PDA

View Full Version : A comparative study between the Bible and the Vedas.



Adhvagat
07 April 2011, 05:37 PM
http://voi.org/books/hvhb/

I found his vision of how the vedas propose monotheism a little misleading, I think monism would be the proper term.

On the whole it basically looks like a refutal of the Bible and elevation of the Vedas with some minor common points that he acknowledges.

What do you think?

pineblossom
07 April 2011, 06:34 PM
From reading the Preface it seems the target of the book seems to be Christian proselytizing and condemnation of Hindu beliefs.

It is not difficult to refute the Bible - particularly the Old Testament.

But if you cut to the chase you will find that what Jesus taught was very much influenced by Hindu teachings emanating from trade between India and Rome.

Sahasranama
08 April 2011, 01:29 AM
From reading the Preface it seems the target of the book seems to be Christian proselytizing and condemnation of Hindu beliefs.

It is not difficult to refute the Bible - particularly the Old Testament.

But if you cut to the chase you will find that what Jesus taught was very much influenced by Hindu teachings emanating from trade between India and Rome.

There are definitely influences of Buddhism, Hinduism and Mithraism in Christianity, but then again Jesus couldn't have taught any of that, since he is not even a historical person.

pineblossom
08 April 2011, 03:56 AM
There are definitely influences of Buddhism, Hinduism and Mithraism in Christianity, but then again Jesus couldn't have taught any of that, since he is not even a historical person.

The evidence I suggest is against such a view.

There is a quantity of evidence to confirm that Jesus died at the hands of Roman authority in Jerusalem under Pontius Pilate at the time Tiberius was Emperor. On that historians agree.

Sahasranama
08 April 2011, 04:00 AM
Well, I am not a historian. Maybe you can provide that evidence and carry this discussion with Bryon.

pineblossom
08 April 2011, 04:13 AM
Well, I am not a historian.

Neither am I. All you have to do is google the question and follow the links as they say. Then you could read the literature. Not very hard.

Sahasranama
08 April 2011, 05:08 AM
[/URL][url]http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j853MLWVZi4)
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j853MLWVZi4)

rkpande
08 April 2011, 05:44 AM
just google- christ viisited india

Sahasranama
08 April 2011, 05:49 AM
Do you believe that?

Adhvagat
08 April 2011, 07:25 AM
Personally, if he existed or not, that doesn't matter (unless he's your saviour, in that case he MUST have existed). The mess done to the Bible would negate any of the cases.

Therefore historical existence becomes a little pointless, the focus should be on philosophy and theology.

Sahasranama
08 April 2011, 07:41 AM
Indeed for Hindus this should not matter at all, although if there's no historical evidence people will not be able to maintain that he was an avatar or yogi without having to admit that they partially absorbed Christian theology by acknowledgement of Jesus' existence alone. But even if some historical man named Jesus existed, it's clear that he was not the man described in the Bible. Jesus from the Bible is an amalgan of different mythological figures, including the Egyptian sun God. For me the answer to the question "Why Hindus should reject Jesus" is self evident, unfortunately, it's not self evident yet for all Hindus, so meanwhile we may bring up more and more arguments to the table from all angels.

BryonMorrigan
08 April 2011, 12:36 PM
The evidence I suggest is against such a view.

There is a quantity of evidence to confirm that Jesus died at the hands of Roman authority in Jerusalem under Pontius Pilate at the time Tiberius was Emperor. On that historians agree.

No. I am a historian, and neither I, nor any of my other friends who are historians, (including a prominent Christian religious professor at a Christian university), believe there is any historical "proof" of the existence of "Jesus." However, just as I don't need historical "proof" of the existence of anything to do with the Vedas in order to follow Sanatana Dharma, a real Christian with real faith does not require it either. The only people who require this type of "evidence" are those who have little faith, or those who seek to use this "evidence" as "proof" of the superiority of their religion.

Actually, the first Roman mention of "Jesus's" existence does not occur until almost a CENTURY after his alleged death, and it's simply an off-handed mention of a troublesome cult. We have solid evidence of the existence of Pontius Pilatus, as well as Emperor Tiberius...but as far as "Jesus," there is no contemporary evidence of his existence outside of the Christian scriptures. Even Josephus, whose mentions of "Jesus" are largely considered to be a medieval forgery, was not even born until years after the alleged crucifixion.