Over the years I’ve noticed that some that seek to discredit Christianity, specifically Jesus, claim that the “myths” surrounding Jesus Christ are based in ideas from other religions. Some suggest Mithraism, ancient Egyptian religion, and Hinduism, specifically the avatar of Krishna. They claim that the “dying God” motif was taken from these religions and ascribed to Jesus.

Now, one of the major beliefs of Christianity is the belief that God really did enter into time, incarnate as a man (while still remaining fully God), taught us how to receive eternal life, He died for our sins, then was bodily resurrected. We believe that Jesus Christ really did exist in history, and that all of these evens occurred in real time.

My question is, what do those that believe in Krishna believe about him? Is he [a] God? Why did he come to earth? Did he die in atonement for our sins (not sure if this is a concept in Hinduism)? The questions that I am most curious in are, is it believed that Krishna really did come to earth, and if so, when, and are there historical evidences pointing to there being a historical Krishna?

The claim that the stories about Jesus [peace be upon him] were borrowed from stories about Krishna is absolute garbage. Don’t believe it for a second.

Who is/was Krishna? that all depends on what type of Hinduism you’re talking about. The Vaishnavs, for instance, would say that Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu, God Almighty, and that Vishnu chose to incarnate himself in various time periods to destroy demons and to establish righteousness [dharma]. Other hindus may say that he is an incarnation of Vishnu, but Vishnu is a lesser deity. Others would say that Vishnu is an incarnation of the Goddess Durga, which, I guess, would make Krishna one of the incarnations of a demigod.

It’s confusing to me, frankly. Hinduism has developed and changed over the many thousands of years it’s been around. Some of Krishna’s teachings in the Bhagavad Gita are in agreement, almost verbatim, from the Sermon on the mount, so I guess that’s how people have assumed that there’s some kind of connection between Krishna and Jesus.

I would reccomend reading the Bhagavad Gita to get the gist of what the most common view of Krishna is. In summary, they’re very different figures. One was a monotheist; the other, a pantheist. Jesus [peace be upon him] according to most people, was celibate. Krishna, however, had over 40,000 wives according to Vaishnav sources. His promiscuity would make even Zeus look like a choir boy.

God sends a teacher to earth approximately every 2160 years (according to the precession of the equinoxes). It is not surprising that these teachers or Avatars have a lot in common. Just for your information the last few Avatars were:
10000-8000 BC Age of Leo - Hermes (Egypt)
8000-6000 BC Age of Cancer- Hercules (Greece)
6000-4000 BC Age of Gemini - Rama (India)
4000-2000 BC Age of Taurus - Mithra (Europe)
2000 - 0 BC Age of Aries - Krishna (India)
0 - 2000 AD Age of Pisces - Jesus (Middle-east)

These Avatars are not exactly Gods, but they are all divine, so pretty close.

Interesting. So is this a common Hindu belief, that Hermes, Hercules, and Mithra were actual avatars of God?

Also, do you believe that there are historical evidences that Krishna existed on this earth? If so, what are some of those evidences?

Thanks for your thoughts. I do agree that the claim that the events surrounding Jesus’ life were imported from those of Krishna and other deities is garbage. I’m curious to see how those that belief in deities like Krishna, who purportedly was on this earth at some point, view the matter of historical evidences for this.

The specific non-indian persons is my belief, but all Hindus believe that Vishnu incarnates periodically as a mortal human being in order to save the world - the specific ones that they believe in and worship are Rama and Krishna.

Apparently he wrote the Bhagwat Geeta- so it is very likely that he existed. Other details like his birthplace, birthdate are regularly observed, so he probably existed, however this question does not bother many Hindus

The Gita was supposed to have been let’s say psychically revealed to King Dhritarashtra by Sanjaya…

Well it’s an interesting topic… Baha’is accept Krishna as a Manifestation of God but we also hold that His original teachings have been lost …at the same time we feel that there are some verses in the Bhagavad Gita that are inspired to a degree… I recall years ago having read the Gita and felt inspired. At the time I was a Christian. I think I realized that the Bhakti or devotional qualities of the Gita were very similar to the Gospel of John in the 13th and 14th chapters …

“He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him”

  • Gospel of John 14:21

In one of the older translations of the Gita by by Edwin Arnold we read:

"Who, fixed in faith on Me,
Dotes upon none, scorns none; rejoices not,
And grieves not, letting good or evil hap
Light when it will, and when it will depart,
That man I love! Who, unto friend and foe
Keeping an equal heart, with equal mind
Bears shame and glory; with an equal peace
Takes heat and cold, pleasure and pain; abides
Quit of desires, hears praise or calumny
In passionless restraint, unmoved by each;
Linked by no ties to earth, steadfast in Me,
That man I love!

“But most of all I love
Those happy ones to whom 'tis life to live
In single fervid faith and love unseeing,
Drinking the blessed Amrit of my Being!”

(Bhagavad Gita (Edwin Arnold tr))

Thanks for explaining.

I’m curious, how is it known, or what is the basis to believe, that Krishna wrote the Bhagavad Gita? Is this a spiritually acquired knowledge?

Also, from what I understand, a 16th century monk, Caitanya, is believed by some to be an incarnation of Krishna. What is the basis for believing that?

Thanks again.

The basis is of course scripture itself. The Gita is part of the Mahabharata (which is an epic like the Illiad). In the Mahabharata, the Gita is recited by Krishna (who is a character in the epic).

I don’t believe Chaitanya was an incarnation of Krishna and I don’t think he believed it either. Chaitanya actually thought of himself as a lover of Krishna, so he identified with Radha (Radha was a woman who lived at the same time as Krishna and was a lover of Krishna at that time). Chaitanya would even dress as a woman sometimes to show how much he was like Radha - someone in love with Krishna.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.