Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 97
  1. #1
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    951
    Post Thanks / Like

    Jesus vs. Krishna

    Forgive me for using the same example ol' gods for the purposes of debate. Really, all gods are the same to me (fiction). But these two are kind of the "big dogs" of religion as I see it. Even other big religions are influenced and/or mention these guys. Islam mentions Jesus as a prophet, and I have heard Hindus make the claim that Buddism is just a break-away sect of Hinduism. But that's not what I'm getting at--just so we can agree both J-Luv and K-Dawg are both claimed as Earthly incarnations of "THE God." I've asked similar questions before, and I will do it again because I felt the answers were not very convincing last time around.

    Why is Jesus the one true god and not Krishna?

    If your answer for this question is faith based (for example: "I just know it in my heart.", please explain in detail how one's faith that Jesus is the one true god is different from one's faith that Krishna is the *one true god.

    *Let us assume that we are talking about those who regard Krishna as the avatar of Vishnu, the "supreme god." From wiki:
    The worship of Krishna in Hinduism is part of Vaishnavism, which regards Vishnu as the Supreme God and venerates his associated avatars, their consorts, and related saints and teachers. However the exact relationship between Krishna and Vishnu is complex and diverse.[5] All Vaisnava traditions recognize Krishna as an avatar of Vishnu; others identify Krishna with Vishnu; while traditions, such as, Gaudiya Vaishnavism,[6][7] Vallabha Sampradaya and the Nimbarka Sampradaya, also regard Krishna as the svayam bhagavan, original form of God.
    You know, much like Jesus is the son/is his own father and "one true god" in many versions of Christianity.


    If your answer is based on evidence (for example: The bible is proven to be true and the vedas are not.), please be so kind as to provide the evidence that *proves the bible is true and the vedas are not.

    *By "prove" I mean evidence, of course, not faith (see above). I am not interested in anything supernatural that has not been proven by any scientific means, such as miracles and events from the bible. This also does not mean eye-witness accounts from the bible. There are also eye-witness accounts in the vedas, and many who claim to have seen and/or heard Krishna.



    My aim is really to cut right down to the meat of why Christians are Christians and not Hindus/Hare Krishnas. Why is one true and not the other?
    Last edited by Prime Zombie; May 14th, 2008 at 01:08 AM. Reason: fix typos

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Because Hinduism is a tangled mess, where even Jesus and Buddha can be seen as an incarnation of Vishnu. Its essentially the same issue I take up with Islam. If Jesus is a prophet then you must accept what Jesus says and what He says rules out anything Mohammed says.

    The Hindus worship a vast array of gods and demons and depending on who you ask some are exist, some dont, and there are even some Hindus who do not believe in actual gods. Thats the sort of overt contradiction of beliefs that simply doesn't cut it.

    I know I have had this debate before and I'm sure it was with you, at least initially before Wannaextreme took up the debate.

    Or maybe it was Wannaextreme only and Im just confused. Most debates have blurred over the years.
    Last edited by chadn737; May 13th, 2008 at 04:22 PM.
    I typically cite original research papers and reviews that are available only to a personal or institutional subscriptional. If you wish a PDF copy of the papers I cite, send me a request.

  3. #3
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    951
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Hello again Chad, thanks for jumping in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chad
    Because Hinduism is a tangled mess, where even Jesus and Buddha can be seen as an incarnation of Vishnu. Its essentially the same issue I take up with Islam. If Jesus is a prophet then you must accept what Jesus says and what He says rules out anything Mohammed says.
    What exactly do you mean by "tangled mess"? One could say the same about Christianity. The Jesus in Islam thing I won't get into much here, as I want to focus on just the two godhead figures in question. I'll only say that I've pitched the very same theory at muslims, to which they told me that I was obviously using the bible's context of Jesus (which is false to them), not the Korans (which is true to them). I say both are false.

    The Hindus worship a vast array of gods and demons and depending on who you ask some are exist, some dont, and there are even some Hindus who do not believe in actual gods. Thats the sort of overt contradiction of beliefs that simply doesn't cut it.
    ...which is why I tried to make it clear in the OP we are talking about:

    Quote Originally Posted by the OP
    Let us assume that we are talking about those who regard Krishna as the avatar of Vishnu, the "supreme god."
    keeping in mind:

    Quote Originally Posted by wiki
    The worship of Krishna in Hinduism is part of Vaishnavism, which regards Vishnu as the Supreme God...All Vaisnava traditions recognize Krishna as an avatar of Vishnu
    So I'm not talking about the Hindus that you claim don't believe in an gods or whatever. Just like I'm not talking about those that regard David Koresh as another incarnation of Jesus/one true Christian god, or Joseph Smith, etc.

    Just for clarities sake:

    Quote Originally Posted by the OP
    ...we can agree both J-Luv and K-Dawg are both claimed as Earthly incarnations of "THE God."
    I hope I was not being clear enough in the OP, and hope now we can focus on the two deities and which one is true (if any, which of course is where I will argue from).

    I know I have had this debate before and I'm sure it was with you, at least initially before Wannaextreme took up the debate.
    I remember. Yeah, it kind of went off track from what I remember. And of course I'm still and atheist and still am not convinced that any gods exist, so I'm always looking for proof that any exist. Oh, and ghosts too. Let me know if anyone has hard evidence on them... actually we could just lump it all together (gods, ghosts, etc.) and call it "the supernatural" and/or "mythology" and/or "things of which people believe in without evidence."

    Again, when I say "evidence" I do not mean "the bible" as that is not what I would call "Facts or observations presented in support of an assertion."

    Nor would I call the vedas "evidence" either. Take the holy books away from the faith, and what are you left with? This is more or less a lot of the point of this debate. And if some parts are true and others false, how are we to really know which parts are which (or which holy books are which, for that matter).

    Or maybe it was Wannaextreme only and Im just confused. Most debates have blurred over the years.
    That's understandable. Though I would think my debate style and his are quite different, with all due respect to Wanna.

    I sometimes mistake GP for LP and vice versa just because they have similar names/avatars, and they are obviously much different in style (not to mention gender).

  4. #4
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by chadn737 View Post
    The Hindus worship a vast array of gods and demons and depending on who you ask some are exist, some dont, and there are even some Hindus who do not believe in actual gods. Thats the sort of overt contradiction of beliefs that simply doesn't cut it.
    Yeah... kind of like people who worship one god, but also claim the one god is three gods... worship a goddess who birthed one of the three/one gods, and a pantheon of local heroes/demigods... and do this all from a set of books that all contradict one another.

    Glass houses, Chad. Glass houses.

  5. #5
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    951
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    *crickets*

    Well... umm...

    I know, are there any atheists willing to put the "Christian hat" on to debate?

    Anyone? Is this really that hard a question? I just want to know why deity A is true and deity B is false.

    Bueller...? Bueller...?

  6. #6
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Be patient, I am engaged in 3 or 4 times the debates you are and somehow I have to fit that into work and real life.
    I typically cite original research papers and reviews that are available only to a personal or institutional subscriptional. If you wish a PDF copy of the papers I cite, send me a request.

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    Yeah... kind of like people who worship one god, but also claim the one god is three gods... worship a goddess who birthed one of the three/one gods, and a pantheon of local heroes/demigods... and do this all from a set of books that all contradict one another.

    Glass houses, Chad. Glass houses.
    You don't think there's a difference between Trinitarian doctrine and polytheism?

    At least self-described Christians (overwhelmingly) consistently believe in the same core doctrines--Christology, Trinitarianism, etc.--Hindus, according to chad, often hold contradictory beliefs about the existence of Hindu gods.

    Imagine if there was significant dispute within Christianity about whether God existed. Don't you think that the Christians arguing that God doesn't exist would have a contradictory belief system, regardless of your disputes about omniscience-vs-free-will or omnipotence-and-omnibenevolence-vs-the-presence-of-evil?
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  8. #8
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,211
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Prime Zombie,

    Since you want down to earth answers, and your focus is comparative, we can start by looking at a pre-requisite (but not a proof of deity) for both Jesus and Krishna, and that would be their historical existence... The traces of historical footprints they left are useful data points. Historical evidence for Krishna is extremely weak - to non-existent. It's hardly surprising since his incarnation would have occurred some 3 thousand years earlier then Jesus.

    From a rational standpoint, this fact is a strike against Krishna.

    I would side-step entirely the Issue of Jesus, or Krishna being Gods in their own right. They are complex enough debates to have their own 2 threads. You seem to be interested in a comparative debate by rational means on the merits of Jesus against Krishna.
    Last edited by Vandaler; May 17th, 2008 at 08:49 AM. Reason: Added precision, grammar.
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

  9. #9
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    951
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by Vandaler View Post
    Historical evidence for Krishna is extremely weak - to non-existent.
    Support, please. Then we'll go from there.

    PS - Good luck!

  10. #10
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Zombie
    What exactly do you mean by "tangled mess"? One could say the same about Christianity. The Jesus in Islam thing I won't get into much here, as I want to focus on just the two godhead figures in question. I'll only say that I've pitched the very same theory at muslims, to which they told me that I was obviously using the bible's context of Jesus (which is false to them), not the Korans (which is true to them). I say both are false.
    Take the following quotes from Wiki:

    Hinduism is an extremely diverse religion. Although some tenets of the faith are accepted by most Hindus, scholars have found it difficult to identify any doctrines with universal acceptance among all denominations.


    and

    Hinduism is a diverse system of thought with beliefs spanning monotheism, polytheism,[14] panentheism, pantheism, monism and atheism. It is sometimes referred to as henotheistic (devotion to a single god while accepting the existence of others), but any such term is an oversimplification of the complexities and variations of belief.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism

    More specifically, referring to Vaishnavism it doesn't get much better:

    Vaishnavism is one of the traditions of Hinduism, and is distinguished from other schools by its primary worship of one supreme God known in different perspectives under names of Narayana, Krishna, Vasudeva or more often Vishnu and their associated avatars.[1][2] It is principally monotheistic in its philosophy, but not exclusive.[3] Its beliefs and practices, especially the concepts of Bhakti and Bhakti Yoga, are based largely on Upanishads associated with the Vedas and Puranic texts such as the Bhagavad Gita, and the Padma, Vishnu and Bhagavata Puranas.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaishnava

    But heres the real problem. Even though Vaishnavism is monotheistic it does not consider itself exclusive, meaning it does not consider itself to be the only path, but rather one of the path amongst the other branches of hinduism. That is how Hinduism is. It includes multiple contradicting paths to coexist as long as they recognize its scriptural authority as being foremost:

    As Hinduism developed, it did not reject its parent traditions, but modified and assimilated them into newer schools of thought. For example, the ancient Vedic notion of sacrifice, and the later philosophies of Sankhya and Yoga, have all been assimilated into the more recent school of Vedanta. Even the more sectarian sampradayas do not entirely reject other doctrines, but claim that they demonstrate a less complete understanding.

    Despite a relatively inclusive approach, Hinduism has rejected those doctrines that do not accept its scriptural authority.


    http://hinduism.iskcon.com/tradition/1101.htm

    That is why in Hinduism its acceptable to be monotheistic, polythiestic, pantheistic, or even atheistic.

    Despite our many denominations, Christianity does have a common doctrine and accepts only those who follow that same doctrine. Primary differences between us lie in worship practice and authority rather than actual doctrine. I am Non-denominational, but I know the Catholic, the Orthodox, the Baptist, the Methodist, the Angelican, etc will all believe in the Trinity, believe in One God, believe that Christ died for our sins, believe that He rose again on the third day, etc, etc, etc.

    Such commonality does not exist in the worship of Krishna or any Hindu god and despite their contradictory beliefs, all are accepted. Christians at least will say when something is heretical and in disagreement with doctrine.
    So I'm not talking about the Hindus that you claim don't believe in an gods or whatever. Just like I'm not talking about those that regard David Koresh as another incarnation of Jesus/one true Christian god, or Joseph Smith, etc.
    Except that the Vaishnavism does not say that Krishna is the only acceptable path. Nor does Vaishnavism say that Vishnu is the only God. It says that he is the supreme God and that others are subordinate to him. It also allows one to follow avatars other than Krishna. Hindus who worship Krishnu would not say that Krishna is the only way. If I worshiped Rama I would also be recognized by the Krishna who believe that Rama is just another avatar of Vishnu.

    Nor is this view limited to other avatars of Vishnu, its far more inclusive than that:

    Vaishnavism, Shaivism and Shaktism are the most prevalent Hindu sects; among these, Vaishnavism is the largest. The devotional sects do not generally regard other sects as rivals, and each sect freely borrows beliefs and practices from others.


    http://www.religionfacts.com/hinduism/sects.htm
    I typically cite original research papers and reviews that are available only to a personal or institutional subscriptional. If you wish a PDF copy of the papers I cite, send me a request.

  11. #11
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,211
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Zombie View Post
    Support, please. Then we'll go from there.

    PS - Good luck!
    Sure.

    It's a bit indirect, but this page below attempts at making the case for an historical Krishna while acknowledging that this view is not what is held by the academia.

    ... This is not a new phenomenon: the question of his historicity has engaged the attention of scholars for nearly two centuries, ever since European scholars began to study India, questioning every belief that the Hindus had held for millennia. They concluded - and their Indian followers faithfully accepted - that Krishna was a myth ....

    http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclo...ical-krsna.htm
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

  12. #12
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    951
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Chad:

    Okay, I get it. Hinduism is complicated. I didn't need you to elaborate on that. Can we both agree that there are those (perhaps most) who regard Krishna as the avatar of the one supreme god?

    It does not really matter that you have lots in common with other Christians. What I am trying to get down to is why you disregard Krishna and accept Jesus. By laying out that there are many paths in Hinduism does not negate the existence of Krishna, nor does it automatically mean that you have proved that Jesus is god.

    It's really a simple question, but I should have known it would get thrown off track as before. Here it is again:

    Why is Jesus the one true god and not Krishna?

    And of course the obvious follow up:

    What proof validates Jesus/nullifies Krishna?

    Van:

    Try again. Taking a tiny quote of one article which may or may not be in context does not amount to proving that Krishna did not exist. Here's some one who would beg to differ with you, to be fair (as I agree with you that Krishna is a myth):

    People who doubt there’s life after death sometimes say, “No one has ever come back to tell us about it.”

    But what if someone claimed to have come back? Would we believe him? What kind of proof would we want?

    Trying to prove that Krishna is God presents a similar challenge.

    Someone might ask, “If Krishna is God, why doesn’t He come and prove it?”

    Well, there’s evidence that He does come. For example, when He came five thousand years ago, millions of eyewitnesses saw Him, He did things only God can do, and Vyasadeva, a reporter with impeccable credentials, kept track of it all.

    Vyasadeva recorded not only Krishna’s matchless deeds but also the testimonials of the greatest spiritual authorities of the time, a time when large numbers of people pursued spiritual realization with every ounce of their being. The consensus of these saints and sages—masters of spiritual learning and discipline—was that Krishna is God.

    People today tend to doubt the credibility of Vyasadeva’s writings, thanks in large part to a smear campaign started by the British during their takeover of India. Yet despite their efforts, the light of the Srimad- Bhagavatam and other books from Vyasadeva’s prolific pen keeps shining. As Devamrita Swami shows in this issue, great Western thinkers who received the Vedas without prejudice were astounded. Vyasadeva’s writings were superior to anything they had ever come across.

    But what about the “stories” Vyasadeva wrote? Was there really a boy named Krishna who lifted mountains and killed monsters? Scholars for whom Vyasadeva’s “mythology” seems incompatible with his erudite philosophical works might propose that Vyasadeva didn’t write both things. But that argument fails if we look at just one example of his work: Srimad-Bhagavatam. There Vyasadeva has written both profound philosophy and—as the climax, no less—charming stories about Krishna.

    The great leaders of India’s spiritual lineages since Krishna’s time have concluded that a great philosopher like Vyasadeva wouldn’t frivolously insert fanciful stories into his treatise on the Absolute Truth. Vyasadeva’s gravity alone is solid evidence that his stories of Krishna’s exploits tell of actual events.

    From: http://www.iskcon-network.com/blog/_...7/2508370.html

  13. #13
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    PZ, you are ignoring the actual argument.

    1) Hindu faith allows for multiple paths to God. Those who worship Krishna are no different recognizing other paths.

    2) Most of those paths are in contradiction to one another.

    3) Since the worshipers of Krishna agree that there are other paths that means that Krishna is not the other path and that one can choose paths other than Krishna.

    4) The fact that the worship of Krishna allows contradictory paths, ones that disagree on fundamental aspects, that tells you that the worship of Krishna is not so logically sound, but rather filled with contradictions.

    5) Its simple logic. Contradiction on fundamental points does not make for a sound religion.
    Why is Jesus the one true god and not Krishna?
    The above argument explains why Krishna is not the one true god, because of its contradictory nature it allows for other possibilities.

    You are the one who wanted to know why I follow Christ and not Krishna. Well that right there is a primary reason for me. I find Hinduism to be unsound logically and self-contradictory, while Christianity is not.

    What proof validates Jesus/nullifies Krishna?
    The tenets of believe in Krishna allow for self-contradiction, hence nullifying it.
    I typically cite original research papers and reviews that are available only to a personal or institutional subscriptional. If you wish a PDF copy of the papers I cite, send me a request.

  14. #14
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,211
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Zombie View Post
    Try again. Taking a tiny quote of one article which may or may not be in context does not amount to proving that Krishna did not exist. Here's some one who would beg to differ with you, to be fair (as I agree with you that Krishna is a myth)
    The authors we both quoted, are both intent in establishing Krishna as an historical figure. They also both have the same complaints.

    Quote Originally Posted by quote from my link
    This is not a new phenomenon: the question of his historicity has engaged the attention of scholars for nearly two centuries, ever since European scholars began to study India, questioning every belief that the Hindus had held for millennia. They concluded - and their Indian followers faithfully accepted - that Krishna was a myth. In reality, it was a preconceived answer, which they sought to justify by giving it an appearance of scholarship. But in these articles I will present evidence to show that Krishna was indeed a historical figure who lived about 5000 years ago.
    Quote Originally Posted by quote from yours
    People today tend to doubt the credibility of Vyasadeva’s writings, thanks in large part to a smear campaign started by the British during their takeover of India.
    Both have the same grievances. So is it Cultural genocide or western rationality that is at play? It's beyond my capacity to respond. I don't know.

    However, what I wanted to outline, is present in both text that you and I advanced. That the overwhelming opinion, by western standards of thinking is that Krishna is a mythical figure.
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

  15. #15
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    951
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by chadn737 View Post
    PZ, you are ignoring the actual argument.
    That's funny, because I think you are doing the same thing. Much of what you have to say are red-herrings, but I will address them anyhow. Remember, you are supposed to be showing me why Jesus as god exists and Krishna as god does not.

    1) Hindu faith allows for multiple paths to God. Those who worship Krishna are no different recognizing other paths.
    And? Having mulitple paths to the supreme god does not mean that this god does not exist. Besides, not all who are Christian are on the path to their supreme god, after all. Many Christians may or may not get to Jesus on their path. Some will get all that gnashing of teeth.

    2) Most of those paths are in contradiction to one another.
    Says you. They may seem contraditory for you, but surely others may see them in perfect harmony. Need I remind you that there are also those who would argue that Christainy's path(s) are contradictory.

    3) Since the worshipers of Krishna agree that there are other paths that means that Krishna is not the other path and that one can choose paths other than Krishna.
    And? Again, this might be a perfect system to some people. We of course can always pull the favorite theist card of "god works in mysterious ways" out, because it doesn't just work for Christianty only. Perhaps Vishnu works in mysterious ways. Ways in which you and I could never understand. If there is a Vishnu, obviously what Vishnu has set up is right, because Vishnu is perfect. Many paths does not mean that Vishnu does not exist.

    4) The fact that the worship of Krishna allows contradictory paths, ones that disagree on fundamental aspects, that tells you that the worship of Krishna is not so logically sound, but rather filled with contradictions.
    See above. Further more, if you are saying that Krishna worship is not logically sound, you are implying that Christianity is. This is very amusing to me, seeing as I find Christianity to be pretty far from logically sound.

    5) Its simple logic. Contradiction on fundamental points does not make for a sound religion.
    The same could be said about Christianity.


    The above argument explains why Krishna is not the one true god, because of its contradictory nature it allows for other possibilities.
    Again, you are claiming it is contradictory. That has yet to be clearly established. Clearly others beg to differ. You are also forgetting one big factor: reincarnation. If Hinduism is true, and Vishnu exists, reincarnation may serve as an equalizer to these so-called contradictions. Perhaps if one takes a "lesser" path, they are only forcing themselves to come back again and give it another shot. If they are on a really "bad" path, they could come back as say a maggot. It's something that requires quite a unique and difficult path to get to be with Krishna/Vishnu.

    You are the one who wanted to know why I follow Christ and not Krishna. Well that right there is a primary reason for me. I find Hinduism to be unsound logically and self-contradictory, while Christianity is not.
    Umm... see that bold part? Yeah... that's kind of what I wanted you to elaborate on. All of your bones to pick with Hinduism can be written off by your lack of understanding of the religion and/or Vishnu's actions/will. I want something concrete. Say, why the bible (which is where Christians get their faith) is "right" and the vedas are wrong.

    I don't think you've read the vedas, and you've done little more than some googling/wikiing on the basics of Hinduism. I'm just pointing out that you could be wrong, and they could be right. There is of course another option which I subscribe to, which is that no gods exist.

    The tenets of believe in Krishna allow for self-contradiction, hence nullifying it.
    That's easy to say. People also say the same about Christianty. Again, you have yet to establish that these so-called contradictions are contradictions to begin with. Next, even if they are contradictions, it does not mean that Krishna did/does not exist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Van
    The authors we both quoted, are both intent in establishing Krishna as an historical figure. They also both have the same complaints.
    And? I'd like to see something specific that shows that Krishna did not/does not exist.

    Both have the same grievances. So is it Cultural genocide or western rationality that is at play? It's beyond my capacity to respond. I don't know.
    Your honesty is laudable. Still does not mean that these grievances prove that Krishna does not exist. Lack of evidence would prove that Krishna does not exist. But the same could be said about Jesus (as a god, not as a man).

    There are even those who argue that Jesus the man did not exist (which of course I don't want to get into here).

    Unless of course you can let me in on the big piece of evidence that proves Jesus to be true over Krishna.


    However, what I wanted to outline, is present in both text that you and I advanced. That the overwhelming opinion, by western standards of thinking is that Krishna is a mythical figure.
    A few quotes which may or may not be taken in context shows a "overwhelming opinion"? I don't think so. Further more, does having something be an "overwhelming" opinion make it automatically true? Like how thousands of years ago the overwhelming opinion was that the sun went around the earth?

    Also, are we to ignore eastern standards of thinking? Do they not count? To many millions of people Krishna is very real.

  16. #16
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,211
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Zombie View Post
    And? I'd like to see something specific that shows that Krishna did not/does not exist.
    Would be nice. Way above my capacity.

    A few quotes which may or may not be taken in context shows a "overwhelming opinion"? I don't think so. Further more, does having something be an "overwhelming" opinion make it automatically true? Like how thousands of years ago the overwhelming opinion was that the sun went around the earth?
    You misunderstood. It's not two people that make an overwhelming opinion. It's two people acknowledging an overwhelming opinion that is contrary to the point they want to make. I take it they are well informed of where they stand on the opinion pole.

    Also, are we to ignore eastern standards of thinking? Do they not count? To many millions of people Krishna is very real.
    I would not, but you tell me... in your OP, you mentioned no magical thoughts, or faith based opinions. Would you allow their collective testimony based on their faith, when you wanted very Cartesian answers.

    Anyhow, this is my best shot. All those Hindu words are giving me an honest and serious pain in the neck. You won't get much more millage out of me other then by the very down to earth but somewhat weak argument that the historicity of Jesus is better supported then that of Krishna (by the standards you are willing to allow). This based on what seem the best testimony we both could find from people who have little interest to project that impression.
    Last edited by Vandaler; May 20th, 2008 at 12:57 PM.
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

  17. #17
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    232
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by chadn737 View Post
    2) Most of those paths are in contradiction to one another.
    Support that the paths contradict? Could you give specific examples of contradicting paths? The paths do not have to be just different; to contradict, each path also has to state that it is the only path (or that other paths are wrong, or something similar). To give a concrete example: you ask me how to get to Africa. I say, take a ship. Person X says, catch a flight.
    Different paths, but are they contradictory?

    5) Its simple logic. Contradiction on fundamental points does not make for a sound religion.
    Support that these points of contradiction are fundamental? And fundamental not just from a Western/Christian viewpoint, but fundamental to the internal logic of the Hindu religion.

    I asked my mother; she told me why differing paths do not render Hinduism illogical:
    1) Hinduism believes all paths lead to God, but at varying speeds; some paths lead there slowly, some rapidly. [although I don't have a citation for this] This belief, coupled with an exhortation in Hinduism to respect other world-views, makes Hindu denominations call other denominations as demonstrating a "less complete understanding" (Wikipedia- Vaishnava).
    2) "Hinduism recognizes scriptural authority to be foremost" or fundamental: You yourself said that in post #10. This scriptural legitimacy is what is fundamental, not the differing paths.
    Last edited by Muse; May 21st, 2008 at 03:13 AM.

  18. #18
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    951
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by Vandaler View Post
    Would be nice. Way above my capacity.
    Again, thanks for being honest. I have yet to meet a Christian that has the capacity to show exactly how other gods don't exist but theirs does. Yet if you and Chad had been born in India, odds are you'd think Krishna/Vishnu were quite real.



    You misunderstood. It's not two people that make an overwhelming opinion. It's two people acknowledging an overwhelming opinion that is contrary to the point they want to make. I take it they are well informed of where they stand on the opinion pole.
    Just like we could find two Christian scholars that point out that Jesus is not recorded much by Roman historians. Or that there are many other gods that have a lot in common with Jesus, such as: Dionysus, Mithra, Horus, and yes even Krishna.


    I would not, but you tell me... in your OP, you mentioned no magical thoughts, or faith based opinions. Would you allow their collective testimony based on their faith, when you wanted very Cartesian answers.
    I allowed for faith:

    Quote Originally Posted by the OP
    If your answer for this question is faith based (for example: "I just know it in my heart.", please explain in detail how one's faith that Jesus is the one true god is different from one's faith that Krishna is the *one true god.
    *Let us assume that we are talking about those who regard Krishna as the avatar of Vishnu, the "supreme god."
    Anyhow, this is my best shot. All those Hindu words are giving me an honest and serious pain in the neck. You won't get much more millage out of me other then by the very down to earth but somewhat weak argument that the historicity of Jesus is better supported then that of Krishna (by the standards you are willing to allow). This based on what seem the best testimony we both could find from people who have little interest to project that impression.
    I can imagine that trying to confront another religion's earthly encarnation of the godhead would give you said pain. I don't think your argument is down to earth per say, but biased in favor of the religion you were probably born, raised, and systematically indoctrinated into. I will agree it's weak, hence why I started the thread. By playing devil's advocate in my head as a Christian vs. a Hare Krishna, I found it to be quite problematic.

    Just saying that Jesus is better supported does not cut it. Krishna is heavily supported. So what options are we left with?

    1. The historical support for Jesus as an earthly god is true, but the support for Krishna as an earthly god is false.

    Conculsion: Jesus existed as an earthly god and Krishna did not. Thus, the Christian god exists.

    2. Same as 1, but in favor of Krishna.

    Conclusion: Krishna existed as an earthly god and Jesus did not. Thus, Vishnu exists.

    3. Both Jesus and Krishna have historical support as earthly gods, and both are true.

    Conclusion: Both Jesus and Krishna existed as earthly gods. Both the Christian god and Vishnu exist.

    4. Same as 3, but both are false.

    Conclusion: Neither the Christian god or Vishnu exist.


    Having a Hare Krishna family members is much like having Christian family members. You ask them why they believe in their respective god. Both say pretty much the same thing. There is a holy book that is true. This holy book is supported by history and many scholars. Also, I know it in my heart to be true via faith/direct contact with my god.


    I'm just trying to see the difference here, if any. Obviously I think that both religions just won out over the rest of what we now call "mythology." Somehow Jesus and Krishna are taken very seriously, yet Zeus and Odin are not, along with many other gods.


    Btw...Chad, you still with us?

  19. #19
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,211
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Zombie View Post
    Again, thanks for being honest. I have yet to meet a Christian that has the capacity to show exactly how other gods don't exist but theirs does.


    You know, very little Christians take the time to really internalize all the intricacies of their Faith. Especially in the west, we are not very contemplatives and have a rather short attention span.

    If you couple that to the amount of investment it takes to learn another Faith and it's own intricacies, you will find that actually, very little people can actually weigh one over the other in an objective way. I'm not surprised at all by what you say.
    Last edited by Vandaler; May 23rd, 2008 at 01:05 AM.
    A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
    - Wayne Gretzky

  20. #20
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Jesus vs. Krishna

    First of all, Jesus Christ was a real man who lived 2,000 years ago in Judea. It's believed that Christ not only taught, but performed healing miracles, died as a sacrifice for our sins, and rose from the dead three days later. Krishna is merely believed to be a teacher. He died, like Mohammed and Buddha. No one believes otherwise. Who is more relevant and able to influence my life, both here and eternally--a dead man, or a living man who conquered death?

 

 
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Conversing with the Past.
    By Mr. Hyde in forum Writing Club
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 8th, 2006, 03:31 AM
  2. Are they still Christian, ye or ne?
    By mustang5 in forum Religion
    Replies: 138
    Last Post: February 27th, 2006, 11:07 AM
  3. Transplanted Jesus 2
    By Pibs in forum Religion
    Replies: 155
    Last Post: November 30th, 2005, 10:39 AM
  4. PIBS' transplanted Jesus thread
    By Zhavric in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 101
    Last Post: November 20th, 2005, 07:57 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •