Jesus and Krishna--Two Peas In A Pod

[SeekingAllTruth]

The similarities between Krishna's life and Jesus' life are so startling that it's often difficult to tell where one begins and the other leaves off. That's why it's important to remember that the Krishna legend was around a full 1000 years before the gospels emerged. The only conclusion a rational person can reach given the often exact same matching details of each is that the gospel writers borrowed heavily from the Krishna legend and other dying/rising gods as they constructed their own legend of Jesus. Here is but a few in a laundry list of similarities

Yeshua and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.

Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.

Both had adoptive human fathers who were carpenters.

Jesus was conceived by a god. Krishna was the reincarnation of a god.

Both were killed by piercing--Jesus by nails and a spear, Krishna by an arrow

Both resurrected.

This list is not exhaustive. It would take up too much space to list Jesus' similarities with all the dying/rising gods before him--Zalmoxis, Dionysus, Horus, Mithra, Romulus--who inspired the gospel writers to copy them.

Instead I want to mention a few details of Krishna's birth that convince me Jesus is an amalgamation of many other earlier stories.

Kamsa, the evil king ruling the land hears a voice from the sky predicting that a child will be born and will kill him. The king is terrified. He orders all the children born to his sister, who is the one who will give birth to the child, to be killed. But with the help of an angel the parents of the future child escape and flee to a faraway land. There they give the baby Krishna to a carpenter and his wife to raise.

Anyone who cannot see the parallels between this and the Jesus legend involving the prophecy of Jesus, Herod and the flight to Egypt for safety has to have blinders one. It's too exact to be coincidental. One can only conclude Matthew borrowed Krishna's story as a model for his own account.

It becomes clear that the Jesus story is just another legend based on many earlier legends that were floating around the area at that time.

 

[sun rise]

There's a lot of mythology in the OP including a claim that Krishna was resurrected from the dead and that's just for starters. So I rank the OP as an interesting fantasy and nothing more.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The similarities between Krishna's life and Jesus' life are so startling that it's often difficult to tell where one begins and the other leaves off. That's why it's important to remember that the Krishna legend was around a full 1000 years before the gospels emerged. The only conclusion a rational person can reach given the often exact same matching details of each is that the gospel writers borrowed heavily from the Krishna legend and other dying/rising gods as they constructed their own legend of Jesus. Here is but a few in a laundry list of similarities

Yeshua and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.

Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.

Both had adoptive human fathers who were carpenters.

Jesus was conceived by a god. Krishna was the reincarnation of a god.

Both were killed by piercing--Jesus by nails and a spear, Krishna by an arrow

Both resurrected.

This list is not exhaustive. It would take up too much space to list Jesus' similarities with all the dying/rising gods before him--Zalmoxis, Dionysus, Horus, Mithra, Romulus--who inspired the gospel writers to copy them.

Instead I want to mention a few details of Krishna's birth that convince me Jesus is an amalgamation of many other earlier stories.

Kamsa, the evil king ruling the land hears a voice from the sky predicting that a child will be born and will kill him. The king is terrified. He orders all the children born to his sister, who is the one who will give birth to the child, to be killed. But with the help of an angel the parents of the future child escape and flee to a faraway land. There they give the baby Krishna to a carpenter and his wife to raise.

Anyone who cannot see the parallels between this and the Jesus legend involving the prophecy of Jesus, Herod and the flight to Egypt for safety has to have blinders one. It's too exact to be coincidental. One can only conclude Matthew borrowed Krishna's story as a model for his own account.

It becomes clear that the Jesus story is just another legend based on many earlier legends that were floating around the area at that time.

Oh no No. No.

Okay. I'm done with the nos. Maybe a Hindu and/or say a JW can explain the error in this?

 

[Rival]

Horus,

No, this is not true.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It becomes clear that the Jesus story is just another legend based on many earlier legends that were floating around the area at that time.

Going back to first century it likely would have seemed to learned people living at the time that the book was borrowing stories from around the world, yes.

In Europe it was not clear to unlearned people at the time that the book was translated into English, sometime after 12th century CE. Unlearned people in Europe treated the stories as completely original. The stories of Krishna would not have been well known, except to the learned of Europe if that.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The similarities between Krishna's life and Jesus' life are so startling that it's often difficult to tell where one begins and the other leaves off. That's why it's important to remember that the Krishna legend was around a full 1000 years before the gospels emerged. The only conclusion a rational person can reach given the often exact same matching details of each is that the gospel writers borrowed heavily from the Krishna legend and other dying/rising gods as they constructed their own legend of Jesus. Here is but a few in a laundry list of similarities

Yeshua and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.

Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.

Both had adoptive human fathers who were carpenters.

Jesus was conceived by a god. Krishna was the reincarnation of a god.

Both were killed by piercing--Jesus by nails and a spear, Krishna by an arrow

Both resurrected.

This list is not exhaustive. It would take up too much space to list Jesus' similarities with all the dying/rising gods before him--Zalmoxis, Dionysus, Horus, Mithra, Romulus--who inspired the gospel writers to copy them.

Instead I want to mention a few details of Krishna's birth that convince me Jesus is an amalgamation of many other earlier stories.

Kamsa, the evil king ruling the land hears a voice from the sky predicting that a child will be born and will kill him. The king is terrified. He orders all the children born to his sister, who is the one who will give birth to the child, to be killed. But with the help of an angel the parents of the future child escape and flee to a faraway land. There they give the baby Krishna to a carpenter and his wife to raise.

Anyone who cannot see the parallels between this and the Jesus legend involving the prophecy of Jesus, Herod and the flight to Egypt for safety has to have blinders one. It's too exact to be coincidental. One can only conclude Matthew borrowed Krishna's story as a model for his own account.

It becomes clear that the Jesus story is just another legend based on many earlier legends that were floating around the area at that time.

This bull**** again?

 

[Riders]

The similarities between Krishna's life and Jesus' life are so startling that it's often difficult to tell where one begins and the other leaves off. That's why it's important to remember that the Krishna legend was around a full 1000 years before the gospels emerged. The only conclusion a rational person can reach given the often exact same matching details of each is that the gospel writers borrowed heavily from the Krishna legend and other dying/rising gods as they constructed their own legend of Jesus. Here is but a few in a laundry list of similarities

Yeshua and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.

Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.

Both had adoptive human fathers who were carpenters.

Jesus was conceived by a god. Krishna was the reincarnation of a god.

Both were killed by piercing--Jesus by nails and a spear, Krishna by an arrow

Both resurrected.

This list is not exhaustive. It would take up too much space to list Jesus' similarities with all the dying/rising gods before him--Zalmoxis, Dionysus, Horus, Mithra, Romulus--who inspired the gospel writers to copy them.

Instead I want to mention a few details of Krishna's birth that convince me Jesus is an amalgamation of many other earlier stories.

Kamsa, the evil king ruling the land hears a voice from the sky predicting that a child will be born and will kill him. The king is terrified. He orders all the children born to his sister, who is the one who will give birth to the child, to be killed. But with the help of an angel the parents of the future child escape and flee to a faraway land. There they give the baby Krishna to a carpenter and his wife to raise.

Anyone who cannot see the parallels between this and the Jesus legend involving the prophecy of Jesus, Herod and the flight to Egypt for safety has to have blinders one. It's too exact to be coincidental. One can only conclude Matthew borrowed Krishna's story as a model for his own account.

It becomes clear that the Jesus story is just another legend based on many earlier legends that were floating around the area at that time.

It is true and I agree. However Hare Krishna mostly chant and meditate, perhaps I am wrong they may pray but mostly they chant, they did when I was at their service,it was chanting the Hare Krishna chant.

 

[Vinayaka]

Oh no No. No.

Okay. I'm done with the nos. Maybe a Hindu and/or say a JW can explain the error in this?

The errors have been explained many times. Personally, I have become detached from such efforts on a single forum that has little impact on how the world views it. Maybe somebody will come along though. Obviously, if somebody wants to hold this view, they can.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

It is true and I agree. However Hare Krishna mostly chant and meditate, perhaps I am wrong they may pray but mostly they chant, they did when I was at their service,it was chanting the Hare Krishna chant.

Krishna followers chant "Hare Krishna". Christians pray aloud "Jesus have mercy". I can't distinguish the difference. Both are praying to their god.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

Going back to first century it likely would have seemed to learned people living at the time that the book was borrowing stories from around the world, yes.

In Europe it was not clear to unlearned people at the time that the book was translated into English, sometime after 12th century CE. Unlearned people in Europe treated the stories as completely original. The stories of Krishna would not have been well known, except to the learned of Europe if that.

Thank God the Internet is exposing the fraudulent doings of the church hierarchy, laying bare for all to see exactly how the Jesus mythology was stolen from a variety of sources to make the Jesus legend more palpable to pagans. Pagans had no idea when they accepted Jesus that they were in actuality accepting the myths of a half-dozen dying/rising god before him. Many must have recognized the similarities instantly.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

Nobody finds it strange that the Jesus' parents fleeing to Egypt to prevent Jesus from being killed by King Herod is exactly the same as Krishna's parents fleeing to another land to prevent Krishna from being killed by King Kamsa?

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

This bull**** again?

Hurts, doesn't it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Krishna followers chant "Hare Krishna". Christians pray aloud "Jesus have mercy". I can't distinguish the difference. Both are praying to their god.

Western concepts of god(s) is different than eastern concepts of "god."

Western:
God, Western Concepts of | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (From the Greeks, Romans, and so forth)
Religion and Morality (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Their culture, language, origin, and so forth differs, thereby their practices, ways of worship, scripture(s), and traditions. I couldn't find eastern religious philosophy from a non-western perspective but that's the main difference. To christians, jesus is external (he died on the cross, sits at his table, things like that). Western religion is highly external: books, statues, incarnations (something/one made flesh/visible), things of that nature.

It goes deeper than that.

If you put in the search box hindu and bahai or something similar, you may find some threads on debating the differences between the two concepts.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Thank God the Internet is exposing the fraudulent doings of the church hierarchy, laying bare for all to see exactly how the Jesus mythology was stolen from a variety of sources to make the Jesus legend more palpable to pagans. Pagans had no idea when they accepted Jesus that they were in actuality accepting the myths of a half-dozen dying/rising god before him. Many must have recognized the similarities instantly.

It is likely a team effort between the church and the pagans, at least at first. I view the church as a battle with people in it fighting the influence of politics over religion. The politicians gain control of high church positions, however they are not initiated into the spiritual life of the church. I imagine these political appointments to spiritual positions being somewhat like Trump as president, with people all around him doing damage control.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Hurts, doesn't it?

Nope. All that Zeitgeist/Jesus myth garbage has been debunked numerous times - years ago! I used to believe it, myself, until I bothered to do research! And I only believed it because I was an angry teen with an axe to grind against organized religion. Are you also 12-15 years old?

 

[SomeRandom]

The similarities between Krishna's life and Jesus' life are so startling that it's often difficult to tell where one begins and the other leaves off. That's why it's important to remember that the Krishna legend was around a full 1000 years before the gospels emerged. The only conclusion a rational person can reach given the often exact same matching details of each is that the gospel writers borrowed heavily from the Krishna legend and other dying/rising gods as they constructed their own legend of Jesus. Here is but a few in a laundry list of similarities

Yeshua and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.

Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.

Both had adoptive human fathers who were carpenters.

Jesus was conceived by a god. Krishna was the reincarnation of a god.

Both were killed by piercing--Jesus by nails and a spear, Krishna by an arrow

Both resurrected.

This list is not exhaustive. It would take up too much space to list Jesus' similarities with all the dying/rising gods before him--Zalmoxis, Dionysus, Horus, Mithra, Romulus--who inspired the gospel writers to copy them.

Instead I want to mention a few details of Krishna's birth that convince me Jesus is an amalgamation of many other earlier stories.

Kamsa, the evil king ruling the land hears a voice from the sky predicting that a child will be born and will kill him. The king is terrified. He orders all the children born to his sister, who is the one who will give birth to the child, to be killed. But with the help of an angel the parents of the future child escape and flee to a faraway land. There they give the baby Krishna to a carpenter and his wife to raise.

Anyone who cannot see the parallels between this and the Jesus legend involving the prophecy of Jesus, Herod and the flight to Egypt for safety has to have blinders one. It's too exact to be coincidental. One can only conclude Matthew borrowed Krishna's story as a model for his own account.

It becomes clear that the Jesus story is just another legend based on many earlier legends that were floating around the area at that time.

I hate to “well actually” on this as there are no doubt many variations of the mythology. But Krishna’s adoptive father wasn’t a carpenter, as far as I’m aware. Maybe he was a handyman. But I think most men had to be back then anyway. I dunno
Though he was considered a community elder and leader and was a very respected member of the community.
Kansa had his sister and her husband imprisoned, though he loved his sister dearly. His brother in law promised to give up all his children to Kansa and Kansa, knowing how honourable he was, accepted. I think the 7th child is divinely relocated to Rohini’s womb and thus born safely as Krishna’s elder brother Ram. The 8th child is born while the entire palace (including Krishna’s mum) is asleep. Again divine intervention. Krishna’s father carries him to the nearby town of Gokul and swaps him for the newly born daughter of the local Village leader/elder. He then grows up around cow herders and farmers.
When Kansa comes to kill the infant, she transforms into Durga (the warrior Goddess) basically chides him for being arrogant and says his days are numbered so maybe buck up a bit. And then vanishes back to the “heavens.”
Krishna isn’t resurrected either. That’s more of a “translation wonk.” Basically we say he was resurrected to help our Western brethren understand his “return.” But it’s really just him being Krishna.
I sympathise with the blending of world myths, I sincerely do. And I think there is evidence of there being one source, just retold over and over. Or at least a handful of ideas that we repackage over and over (see the underworld myths and their startling similarities.)
But the devil is in the detail, as they say

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

I hate to “well actually” on this as there are no doubt many variations of the mythology. But Krishna’s adoptive father wasn’t a carpenter, as far as I’m aware. Maybe he was a handyman. But I think most men had to be back then anyway. I dunno
Though he was considered a community elder and leader and was a very respected member of the community.
Kansa had his sister and her husband imprisoned, though he loved his sister dearly. His brother in law promised to give up all his children to Kansa and Kansa, knowing how honourable he was, accepted. I think the 7th child is divinely relocated to Rohini’s womb and thus born safely as Krishna’s elder brother Ram. The 8th child is born while the entire palace (including Krishna’s mum) is asleep. Again divine intervention. Krishna’s father carries him to the nearby town of Gokul and swaps him for the newly born daughter of the local Village leader/elder. He then grows up around cow herders and farmers.
When Kansa comes to kill the infant, she transforms into Durga (the warrior Goddess) basically chides him for being arrogant and says his days are numbered so maybe buck up a bit. And then vanishes back to the “heavens.”
Krishna isn’t resurrected either. That’s more of a “translation wonk.” Basically we say he was resurrected to help our Western brethren understand his “return.” But it’s really just him being Krishna.
I sympathise with the blending of world myths, I sincerely do. And I think there is evidence of there being one source, just retold over and over. Or at least a handful of ideas that we repackage over and over (see the underworld myths and their startling similarities.)
But the devil is in the detail, as they say

Yes, that's pretty close to what I read. I didn't have room for all that so I took out the salient details that most closely matched the story of Jesus, Mary, Joseph and Herod. I think it's too identical to be a coincidence, but I agree the gospel writers kept the framework of the Krishna legend and added their own minor details to try to hide their plagiarism.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

Nope. All that Zeitgeist/Jesus myth garbage has been debunked numerous times - years ago! I used to believe it, myself, until I bothered to do research! And I only believed it because I was an angry teen with an axe to grind against organized religion. Are you also 12-15 years old?

You can deny it all you want. It's pretty evidence for those who don't have blinder on.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

It is likely a team effort between the church and the pagans, at least at first. I view the church as a battle with people in it fighting the influence of politics over religion. The politicians gain control of high church positions, however they are not initiated into the spiritual life of the church. I imagine these political appointments to spiritual positions being somewhat like Trump as president, with people all around him doing damage control.

I agree completely. It's not about truth, it's all about the politics--the power and the money. Those are the foundations of Christianity.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You can deny it all you want. It's pretty evidence for a those who don't have blinder on.

Good grief, even Evangelicals easily refute crap like this: Is Jesus a myth? Is Jesus just a copy of the pagan gods of other ancient religions? | GotQuestions.org

It's based on a number of errors and fabrications. Most of those things you said about Krishna are simply not part of his mythology.