Vaishnavas and Christians

[sudhaya]

 

How can we preach when we meet somebody who believes in Jesus Christ but won't accept Krishna, what do you say, just tell them as long as you respect Krsna its ok?

 

Also we are meant to be preaching KC not Christianity right?

 

For an advanced devotee his attention/concentration is one-pointed he knows Krsna perfectly, but we on the other hand do not have this,

 

I guess and its obvious what I am trying to say is, how we can expect ppls to take up Vaishnava Tradition, when we say its ok to be a Christian, knowing that they are Not even adhereing to simple doctrine namely 'thou shall not kill'.

 

How shall we bring ppls to Krsna, perfect Science, more advanced than Christianity and Islam, when we say its ok?

 

Hope devotee can answer these questions, I respect Jesus as a Guru, and Krsna as well as sweet Krsna lol.

[Guest guest]

"How can we preach when we meet somebody who believes in Jesus Christ but won't accept Krishna, what do you say, just tell them as long as you respect Krsna its ok?"

 

 

the problem is not to preach, the problem is that this soul has to accept to make some steps towards krishna consciousness

 

so we have to be so gentle that this soul accepts to chant mahamantra, to come in the temple or in our home to take prasadam and to join or see and hear bhajan or kirtan and so on

 

if we find one millions systems to defeat him with philosophy and dialectic what's the use?

 

so our main concern has to be: "this man must have, after me, another contact with krsna consciousness, another minute of association with krsna

 

other things are marginal

[gHari]

Preach to yourself. Your tender faith will be destroyed by the doubts of others. When you have no doubts yourself then you can preach. And even then one need not preach sectarianism.

 

 

[sudhaya]

 

I accept Christianity so I am ok, Islam also, but if ppls want to come to Kc. Then thats great.

 

Most ppls say they are Muslims/Hindus/Christians, but actually have no love, don't know what Bhakti is, I am wondering how I lived without it, its not sentimental I am talking its a fact.

 

I want to look at bigger picture and your right we are not sectarian, but was looking for answers.

 

Guest above says good things, makes me think after reading the post, preach and leave the rest to Krsna.

 

We can only do so much...

 

 

[gHari]

You cannot even go to Gaudiya ritvik pages without getting all messed up. Your mind is filled with doubts as evidenced by the constant stream of questions and paradoxes you present here. You come to us before Krsna.

 

Your ego will simply get you into trouble if you talk with people who do not have firm faith in Krsna. Their doubts and weaknesses will become yours. Sit in the Gita. Period.

 

Asking what is the impersonal Brahman shows that you have only given the Gita a cursory glance. Don't cheat yourself. It's not about impressing others. It's not about collecting words and regurgitating them. It's not "I have read BG, SB, CC, Jaiva-dharma, Upanishad this and that. Now, what do you want to know? Let me tell you about Radha. Let me tell you about Krsna". You are in arithmetic class with your head buried in rocket science research papers. How will you learn that 1+1=2?

 

Surely you can see how superficial it is. Krsna can. If you do not eventually heed this advice you will be distanced further and further from Krsna in an increasingly shallow non-relationship. Without His help we will just slip away, for words are only mind-deep no matter how many of them you have gathered. "For he who has conquered the mind, ........."

 

[ancient_paztriot]

Yes, they are trapped in their own karma.

 

He needs to talk to himself for awhile.

 

I view some of these people as devoted demons who are messing with things they don't understand. Nothing but offenses in the name of spiritual discussion.

 

Doesn't care for our feelings after trying so hard to engage us. I'm still trying to make sense of that one. Can't think of a good one.

 

I don't think they believe themselves.

[sudhaya]

 

I need to read Gita.

 

-

 

Thankyou for your truthfull post. Pamho

[gHari]

<center><h3>DO.</center></h3>

 

Do the homework.

 

[theist]

It makes no sense to try to give a Christian your own version of a make over and get him to look, sound and act like a Hare Krishna. What a waste of time and you will surely absorb offenses.

 

If in this situation just try to inspire them from within their own tradition. If someone has a name of God just try to help them increase their faith in some way.

 

Also help them understand their spiritual identity apart from this material body. Their present lack of understanding prevents them from grasping reincarnation which is the missing link in Christian teaching.

 

Another point is they should be challenged on animal slaughter. Stopping cow slaughter is preliminary to understanding Govinda.

 

Keep it very basic. Like "Please chant the name of Christ and stop the cruel slaughter. God bless you."

 

If you find someone who is more intelligent and open then you can go deeper. That may be rare though.

 

Haribol

[krsna]

 

 

Quoting Bhaktisiddhanta, Shree Prabhupada has said about the comparison between Vasudeva Datta and Jesus Christ, that Vasudeva Datta was millions of times more advanced than Jesus Christ. Prabhupada makes the distinction between Jesus and a Vaishnava in terms of their generosity and self-sacrifice by saying that a Vaishnava is prepared to risk everything to save the conditioned souls whereas Jesus was not.

 

"Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur gives the following commentary on this verse. In the Western countries, Christians believe that Lord Jesus Christ, their spiritual master, appeared in order to eradicate all the sins of his disciples. To this end, Lord Jesus Christ appeared and disappeared. Here, however, we find Shree Vasudeva Datta Thakur and Shree Haridas Thakur to be many millions of times more advanced even when compared with Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ relieved only his followers from all sinful reactions, but Vasudeva Datta is here prepared to accept the sins of everyone in the universe. So the comparative position of Vasudeva Datta is millions of times better than that of Lord Jesus Christ. A Vaishnava is so liberal that he is prepared to risk everything to rescue the conditioned souls from material existence.

 

ShreeVasudeva Datta Thakur is universal love itself, for he was willing to sacrifice everything and fully engage in the service of the Supreme Lord.

 

"Srila Vasudeva Datta knew very well that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu was the original Personality of Godhead, Transcendence itself, above the material conception of illusion and maya. Lord Jesus Christ certainly finished the sinful reactions of his followers by his mercy, but that does not mean he completely delivered them from the pangs of material existence. A person may be relieved from sins once, but it is a practice among Christians to confess sins and yet commit them again. By getting freed from sins and again engaging in them, one cannot attain freedom from the pangs of material existence. A diseased person may go to a physician for relief, but after he leaves the hospital he may again be infected due to his unclean habits.

 

Thus material existence continues. Srila Vasudeva Datta wanted to completely relieve the conditioned souls from material existence so that they would no longer have an opportunity to commit sinful acts. This is the significant difference between Srila Vasudeva Datta and Lord Jesus Christ. It is a great offense to receive pardon for sins and then commit the same sins again. Such an offense is more dangerous than the sinful activity itself. Vasudeva Datta was so liberal that he requested Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to transfer all offensive activity upon him so the conditioned souls would be purified and go back home, back to Godhead. This prayer was certainly without duplicity." (Cc, Madya 15.163 purport)

 

 

 

 

 

Prabhupada writes, "Regarding your questions on Christianity, we are not very much keen to engage them in argument because for the most part they are sentimentalists and have no philosophy, therefore they become fanatics or dogmatists, and this type of person we cannot change. (Letter to Dasarha 1977 March 4 Bombay)

 

In a conversation Shree Prabhupada makes further accusations that the Christian theologians are rascals.

 

Candanacarya: "Yesterday I made the acquaintance of a theologist, a professor from the University of Montreal. He said that the Roman Catholic presentation of Christianity is that God came to share the suffering of man."

 

Prabhupada: "That is another rascaldom. Why God should share the sufferings of man?"

 

Candanacarya: "I asked him this, and he said, 'So that man would accept more as reality, suffering.'"

 

Prabhupada: Very good theologian - a rascal number one." (Los Angeles, Dec. 15, 1973)

 

 

 

 

 

Prabhupada writes: "Regarding Aquarian Gospel of Lord Jesus The Christ, I have taken some stray extracts just to support our views, but we don't give any importance to that book. (Letter to Tamal Krishna, 14 Sept. 1969)

 

Also Prabhupada has written: "Regarding your question about Lord Jesus Christ, we accept him as saktyavesa avatara. Lord Buddha is in the same category also.

 

Lord Buddha is mentioned specifically in Srimad-Bhagavatam as incarnation of Godhead, and yet Vaishnavas do not accept his philosophy, which is classified as atheism. Similarly, even if we accept Lord Jesus Christ as saktyavesa avatara, it doesn't mean that we have to accept his philosophy. But we have all respects for him without fail. Regarding books like Aquarian Gospel or even the Testaments, we cannot accept them as authorities because sometimes it is learnt that the words are not actually spoken by Christ, but they are so set up by the devotees." (Letter to Hamsaduta, Nov.2, 1969)

 

 

 

Chapter 24 of the "Aquarian Gospel" states, "In Puri, Jesus asks the Brahmins about caste. The Brahmins explain that according to the shastra, the Brahmins came from the mouth of Parabrahma, the kshatriyas from the arms, the vaishyas from the thighs and the shudras from His feet.

 

 

Their compilation has a history; they are not eternal like the Vedic knowledge. Therefore, although they have their arguments and reasoning, they are not very sound and transcendental. As such, modern people advanced in science and philosophy, deem these scriptures unacceptable. (Cc Adi. 17,169 purport)