nightflight

Did Christianity borrow from Hinduism? Is the Jesus story a replication of the Krishna myth? I wonder about this; Christian apologists say that its a non-issue (big surprise). However, I have heard non-christians say the same. Any thoughts?

http://www.bobkwebsite.com/krishnajesusmyths.html

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr.htm

Bearlaker

I hadn't read anything about Krishnas' supposed birth, early life, or that he had been crucified, interesting.
His legend would make a much more exciting movie than Jesus' would.

Toto

If you search this forum for Krishna, you will find some previous discussion. Also check out Richard Carrier's comment on Kersey Graves' 16 Crucified Saviors

To summarize: there is no evidence that Christianity borrowed from Hinduism or that Christ is based on Krishna. Krishna was not crucified or born of a virgin, among other false claims that have been bandied about. There is some evidence that Christian missionaries tried to portray Christianity as somehow similar to Hindu myths, as a device to convert Hindus. There is also evidence that Hinduism absorbed some Christian mythology.

Thomas II

Both figures seem to have a lot of mythical elements.
Was Jesus just one individual or the combined personalities of two individuals?
Are the sayings attributed to Jesus the sayings of one or more individuals?
It's possible. It's probable.
Was Mary a virgin? Doubtful.
Was a spiritual being the father of Jesus? Doubtful.
Was Joseph his father? Apparently not.
Did he have brothers and sisters? Apparently..
Was he a God/Man? It is doubtful.
Why? Because God/Men are mythical figures.
Did Jesus have "father" issues? Apparently.
Did he have "mother" issues? Apparently.
Did he have "sibling" issues? Apparently.
Did he have "clergy" issues? Apparently.
Has the Church manipulated the image and sayings of Jesus? Apparently.
Have they destroyed valuable evidence? Apparently,though they keep a lot of original documents hidden at the Vatican.
Is the whole religion around Jesus a fabrication? Apparently.

Toto

More like 5 or 6.

Or were they common sayings of earlier sages selected and added to by later theologians?

Or did Mary exist?

Probably not.

There is no credible evidence that any of these people existed.

The Vatican is opening its archives. I sincerely doubt that there is any hidden smoking gun there.

Wallener

In 35CE a claimant to the Samaritan messiahship was killed by Pilate's soldiers while leading people up Mount Gerizim to reclaim the sacred vessels purportedly buried there after Moses. Given that (a) many Samaritans apparently believed this guy and (b) in the Samaritan tradition Messiah is a carpenter named Joshua born of Jospeh, I suspect Jesus-as-fabrication is a little strong.

Dharma

again there is more evidence of similarities between the story of the Buddha and Christ then there is between Krishna. The original story of Krishna is considered older than the story of the Buddha, if astronomical indications given in the Mahabharata give any clue, it could've been around anywhere from 3000-1500 bce.

Krishna's kingdom lay off the coast of Gujarat according to records, an island which sank after Krishna retired...an island city has been found where this city was supposed to be.

http://www.vnn.org/world/WD9902/WD13-3039.html
http://www.4to40.com/discoverindia/p..._places_dwarka

Steven Avery

> ThomasII
> Was Joseph his father? Apparently not.
> Did he have brothers and sisters? Apparently..

Hmm.. Which NT personages have "credible evidence" ?
Theophilus,
Zachariah.- Priest
Zachariah's wife - Elizabeth.
Joseph
Mary
Jesus
John the Baptist
King Herod
Herod was tetrarch of Galilee
Philip tetrarch of the region of Iturea and Trachonitis, and
Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene,
The daughter of Herodias
Pilate
James
"The Egyptian"
Paul
Luke
Caiaphas
etc.

How do you determine "credible evidence" ?
Is there...
Anybody mentioned ONLY in the NT that is "credible" ?
Anybody mentiond EXTERNAL to the NT as well as NT that is "not credible" ?

Shalom,
Praxeas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/

Toto

Credible evidence is evidence from archeology or from texts that were not written as religious documents. "Credible" does not mean that anyone can be 100% sure that the person existed; merely that there is some actual evidence. "No credible evidence" does not mean that they did not exist, just that there is no evidence.

I said that there is no credible evidence of the named members of Jesus' family, because they are mentioned only in the gospels (with the possible exception of James, although I think that the one description in Josephus of James as the "brother of Jesus" is as phony as the ossuary with that inscription, and the phrase "Brother of the Lord" in Paul is not a biological brother.)

For instance, John the Baptist is mentioned in Josephus, and the description there is significantly at variance with the Biblical description of John, so it seems reasonable that there was such a person. But Frank Zindler has argued that the mention in Josephus was interpolated by followers of JtB, and JtB was entirely mythological. (I would not agree, but it is an argument.)

The Herodians are mentioned in Josephus, and we know of one daughter of Herodias, Salome, who would not be of the age of the young dancing girl mentioned in the gospel accounts.

I would regard Paul's letters as evidence that a person named Paul existed. Others might disagree.

Weighing historical evidence is not a very scientific process, in the absense of hard archeological data.

Steven Avery

Ok, I just found it interesting. If a "religious document" handles 100 externally corroborated figures correctly, the 100 non-corroborated figures are still considered "uncredible" because it is a "religious document". I believe that is a very strange disassociation of "religious document" from "hisorical document'' but it is the answer I expected.

Ok, thanks, Toto... good moderation.. wrapping up as I just pointed out on the Dating of Mark thread.

Shalom,
Praxeas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/