easter was originally Hindu in origin. the similiarities of Krishna and
Christ in name point to India as the origin of Christianity (Krishnanity.)
Krishna was a Hindu Deity that came from a vimana (flying vehicle.) Ancient Hindu illustrations repeated show men flying around the sky. He was a celestial being who originate from elsewhere.
The birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus was plagiarized by the Greeks from ancient Hindu text that out date "jESUS" (b.c.e. 4 b.c.) by 10,00 years! "When we've been there 10,000 years bright shining as the Sun..." the sun was the vimana . don't believe me... check out the the ancient Hindu texts (such as the Upanishads) for yourself!
comments...
Originally posted by dragonstarr369Interesting - do you have any online literature for this?
easter was originally Hindu in origin. the similiarities of Krishna and
Christ in name point to India as the origin of Christianity (Krishnanity.)
Krishna was a Hindu Deity that came from a vimana (flying vehicle.) Ancient Hindu illustrations repeated show men flying around the sky. He was a celestial being who originate from elsewhere.
The birt ...[text shortened]... heck out the the ancient Hindu texts (such as the Upanishads) for yourself!
comments...
Originally posted by dragonstarr369So are you saying the New Testament/Christian Scriptures were written by Hindus who used various methods to trick scripture scholars and archaeologists? Or more Greek tomfoolery?
easter was originally Hindu in origin. the similiarities of Krishna and
Christ in name point to India as the origin of Christianity (Krishnanity.)
Krishna was a Hindu Deity that came from a vimana (flying vehicle.) Ancient Hindu illustrations repeated show men flying around the sky. He was a celestial being who originate from elsewhere.
The birt ...[text shortened]... heck out the the ancient Hindu texts (such as the Upanishads) for yourself!
comments...
Originally posted by pawnhandlerHave archaeologists ever found evidence of Jesus and chums?
So are you saying the New Testament/Christian Scriptures were written by Hindus who used various methods to trick scripture scholars and archaeologists? Or more Greek tomfoolery?
the Hindus abandoned Christianity and stareted Buddhism 2000 years ago, the Greeks and Romans under the council of Nicea wrote the bible. they plagiarized stories from the past and is why many stories in the bible have similarites to ancient stories written before 6,000 years ago. We need to get the oldest text to determine where all these stories come from. the Hindu texts has the oldest know written text written by humans .
Originally posted by dragonstarr3691. Easter has a long and varied history, I don't think it has anything to do with Hinduism though. Why do you?
easter was originally Hindu in origin. the similiarities of Krishna and
Christ in name point to India as the origin of Christianity (Krishnanity.)
Krishna was a Hindu Deity that came from a vimana (flying vehicle.) Ancient Hindu illustrations repeated show men flying around the sky. He was a celestial being who originate from elsewhere.
The birt ...[text shortened]... heck out the the ancient Hindu texts (such as the Upanishads) for yourself!
comments...
2. I doubt that the current way that Christ is pronounced by English speakers is the way it was pronounced by the Jews, also the word has a long history in Judaism and similarity to Krishna is merely coincidental.
3. According to Wikipedia, the Upanishads date from 7BCE to the medieval or early modern period. Hardly 10,000 years.
Or did you get the 10,000 year figure out of the Upanishads themselves?
- Joined
- 21 Jul 06
- Moves
- 91650
Originally posted by twhiteheadTo add the that, the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth is rarely questioned now. There is enough evidence to suggest that it is more than likely that he existed and that he was executed in Judea in the tenure of Pontius Pilate.
1. Easter has a long and varied history, I don't think it has anything to do with Hinduism though. Why do you?
2. I doubt that the current way that Christ is pronounced by English speakers is the way it was pronounced by the Jews, also the word has a long history in Judaism and similarity to Krishna is merely coincidental.
3. According to Wikipedia, the ...[text shortened]... . Hardly 10,000 years.
Or did you get the 10,000 year figure out of the Upanishads themselves?
While this is not irrefutable evidence, it sums it up nicely enough, I think:
"[If Jesus did not exist then we] should therefore have to believe that thirty years after the death of a man who had never lived, hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people not only believed firmly that he had lived, but at great danger to themselves believed him to have been divinely commissioned to establish a universal kingdom.” (Radin, Max The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth, (The University of Chicago, 1931), p10)
the upanishad is a reference to an earlier period than that. the Hindu texts attempt to explain the origins of life on this planet. i'll have more proof of this in later posts on this subject. ancient texts were written in sanskrit one of the oldest languages known.
also, hindus repute to have come from some other place than earth, making them...aliens by our definition. where they came from will force me to do more research on this as later posts will reveal.
Originally posted by HumeAIt is only rarely questioned because the largest religions in the world require it to be true and thus members of those religions will not question it.
To add the that, the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth is rarely questioned now. There is enough evidence to suggest that it is more than likely that he existed and that he was executed in Judea in the tenure of Pontius Pilate.
While this is not irrefutable evidence, it sums it up nicely enough, I think:
"[If Jesus did not exist then we] should therefore have to believe that thirty years after the death of a man who had never lived, hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people not only believed firmly that he had lived, but at great danger to themselves believed him to have been divinely commissioned to establish a universal kingdom.” (Radin, Max The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth, (The University of Chicago, 1931), p10)
It is telling that you had to go back to 1931 to find a supporting quote, and that your quote not only does not 'sum it up nicely' but in fact shows a fundamental flaw.
Your quote is essentially saying: If Jesus didn't exist then our religion is wrong, therefore we cannot admit the possibility that Jesus didn't exist.
We just have to look at various cults today to see that it is entirely possible for a man who never existed to have thousands of followers within 30 years.
I personally question the existence of Jesus and even more so question the vast majority of claims made about him.