What do Hare Krishna devotees believe about Christ?

[Priitaa 0]

I didn't know Methodists had branches. They broke away from the portestants, as they Methodists "are" the branch, as I understood it. But its no big deal. If there were to alter their doctrine, I would not be surprised. Just that I wouldn't want to speculate on it as a fact, but ulatimately its not so important to me.

 

I belonged to the Methodist Unitarian church, which is just a regular Methodist church. Yes, they still believed in Father, Son and Holy Ghost, thus the Trinity idea is there, but the Methodists at the time understood "Son" actually as son. And as guru, tho they would never use that word; but not as God.

 

I don't know that Prabhupada was against the Trinity idea tho. Father being God/Krishna, Son being guru, and Holy Spirt being our soul or SuperSoul. Unless you have read something I have not. (Dogma, now that's different.)

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

 

 

are you sure you mean unitarian not united ?

 

i've never heard of methodist unitarian,

the methodists indeed have different sects,

since he beginning of methodism.

 

the unitarian church or religion is a completely

different belief system, they do see jesus as an

empowered or enlightened person not god,

they are a syncretist religion believing in

the universalist or unity of all religions

and there is no one dogma for unitarians.

 

Methodists ,at least the ones i have heard of are all

believers in the standard trinitarian dogma,

you can read at the link i gave,

that beleif is that jesus was fully god and fully human,

in other words they believe that the body of jesus

was fully human and that his soul was in fact

an avatar of god the father and the holy spirit,

fully god.

[theist 1]

Prabhupäda: Krsna, Christ... Of course, this question was several times put to me. Christ says that I am son of God. And Krsna says I am God. So there is no difference. Son of God and God, we respect everyone. If I respect your father, I respect you also. Do you mean to say if I disrespect your father, you'll be pleased upon me? No. That is our philosophy. So Caitanya Mahäprabhu says that I am servant of the servant of the servant of the servant of the servant of Krsna [Cc. Madhya 13.80]. So if anyone loves Krsna, he must love Lord Jesus Christ also. And if one perfectly loves Jesus Christ he must love Krsna. If he says, Why shall I love Krsna? I shall love Jesus Christ, then he has no knowledge. And if one says, Why shall I love Jesus Christ? I shall love..., then he has also no knowledge. If one understands Krsna, then he will understand Jesus Christ. If one understands Jesus Christ, you'll understand Krsna.

 

 

Prabhupada's view IS the Hare Krsna viewpoint.

[Guest guest]

christians mostly ask this quetion to non christians.

 

a vaishnav or a vedic person never asks a non vedic person, what they think of krishna or what jesus or bible says about krishna. if they ask, the answer is vaishnavism and vedic religions are false religions, the works of devil according to bible.

 

they do not want to accept the fact that jesus at puri temple in india.

 

 

[theist 1]

Yes, it's often dangerous to speak too much to most Christians about these topics. Dangerous because they will be prone to blaspheme that which they don't understand.

 

There are exceptions but I have been burned so many times that now I just avoid them for the most part. Best to keep a friendly distant I've found.

 

Srila Prabhupada when speaking to them would always question them about their engagment in animal slaughter.

[Priitaa 0]

Hmmmm I could have sworn that sign outside the old Methodist church I use to attend said Unitarian, but now I am not sure. You could be right. Anyway, it doesn't really matter, as what they preached inside where I attended, regardless of what others preached, is that Christ was Son and not God. This, I felt, was one of the reasons I was able to come to Krishna consciousness, because I had never heard in my life that Jesus was God! Phew. Thank Krishna for that.

 

Maybe things have changed, but I read about the origin of Methoidists as rebellion against those who believed Jesus was God. There may be various opinions on this, as there are on everything. I know I should check out that link, I just have been busy reading Vedic shastra right now (about Lord Caitanya), and don't really want to read something else at the moment. But most likely, my curiousity will eventually get the better of me, and I will. :-) Thanks.

 

By the way everyone, HAPPY GAURA-PURNIMA!!!!!!!!!!!

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body or parts, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things, both visible and invisible. And in unity of this Godhead there are three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

 

The Son, who is the Word of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin; so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in one person, never to be divided; whereof is one Christ, very God and very Man, who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men.

 

this the stated dogma on jesus for methodists.

it is the exact same dogma as catholics, and most christian faiths.

 

your parents may have been methodists who becamwe unitarians,

the unitarian church believes exactly what you said,

and many people of different faiths belong to the unitarian church, catholic unitarians,jewish,muslim,

etc.

 

they are syncretists like vivekananda and ramamkrishna

preaching the unity of all religions ,all paths

are able to bring one to god, they do not accept

jesus as god though.

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

http://www.1wellbrock.org/methodism.htm

 

this is the origins of methodism, it had nothing to do

with the dogma of who is jesus, it had to do

with the way the lifestyle of the believer

should be.

[Guest guest]

is not good.

 

i have argued with they have not been able to accept any of their points.

 

one answer could be:

what does it matter to you?

 

i also tell them that jesus was not the only son of god.

we and you are not bastards.

we all are sons of god.

 

 

[theist 1]

Such knowledge seems scanty in the Bible unfortunately.

 

Here is one quote from Psalms 82

 

Psalm 82

6 "I said, 'You are "gods";

you are all sons of the Most High.'

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Many people in the world know Christ yet have not found chanting. Chanting doesn't mean you don't know and admire Jesus. The opulence of Krishna is different than the body of Christ communion, but they serve a simliar purpose, and that is to replenish the soul. Krishna can protect from sinful interaction and demonic influence much like Christ. Either way you are offering your behavior to a holy spirit who will guide you through life.

[Guest guest]

I don't see where the dogma is, unless it is beacause they are Christians and use Chrits name -- to that, I just accept. They are going to use Christ as we are going to use Krishna. Prabhupada has often said like this, Christ and Krishna being the same. And that its pointless to argue this with them too. ha But much of what say, (except for 'without body or parts') we also say! It is true that there is only one God, it is true that their guru (Jesus) is nondifferent from the Father (God) - that is also Vedic since the instruction of the Father and Guru are the same.

 

"And Krsna says, "I am God." So where is the difference? The son will say the same thing, the servant will say the same thing, and the father also will say the same thing. So theology means to know God and abide by His order" ~ Srila Prabhupada Garden Conversations with Professors, Chairman of the Religion Dept. of U.S.C., and Dr. Stillson Judah, and others - June 24, 1975, LA., Ca

 

Of course, as they get into the womb stuff and manhoood stuff, they dont know how to understand the difference beteween bodily concept and spiriutal concept.

 

My parents never were Methodits who became Unitarians. They never went to church! lol They did sometimes pray at home, as they believed, but I supsect she was sick of organized religion, and my father was big on "fear" of God, so I think he was scared to death to attend. No. I started to attend first because a friend encouraged me, and later, on my own. This is what I remember being preached, that Jesus was Son of God. Tho I was young and could have missed something! :-)

 

But what I dont understand is your concern over the trinity. Prabhupada never had a problem with it. If you scroll up you will see a quote, and there are others. Unless it is not the trinity you are trying to point out, but the dogma?

 

In any case, if you are trying to get the Christians to cent per cent agree with us and if that's not possible, trash the whole thing and for us to therefore cent per cent dislike the Christains (not saying you are!), neither is going to happen. Vaisnava's have the highest knowledge, also understanding that Christ, like many others, preached according to time, pleace and circumstances. We recognize the differences but to focus on them is not helpful preaching. Instead, we can try to show them how Jesus did indeed worship Krishna! From that point on, they may agree or disagree.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

Guest,

 

Good reply! Though I stay away from the fundamentalists as they are having too much fun being mental. :-)

 

And I avoid the conventionalists or those who regularly attend any little church down the street, or a big church in a city - generally any church. ha I only peach to those who want to hear, are a little submissive to Krishna or our message.

 

Tho I would preach to the Essenes, but they are usually satisfied in their religion. Cuz it is REAL Christianity.

 

The Pagans are those who who call us Pagans. The Essenses never call us Pagans, though they do refer to most other Christian's as Pagans. ..........Too bad they are a small group.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

{b]Psalm 82

6 "I said, 'You are "gods";

you are all sons of the Most High.'

 

That's excellent! But true, there are not many like that. Though one wonders, with Christ having traveled thru India, Tibet, and many other countries, reading or hearing of their mystical religious beliefs, if he really did say much more bit maybe it was not 'allowed' in the Bible. Not only was the Bible tampered with, some point out that much of what has been written as Christ's words, were not necessarily his words or exact teachings, but the memory (and understanding?) of others who were there when Christ spoke, possibly tinged by the Church of at least various authority figures at the time they were under, or the disciples endeavor to make his way the only way? (Which is not what he taught.)

 

"In another place the gentleman quotes one book written by Prof. Charles Smith. The book's name is ``The Paradox of Jesus in the Gospels''. In this book it is admitted that all the statements in the Bible are not directly spoken by Jesus. Some of them are staged through the mouth of Jesus Christ; and specifically this passage: ``I am the way, the Truth and the light. No man comes unto the Father but by me.'' This gentleman admits that it is put into the mouth of Jesus because that is the literary convention of the author of the 4th Gospel. Such kinds of observations definitely suggests that there are many passages in the Gospel which are later on set up to be spoken by Lord Jesus Christ, but actually they were manufactured by different devotees." ~ Srila Prabhupada Letter to Satsvarupa -- Tittenhurst House, England 31 October, 1969

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Priitaa 0]

And I thought I was logged in. Sorry.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

There is ample proof about the existence of Dwaraka as per the reports from the excavations done in the last decade and there is a book published on it with photographs (I do not remember the title though). A time period of about 8000 yrs (Mahabharata war was fought in 5561 b.c. Pl. see the site by Vartak on dating of Mahabharata and Ramayana wars:

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/mahabharat/mahab_vartak.html). During this long period, floods, earthquakes, global warming and many other natural calamities have played their roles in devastating Dwaraka, leaving very little evidence for the 'scientists'. But ShriKrishna has remained in the minds of His devotees continuously. About christions and reincarnations. I read at some place that until 300AD, christions did believe in reincarnations and thereafter, church forced them to abandon this view.

[Priitaa 0]

 

There is ample proof about the existence of Dwaraka as per the reports from the excavations done in the last decade and there is a book published on it with photographs (I do not remember the title though). A time period of about 8000 yrs (Mahabharata war was fought in 5561 b.c. Pl. see the site by Vartak on dating of Mahabharata and Ramayana wars:

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/mahabharat/mahab_vartak.html During this long period, floods, earthquakes, global warming and many other natural calamities have played their roles in devastating Dwaraka, leaving very little evidence for the 'scientists'. But ShriKrishna has remained in the minds of His devotees continuously. About christions and reincarnations. I read at some place that until 300AD, christions did believe in reincarnations and thereafter, church forced them to abandon this view.

 

 

 

Thank you for this link. This was exactly the kind of thing I was talking about previously - that there is plenty of evidence about Krishna, they are just looking in all the wrong places. And I read many similar accounts in BTG. Tho am always looking for more, especially online! :-)

 

There were some initial problems getting into the link tho, just due to typo's, so I fixed and reposted here. Anyone sould be able to just click on it now.

 

Again, glad someone posted something like this. Thanks.

 

YS,

Prtha dd

 

[Guest guest]

 

 

I have to confess that I once made the mistake of trying to tell Christians that Jesus was actually a Krishna devotee and unfortunately for me I offended them greatly even to the point where I lost all my friends. I didn't mean to offend them but when I was younger I had a bad habit of just speaking my mind without thinking sometimes. Anyways I don't know if I have been punished by the Lord for undermining my friends understanding of Christianity or if I was right in telling them that Jesus was a Vaisnava but either way I tend to avoid the subject anymore.

[Priitaa 0]

 

I have to confess that I once made the mistake of trying to tell Christians that Jesus was actually a Krishna devotee and unfortunately for me I offended them greatly even to the point where I lost all my friends. I didn't mean to offend them but when I was younger I had a bad habit of just speaking my mind without thinking sometimes. Anyways I don't know if I have been punished by the Lord for undermining my friends understanding of Christianity or if I was right in telling them that Jesus was a Vaisnava but either way I tend to avoid the subject anymore.

 

 

 

Haribol!

 

I highly doubt the Lord is punishing you for preaching! Srila Prabhupada started a preaching movement, so we have all been insulted repeatedly by fundamental Christians. Too bad you lost friends tho. Many of us lost friends when we joined. I remember being so excited about moving into an 'ashrama,' that I told everybody and invited them to come visit. This one who I thought to be very opened minded, was actully offensive! And the others, tho not offensive, well, I lost those friends. But the way I see it is that now, I have much better ones! And now at least I have devotees of Krishna for my friends! So it was worth it.

 

As far as what to tell the Christians and what not to, I generally try not to agitate their minds. If they are open to it, I will tell. If they are not, I leave them alone. Better they believe in something than nothing cuz we have much power, much knowledge, and it would be easy to disprove their fundamental fanaticism. However, the result of that too often is not that they turn to Krishna, but at least their is risk they go agnostic or athiestic. So I have read it is better to let them believe in some form of religiosity than none, or else we will have a corrupt society. Or more corrupt.

 

Many spoke their minds in youth. :-) Not to worry. We learn as we go. Haribol!

 

YS,

Prtha dd

[Guest guest]

 

 

 

Thank you for the support. I really appreciate it.

 

 

Hare Krishna

[Guest guest]

Haribol, theist, great points are available here in your point about similarities between the two. I find such similarities uncanny, especially when we consider Lord Brahma in the mix.

 

Imagine, the creator worshipping one greater than Himself.

 

Lord Jesus always worshipped, which proves his position as subserviant Lord.

 

And not just the assassination attempts by the government through treachery from so-called followers, but position in society as well. Though Jesus was of rabbinical society, the house of david was discriminated against due to the maccabean wars, isolated in nazareth. This placed Jesus at odds with the sanhedrin, not unlike the discrimination against haridas by brahmanical society. Jesus operated in separation from His Father, so he sometimes invaded the temples to throw the demoniac out, but haridas was personally with the Lord, so the benefits of the pure temple came to him.

 

And the title of "Namacarya" also fits Lord Jesus, who also champions the potency of the Hallowed Name of the Father.

 

Haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

[Guest guest]

 

 

Lord Jesus always worshipped, which proves his position as subserviant Lord

 

 

Applying the same logic,

 

Chaitanya always worshipped, which proves his position as subservient Lord.

Krishna worships Shiva in the Mahabharatha, which proves his position as subservient Lord.

 

[Guest guest]

Incidentally NASA has published the aerial photographs of an ancient bridge (which they have 'named' as Adam's bridge) which according to all Hindus is the famous bridge built by Lord ShriRamchandra in Treta Yuga. Pl. visit this site, http://www.rootsweb.com/~lkawgw/adamsbridge.html

for the pictures. There is one more better site as,

http://india.krishna.org/Articles/2002/10/002.html which gives a whole lot of information. The basic idea of writing this here is to emphasize that, all that devotees talk in India is discarded by westerners as mythology. This attitude must change.

[theist 1]

From Chakra.

 

Perspective on the Rg Vedic Purusa Sukta Hymn

by Bhakti Ananda Goswami

Posted March 26, 2003

 

Hare Krishna ! Jesu ki jaya !

Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga ki jaya !

 

Dear Devotees,

 

Please accept my humble obeisances.

 

Sri Baladeva Purusha as Yupa Dhvaja...Why the Cross is the Symbol of Christ

 

Understanding the Rig Vedic Purusha Sukta Hymn

 

At the beginning of every cosmic manifestation, the Second Person of the Godhead, Lord Baladeva, the Servitor Lord, Original Spiritual Master and Savior of all devotees, sacrifices Himself as the cosmic Purusha, for the creation, maintenance and redemption of the entire universe. The Rishis (compare Hebrew Roeh 'Seers') assist Him at His Self sacrifice. The remnants of His sacrifice become the food of all beings. Commemoration of His sacrifice becomes the central rite / act of worship in the whole universe. His consecrated Body / Remnants / Sesha or PURUSHA-IDA / Prasadam are the 'remnants of His sacrifice' sacramental food of the twice born. All of the Devas are born from His sacrifice. From His head the brahmanas are manifest, from His arms the kshatriyas, from His belly the vaishas and from His legs the sudras are manifest. Thus the varnashrama dharma sacramental 'Mystical Social Body' of Purusha is the primal cause of theocentric human civilization and all sacramental social life.

 

The Vedic sacrifices all began with this cosmic Self-sacrifice of Purusha Yupa Dhavja, and ultimately commemorated His 'once-and-all-sufficient' Self- offering. Thus Purusha or Yagna Purusha as 'Self Sacrifice Personified' was called Yupa Dhvaja ('Stake-flagged') because the instrument of His cosmic sacrifice was the sacred Axis Mundi Yupa Stake, Cross or Post to which He was fixed in the primal Purusha Sukta Hymn, for His cosmic sacrifice. Thus in the Vedic Sacrificial system, sacrificial victims were fixed to a post, pole or cross called a Yupa, in memory of Purusha's cosmic sacrifice. Since He was sacrificed on the cosmic Yupa Axis Mundi or 'Cross of all Creation', He was called Yupa Dhvaja....or the One Whose eternal emblem or symbol (or 'heraldic devise' for His Flag / Dhvaja ) was the instrument (Yupa Post) of His cosmic sacrifice.

 

All the Vedic sacrifices related to the Purusha Sukta were intercessory or ATONING in nature. Thus Vedic kings and brahmanas, JUST LIKE THE JEWS would perform great Vedic sacrifices to atone for the sins of the nation. This was still going on in India when Shakya Muni Buddha promoted His ahimsa doctrine to stop it. In fact a 'SCAPE GOAT' type of Vedic Rite was recently performed in Nepal, to cleanse the Nation of its bad karma for the assassination of its royal family.

 

The Apostolic Catholic and related Christian worship of Jesus Christ as the Second Person of the Godhead Self-offered for the salvation of the whole universe, is the worship of Baladeva, the original Spiritual Master as Yupa Dhvaja, Who "takes away the sins of the world". Thus the sacramental social body of Christ in Catholicism is related to the mystical social body of Purusha Yupa Dhvaja or Yagna Purusha, and the Eucharist is Lord Jesus Purusha's Maha Prasadam. As the Second Person of the Godhead, He is the Original Spiritual Master and the Savior of all universes. None come to the Father but through, with, in and by Him.

 

So, please don't blaspheme Lord Baladeva as Purusha Yupa Dhvaja, and don't ridicule His Christian devotees for worshiping Him in His Sign of the Yupa or Cross, according to the ancient Vedic Tradition...as Yupa Dhvaja. He is the cosmic Redeemer Form of the Original Spiritual Master, Who has taken away the sins of the entire cosmic manifestation ! To really behold His Cross / Yupa is to see the FINAL END of all the universe's sins, as the central fact or Axis Mundi of all creation. In the Cross / Yupa of Lord Baladeva as Jesus Purusha, all things past and future, human and Divine, are finally reconciled IN HIS SELF-SACRIFICING LOVE.

 

An aspiring servant of the servants of Lord Baladeva as Yupa Dhvaja,

 

Bhakti Ananda Goswami

 

 

 

 

 

[theist 1]

I thought the above article concerning Balarama was interesting as far as I could follow, having no knowledge of the Rig veda myself. I hoped that others would have added something. Well maybe after I bump this thread up again.

 

One obvious simlarity between Arjuna and Lord Jesus' life examples to us,that I have noticed, is the test that they both showed us how to pass. The test of surrendering their will for the pleasure of the will of the Supreme Lord.

 

Arjuna's crisis on the chariot before the battle, where his mind was reeling and he was overcome with grief. Lord Jesus sweating blood in prayer, and yet saying "not my will but thy will be done". Both then carrying through with their respective God assigned missions.

 

Krsna told Arjuna "Armed with yoga, O Bharata, stand and fight".

 

Lord Jesus Christ tells us "Pick up your cross and follow me".

 

Such exalted Vaisnava's.

 

I pray, "O Lord, put not this weak soul to the test". But is it really avoidable?