsna was going to send you to hell, from a Christian teaching. Jesus teaching was to worship the Father (Krsna) in Spirit and in Truth. This is a completely transcendantal understanding that endorses no specific religious sect.

[theist]

 

I dont have the rising doubt that being a Krishna Devotee is going to send me to Hell because of what Todays Christians preach. And that is a BIG thing..

 

 

Nice realization. Not being God conscious IS hell. So we should be fearful of being in hell but that hell is forgetfullness of Krishna.

 

Forgetfullness of Krishna leaves us in the burning lake of fire and that fire is composed of material desires which never satisfy and are unquenchable.

[suchandra]

 

 

Looks like a staunch Vaishnava and advocate of bhagavat-dharma is saying this. How come you sometimes say that you're not a Vaishnava?

[theist]

 

 

Parrot talk bro. Vaisnava's realize Krsna. Vaisnava's love Krsna. That is my future but not my present.

 

I am a Vaisnava in the way everysoul is a Vaisnava but I am still asleep to my own higher nature. But this is not false humility or some self deprecation. I am on the fringes of Vaisnavism and so am in a good position in that sense but one step at a time.

 

But thank you for the nice words anyway.

[Sarva gattah]

 

 

Reminds me years ago of a movie george harrison financed, The Life Of Brian, he said he wasn't the messiah, therefore everyone thought he was being humble and must be the messiah

 

Not that Theist is the next messiah. Or is he?

[raghu]

 

I had a major realization last night.. I know it may not seem like much to others but I finaly see the truth in Jesus in relation to Krishna. For a long time I loathed Christianty because when I was a believer what the Christians taught me really screwed me up. Last night I was thinking about Buddha and Krishna and Kabbalah and their similarities.. and Galatians 5: 16-25 and how it's very similar to Bhagavad Gita chapter 16. and Kabbalahs view on Satan. (Not the accepted Christian View of a Evil being trying to rip people into Hell)

I saw how Todays Christians dont understand real Jesus's truth.. How the Bible isn't Infallible and I can point out major mistakes in it's teachings that are accepted today. And I realized Jesus is in union with Krishna. I'm so happy.. I dont have the rising doubt that being a Krishna Devotee is going to send me to Hell because of what Todays Christians preach. And that is a BIG thing..

 

So the Bible isn't infallible, has major mistakes, and yet Jesus is clearly in union with Krishna.

 

Ok....

[Tirisilex]

 

So the Bible isn't infallible, has major mistakes, and yet Jesus is clearly in union with Krishna.

 

Ok....

Yes.. you need to look at truth and know what truth is.. What does Infallible mean? Infallible = exempt from liability to error. This means It cannot have any errors within it. I can point out errors.. Some examples.. The Doctrine of Hell. In todays Bible you will find the word Hell aproximatly 35 times. In the old testament the word that is translated as Hell is Sheol which means Death not eternal torment. In the New Tetsament The words Gahenna and Hades are translated as Hell but Gahenna was a pit where people threw their trash and Hades is the lord of the Dead again not a Place of Eternal Torment. The Jehovah witnesses and the Christadelphians have this right. If you look at Mathew Chapter One and Compare it with Luke Chapter 3:23-38 you'll find that the Geneology doesnt line up.. They are completely Different. Galatians Chapter 5:20 Jealousy and Wrath (Anger) are listed as things NOT of God. Exodus 20:5 Clearly says "for I the Lord am a Jealous God." and Im not even going to count How many times the Bible states about the "Wrath of God" its too much. Now is God a Hypocrite? No.. So Where does the Error lie? Not in God but in the Bible. This is Just Three things that I can point out right off the top of my Head. There is alot more... SO yes the Bible is not infallible but when you know the truth and have been set free you can see the errors and you can see the truth.

[theist]

 

So the Bible isn't infallible, has major mistakes, and yet Jesus is clearly in union with Krishna.

 

Ok....

 

First sensible thing on the topic you have said. Too bad you are being sarcastic.

[Dark Warrior]

Actually, the main error lies in assuming that Jesus is a Vaishnava just because he promotes moral values and advocates worship of a God. But these moral values and devotion are present in religions other than Vaishnavism as well.

 

The Bible contains mistakes. Heck, even the message of Jesus is not perfect. Now, Shruti is infallible and apaurusheya, and all Smriti is judged as authoritative only with Shruti as a yardstick. Thus, if we apply the same technique to the Bible, we find that except for general morals, the philosophy/spirituality of Jesus is incompatible with Shruti.

 

Therfore, to say Jesus is in 'union' with Krishna is based on your own experience. It has no backing in sastras.

[Malati dasi]

CBrahma: I'm not sure where you got the idea that 'believing' in Krsna was going to send you to hell, from a Christian teaching. Jesus teaching was to worship the Father (Krsna) in Spirit and in Truth. This is a completely transcendantal understanding that endorses no specific religious sect.

 

Ok, the below are for the Hare Christnas:

 

From Exodus, No. 4 of the TEN Commandments of GOD

Do not make an image or any likeness of what is in the heavens above

 

In Deutoronomy: NO. 8 of the TEN Commandments of God:

You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

 

So, puja to the Archana vigraha of the Lord will send me to hell?

 

Theist and CBrahma, I assert that Christianity is not compatible with (Gaudiya) Vaishnavism. I think it was St Paul who chastised the early Christians who prayed on the streets. However, Sankirtan in every streets and villages is what the movement of Lord Chaitanya is all about.

 

Also, the emphasis of Jesus' prayer as below, is not exactly how Gvism approach spirituality:

 

1. Our father who art in heaven 2.

2. hollowed be thy name thy kingdom come, thy wil be done on earth as it is in heaven.

3 Give us this day our daily bread

4. And forgive us our trespasses as

5. we forgive those who trespassed against us

6 . And lead us not into temptation and deliver us from evil

Amen

 

The ones in red according to the Gita is a lower form of spirituality.

 

Also, eating meat is alright in Christianity. Krishna however does not accept such kind of offering.

 

What's next Theist? Jesus Christ is the illegitimate son of Radha and Krishna !

 

Stop your crusade. That is why you get abused by some forummers here, for your lack of education.

 

 

[cbrahma]

[to Malati

Your devil's advocate arguments are kind of weak.

Christians have crosses and statues in abundance. Everything in the Old Testament does not apply to Christianity. It applies to Judaism. The Torah is full of rules Christians do not follow. Jews may not utter the name of God.

Not so with Christians.

The explanation of murtis, especially forms of Krsna appeals to the non-dual nature of the Absolute. That God's form is non-different from God.

So the Diety form is not an idol, per se.

Certainly Krsna is not mentioned in the Bible. He is not mentioned in any of the Western religious scriptures. Does that mean all of Western religion is incompatible with GV?

When it comes to prayers of petition, we are exhorted to pray the Mahamantra like a child is crying for its mother. I can't think of anything more supplicant than that.

 

 

Also, eating meat is alright in Christianity. Krishna however does not accept such kind of offering.

 

What's next Theist? Jesus Christ is the illegitimate son of Radha and Krishna !

 

Stop your crusade. That is why you get abused by some forummers here, for your lack of education.

 

 

The Vedas authorized meat eating in certain cases. In fact animal sacrfices become a pretext for eating meat.

Are you saying no GV ate meat? The ksatriyas did. In fact all the Western religions do. So they are incompatible or simply in tama guna?

 

Stop your crusade. That is why you get abused by some forummers here, for your lack of education

This is hardly a crusade. It is in opposition to a crusade. Lack of education?

Please I understand GV as well as you. Asking for guru, sastra and sadhu evidence of the incompatibility of Christianity is no reason for a Vaisnava to be offensive. In fact a Vaisnava is never supposed to be offensive, even for less legitimate reasons.

Finally you need to read my quote from Bhaktivinode Thakur on the subject-

he mentioned how he preferred Christianity. If it's so stupid and uneducated to think that Christianity is compatible with GV, why wouldn't he say so?

 

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur on the nature of sectarianism from the introduction to the Sri Krsna Samhita

 

There are three types of standards-alocakagata, alocanagata, and alocyagata. Alocakagata is when sectarianists accept some external signs. Examples of alocakagata are tilaka, neck beads, saffron robes, and the baptism that is practiced abroad.

 

The different activities practiced in the process of worship are called alocanagata. Examples of alocanagata are sacrifices, austerities, fire sacrifices, vows, studying scriptures, deity worship, constructing temples, respecting the purity of various trees and rivers, dressing like sannyasis, acting like acaryas, dressing like brahmacaris or grhasthas, closing one s eyes, respecting particular types of books, rules and regulations in eating, and respecting the purity of particular times and places. The examples of alocyagata are attributing personalism or impersonalism on the Supreme Lord, installing deities, exhibiting the mood of an incarnation of the Lord, speculating on heaven and hell, and describing the future destination of the soul. The different forms of these spiritual activities create divisions of sectarianism.

 

Differences that arise from places, times, languages, behaviors, foods, dresses, and natures of various communities are incorporated within people s spiritual practices and gradually make one community so completely different from another community that even the consideration that everyone is a human being may cease to exist. Due to these differences there is disagreement, cessation of social intercourse, and fighting, even up to the point of killing one another. When an asslike mentality becomes prominent within the kanistha-adhikaris, they certainly indulge in these things. But if they develop a swanlike mentality, then they do not take part in quarrels; rather, they endeavor to attain a higher level. Madhyama-adhikaris do not quarrel so much about external standards, but they are always attacked by philosophical disagreements. Sometimes they condemn the standards of neophytes and establish their own standards as superior. They condemn the neophytes deity worship in order to establish the worshipable Lord as formless. In such cases, they are also considered asslike people. Otherwise, if they had a swanlike mentality and a desire to attain a higher level, they would respect others practices and inquire about higher topics. Contradictions actually arise only due to asslike mentality. Swanlike persons consider the necessity for different practices according to one‘s qualification, so they are naturally detached from sectarian quarrels. In this regard, it should be understood that both asslike and swanlike people are found amongst the kanistha-adhikaris and madhyama-adhikaris. I do not expect that asslike people will accept this book with respect. If neophytes and madhyama-adhikaris become completely indifferent in regard to the contradictions found in various practices and try to advance further, then they become swanlike persons. Then they are our respectable and dear friends. Although swanlike personalities may accept a particular practice from birth or childhood according to instructions they have received, they nevertheless remain indifferent and nonsectarian.

 

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

 

[cbrahma]

In The Path of Perfection, Srila Prabhupada describes the Vaishnava understanding of Christ and Christianity in greater detail: "Bhakti-yoga means connecting ourselves with Krishna, God, and becoming His eternal associates. Bhakti-yoga cannot be applied to any other objective; therefore, in Buddhism, for instance, there is no bhakti-yoga, because they do not recognize the Supreme Lord existing as the supreme objective. Christians, however, practice bhakti-yoga when they worship Jesus Christ, because they are accepting him as the son of God and are therefore accepting God. Unless one accepts God, there is no question of bhakti-yoga. Christianity, therefore, is also a form of Vaishnavaism, because God is recognized...However, where there is no recognition of a personal God...there is no question of bhakti-yoga."

[sanatan]

Re: more education.

 

Once again, a perceptive member here cuts through the flying BS and offers a pertinent quote from Srila Prabhupada.

 

In the strict sense, Christianity and Vaisnavism aren't the same...there are many differences in philosophy, cosmology, and practice.

 

But in a broad sense, the one SP was coming from, they are very much similar.

[theist]

 

Ok, the below are for the Hare Christnas:

 

From Exodus, No. 4 of the TEN Commandments of GOD

Do not make an image or any likeness of what is in the heavens above

 

In Deutoronomy: NO. 8 of the TEN Commandments of God:

You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

 

So, puja to the Archana vigraha of the Lord will send me to hell?

 

You have a hellish mentality if you think the arca vigraha of the Supreme Lord in a representation of a a form from heaven, That means you are just another demi-god worshiper.

 

The verse you quoted also means no forms from under the sea or on the land plus those in heaven which the the early jews took to mean the stars.

 

It is an offense to consider the Lord's Name Form etc. to be a product of heaven land or sea.

[theist]

Why continue to talk to such people cbrahma? Don't you find these small minds a bore. We have malati dasi quoting from the Old Testament as if they were the words of Christ. She considers forgiving others as a low form of spirituality as if she herself has surpassed such a state. Let's be honest these so-called big big Vaisnavas are as self-righteous as Christian evangelists and in many ways more so.

 

And then there is shvu. An atheist who thinks he has some realization on what Bhakti is. What a joke.

 

We can go with Prabhupada's realization on the matter and let all these hypocrites who claim to be his followers yet reject his teachings go on with their charade.

 

No need to continue to place pearls before swine.

[cbrahma]

 

Why continue to talk to such people cbrahma? Don't you find these small minds a bore. We have malati dasi quoting from the Old Testament as if they were the words of Christ. She considers forgiving others as a low form of spirituality as if she herself has surpassed such a state. Let's be honest these so-called big big Vaisnavas are as self-righteous as Christian evangelists and in many ways more so.

 

And then there is shvu. An atheist who thinks he has some realization on what Bhakti is. What a joke.

 

We can go with Prabhupada's realization on the matter and let all these hypocrites who claim to be his followers yet reject his teachings go on with their charade.

 

No need to continue to place pearls before swine.

I'm beginning to see your point. Their rabid anti-Christian ad hominem which is their one-trick pony, every time I respond or question was very hard to shake. I thought by confronting them outright there was a chance of destroying it completely, but alas like the hyrda ignorance seems eternal. It is so unfortunate that it has to attack in the false guise of Vaisnavism.

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

Having myself undergone a marked change in spirit since my abnegation of Bengali Vaishnavism, I shall applaud the sensible stance of Theist and cbrahma in having the insight and generosity to see good and genuine spirituality in traditions other than the one that most people happen to follow here. I'm not going to dignify the anti-party in this instance with a comment on their views. However, one of the immense benefits that impersonalism has afforded me is the ability to develop appreciation for a whole multitude of superficially divergent, conflicting philosophies, including a renewed realisation of the value of modern critical scholarship and science. So I can only conclude with this: "Way to go, buddies!" and in addition feel really remorseful of the past opprobrium heaped upon Christ on these forums by myself.

[theist]

 

I'm beginning to see your point. Their rabid anti-Christian ad hominem which is their one-trick pony, every time I respond or question was very hard to shake. I thought by confronting them outright there was a chance of destroying it completely, but alas like the hyrda ignorance seems eternal. It is so unfortunate that it has to attack in the false guise of Vaisnavism.

And false it is. The ability to appreciate another's devotion to God is natural in a Vaisnava. Vaisnava being one who has left all sectarian considerations based on religious choice, culture land of birth etc. behind. A basic understanding of Vaisnavis is that it is a post liberation activity consisting of various moods of love of God. Post liberation means beyond sectarian, cultural, land of birth considerations and prejudice.

 

The atma has no land of birth anywhere in the material field yet on another thread Dark Warrior specifically claimed he accepted that God only appears in the land of his birth, India. Makes you wonder if some of these people ever gazed at the stars to grasp even a tiny glimpse of the immensity of God's creation. If they did it made little impression or no one could be so blind as to say God is only in India.

 

I understand your frustration cbrahma. It is painful to see Prabhupada's teaching on the universiality of the transcendental experience, and Vaisnavism in general, so grossly misrepresented.

[bija]

....ignorance seems eternal cbrahma

I dont know if it is eternal, but any journey man knows, its easy to take a short holiday into hell once in a while. Ignorance lingers:eek3:

 

Just got back actually....cooling myself down this morning with the Holy Name:burn:

[theist]

 

Having myself undergone a marked change in spirit since my abnegation of Bengali Vaishnavism, I shall applaud the sensible stance of Theist and cbrahma in having the insight and generosity to see good and genuine spirituality in traditions other than the one that most people happen to follow here.I'm not going to dignify the anti-party in this instance with a comment on their views. However, one of the immense benefits that impersonalism has afforded me is the ability to develop appreciation for a whole multitude of superficially divergent, conflicting philosophies, including a renewed realisation of the value of modern critical scholarship and science. So I can only conclude with this: "Way to go, buddies!" and in addition feel really remorseful of the past opprobrium heaped upon Christ on these forums by myself.

 

That is a good lesson to learn. It is one that is there in Vaisnavism also only it is being covered up by narrow minded proponents and preachers. What helps me is I accept the definition that Vaisnavism is the natural loving activity of the soul in relationship to the Supersoul. This allows me to acknowledge the Vaisnavism lying dormant in the atheist as well as the beginning theist. I see the same Vaisnavism dormant in the plants trees birds beasts demigods microbes or what have you. it is intregal to every soul. I even see dormant Vaisnavism in those taking a long rest in the brahmajyoti.

 

Everyone is a Vaisnava. In some it is awakened and in some it is dormant. Wherever there is a livity being there is Vaisnavism, either awakened or sleeping.

 

I see the stirring of Vaisnavism in the Muslim as he bows to Allah 5 times a day or the drug user who has finally come to the end of this rope and simply prays God help me (my position).

 

The Lord sends His representatives or comes Himself to inspire the sleeping souls to awaken and to accomplish this His message is tailored to the time place cicumstance which bind any particular grouping of souls.

 

This is such a day one, basic teaching of Srila Prabhupada's that I am amazed at those that claim to be in his line taking a different stance.

 

Tragic.

[bija]

 

3 Give us this day our daily bread

Amen

 

The ones in red according to the Gita is a lower form of spirituality. posted by malati

 

I read several times Srila Prabhupada criticize christians desires using the example of asking for daily bread. I appreciate his point, infact many spiritualities and new spiritualities do the same. One popular book that is called spiritual is 'How to get what you want'.

 

But this argument is not true in all cases. When I first read Srila Prabhupada say this I thought.....hmmm not always the case.

 

I was an odd catholic boy, and always saw the 'bread' as love...in later years as love of God.

 

'Give us the bread of love...we desire nothing else in the heart of hearts...please remove unwanted things so this desire may be true'.

[RadheRade1657]

 

CBrahma: I'm not sure where you got the idea that 'believing' in Krsna was going to send you to hell, from a Christian teaching. Jesus teaching was to worship the Father (Krsna) in Spirit and in Truth. This is a completely transcendantal understanding that endorses no specific religious sect.

 

Ok, the below are for the Hare Christnas:

 

From Exodus, No. 4 of the TEN Commandments of GOD

Do not make an image or any likeness of what is in the heavens above

 

In Deutoronomy: NO. 8 of the TEN Commandments of God:

You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

 

So, puja to the Archana vigraha of the Lord will send me to hell?

 

Theist and CBrahma, I assert that Christianity is not compatible with (Gaudiya) Vaishnavism. I think it was St Paul who chastised the early Christians who prayed on the streets. However, Sankirtan in every streets and villages is what the movement of Lord Chaitanya is all about.

 

Also, the emphasis of Jesus' prayer as below, is not exactly how Gvism approach spirituality:

 

1. Our father who art in heaven 2.

2. hollowed be thy name thy kingdom come, thy wil be done on earth as it is in heaven.

3 Give us this day our daily bread

4. And forgive us our trespasses as

5. we forgive those who trespassed against us

6 . And lead us not into temptation and deliver us from evil

Amen

 

The ones in red according to the Gita is a lower form of spirituality.

 

Also, eating meat is alright in Christianity. Krishna however does not accept such kind of offering.

 

What's next Theist? Jesus Christ is the illegitimate son of Radha and Krishna !

 

Stop your crusade. That is why you get abused by some forummers here, for your lack of education.

 

 

So, you're using a Middle-Eastern tribal book and the words of a man who never even knew Jesus, as well as a prayer to stop famine as a way to criticize Jesus?

Here are the commandments Jesus said to follow to a man who questioned him:

"You shall not kill; You shall not steal; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not bear false witness; Honor your father and mother; and, love your neighbor as yourself."

So, I really don't see how the commandments he lists off are going against any principle of Gaudiya Vaishnavism.

 

As to Paul, he never even knew Jesus. He never met him. The Acts of the Apostles says that he claimed to have seen a vision of Jesus many years after he died, but, since he would be the only witness to such a vision, we don't know if this is for certain.

 

"Give us this day our daily bread..."

I didn't realize that praying for God to save your people from famine was sinful.

"...And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who have trespassed against us..."

I think it's a nice summary of Karma, myself: "I ask You to treat me as I have treated Your children."

"...And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil."

(The Aramaic/Syriac reads, "And let us not enter into temptation..." but I digress.)

I don't see how asking the Lord to keep you from bad situations is sinful, or how asking him to 'deliver you from evil' (whether that be negative influences in your life, the evil thoughts within you, etc...).

[Tirisilex]

I believe it is better to say that EARLY Christianity was exactly like Vaishnavism.. Differences in words maybe.. but the same.. The Catholic Church and the Council of Nicean had brought the fall of Christs True teachings..

 

What is sin? Sin is an act that seperates you from God. Galatians 5:16-25 (My Favorite chapter) Tells you how to know when you are walking with God. When you are walking with God you will have the fruits of the Spirit. Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Goodness, Self-Control, Gentleness, Faith (Knowledge of God).. When you sin it will take these things away. Much Like The Afflictive Emotions in Buddhism and How they keep you from Enlightenment. Now I would like to examine the "sin" of Idolatry.. The problem of Idolatry and how it seperates you from God is it can detract you from the true knowledge of God.

When Moses came down from the mountain He found the people had created their own God. This God had it's own qualities but it did not contain the truth of God because it did not create the fruits of the Spirit. This is how Idolatry seperates you from God. For Example.. There are unfortuanate people out there who actually worship Charles Manson. This Worship is not creating the fruits of the Spirit. So they are performing Idolatry. However.. If your worship is creating the fruits of the Spirit then this is not Idolatry. Understand?

Jesus has down away with the 10 Commandments.. The new Commandment is to Love the Lord thy God with all your heart and Mind. Bhakti is this practice.. Most Christians don't realize the meaning of one of Gods qualities.. Omnipresence.. It practicaly Goes Unnoticed.. Just as Bhakti Tells you to see God in everything which he is because he is Omnipresent.

[raghu]

 

Yes.. you need to look at truth and know what truth is.. What does Infallible mean? Infallible = exempt from liability to error. This means It cannot have any errors within it. I can point out errors.. Some examples.. The Doctrine of Hell. In todays Bible you will find the word Hell aproximatly 35 times. In the old testament the word that is translated as Hell is Sheol which means Death not eternal torment. In the New Tetsament The words Gahenna and Hades are translated as Hell but Gahenna was a pit where people threw their trash and Hades is the lord of the Dead again not a Place of Eternal Torment. The Jehovah witnesses and the Christadelphians have this right. If you look at Mathew Chapter One and Compare it with Luke Chapter 3:23-38 you'll find that the Geneology doesnt line up.. They are completely Different. Galatians Chapter 5:20 Jealousy and Wrath (Anger) are listed as things NOT of God. Exodus 20:5 Clearly says "for I the Lord am a Jealous God." and Im not even going to count How many times the Bible states about the "Wrath of God" its too much. Now is God a Hypocrite? No.. So Where does the Error lie? Not in God but in the Bible. This is Just Three things that I can point out right off the top of my Head. There is alot more... SO yes the Bible is not infallible but when you know the truth and have been set free you can see the errors and you can see the truth.

 

I wasn't disagreeing with the point about the Bible not being infallible.

 

The point I was trying to make is, I don't see how you can say that Jesus is "in union with Krishna," or for that matter make any definitive statement about Jesus, when the only sources upon which your understanding of him is based, are as per your own admission, flawed.

 

Just a logical objection, you see. Apologies in advance if it was too rabidly anti-Christian of me.