Link Between Jesus and Krishna?

[Crazednewt]

Krishna was born, lived and died at least 14 centuries before Jesus. Estimates of his birth date vary. Whether or not his existance is fact or fiction, one thing remains clear: The story of Krishna predates the story of Jesus. Now, let's look at some similarities between the two:

Jesus and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.
Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man.
Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.
A spirit or ghost was their actual father.
Krishna and Jesus were of royal descent.
Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star.
Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna's parents stayed in Mathura.
Both Jesus and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted.
Both were identified as "the seed of the woman bruising the serpent's head."
Jesus was called "the lion of the tribe of Judah." Krishna was called "the lion of the tribe of Saki."
Both claimed: "I am the Resurrection."
Both referred to themselves having existed before their birth on earth.
Both were "without sin."
Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine.
They were both considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.
Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole. Each cured "all manner of diseases."
Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead.
Both selected disciples to spread his teachings.
Both were meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners.
Both encountered a Gentile woman at a well.
Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies.
Both descended into Hell, and were resurrected. Many people witnessed their ascensions into heaven.

As you see, that's alot of similarities. In the early stages, Christianity's main competition were the pagan religions, one which was Hinduism. It seems to me that Christianity simply plageurised the themes and concepts of the story of Krishna in order to appeal to these religions.

 

[okinrus]

The problem is that, while the Krishna legend may predate Christ, it evolved after Christ and added elements of Christ to itself. In fact, some believe Christ was a personification of Krishna.

 

[Yorda]

Krishna and Christ were probably two incarnations of the same Son of God. Things like these doesn't have to do with plagiarism. The Qur'an tells us that God has sent his messenger(s) to all parts of the world.

 

[Crazednewt]

"The problem is that, while the Krishna legend may predate Christ, it evolved after Christ and added elements of Christ to itself. In fact, some believe Christ was a personification of Krishna."

And what evidence are you basing this on?

 

[spidergoat]

The link could just be mankind and the similar mythologies we create, like Joseph Cambell describes. They both represent a particular archtype.

 

[okinrus]

"The problem is that, while the Krishna legend may predate Christ, it evolved after Christ and added elements of Christ to itself. In fact, some believe Christ was a personification of Krishna."

And what evidence are you basing this on?

Well, I knew before that some treated Jesus as an incarnation of Krishna. For example, the Krinsha conscious people and that hinduism was an inclusive religion, borrowing from many different religions.

Overall, though, somethings you said look wrong. For example, you say Jesus went to Muteria, but this place isn't mentioned in the Bible. You say that Jesus and Krishna both were considered the second member of the Trinity, but how hindus treat their trinity and how Christians treat theirs is radically different; this issue is addressed in Christian apologetic sites. You say that Jesus and Krishna were both were treated as omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent, which may be true, but how a polytheist religion believes their gods to be omnipotent is left unexplained. You then go on to say that both found a Gentile woman at a well, but your use of gentile doesn't make sense, a gentile is a non-Jew. Then you say stuff like both cast out demons. But in the legends, at least the one I've read, Krishna only fought demons. He didn't cast them out of people. Basically, without the quotes from hindu writings before Christ what you say isn't proved.

 

[TheMidnight12AM]

Krisha is described multiple places as having a dark complexion or blue skin, depending on the source. Jesus was either Arab, ethnic Hebrew or south European, which would have made him light brown or white in color.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

TheMidnight12AM: Krisha is described multiple places as having a dark complexion or blue skin, depending on the source. Jesus was either Arab, ethnic Hebrew or south European, which would have made him light brown or white in color.
*************
M*W: Please explain what you mean when you say "ethnic Hebrew?" Jesus was a Jew, according to the myth. Both Jews and Arabs are Semites. Also, where do you get that Jesus may have been a "south European?" It's all a myth. No point in changing the myth now.