Vishnu, Krishna, Kalki

[msindiausa]

I am not sure what you mean, but Jesus did warn of false prophets who would know nothing but fool a lot of people.

 

[arunma]

yeah , maybe thats why Islam was born and maybe thats why Jesus warned in advance, maybe thats why Jesus said ..you know something, you dont know many things.

I suppose that technically, Mohammed happens to fit the descriptions of false prophets that both Jesus and Moses warned others about.

As for Msindia not knowing many things, she's right. You're free to believe that Jesus and Christ are two separate things, to the same extent that you're free to believe that the sky is green. But your belief doesn't equate with fact. Jesus is the name of a certain individual, and Christ is the title of the Messiah. Christians hold that Jesus is the Christ. It would at least make logical sense if you said "Jesus is not the Christ," because you'd be claiming to not believe Jesus' claims about himself.

But instead, you're claiming that Christ is God the Father. That makes no sense. While we believe that Christ Jesus is God (the Son, not the Father), the words Christ and God have different meanings. Now maybe you just haven't articulated yourself very well, thus far. But at the moment, your conclusion seems like a non sequitur.

 

[rahul_sharma]

I suppose that technically, Mohammed happens to fit the descriptions of false prophets that both Jesus and Moses warned others about.

Why mohammed, why not Paul and Peter?

As for Msindia not knowing many things, she's right. You're free to believe that Jesus and Christ are two separate things, to the same extent that you're free to believe that the sky is green. But your belief doesn't equate with fact. Jesus is the name of a certain individual, and Christ is the title of the Messiah. Christians hold that Jesus is the Christ. It would at least make logical sense if you said "Jesus is not the Christ," because you'd be claiming to not believe Jesus' claims about himself.

You are also free to deny every logical thing. Remember again, coincidents dont happen on very large scale. Please read previous replies again.

But instead, you're claiming that Christ is God the Father. That makes no sense. While we believe that Christ Jesus is God (the Son, not the Father), the words Christ and God have different meanings. Now maybe you just haven't articulated yourself very well, thus far. But at the moment, your conclusion seems like a non sequitur.

Yes, thats what you believe and i dont believe Christian intrepretation. I also dont believe many things in 2000+ versions of different Bibles.

 

[msindiausa]

I don't know many things?....maybe thats why I am here.

 

[msindiausa]

By the way, Jesus Christ is completely different than Krishna...Just because their names sound similar does not mean that they are.

 

[arunma]

Why mohammed, why not Paul and Peter?

Because Peter and Paul didn't contradict Jesus. Besides that, everything about Jesus is known through his apostles and the early church, so it's impossible to know Jesus except through the Holy Spirit and the writings of the apostles.

You are also free to deny every logical thing. Remember again, coincidents dont happen on very large scale. Please read previous replies again.

I already read your post. Nothing you said is coincidental. You (or rather, the Hindu propagandist who invented these claims) have misrepresented the facts in order to advance your belief.

Yes, thats what you believe and i dont believe Christian intrepretation. I also dont believe many things in 2000+ versions of different Bibles.

"2000+ versions of different Bibles" seems more like a buzz phrase than a true statement. I think you know quite well that there aren't 2000 different versions of the Greek manuscripts. If you disagree, then prove your claim.

 

[msindiausa]

wrong thread yaqinud.

@Rahul...I agree with arunma...Peter and Paul did not contradict Jesus, so how could they be false prophets of christianity?

Also, most ancient christian texts are similar, meaning, none of them contradict each other.

Getting back to Vishnu, Krishna, and Kalki...

 

[sefroth77]

Okay, I understand when he is coming now...Do you really think Islam and Christianity will be gone by then? Juaism has been around for some 3,500 years and christianity for some 2,000 years...It would be strange for them to just disappear....I guess 427,000 years is enough time for anything to happen.

Yes Christianity survived for 2000years,But you must understand that for 1900 years there was no Cars,television or other material things. But it is since on the decline in the western world. Its Going down at a fast rate, The conversion to Christinaity in the Eastern world have been greatly reduced, thanks to Swami Vivenkanda,Sai Baba,Praphupada, the Gita, Yoga,Ravi Shanker and other Hindu gurus, Hindus who were ignorant of their own faith finally realised it. The Drinking Milk of Lord Ganesh in mid 1995 sway many Christians and muslims to mainstream hindusim. People who are in the Christian Faith are covered with Material Enjoyment, this will change in the course of time, Technology Advancement will help to speed up this process.

I know Christ does sound a bit like Krishna, but the word means messiah in greek...They were both gods on earth, but krishna and Christ were extremely different...But both did teach good lessons...that is their common ground.

Jesus is Not God, He is a Advanced Yogi, There are many people like him in India over the course of time, Whatevers he does a Yogi can also do it. Since Jesus have done all this miracles they see him as God, But in Vedic Religion this is common. Thats the difference.


[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

When an Indian person calls on Krishna, he often says, Krsta. Krsta is a Sanskrit word meaning attraction. So when we address God as Christ, Krsta, or Krishna we indicate the same all-attractive Supreme Personality of Godhead. When Jesus said, Our Father who art in heaven hallowed be Thy name, the name of God was Krsta or Krishna.[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada (04-16-04)[/font]

Srila Prabhupada: What is the meaning of the word Christ?

Father Emmanuel: Christ comes from the Greek word Christos, meaning "the anointed one".

Srila Prabhupada: Christos is the Greek version of the word Krishna.

Father Emmanuel: This is very interesting.

Srila Prabhupada: When an Indian person calls on Krishna, he often says, "Krsta". Krsta is a Sanskrit word meaning "attraction". So when we address God as "Christ", "Krsta", or "Krishna" we indicate the same all-attractive Supreme Personality of Godhead. When Jesus said, " Our Father who art in heaven hallowed be Thy name," the name of God was Krsta or Krishna. Do you agree?

Father Emmanuel: I think Jesus, as the son of God, has revealed to us the actual name of God: Christ. We can call God "Father", but if we want to address Him by His actual name, we have to say "Christ".

Srila Prabhupada: Yes. "Christ" is another way of saying Krsta and Krsta is another way of pronouncing Krishna, the name of God. Jesus said that one should glorify the name of God, but yesterday I heard one theologian say that God has no name -- that we can call Him only "Father". A son may call his father "Father", but the father also has a specific name. Similarly, God is the general name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, whose specific name is Krishna. Therefore whether you call God "Christ", "Krsta", or "Krishna", ultimately you are addressing the same Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Father Emmanuel: Yes, if we speak of God's actual name, then we must say, "Christos". In our religion we have the Trinity: the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We believe we can know the name of God only by revelation from the son of God. Jesus Christ revealed the name of the Father, and therefore we take the name "Christ" as the revealed name of God.



Hare Krishna

 

[arunma]

Sefroth, many of the statements in your last post are statements of belief that aren't supported by any historical records whatsoever. And of course, the following statement is false:

Srila Prabhupada: Christos is the Greek version of the word Krishna.

 

[sefroth77]

Sefroth, many of the statements in your last post are statements of belief that aren't supported by any historical records whatsoever. And of course, the following statement is false:

How you know its False ? anyway i know the meanings are different, but still the name is the same, Krishna or Christna. Anyway Christ is the name of the Father as per Father Emmanuel quotations.

 

[indianx]

I don't have any opinion on the matter, because I have not studied these things, but why do we (Hindus) have to go to such great lengths to show that Jesus and Krishna are the same? I mean, what do we gain spiritually or even in regards to our religion, from doing so? If they want to believe Krishna and Jesus are not the same, ok, I seriously don't give a da- if they believe it or not. Why do we have to go out of our way to appease them?

 

[Ram]

What Seffroth mentioned is correct, I have read it before.
http://www.harekrishnatemple.com/bhakta/emmanuel.html

Whether the site is trustworthy I dont know....

 

[Ram]

I don't have any opinion on the matter, because I have not studied these things, but why do we (Hindus) have to go to such great lengths to show that Jesus and Krishna are the same? I mean, what do we gain spiritually or even in regards to our religion, from doing so? If they want to believe Krishna and Jesus are not the same, ok, I seriously don't give a da- if they believe it or not. Why do we have to go out of our way to appease them?

No, the Hindus on this forum have virtually stopped this comparison, every time a newbie comes here, the story repeats.

 

[tdcharles]

How you know its False ? anyway i know the meanings are different, but still the name is the same, Krishna or Christna. Anyway Christ is the name of the Father as per Father Emmanuel quotations.

It is not "Christna", it is "Christos". The word "Christna" appears nowhere in the greek bible.

This person you are quoting is incorrect. It is principally a title, as is Lord and Son of God. Christ Jesus, King Herod, President Roosevelt. It's custom to call the President "Mr. President", but President is not his name. It is similar for Christos, the angel said His name would be Jesus, not "Christna" (Matthew 1:21). It is not the name of the Father, it is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word Messiah, which is Jesus, not the Father. If he is a Catholic priest then Catechism paragraphs 429, 436 and 453 contradict what he is saying. Although the conversation seems contrived to me.

 

[indianx]

Again, do we really need to give a - about what they think on this issue? ok, this guy doesn't believe in it, so what? Does it affect our religion? Does it affect the way we view god? So, what if Krishna is not the same as Christ in language roots, what difference does it make? Even if it is the same, what difference does it make to us?

I really don't think this an important issue, why do we need to go out of our way to show them something about their religion that really doesn't matter to us or to them?

 

[Ram]

Again, do we really need to give a - about what they think on this issue? ok, this guy doesn't believe in it, so what? Does it affect our religion? Does it affect the way we view god? So, what if Krishna is not the same as Christ in language roots, what difference does it make? Even if it is the same, what difference does it make to us?

I really don't think this an important issue, why do we need to go out of our way to show them something about their religion that really doesn't matter to us or to them?

No need, just a kind of elitism. Personally, I am interested in these comparsons just to see if there connecting links between religions.

Most christians belive non christians are almost atheists or satan worshippers - that looks elitist to us.

Most muslim beleive non muslims are almost atheists or satan worshippers - that looks elitist to us.

Most Hindus believe all theists irrespective of their religion are OK, but yet think Hinduism is superior, that looks elitist to others.

I think Hindus are still better off than many established religions, because their elitism is atleast restricted to acceptance of other faiths.

Regards,
Ram

 

[rahul_sharma]

No need, just a kind of elitism. Personally, I am interested in these comparsons just to see if there connecting links between religions.

Most christians belive non christians are almost atheists or satan worshippers - that looks elitist to us.

Most muslim beleive non muslims are almost atheists or satan worshippers - that looks elitist to us.

Most Hindus believe all theists irrespective of their religion are OK, but yet think Hinduism is superior, that looks elitist to others.

I think Hindus are still better off than many established religions, because their elitism is atleast restricted to acceptance of other faiths.

Regards,
Ram

well said
i personally believe some people fear "OK" nature of Sanatana Dharm more than "Jihadi/one way" nature of other religions.

 

[indianx]

ok.. (lol, this ok doesn't contain the hidden meaning that Latreia's "ok" consists of, it's just an acknowledgment of your opinion)

 

[rahul_sharma]

Lol

 

[looking4wisdom]

Krishna and Christ related?...That is something I have never heard...Wow.