InvestigateTruth
Well-Known Member
It suggests that certainly there was a person by name Krishna, who had claim to be divinely inspired, or as someone supernatural. Certain people have believed in Him. This is how the community of the Hindus was created. I mean the Hindus who believe in Krishna, was created in this manner. Just as how community of Muslims or Bahais was created. Consider the Quran. Did people make that up as a fiction? Or Muhammad told the verses of Quran? Muhammad did. Now, the Quran contains many things that, from your view, is a myth, or fiction. I don't say myth. I call it symbolic expressions and stories. Now, after Muhammad there were 11 imams, who said many Hadithes, if you read, you would see them as fiction. I see them as symbolism. Regardless, I suggest, same with Krishna. The only difference is, sayings of Krishna perhaps were not written during in His time. But, there were people in His time, who truly believed in Him as Manifestation of God. Thus, for them, His words were holy, and for this reason, they cared to preserve them.Doesn't this give the lie to your argument though? If there's a span of over 2000 years, according to scholarly opinion, for the time of Krishna's supposed existence, and presumably as long or longer for the writing of stories about him to have accumulated - perhaps from oral traditions that go back even further still...doesn't that suggest that whilst there may have been someone by that name who was an influential person in the field of religion at some point, the accounts about his life, teachings and exploits are not historical but collections of myths?
.
.
Ok. That would be your view, and is understandable.And as for someone in 5000 years doubting the existence of Baha'u'llah, I think anyone who reads the accounts about his life will not need that long to start doubting the historical accuracy - 5 minutes would be more like it.