What do Hare Krishna devotees believe about Christ?

[Priitaa]

Frodo,

 

With all due respect, you ask us to blindly accept your comment that Jesus was Lord Gauranga Mahaprabhu and stop our 'speculation' of who Jesus was, yet you give us no 'proof' of your own.

 

However, please note, no one said Jesus was Krishna, as you suggested.

 

Also please note that what I stated about Jesus was based on what jagat guru Srila Prabhupada either said about him or wrote in the Srimad Bhagavatam, which will go on for the next 10,000 years. Prabhupada never stated he was Lord Gauranga, but that he is Satkyavesa avatara. Thus, it is authoritative information.

 

So please clarify, where do you get your authority from on this topic?

 

Thank you.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Frodo]

 

Guest and Priitaa,

 

I guess that both of you need glasses to correctly being able to understand the sentences as they are written. Especailly I sense, that glasses are also needed on your hearts as there energies of enviousness vs. Laksmhi-devi currently still reside. :-(

 

Christ=Vishnu-tattva, Jesus=Jiva-tattva

 

My authority is Lord Gauranga Himself and He guides me in providing this information to you.

 

You must understand, Priitaa, that Lord Gauranga is not static but dynamic, therefore when time is appropriate He can reveal wisdom to all his pure instruments, by also doing it in a way that may shock orthodox, dogmatic so-called Vaishnavas.

 

Sincerely,

Frodo

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>>Frodo: My authority is Lord Gauranga Himself and He guides me in providing this information to you.<<

 

 

Thanks anyway Frodo.

 

[Priitaa]

Dear Frodo,

 

No one needs glasses merely because they have a different opinion than yours.

 

Your proof is only based on your opinion. It is not what Prabhupad said.

 

You can not claim to be your own authorty. A guru is ALWAYS required. So who is your guru?

 

Prabhupada has made it clear that Jesus was jiva tattva, there is no argument there, so I don't understand why you try to make one. Maybe a misunderstanding.

 

Anyway, nowhere in Vedic literature does it say Christ=Vishnu-tattva, Jesus=Jiva-tattva. Unless you can show otherwise.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Priitaa]

 

I remember seeing something on some scientists snipping a bit of the shroud to test it but that was long ago and I haven't up to see the results.

 

 

Thiest,

 

Would you like me to post the findings I came across? They are very interesting, especially for one who also has a bit of a scientific mind. Tho they are graphic. But it is convincing.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Frodo]

 

Priitaa,

 

Opinions made by envious souls as you are are not of interest to anyone as it is useless for truth seeker.

 

An honest Vaishnava is able to feel Krishna and also hear Him in the heart. Sometimes they can also feel His instructions and know exactly what is true and not as Krishna tells them what is true and what is untrue.

 

In contrast to you, I can actually claim to be a person that is directly instructed by Lord Krishna in all spiritual matters, therefore I am an authority in everything I say.

 

Your personal acceptance of this is again not of worth to anyone.

 

Vedic wisdom is vast and is revealed to pure bhaktas. Vedic wisdom is not limited to the sastras you have access to as those sastras with their slokas are profound and sometimes they inherent hidden wisdom that is only accessible to honest bhaktas but not to envious souls.

 

The conclusion is that prior to try to criticize me with the same arguments - e.g. where is the vedic evidence etc., please try to start an effort in you to become humil and bag for apologize, not just in words but in facts, at Lord Vishnu's and espeacially Srimati Lakshmi-devi's lotos feet.

 

No matter what you think, Christ is a name of Lord Gauranga, therefore it is Vishnu-tattva and Jesus is an eternal beloved child of Lord Gauranga. This is truth and can not be changed by your speculative and arrogant thinking.

 

Sincerely,

Frodo

[Priitaa]

 

I can actually claim to be a person that is directly instructed by Lord Krishna in all spiritual matters, therefore I am an authority in everything I say----My authority is Lord Gauranga Himself and He guides me in providing this information to you

 

 

 

Frodo,

 

Such name calling and chastizement in your last post, as well as your assumed guru-like position, reveals you are unaqualified to be telling me or anyone else what to do.

 

I don't want to continue this pointless nonsense with you anymore. We've both said our piece, now let it go.

 

Thank you.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

Prtha dd,

 

Yes I would like to see them, thank you. Use you judgment on either posting them here or a link.

 

Another interesting thought is that Jesus is refered to as the only begotten Son of God. From the view of creation that can only be said of Brahmaji.

 

It seems our friend Frodo has become so advanced he no longer needs guidance from Gandolf. It's just a phase.

 

Haribol

[leyh]

Dear Frodo:

 

Please allow me to direct your attention to the following excerpt:

 

I noted when we were preaching in South India, that whenever any gentleman who was a renowned devotee in a particular place approached our guru maharaja, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura Prabhupada, he used to ask such men, "Under whose guidance does your devotional service to Krsna go on?" Generally they used to say, "No, no, I am directly concerned with Lord Krsna, and Lord Rama." Then, when they went away, we heard our guru maharaja say, "He has no devotion." That person was dismissed as an imitation devotee. That is a vague kind of devotion. It has not taken any particular shape, because he is ignoring the asraya, the shelter-giving devotees in the positions surrounding the Lord. That is the great test of devotion. (From Chapter 12 of Sri Guru & His Grace by His Divine Grace Bhakti Raksaka Srila Sridhara Deva Goswami)

 

Let us try to follow the example of the previous acaryas. Hare Krsna.

[Priitaa]

Haribol Thiest,

 

Interesting point you make about Jesus and Brahma. I'll have to think about it.

 

The Shroud Evidence is probably not tooooooo graphic to put here, and it pretty factual. Tho for those with weak stomachs, they may not want to read. And sometimes, that includes me. I found by reading some, that was proof enough. Anyway, take a look and decide for yourself.

-------

 

That the Man of the Shroud and the Man of the Tomb are the same person

 

That the Man of the Shroud, obviously, most certainly survived his apparent crucifixion, as he could not be located in a tomb in Kashmir had he died as a result of the crucifixion, especially if it is assumed that that man was Jesus Christ.

 

That the oral and written traditions that speak of Yuz Asaf are traditions referring to none other than Jesus Christ.

 

Had the Shroud revealed nothing but a smooth image, then even a DNA match would say nothing other than that the cloth of a man who now lies in the Roza Bal in Srinagar, Kashmir, India, somehow ended up in Turin, Italy. But this cloth bears markings that exactly parallel the descriptions one finds in the Bible of the scourging of Jesus Christ. As Kersten notes in his book, The Jesus Conspiracy: The Turin Shroud and the Truth about the Resurrection:

 

The distinct details allow us to recognize six of the Stations of the Cross reported in the Gospels. First, expert medical studies have discovered a severe swelling under the right eye and other surface face wounds, which are obviously related to blows to the face inflicted by the soldiers.

 

Secondly, a large number of small, very conspicuous, dumbbell-shaped markings are visible on the front and rear of the body&#8212;they are particularly distinct on the shoulder and back regions. In total over ninety of these wounds can be counted, and their shape allows a reconstruction of the kind of instrument used to inflict them. The wounds are clustered in groups of three at a certain fixed angle to the body, so one has to assume it was a whip. The characteristic form of the individual wounds points to the Roman flagrum. One often encounters this terrible instrument of torture in stories of the early Christian martyrs. It was especially feared because it was fitted at the ends of the three leather thongs with very small lead dumbbells, called plumbatae, and sometimes bone pieces, which could cause painful wounds.

 

Thirdly, in the shoulder region the whip wounds appear smeared with blood. This observation tallies with the custom of making the person sentenced to death on the cross carry the crossbeam (patibulum) to the place of execution himself.

 

Fourthly, the irregular course of the streams of blood on the forehead and the back of the head allow us to infer a crowning with thorns. The way these wounds are distributed over the head is interesting. It shows that what the Man of the Shroud wore was not the ring of thorns familiar to us from the whole Christian iconography. It was rather a cap covering the whole head. This corresponds exactly to the oriental crowns which were widespread in those days.

 

Fifthly, the nail wounds are striking, especially one of the hand wounds. The course of the larger streams of blood indicates that the arms were stretched out on the cross at an angle of 55-65 [degrees] to the vertical. The hand wounds supply a surprising piece of information: in art it is only the palms of the hands that are pierced, but the blood flows on the cloth clearly show that the nails were actually driven through the wrists, a fact which was to be supported by later investigations.

 

The final Station of the Cross is evident from an oval wound on the right side about 4.5 centimeters in length, situated between the fifth and sixth ribs. Quite a lot of blood appears to have flowed from this wound, the dispersal of which is best made out on the rear view. As is well known, the text of John mentions an injury to the side caused by a lance, saying "blood and water" immediately flowed from it. One does not find any sign of major injuries to the upper or lower legs, suggesting that the legs were not broken, again as confirmed by the Bible.

 

The anatomically precise representation of the body is similarly inexplicable [were the Shroud a forgery]. Anatomical knowledge up until the sixteenth century was based on the works of the Greek physician Galen (129-201), and was not modified until the pioneering studies of the Flemish anatomist Andreas Vesal (1514-64). One only has to glance over the medical codices from the end of the fifteenth century to be confronted in a striking manner with the paucity of the anatomical knowledge then available for iconography. As an example, I can refer you to the manuscript of the famous Monumenta Medica of John of Ketham of 1491, now kept in the National Library in Paris.

 

There can be no doubt that the picture on the cloth shows the imprint of a man which really has been impacted on the sheet of fabric. Moreover the evidence of the details proves that it could not have been just any crucified person. The agreement in so many details with the reports of the Gospels about the Passion of Jesus, and with other historical data about his crucifixion, is so impressive that even the Jesuit and historian Herbert Thurston, who considered the linen to be a forgery, wrote in 1903: "If this is not the impression of the Christ, it was designed as the counterfeit of that impression. In no other person since the world began could these details be verified."

 

-----

 

I can put more later, if folks read thru that OK. Anyway, at the very least, it makes one think.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

 

I have recently read a book by Catholic philosophy

scholar Hans kung, he is considered by many

to be the the best of the catholic scholars.

 

his book was on comparative philosophy and theology between christianity and islam,buddhism, and hinduism.

 

It is a very well researched and written book, his conclusion is that christianity has more in common

with the teachings of vaisnava vedanta in the ramanuja

line then with any other religion.

 

i was amazed on how he went very meticulously point

to point in comparing the two philosophies.

 

He agreed that the visishtadvaita or bhedabheda

philosophy expounded by Ramanuja was the exact same

philosophy of christianity.

 

in fact the only difference he could find between the two

was in the concept of Karma and reincarnation, and the

special place given to jesus in christian dogma.

 

He agreed that karma and reincarnation was philosophically

better and more tenable then christian dogma when it came

to explaining why there is a wide disparity between

peoples experience in this life, some born rich or poor,

healthy or sick, opportunity or none, etc.

 

He agree that christian philosophy left those questions unanswered and left it to the mystery of God, and that

vedic philosphy was a more attractive and rational

philosophy.

 

then comparing jesus and Krishna his view,the christian

(educated catholic philosopher), view was that in jesus

we can find a historical believability that is

not found in Krishna, due to Krishna's appearence so long ago.

 

his view of the vedic conception being cyclical

in nature,with God appearing regularly and bringing

revelations over and over throughout many ages,

as being a major point of departure from the Christian

view of history being linear, having a beginning

and coming to a conclusion with Jesus and his bringing

redemption to those who accept him.

 

while he admits that philosphically speaking the vedic conception,especially in the line of Ramanuja is more philosphically satisfying and better at explaining

God and creation in a holistic way then christianity

he gives the christian view a higher status,

although that might just be him playing to his christian

audience upon who he depends on for his living.

[Frodo]

I can notice and sense that alltogether (except me) form a strange clan of envious rascal souls vs. Lord Vishnu and Srimati Lakshmi-devi.

 

Yes, fallen angels, I am indeed an authority, you can call it guru too, that gives guidance to others on how to surrender to God.

 

Especially you need urgent guidance as very soon changes will happen on our bhumi planet which requires a deep heart transformation towards bhakti yoga and a complete dissolving of enviousness towards God.

 

It is always funny to see how speculators talk about spiritual topics without having any clue about what they are talking about due to their non-vijnana experienced knowledge but just mind-/envious-heart speculative thoughts.

 

Is a frog prisoned in a fountain a reference about telling on things happen in the sea? This is actually your current consciousness situation, no idea at all about what you are talking about.

 

It is right that for fallen angels as all of you are, it is necessary to physically surrender to a living guru. For not fallen angels as in my case it's up to Lord Gauranga to decide whether or not it is currently needed to have a diksha guru; currently He has not sent me to any diksha guru, but maybe this will change in the future.

 

Frodo

[Priitaa]

Siva,

 

Thank you for that informative post. That there are any findings at all to show a connection between Christianity and the Ramanuja line, that is surprising, as they hate to be connected to us but love to view us as heathens. It was quite an interesting read.

 

Having been raised as a Christian myself, I was surprised to learn that many Christians believed Jesus was God. Matter of fact, I never had heard of such a thing until after I joined the movement and devotees were running up against it out on Sankirtana! I suspect it was a new concept than. So while I would agree with much of what Hans Kung has to say, it appears there are various branches of Christianity that hold different belief systems about Jesus.

 

My mother was Catholic, my father - Methodist. I was raised Methodist, which is a historically known religion for the belief that Jesus was *son* of God. Maybe the Catholics believe otherwise, but that had not been my experience. At least, I never got this from my mother or her side of the family. I wonder if this is a kali yuga thing, as I was a child quit some time ago. <G> Times, and beliefs, may have changed?

 

Also, some Christians believe Jesus was a vegetarian, and some also believe in karma and reincarnation; tho I must admit, they are not the conservatives or the fundamentalists. But there are Christians out there who take this view and back it up with Biblical verses.

 

I would have to take issue with this Hans gentleman over his idea that in Jesus can be found historical believability that is not found in Krishna due to Krishna's appearence so long ago. There has been much archeological evidence of, for example, the existence of Dwarka. And others. He's just not looking in the right places. :-)

 

In my research I was finding more and more, Krishna as the root of all religions. Of course we know that, but it's nice to see how it unfolded, somewhat. Jai!

 

YS,

Prtha dd

 

[Guest guest]

Prtha dd, That was very informative.Somehow I was under the impression that no such though investigation of the shroud was allowed for fear of ruining it. Glad to see I was mistaken. Where do they say this shroud is from? Is someone claimimg Kashmir? I thought present day Israel. How do they explain the fact that there is such an imprint left on this cloth in the first place?

 

Siva, I went to the library to locate the book you spoke of but to no avail. Many by Hans Kung, but I could not find any that spoke of Indian Vaisnavism, at least from the titles I got no indication. Would you please post the title?

 

Hare Krsna

[Priitaa]

Actually, you are correct. They did not allow for much testing. Its the Shroud of Turin. But they are claiming Christ lived and died in Kashmir, India, and that THIS is what he meant when he spoke of the "Holy Land." (!)

 

Here's more.

 

-----

The Shroud of Turin (see previous page) shows full-length front and back images of what appears to be a crucified man. It is made of fine linen and is 3.5 feet wide and a little over 14 feet long. The markings and the image on the Shroud appear to correspond to Biblical descriptions of the brutal beating and persecution of Jesus Christ. There are many people who believe that the Shroud of Turin is the actual burial cloth of Jesus Christ. There are others who believe it to be a medieval fraud created by some ingenious individual.

 

The picture is generally very well known. That picture is actually the photographic negative of the image on Shroud of Turin. But when one actually views the Shroud itself, the image appears very faint, though distinct. So, the negative produced from photographing the Shroud gives an indication of how the Shroud would have looked to the human eye before it faded over the centuries. The Shroud is owned by the Catholic Church. You may read more about the Shroud of Turin at http://64.224.220.220 , a fascinating site. Another excellent site is the Shroud of Turin Website, managed by Mr. Barry Schwortz, the photographer responsible for photographing every square centimeter of the Shroud of Turin during the 1978 STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) scientific investigations. You may also wish to check out the site run by the Council for the Study of the Shroud of Turin.

 

What on earth has the Shroud of Turin to do with the theory of Jesus in India? That's what we'll examine.

 

One hypothesis that is constantly propagated by Christians (particularly Catholics) who believe that the Shroud is genuine is that the image on the Shroud proves that Jesus Christ actually resurrected, emitting a burst of light and radiation causing the image to form on the Shroud. It has been claimed that science has not, as yet, discovered how the image was made.

 

But there are those who believe that the Shroud of Turin might tell another story: that the markings and image on the Shroud prove that Jesus survived the crucifixion. They claim that there is a very natural explanation of how the image on the Shroud was made, although, of course, that explanation is rejected by Christians and by scientists who begin their scientific studies of the Shroud with the assumption that whoever the Shroud covered was dead. Those who believe that the Shroud stands as proof that Christ survived the crucifixion avow that if one begins with the assumption that the body was still alive after the crucifixion, then a natural explanation of how the image was made comes to the fore.

 

Bioplastic Coating on the Shroud of Turin

 

In 1978, the STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) scientist, Dr. Ray Rogers, of the Los Alamos Laboratory in New Mexico, who had been one of the participants of the first thorough scientific studies of the Shroud (conducted in Turin, Italy) hand-delivered 32 sticky-tape slides containing fibers of the Shroud of Turin to Dr. Walter McCrone, a microscopist. Dr. McCrone noticed what he believed to be powdered iron oxide on the fibers that had been taken specifically from body image areas of the Shroud. Iron oxide is a natural pigment that has been used in art for thousands of years.

 

He also noticed other materials that led him to the conclusion that the Shroud was a medieval forgery produced by a very clever artist. McCrone's finding was at complete variance with the findings of Dr. Heller, whose research identified the stains on the Shroud as bloodstains. Heller, in his book, Report on the Shroud of Turin, noted the following:

 

Thus far, our positive blood tests had included (1) microspectrophotometric scans of crystals and fibrils, (2) reflectance scans on the Shroud, (3) positive hemochromogen tests, (4) positive cyanomethemoglobin tests, (5) positive tests for bile pigments, and (6) characteristic heme porphyrin fluorescence. Any one of these is proof of the presence of blood, and each is acceptable in a court of law. Taken together, they are irrefutable.

 

So there now existed two diametrically opposed conclusions regarding the blood on the Shroud, both coming from noted scientists in their fields. In the meantime the scientific community had been urging the Vatican to allow carbon dating of the Shroud as a way to settle the issue. In October of 1987, Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero, of Turin, Italy, approved a list of three radiocarbon laboratories that would be allowed enough samples of the Shroud to carry out the test. These labs were: The Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology's radiocarbon-dating facility at Zurich, and the University of Arizona's facility at Tucson. The results was performed, and on October 13, 1988 in the British Museum's Press Room, it was announced that the carbon dating had dated the Shroud to somewhere between the years 1260-1390. The conclusion was that the Shroud was a fake.

 

But at a conference held in Rome, Italy in June of 1993, and sponsored by the Centre International d'Etudes sur le Linceul de Turin, Dr. Leoncio A. Garza-Valdes rocked the entire Shroud community in a paper he read entitled, Biogenic Varnish and the Shroud of Turin.

 

Valdes discovered that on many ancient artifacts, there exists a plaque-like coating that accumulates over centuries. He called this coating a "bioplastic material." This material accumulates through the activity of millions of bacteria fungi that build up into a hard casing similar to a coral reef. Dr. Garza-Valdes explained that this bioplastic coating is invisible unless a special medium is used to disclose its presence. In April of 1993, Dr. Garza-Valdes traveled to Turin, Italy for the purpose of examining under a microscope some threads of the Shroud that were in the possession of Giovanni Riggi. He described his first reaction, upon viewing these threads, as follows:

 

"As soon as I looked at a segment in the microscope, I knew it was heavily contaminated. I knew that what had been radiocarbon dated was a mixture of linen and bacteria and fungi and bioplastic coating that had grown on the fibers for centuries."

 

Walter McCrone raised the objection that if such a coating existed on the carbon-dated fibers of the Shroud of Turin, then that coating would have been removed due to a very stringent pretreatment cleaning routinely performed by radiocarbon-dating laboratories. This cleaning is performed specifically to remove any contaminants that might exist on a specimen and, as a consequence, interfere with the results of the test. All three of the laboratories that dated the Shroud fibers had used a cleaning agent composed of hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide. So, Dr. Garza-Valdes reproduced this cleaning process, and concluded:

 

"When you clean these with hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide not simply with the concentration used by the radiocarbon laboratories but with six times the strength of that used in 1988, you don&#8217;t do a single thing to the bacteria and the bioplastic coating. The only thing that you do is to dissolve part of the cellulose from the flax, so that you are going to make bigger the contaminant in relation to the cellulose of the flax."

 

But how was it possible that three different radiocarbon-dating laboratories could have missed this coating? Garza-Valdes argued that the bioplastic coating is like clear plastic, and one can look right through it just as one would look through glass. He said:

 

"This is why many people have looked with the microscope and have missed the deposit and said the fibers are clean. A few years ago they could not have understood how the Mayans gave that beautiful polish to the ancient jades. No one could understand the technology they used to give that beautiful luster. But the Mayans didn't do it. It was the bacteria that deposited this acrylic on the ancient surfaces."

 

"The DNA of God?"

Well, despite Heller's tests demonstrating that blood does exist on the Shroud, and despite Garza-Valdes's discovery of the bioplastic coating, a debate emerged regarding the color of stains on the Shroud. Dr. Walter McCrone believed that since exposed blood eventually turns a brownish color, then the stains on the Shroud could not be blood because of their deep, red appearance. But Dr. Alan Adler, a STURP member, offered the biological explanation that if the Man of the Shroud had undergone torture, scourging, crucifixion and shock, then in less than 30 seconds, a high amount of billirubin would have been produced.

 

Under these conditions, when the blood clots, an exudate forms that would remain, minus all the intact cells with haemoglobin, on any cloth with which it might come in contact. So, in the case of the Shroud, this enhanced bilirubin is what would have been left. This substance, which is a yellowish-orange, mixes with something called mehaemoglobin, and the result of this mixture is the very red color of the bloodstains.

 

But despite these explanations, there still remained people who insisted that the blood was not blood at all, but paint. Scientists knew that if McCrone were correct if the bloodstains were paint, "then DNA could not be present." Conversely, if Heller and Adler were correct, then DNA would be found on the stains. In 1995, threads that had been taken from the Shroud during the 1978 STURP investigations were examined at Genoa's Institute of Legal Medicine. These threads had been taken from the foot area of the Shroud. Professor Marcello Canale, reported the following:

 

"We have extracted the DNA present on these tiny threads and have amplified this with a chain reaction that allows us, via a particular enzyme, to keep on replicating the DNA an infinite number of times. It is a method that can be used even in the case of a single cell 'The DNA chain is very long, and we are able to identify very small sectors representing individual characteristics which can ultimately enable us to identify the individual from whom they derive.' "

 

Dr. Victor Tyron and his wife, Nancy Mitchell Tyron of Texas University's Center for Advanced DNA Technologies, performed an independent test for DNA. They first established that the threads contained human blood, and then that DNA was present in the blood.

 

The Shroud, the Tomb, and DNA

"The DNA chain is very long, and we are able to identify very small sectors representing individual characteristics which can ultimately enable us to identify the individual from whom they derive."

 

We have no idea how Professor Marcello Canale would "identify the individual from whom they derive," unless he were able to find a sample of DNA to compare with the Shroud DNA sample.

 

If the Roza Bal could be searched for remains, and if DNA were to be extracted from those remains, then a comparison of DNA found on the Shroud to DNA found in the Roza Bal could be made. And if this comparison showed a match, then strong circumstantial evidence that would suggest:

 

That the Man of the Shroud and the Man of the Tomb are the same person

[Guest guest]

 

 

here is a site devoted to Kung,his book

is two thirds of the way down on the left,

christianity and world religions.

http://www.gnooks.com/discussion/hans+kung.html

 

and also the methodist theology is the

same as most christian dogma when it comes

to jesus, trinitarian, jesus is god incarnate.

 

When kung writes that jesus is more historically

available, that is ebcause he is playing for his audience, christians.

 

in fact around 100 years ago the catholic church

started the catholic modernist movement, it was started

by the church due to the new science of biblical archeaology, they wanted to counter the new scientific

'science' of historical research of archaeology

which was new at the time.

 

so they decided to train a bunch of priests in archeaology

to search for the scientific historical proofs

of their beliefs.

 

it backfired, what happened is that the priests

couldn't find any proof, just the opposite,

and many left the church.

 

the historical jesus is paramount in most christian

dogma, since the data that is available that is subsantiated by science of jesus as a historical figure,

with his teachings as presented in the gospels,

since all that is non existant, just the opposite,

especially since the discovery of the dead sea scrolls,

it makes the christian contention of their theology

as being scientifically accurate untenable.

[Guest guest]

Haribol. If Jesus were to hear our friend frodo, he would tell us the same thing he told his disciples when they tried to say he was god., No he is not the Father, but his mission is the same.

 

If anyone comes close in Chaitanya Lila to the characteristics of Lord Jesus Christ, it is Haridas Thakur. The similarities are countless, and comparisons to Lord Brahma are also significant, (ie creator, only son of visnu (as in born from the lotus)).

 

Jesus served in total separation, crying blood in such separation, and for his unwavering service, he is serving without such separation as Haridas. Haridas even discussed with Lord Chaitanya how intolerable separation has become, and was "allowed" to pass prior to the disappearance of Mahaprabhu.

 

Jesus was not tolerable to his community (the sanhedrin), while haridas was not even allowed to enter the temple of Lord Jagganatha. Both were assaSSINATED BY THE GOVERNMENT who paid religious folks for treachery, both miraculously survived assassination after being declared dead.

 

Both emphasized the perfection of life is contained in the utterance of the Holy Names of the Supreme Lord.

 

Many see Lord Brahma as supreme, but Narada Muni discovers that Lord Brahma is subswerviant to a greater Supreme Lord. Similarly, many see Jesus as supreme being, but He denies this, saying that he is under the direction of his Father, doing His Father's bidding.

 

Lord jESUS IS THE SON OF nARAYANA, and Laxmi as well, whom Mother Mary is a partial incarnation of. Mary's position as Laxmi is confirmed by Srila Prabhupada (I saw the citation, but I have no access, an assist from an archive expert would be handy here.)

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[theist]

Regarding the Christian's Trinity, I believe it is called God, the Holy Ghost, and the son. Person in Krishna Consciousness accepts this by the name Visnu, Paramatma, and Jiva. God is a Person, the holy spirit or the supersoul is a person, and the living entity is also a person. Also, Mary is the representation of the energy of God. Either as internal energy Radharani or as external energy Durga, the energy of Godhead can be considered the mother of the living entities. But there is no clash between the Bible and the Vedas, simply some people formulate their personal ideas and cause quarrelings. Letter to Sivananda NY April 19, 1968

[Guest guest]

Haribol, thanx theist, for the citation. There are others as well, I remember one where Srila Prabhupada stated that Mary's residence is as Laksmi, who is massaging the feet of the Creator Narayan. For years, I have referred to Mata Mary as Mother of Lord Jesus Christ, Wife of Lord Narayana. And, strict definition of the word "Israel" translates as the wife of God as well.

 

The coptics, and even the gnostics, also cite previous existance of Mata Mary in the description of The Pearl, who incarnated in the hearts of true ISRAELITES, chosen by dint of their own choice to freely serve the Supreme Lord.

 

Hare Krsna, and again, thanx, theist. ys, mahaksadasa

[Guest guest]

hey ,good post,

although most christian dogma believes that jesus

was not a jiva, some actually do,but most beleive

that jesus is God, the trinitarian doctrine

states that god the father is one with the holy spirit

and the son, the son is one with the holy spirit and the father,and the holy spirit is one with the father and the son.

 

then it says, that they are only distinct from each other,

in relation to each other,otherwise they are one

in substance.

 

like saying that you are one person, you have children

and are a father to them, you have people who work for you and you are their guide and director,and you have

parents who you are a son to, you are one person

but 3 distinct personas.

 

that is the trinitarian doctrine.

 

most christians believe that, although some sects have

a more mayavadi belief system, with jesus as an

enlightened human,and role model ,or guru,

that is also the christian gnostic belief

or christian mystery school belief.

[Guest guest]

http://www.geocities.com/mahaksadasa/mas1.html

 

The story of the Pearl

 

http://www.geocities.com/mahaksadasa/trin.html

 

A Trinity Perspective

 

haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

[theist]

Haribol Mahak, Nice to see you posting a little more these days.I am enjoying very much you and Babhru talking story on the early Hawaii days. I never came across the quote you mentioned but I will look for it and post it if i'm successful.

 

So much we can't see from our perspective. Tiny in the first place and then covered by this veil on top of that.Man its rough. But if we can learn to treasure the small bits I think the Lord will give us much more.

 

Shiva, the Christians need to see both as correct simultaneously. After reading Prabhupada when we read the book of John, especially where Jesus is speaking of his coming departure, it is very clear that he is saying one and difference. The trick is to see both at the same time not either /or. The Supreme Personality of Servitor Godhead.

 

Thanks for the lead on the Hans Kung book.

 

Hare Krsna prabhus

[Priitaa]

Siva,

 

Thanks for the info. I will check out that site as soon as I have a chance.

 

Regarding the belief's of the Methodists, I know their theology cuz I was one. However, they may have changed their doctrine. This I do not know about.

 

The Methodist church started due to disagreement with other Christians religions because those particular religions believed Jesus was God, and not the son of God. This, the Methodists strongly took issue with, so they broke away and the Methodist church was founded.

 

And that is what I was taught (about Jesus) when I attended church. I believe we would have to look into it facutually if we wanted to see if anything changed, since that's an integral part of their doctrine.

 

I am not surprised the Catholics could not archeologically find much historical proof to back up their belief about Jesus. That's because Jesus is not one of them, he's one of us. :-)

 

As you may know, Jesus preached in India, Tibet, Peru, Etc. But where did he decide to settle down for the rest of his life? India! /images/graemlins/smile.gif I would not be surprised if, in their research, the Catholic church discovered more archeological findings in these areas than their own. Or they may have found out that Jesus was a Vaisnava, the very religion they detested, so they tried to brush that under the carpet, IMHO.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Priitaa]

 

Regarding the Christian's Trinity, I believe it is called God, the Holy Ghost, and the son. Person in Krishna Consciousness accepts this by the name Visnu, Paramatma, and Jiva. God is a Person, the holy spirit or the supersoul is a person, and the living entity is also a person. Also, Mary is the representation of the energy of God. Either as internal energy Radharani or as external energy Durga, the energy of Godhead can be considered the mother of the living entities. But there is no clash between the Bible and the Vedas, simply some people formulate their personal ideas and cause quarrelings. Letter to Sivananda NY April 19, 1968

 

 

 

As I was first reading this, I did not realize it was a quote from Prabhupada. Thank you for this. I had never heard that particular quote. Quite an eye opener, and it sure makes a person think.

 

Anyhow, always more to learn about spirutal life. Everytime we think we got it all figured out, there is more. Thank goodness for that. Ours is not a dull path. Keeps us humble too.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

 

maybe there are a variety of beliefs in methodism, i don't know, as far as i have studied they are a typical protestant

church.

 

http://www.umc.org/churchlibrary/discipline/doctrinalstandards/doctrinal_standards.htm

 

here you can see the stated dogma on jesus is the typical

trinitarian belief, what branch of methodism did you

belong to ?