Krishna is the God of Jews, Christians, and Muslims

[prithvi]

It has already been long pointed out by several historians that Abraham of Jews and Brahma of Hindus are too close by name to miss. Additionally Sarai is too close to Hindu goddess Saraswati, the wife of Brahma, and the connection cannot be missed. As per Hindu legends, Saraswati is the daughter of Brahma because he has created her. And together with her, he fathers the people of this world and creates all living beings. So Brahma’s relationship with Saraswati is an incestual relationship. And the same is the case with Abraham and Sarai of the Abrahamic world. Sarai is the half-sister of Abraham. In that sense, his relation with her is an incest. And as in Hindu legends, Abraham along with Sarai fathers a large number of nations across the world.

This relation between Brahma and Abraham, Sarai and Saraswati has already been recognized by several historians. And Mount Moriah itself is pointed out to be Mount meru of the Hindus. We cannot miss the similarities. Despite such close connections being shown, the similarity of two or three names does not seem to break much ice; one problem with these similarities is the causative factor. It can be argued both ways – that Jews have copied from Hindus or that Hindus have copied from Jews. And as long as the argument stays at this deadlock, it does not progress much in capturing public as well as scholarly imagination. So let me show that there is more resemblance than just two names here.

Abraham’s son Issac is none other Iswar aka Siva of the Hindus! the similarity of names and the concept cannot be missed. In Hindu legends, Iswar is the son of Brahma, he is even called Brahmaputra meaning son of Brahma. And in Jewish legends, Issac is the son of Abraham.

Rebeccah, the wife of Issac is none other than Ambica, the wife of Siva of the Hindus. Ambika/Rebecca – the names are quite similar. Rebeccah of Jews is portrayed as a pleasing and benign woman. And just like in Jewish legend, the ambika of Hindus is actually a benign and pleasing goddess, it is durga who is of the ferocious form.

The most revealing connection is that of Hagar, the handmaiden of Sarai. This is nothing but the tributary of river Saraswati, the river by name Ghaggar in India!. Ghaggar/Hagar - the resemblance is overwhelming. And the relations they have with Sarai/Saraswati are quite revealing in themselves. Ghaggar is a tributary to river Saraswati and this relation of being tributary is being described as that of handmaiden. Saraswati is the mighty river and Ghaggar is small tributary to it. Similarly Sarai is the real mistress holding all the powers while Hagar is just handmaiden under her.

And what does the son Ishmael of Hagar signify? Ishmael is just a morphed form of Ishalay (Isha + Alay) meaning temple of Ishwar or Siva. Why would a temple of Siva be made the son of Hagar the tributary of Saraswati?

This entire covenant of Abraham is nothing but an agreement amongst Yadavas that henceforth, they are not going to worship any god other than Krishna/Yahweh. So having made such an agreement, it was necessary to show that they have discarded other gods of Hinduism. Which all gods did they discard? They listed down the entire Hindu pantheon as the descendants of Abraham! They are just symbolically representing the gods rejected as Abraham and his descendants. These gods named under Abraham are henceforth to be considered as humans and not as divine. And then they have woven all of their experiences in India, after Krishna’s time, into these legends, with Abraham and others as central characters. So the experiences of Abraham and his descendants are nothing but symbolic allegories of all the difficulties faced by Yadavas during their time of stay in India.

So the gods who are rejected by Yadavas are listed under the covenant as different characters. Who all have they rejected? They have rejected Brahma (Abraham). They have rejected Saraswati (Sarai), they are no longer going to consider her as a goddess, if anything, she would be shown as a human woman who would be dependent on the grace of Yahweh/Krishna as much as the Yadavas are. They have rejected Siva (Issac). They are no longer going to worship him. They have rejected Amibka, Siva’s wife (Rebecca), she would henceforth be considered as human. Siva is an important god of the Hindu pantheon, his worship was strong in the Gujarat region. So it is likely that some Yadavas were reluctant to completely give up the worship of Siva. It might not be that they wanted to worship Siva alone but they probably wanted to continue worshipping the Hindu religious trinity of Brahma/Vishnu/Siva and the Vedic Gods they probably did not want to completely discard the worship of everyone, especially Siva. Such Yadavas have been left in India on the banks of Hagar river.

Yadavas were traveling from Gujarat region along the banks of Saraswati river towards Kashmir in search of water. As the famine drew stronger, it was necessary to find water and people just about migrated to any place where they thought that they could find water. Right from the next day of Krishna’s death, they are likely to have had an agreement that they are no longer going to worship anyone other than Krishna. On their way to Kashmir, it looks like they had a disagreement in this regard. Obviously the strongest of faiths can wither at the onslaughts of such dramatic famines of hundreds of years. And some Yadavas are likely to have lost faith in this new religion of theirs. They wanted to go back to the old Vedic religion where they worshipped all Vedic gods including Siva and mother goddesses. A disagreement arose and such Yadavas who wanted to go back to the pre-Krishna religion were discarded. This separation probably took place on the banks of river Ghaggar probably near some Siva temple. So they have recorded it in their scriptures in the form of Hagar and Ishmael. Jews did not take these people along with them to Kashmir and later to Israel.

And then after they broke away from this faction, the Yadavas then had a serious discussion amongst themselves about their religion. Once again they took oaths amongst themselves that henceforth they are not going to worship anyone else other than Krishna. In order to prove that they abide by this agreement, it is likely that various measures were taken by the Yadavas. For example any idols of Siva or other gods had to be thrown away, such other idols should not be kept with anyone. From then on, no one would even utter the name of Siva and other gods. This has been symbolically represented in their scriptures when Isaac is taken to mount Moriah and is offered as sacrifice to Yahweh. Mount Moriah is nothing but Mount meru of Vishnu/Krishna. Vishnu/Krishna is believed by vaishnavites to reside there. Abraham takes Isaac there and offers him as sacrifice before he is stopped in the last minute. This is symbolic representation of the fact that, in favor of Vishnu/Krishna, they would henceforth give up Issac/Iswar/Siva worship completely; his worship is given up as a sacrifice unto/in favor of Krishna. The sacrifice of Isaac on mount meru is an allegory that is representative of an agreement between the Yadavas, whereby any small remnant of Siva worship is thenceforth given up by them completely and they would henceforth have nothing more to do with his worship.

They have rejected Brahma, Saraswati, Siva and Ambika/Parvati. Who else did they reject? Obviously Siva’s sons Ganesha and Skanda have to be rejected. And they have been rejected. Issac’s sons Jacob and Esau are none other than Siva’s sons Ganesh and Skanda!

Ganesh is many a times called Jaiganesh in the north. In fact people are named as Jaiganesh and this particular habit of prefixing jai is a peculiar habit of this deity alone. For other deity names, they also append Sri along with Jai, for example JaiSriram. More over no one is named as Jaisriram. However I have seen people being named as Jaiganesh. Jai means ‘Hail’. They have done a lot of cutting the names right in the middle. For example, we can see that the long name of Saraswati is cut right in the middle and only Sarai portion of it is retained. Similarly in Ishwar, only Ish has been retained and a consonant has been suffixed to get Isaac. Similarly in Jaiganesh, only Jaiga has been retained and a consonant has been added to it as suffix to make it Jagob or Jacob. Similarly Siva’s other son is named as Swamy. Not many are aware of it that Siva’s second son is named as Swamy. I once read an article of a tamil scholar who claimed that the word Swamy originally belonged to Skanda. Later on it started being applied to all other gods. So for example tirupati Balaji is called Venkateswara swami. After pointing out all of this, the scholar claimed that, this is indicative of the fact that Venkateswara Swamy and Skanda are one and the same and likewise all forms of worship are different manifestations of the same god, he argued. Esau is none other than Swami (again cut in half like other names), Siva’s second son. In south India, Ganesha is considered elder to swami. However in north India he is considered to be younger, Swami is considered as elder.

The resemblance between the characters is quite striking. In Hindu legends, Swami is a warrior god, he is fit and agile and served as the commander general of the armies of gods. This fits in with the description of Easu who is said to be an agile and able hunter. Obviously Jewish forefathers could not write that Esau is the chief of armies of gods because they want to consider Easu as human in their legends. The legend needed to be suitably modified to fit in the new realm. Similarly in Hindu legends Ganesha is a rotund personality who is no where near as agile or as able as his brother. However he is said to be high in intellect. This is quite similar to the description of Jacob. Jacob is not so able but is considered to be an intellect.

There are several legends that show that Ganesha and Swami/Skanda fought with each other for various things. Ganesha’s original name as Vignesa (lord of obstacles) and not Ganesha (lord of ganas). How did he get this name, the legend runs as follows:

Once Siva and Parvati decided to make one of their sons as the chief or lord of the ganas (warriors or attendants who accompany Siva and live along with him on kailas) of Kailas. Considered to be an extremely important post, both the brothers fight for the post. In order to break the deadlock, it is declared that whoever goes around the world and comes back first would be made the lord of the ganas. Skanda immediately starts on his peacock and goes around the world at a fast pace and comes back in seven days. To his surprise however, his brother Ganesha is happily seated munching sweets on mount kailas, and is declared as the winner of the contest and is given the title of Ganapati/ganesha or the lord of the ganas. How did he get the title? Simple. As per scriptures, circulambulating around one’s parents seven times is considered equal to circulambulating the world. So after Skanda went away, Ganesha promptly bowed down to his parents and then ambulated around them seven times. That was it, he won the contest! Skanda feels cheated by this development and he in fact goes away from Kailas to far away place in the south.

This legend has other variations. For example, in another variation, they were fighting for the two grand daughters of Brahma. Whoever wins the contest gets both their hands in marriage. In another variation, something else. But all these legends carry the same framework. There is something to be gained for which Skanda leaves home and goes out. In his absence the less able Ganesha wins the booty through guile/wisdom. And needless to say that this is the same framework that was adopted for the fight of Jacob and Esau in the Jewish bible. Abrahamic legacy is the booty to win to attain which, the more able Esau goes out. In his absence, Jacob wins the booty through guile/wisdom. On his comeback, Esau feels extremely cheated. In both cases it is about the title and legacy. Ganesha in Hindu legends becomes the lord of ganas whereas Jacob in Jewish legends gets the title of Israel and is bestowed with abrahamic legacy. The legends of the Jewish bible have been appropriately modified to fit them with human beings. The legends of Hindus are obviously pertaining to godly figures. So they need to be suitably modified so as to fit them and show them as legends about mortals. Some modifications are done here and there to fit the legend of godly figures into the legends of mortals. For example, to justify the attainment of title by Jacob, they have shown Esau as a bad figure, otherwise it would be difficult to justify the guile with which Jacob had acted.

They have rejected Brahma, Saraswati,Siva, Ambika, Ganesh, Skanda. Who else? Well the Vedic gods. Even they need to be rejected and discarded. Obviously they would have taken a decision to discard all Vedic gods as well? And the answer to that is yes. They have rejected the Vedic gods as well!

At the ripe old age of 137 years, Abraham is said to have married another woman, termed as concubine, named Ketura. And he is said to have fathered six sons through her. And the names of these six sons along with their meanings are as follows :

Zimran – Celebrated, Vine Dresser
Zokshan – Hardnes, knocking
Medan – contention, conflict
Midian – Strife, Judgement
Ishbak – Leaving
Shuah – Ditch, Humiliation

Let us start with Ketura. Ketura is none other than Hindu goddess Gayatri, considered to be the mother of Vedas. And she is considered to be the second wife of Brahma! And the most important Gayatri mantra of the Hindus belongs to her, it is in her name. In terms of importance as a wife of Brahma, she is only second to Saraswati. And this nicely tallies with Ketura, Abraham’s second wife.

And Gayatri being considered as the mother of Vedas, the Vedic gods have been represented as her sons in the Jewish legends. The six sons of Abraham through Ketura are none other than the Vedic gods of India.

Showing the connection between the six sons and the Vedic gods requires some Linguistic analysis; it would not be possible to show the analysis here. Just to capture the results of the analysis, Zimran is Devendra, Zokshan is Daksha, Medan is Marut, Midian is Mithra, Ishbak is Aswins and Shuah is Rudra. One important thing to notice is that they have not listed Pancha Bhutas or the five elements and Sun and Moon in this list of six sons; probably because they considered these to be the manifestations of Krishna on earth.

All six sons of Ketura are Vedic gods! Since she is the mother of Vedas, they have been listed as her sons. It is said that Abraham sent them to the east, far away from his son Issac. This symbolically represents the fact that they had left the worship of these Vedic gods in the east, in India. The Jews no longer wanted to have anything to do with these Vedic gods.

To put it succinctly, the entire covenant with God of Abrahamic religions including Judaism, Christianity and Islam is nothing but an agreement amongst Yadavas to worship only Krishna/Yahweh and to reject all other Hindu gods in favor of Krishna. So given that Vaishnavite Jews/Yadavas who had forsaken Vedic religion were considered to have been in central Asia by 1800 BC itself after migrating from India, does it make sense to say that some Aryans invaded or migrated into India in 1500 BC and formed Vedas and epics after that date in India? Indian civilization is extremely ancient; and Indian and world civilizations are 19000 years in the making.

 

[mamman]

What do Muslims have in common with themselves regardless of where they live?

... Is there any relationship between Christ and the hindu god Krishna? ...

Jesus preached monotheism then why do Christians not follow him but believe in

polytheism the trinity? ... Do jews celebrate lent? [Edit categories] Popularity

: 1

[Sephiroth]

Actually, no Muslims will ever believe or accept Sri Krishna to be related in anyway to their Islam or their god. Matter a fact, if anyone states so, you can be sure that it is a ploy to turn Hindus into Muslims or at least make Hindus forget who their enemies are.

 

Do not be fooled. Hindus (or Jews for that matter) have NOTHING in common with Muslims.

[sant]

 

Matter a fact, if anyone states so, you can be sure that it is a ploy to turn Hindus into Muslims or at least make Hindus forget who their enemies are.

 

Do not be fooled. Hindus (or Jews for that matter) have NOTHING in common with Muslims.

 

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

enemies huh

in waht way

i know many muslims but i dont make them my enemies.

keep your fanatical views to yourself

[Sephiroth]

 

enemies huh

in waht way

i know many muslims but i dont make them my enemies.

keep your fanatical views to yourself

 

Did anyone ASKED what you thought of them?

 

People like you are traitors to your own race, willing to bow and serve them just to get table scraps thrown to you.

 

I know, here in Malaysia, we have a few of your kind here - calling themselves Leaders in MIC who were blind and deaf when 100 HINDU TEMPLES were demolished.

[sant]

im not from malaysia.

Im sorry i understand what you mean.

guy who you were talking to must be malaysian .

i know you must be full of hatred.

but you dont call all muslims enemies.

dont you understand.

i live in india.

i dont go around abusing muslims on the way,.

Im not an idot.

Ido not look at them as my enemies.

They are indians from my country.

Such views cause problems.

Im shore you are quite intelligent to understand that hindus and muslims are just by bodies.

[prithvi]

 

Is there any relationship between Christ and the hindu god Krishna? ...

Jesus preached monotheism then why do Christians not follow him but believe in

 

polytheism the trinity? : 1

The name of Isa is not Christ. The name Christ, meaning savior, has been derived from Greek Chrestos; and Chrestos has been derived from Chrishna of India. Even the name of Jesus is derived from Krishna - Krishna's full name is Krishna Jesues. Krishna is called Yesu Krishna in some places in India. The reason why Christians worship trinity is because they are Vaishnavites who left India and settled abroad; they are following the Vaishnavite trinity. As per beliefs, Vishnu incarnated as Narayan (Krishna) and Nar (Arjun) at the time of Mahabharat; so you get the vaishnavite trinity - Vishnu, Narayan, Nar. ThanksPrithvi

[Sephiroth]

 

im not from malaysia.

Im sorry i understand what you mean.

guy who you were talking to must be malaysian .

i know you must be full of hatred.

but you dont call all muslims enemies.

dont you understand.

i live in india.

i dont go around abusing muslims on the way,.

Im not an idot.

Ido not look at them as my enemies.

They are indians from my country.

Such views cause problems.

Im shore you are quite intelligent to understand that hindus and muslims are just by bodies.

I talked to NO ONE, I have experienced Muslim persecutions on Hindus FIRST HAND. Do not treat me like some fellow who takes his stories from a third or fourth person's view.

 

I know how twisted Muslims can be. They demolish Hindu temples and claim that they are saving Hindus from eternal torment. And this they do so they could be rewarded in heaven with alcholol, wealth and virgins. THAT IS WHAT ISLAM TEACHES.

[Sephiroth]

 

The name of Isa is not Christ. The name Christ, meaning savior, has been derived from Greek Chrestos; and Chrestos has been derived from Chrishna of India. Even the name of Jesus is derived from Krishna - Krishna's full name is Krishna Jesues. Krishna is called Yesu Krishna in some places in India. The reason why Christians worship trinity is because they are Vaishnavites who left India and settled abroad; they are following the Vaishnavite trinity. As per beliefs, Vishnu incarnated as Narayan (Krishna) and Nar (Arjun) at the time of Mahabharat; so you get the vaishnavite trinity - Vishnu, Narayan, Nar. ThanksPrithvi

 

The hell ...

 

I have read the Mahabratha epic, Bhavagad Gita AND the Bible (New and Old Testament).

 

Exactly where did you get this little fairy tale from?

[sant]

 

I talked to NO ONE, I have experienced Muslim persecutions on Hindus FIRST HAND. Do not treat me like some fellow who takes his stories from a third or fourth person's view.

 

I know how twisted Muslims can be. They demolish Hindu temples and claim that they are saving Hindus from eternal torment. And this they do so they could be rewarded in heaven with alcholol, wealth and repatchable virgins. THAT IS WHAT ISLAM TEACHES.

 

You can call them whatever you want, but remember this - when they have the opportunity, they WILL find you and slice your throat.

 

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

you must be i didnt deny.

Was just saying that guy u were speaking to must also be a malysian.

I meant prithvi.That is why you said our.

 

BBut i think maybe you dont have any good muslim friemds or good muslims in Malaysia.

Come to india.

Muslims are also discriminated.

You dont want to make any one your enemy just because he is muslim.

[prithvi]

 

The hell ...

 

I have read the Mahabratha epic, Bhavagad Gita AND the Bible (New and Old Testament).

 

Exactly where did you get this little fairy tale from?

There are hundreds of books being written out there that the Christ legend is not an original one and is borrowed from other legends - the two most important being Krishna of India and Heru of Egypt. It is funny that you call this a fairy tale after such huge amounts of research by such a large number of scholars. Christ is just one of a large number of crucified saviors in the whole world. Here is a list -Adad of Assyria Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece Alcides of Thebes Attis of Phrygia Baal of Phoenicia Bali of Afghanistan Beddu of Japan Buddha of India Crite of Chaldea Deva Tat of Siam Hesus of the Druids Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded appearance was adopted for the Christ character34 Indra of Tibet/India Jao of Nepal Krishna of India Mikado of the Sintoos Mithra of Persia Odin of the Scandinavians Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece Quetzalcoatl of Mexico Salivahana of Bermuda Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later turned into the disciple Thomas35) Thor of the Gauls Universal Monarch of the Sibyls36 Wittoba of the Bilingonese Xamolxis of Thrace Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia Zoar of the Bonzes Sources: Jesus Lived in india, by Holger Kersten World's Sixteen crucified Saviors, by Kersey Graves . The Christ conspiracy:The Greatest Story Ever Told, by S.Acharya Searching for God -- Now a Valid Science, by Gene MatlockThis is just a sample; you can fill a library with books written to show that the legend of Christ has been made up by borrowal from other sources. You can search for them in Amazon and get them. The only point these books do not cover is about the Vaishnavite trinity. That would be an additional evidence from my book. Also westerners trace Christ to Chrestos, but they would not acknowledge Chrestos to Chrishna, because of sectarian considerations. Thanks

[prithvi]

 

The hell ...

 

I have read the Mahabratha epic, Bhavagad Gita AND the Bible (New and Old Testament).

 

Exactly where did you get this little fairy tale from?

 

 

 

(sorry, message garbled. so repeating it)

 

There are hundreds of books being written out there that the Christ legend is not an original one and is borrowed from other legends - the two most important being Krishna of India and Heru of Egypt. It is funny that you call this a fairy tale after such huge amounts of research by such a large number of scholars. Christ is just one of a large number of crucified saviors in the whole world. Here is a list -

 

Adad of Assyria

Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece

Alcides of Thebes

Attis of Phrygia

Baal of Phoenicia

Bali of Afghanistan

Beddu of Japan

Buddha of India

Crite of Chaldea

Deva Tat of Siam

Hesus of the Druids

Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded appearance was adopted for the Christ character34

Indra of Tibet/India

Jao of Nepal

Krishna of India

Mikado of the Sintoos

Mithra of Persia

Odin of the Scandinavians

Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece

Quetzalcoatl of Mexico

Salivahana of Bermuda

Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later turned into the disciple Thomas35)

Thor of the Gauls

Universal Monarch of the Sibyls36

Wittoba of the Bilingonese

Xamolxis of Thrace

Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia

Zoar of the Bonzes

 

Sources: Jesus Lived in india, by Holger Kersten World's Sixteen crucified Saviors, by Kersey Graves . The Christ conspiracy:The Greatest Story Ever Told, by S.Acharya Searching for God -- Now a Valid Science, by Gene Matlock

 

This is just a sample; you can fill a library with books written to show that the legend of Christ has been made up by borrowal from other sources. You can search for them in Amazon and get them. The only point these books do not cover is about the Vaishnavite trinity. That would be an additional evidence from my book. Also westerners trace Christ to Chrestos, but they would not acknowledge Chrestos to Chrishna, because of sectarian considerations.

 

Thanks

[chandu_69]

This is getting more and more embarassing.Prithi saab, pls spare us the torture.

[Sephiroth]

 

you must be i didnt deny.

Come to india.

Muslims are also discriminated.

You dont want to make any one your enemy just because he is muslim.

 

Muslims are discriminated because they allow themselves to be discriminated.

 

Their religion consists of forcing others to submit to their god - Allah. As long as others do not, they will always force their belief down on our throats. When we fight back, they will say we are discriminating them.

 

That is their mindset - they are torturing themselves, and they are unhappy till we are tortured as well.

[Sephiroth]

 

This is getting more and more embarassing.Prithi saab, pls spare us the torture.

 

Yeah, I agree with this one.

 

Instead of looking for Christ, why don't you take a break and look deep within yourself?

 

God (not Christ) will be there for you to find. Don't waste your time with fairy-tales.

[sant]

 

Muslims are discriminated because they allow themselves to be discriminated.

 

Their religion consists of forcing others to submit to their god - Allah. As long as others do not, they will always force their belief down on our throats. When we fight back, they will say we are discriminating them.

 

That is their mindset - they are torturing themselves, and they are unhappy till we are tortured as well.

 

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

 

Well maybe they must be.BUt im not like them nor you should be .

fighting for self defense is another and to attack is another.

Not everybody is like that remember that.

A person can be good or bad Irespective of hindu/muslim.

Here most muslims ive met are really good people.

Many are being discriminated all over.

So in there in malasia it might not be.

But come to india sir.

Hatred makes no sense.

Your other posts show little smart things but i think you should try to follow them.

[sant]

 

sorry, message garbled. so repeating it)

 

There are hundreds of books being written out there that the Christ legend is not an original one and is borrowed from other legends - the two most important being Krishna of India and Heru of Egypt. It is funny that you call this a fairy tale after such huge amounts of research by such a large number of scholars. Christ is just one of a large number of crucified saviors in the whole world. Here is a list -

 

Adad of Assyria

Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece

Alcides of Thebes

Attis of Phrygia

Baal of Phoenicia

Bali of Afghanistan

Beddu of Japan

Buddha of India

Crite of Chaldea

Deva Tat of Siam

Hesus of the Druids

Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded appearance was adopted for the Christ character34

Indra of Tibet/India

Jao of Nepal

Krishna of India

Mikado of the Sintoos

Mithra of Persia

Odin of the Scandinavians

Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece

Quetzalcoatl of Mexico

Salivahana of Bermuda

Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later turned into the disciple Thomas35)

Thor of the Gauls

Universal Monarch of the Sibyls36

Wittoba of the Bilingonese

Xamolxis of Thrace

Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia

Zoar of the Bonzes

 

 

hercules was crucified,budhha was crucified?

Krishna was crucified?

zeus?

Zeus is compared to be indras father as i know.

What nonsense do you post

Whats your problem .

show some respect.

JEsus christ greatness is just too much even to describe.

 

jai jesus christ

[prithvi]

 

Yeah, I agree with this one.

 

Instead of looking for Christ, why don't you take a break and look deep within yourself?

 

God (not Christ) will be there for you to find. Don't waste your time with fairy-tales.

 

 

Hundreds of scholars have spent their lifetimes in researching the crucified savior phenomenon that was spread across the world even before christianity ever came into existence. You want to call this vast amount of research as fairy tale and torture? A large number of books have been written at the time of Christ about Jewish history and no author has ever made any mention of Jesus, putting a question mark on whether Jesus ever existed. A book "Antiquities of Jews," published in 93 AD gives a detailed view Jewish history until then - it talks about Herod, John the Baptist, Pontius Pilate and others, but it does not talk about any Jesus; and it does not talk about Herod wanting to kill kids aged below 2 years in his kingdom. So who is living in fairyland, you or me?

 

The name of Christ has been derived from Greek "Kristos." - this is widely acknowledged. Check wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ.

 

Western scholars do not want to acknowledge that Kristos has been been derived from Krishna. In south India, people named after Krishna are called Krishnan, Krishnudu, Kristiah etc - does this mean that these names are not derived from Krishna? If Kristiah is derived from Krishna, then why Kristos is not derived from Krishna? Is this some sort of a selective derivation so as to fit into your religious beliefs?

 

Please live in your own fairyland; I do not want to disturb it.

[sant]

Its hard to agree brahma to be abraham,or shiva to be Isaac Etc.

Just by name yes.

 

 

Read the bhavishya puraan.

 

 

according to it it they all have been born in kali yuga.

[prithvi]

 

hercules was crucified,budhha was crucified?

Krishna was crucified?

zeus?

Zeus is compared to be indras father as i know.

What nonsense do you post

Whats your problem .

show some respect.

JEsus christ greatness is just too much even to describe.

 

jai jesus christ

 

 

Please do not think that what ever you read in your scriptures in final. There are legends associating Krishna, Buddha, and even Siva with crucifixation - If you read the vast amont of literature available, you will know. At one point of time, the legend of crucified God was so popular that each and every divinity had to be associated with crucifixation to be considered divine.

[prithvi]

 

Its hard to agree brahma to be abraham,or shiva to be Isaac Etc.

Just by name yes.

 

 

Read the bhavishya puraan.

 

 

according to it it they all have been born in kali yuga.

 

 

Please go by the name association in its totality, not just one or two names. If I show you just two name associations, you can argue in this manner. If I show you twenty name associations, this argument is not valid.

[sant]

 

Please go by the name association in its totality, not just one or two names. If I show you just two name associations, you can argue in this manner. If I show you twenty name associations, this argument is not valid.

 

<!-- / message -->

SHOW THEN

[sant]

Its Obvious You Have Little Knowledge About The Demigods Brahma Shiva Parvati

The Only Way Similarity Can Come If By Any Chance Shiva Had An Incarnation As Isaac.

Or Sarswati As Sarai

[prithvi]

 

SHOW THEN

 

 

I have given already given the name association for the entire Hindu pantheon.

[prithvi]

 

Its Obvious You Have Little Knowledge About The Demigods Brahma Shiva Parvati

The Only Way Similarity Can Come If By Any Chance Shiva Had An Incarnation As Isaac.

Or Sarswati As Sarai

 

 

It is not about incarnation of Siva. Jews (Yadavas) have rejected the Vedic religion in favor of worship of Krishna, and they have listed the names of the Hindu Gods under their covenant as different allegorical characters.