"Jesus Lived in India" - Holger Kersten

Hi

“Thus begins Holger Kersten’s book ‘Jesus Lived in India’. This German book is a thorough, methodical and authoritative examination of the evidence of Christ’s life beyond the Middle East before the Crucifixion and in India and elsewhere after it.
This article is a summary of Kersten’s exhaustive research into Christ’s travels after the Crucifixion, his arrival in India with the Mother Mary and finally his death and entombment in Kashmir. Kersten notes the many parallels of Christ’s teachings with other religious and cultural traditions and suggests that at least some of these figures may have been one and the same personality. It is not possible, Kersten asserts, to disprove that Christ went to India. The current information documenting Christ’s life is restricted to the gospels and the work of Church theologians. One can hardly trust these sources to be objective considering their obvious interest in maintaining the authority of their Church and its grip on the masses.”

sol.com.au/kor/7_01.htm

Since my Catholoc friends in this forum have been asking me for some historical evidences on Jesus in India, I have introduced this article here for benefits of the members and for their comments if any. Please don’t mind.
Thanks

I’ve read “authoritative” treatises like this before. Curiously enough, they never reference “authoritative” sources rather, wild speculation that some cryptic figure was “remarkably similar” to Jesus.

It is not possible, Kersten asserts, to disprove that Christ went to India.

This is one of my all time favorites. I would point out that it is also impossible to disprove that Jesus went to the Moon. The onus of proof is not on those who dispute it, rather it must be proved that He did go to India (or to the Moon for that matter.) There is not a shred of credible evidence to prove it, period. I would be perfectly happy if He did go there. As a matter of fact I think it would be fascinating to study.

The current information documenting Christ’s life is restricted to the gospels and the work of Church theologians. One can hardly trust these sources to be objective considering their obvious interest in maintaining the authority of their Church and its grip on the masses.

This comment illustrates a profound lack of objectivity and scholarship so why should anyone trust the person who wrote this? Not to mention the fact that by the author’s own admission existing information about Christ’s life is restricted to the Gospels etc. So what exactly are the sources for the supposed authoritative study being foisted upon us?

Since my Catholic friends in this forum have been asking me for some historical evidences on Jesus in India, I have introduced this article here for benefits of the members and for their comments if any. Please don’t mind.
Thanks

And…we’re still waiting.

Peace,
+N

My friend, you have an interesting theory, and I found the article fascinating.

However, I think the burden of proof is still on you–there are millions of Catholics and relatively few who believe that Jesus was ever in India.

Crucifixion kills–the Romans do not err when they are punishing those who pose significant religious and political threats. The apostles gave their lives because they **saw it happen ** and hundreds followed them because of what they witnessed.

I wonder why the historical Jesus would have gone to India. The Latter-Day Saints in America believe that Jesus came to America to teach the Native Americans, because it’s much easier to believe in someone who walked your own soil than the sands of Israel. Could this be a case of the same?

Hi

Do you think if the Catholic had been in small numbers then their stance would have been false, and the onus of proof would have been on them? Now that they are in large numbers so they must be considered infallible.

In the time of Jesus, Jews were in great numbers at least larger than the Christians. Does that make the stance of Jews reasonable? No, it is not reasonable. Since Catholic stance is weird, they have to prove their weird stance undoubtedly.

I don’t say that Latter Day Saints stance should be rejected summarily that Jesus went to South America as you say. To me, their stance is stronger and natural as they say that Jesus remained on this globe than of the Catholics who say he ascended to skies, a weird stance that would be.

I don’t have to check the efficiency or otherwise of the executions of the Roman Umpire, after all they were human beings, so they could make mistakes. There are instances quoted of humans surviving the Roman executions on Crosses for a longer period than Jesus remained on Cross for a few hours only.

In fact since Jesus had himself predicted his survival being a Prophet, the more the efficiency of the Romans, the more it makes possible as God helped his survival.

Thanks

The first and primary source on “Jesus did not die on Cross” - rather Jesus was not killed on Cross and later died naturally is the pristine Word of God revealed on the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi 1835-1908.

Satan lost the battle and here comes the false prophet. By saying thing above, he wants to tell the whole world Christianity is not true.

Do not bridge the gaps between religions by taking out the truth. Without the truth, you are making big gap.

Hi paarsurrey,

Your persistance is admirable, albeit a waste of time.

Everything we (Christians) believe about Jesus is a fulfillment of ancient prophecy. His birth, life, death, and resurrection, was foretold, and documented in the Old Testament, centuries prior to them happening. This is how we know that our stories about Jesus are from God. Only God can inspire prophecy, because only God knows the future.

Why would we waste our time regarding Jesus and India? What prophecy does it fulfill? There is no evidence to sugest that this foolish story is from God.

P.S. Please use a normal font like everybody else. Your font makes you appear that you are boasting. Humble yourself a little bit; use a normal font.

The idea that Jesus went to India after the crucifixion is wildly rejected by the *vast majority *of mainstream scholars! Until this notion becomes mainstream by the most intelligent and educated people in the field, your belief will remain on the furthest fringe of academia. If you want to believe it fine, but don’t try to convince us this idea is within the realm of fact when it’s much closer to the realm of fantasy. Furthermore, few scholars can even prove that Jesus did not die on cross, much less travel to a distant land after going through a torturous ordeal.

Hi

All realities are held to start with by one or a few people; so becoming a mainstream/popular subject is never a criteria for the truthfulness of a fact nor it is essential, in my opinion. I never said that it is an idea based primarily on some historical evidences of which others have to necessarily believe in, though historical (etc, etc) evidences are there and these do support this fact also.

I have repeated several times and once more I say very humbly to whoever who listens to or reads it is that:

The first and primary source on “Jesus was not killed on Cross” – but Jesus later died naturally in Kashmir, in India is the pristine Word of God revealed on the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi 1835-1908.
The Word of GodAllahYHWH is and had been the first/authentic and primary source of human knowledge whether revealed on Moses/Buddha/Jesus/Muhammad or Mirza Ghulam Ahmad; it is of itself a complete and without doubt and requires no external witnessing.
.

I’m not sure how to continue this thread. It seems like you have 2,000 years of history going against you–4,000+ if you count that we do indeed believe that Jesus is the fulfillment of Hebrew prophecy, and yet you’re going to take as truth the words of a “promised messiah” whose words have only been around for a century.

Again, Joseph Smith did much the same thing, believing that God spoke to him and reestablished His true church, which had lain dormant since the time of Christ. Difficult to believe, since he is the only one who claims this vision. Is there anyone who can sufficiently prove that the evidence for Jesus living in India at any point triumphs over the evidence for him dying on the cross, whether or not resurrected? External witnessing is CRUCIAL–otherwise I can say that I just committed suicide and came back to life, and people, in your view, would have to trust me if I claimed myself to be divine.

So, it’s the Imam Mahdi’s word, Joseph Smith’s word, anyone who seeks to be worshipped or adored outside of his/her league as a mortal human being’s word…against the Catholic Church. This isn’t to say that the majority is always right, but you must understand that a fringe belief is always less likely to be accepted as Truth, because if there are any forces of Good in the universe, they are leading mankind in the right direction.

Hi
You never mind for the odds against I believe. Please continue giving rational and reasonable arguments and remain research oriented and steadfast for the truth you believe in, never wavering or getting confused.
The truth remains fresh as ever, time does not make it stale, as it was 2000+4000 years before or a hundred years before us, its fragrance is the same, it is not difficult to know it, though difficult to accept it.

There was a day, a very first day please remember, GodAllahYHWH talked to Noah.
Genesis 6:9
This is the account of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God.
Genesis 6:13-18
So God said to Noah, "I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. 15 This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. 16 Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. 17 I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish. 18 But I will establish my covenant with you, and you will enter the ark—you and your sons and your wife and your sons’ wives with you. Unquote

Now my Catholic friend, please don’t mind. Just think for a little while, if you had been in the time of Noah; would you accept what Noah said or you would reject him?
I am confident being a **steadfast Catholic **you cannot afford to reject Noah.
If you say, yes, I would accept Noah as he walked with God. Then please read your post again and **delete the arguments which you think are not aligned with the above quote **from OTBible.
If you wont accept Noah, then give your arguments again, giving your argument from OTBible with references.

Thanks

I didn’t quote from the New Testament, I quoted from history.

I appreciate your response, but you need to respond to one argument before introducing another, especially with a topic as broad as this. Otherwise, it’s easy to get lost.

(And if it makes a difference, I am a Protestant.)

Hi again, paarsurrey;

It’s not the message that we reject, but rather the credibility of the messenger.

I think your problem stems from Islam; Muslims believe Muhammed is God’s messenger too. But muslims have failed to prove that the Qur’an has God’s signature on it, ie prophecy.

Similarly, you have taken the Islamic logic and applied it to Mahdi. Your foundation is flawed.

I agree with Excalibur just above; There is no point in changing the subject and talking about pople like Noah. Changing the subject renders your original argument as dead.

You have to explain to us why Mahdi is a messenger of God. I don’t think you can do this. You are just spewing rhetoric. I’m sorry for the personal attack, but when I see that you have submitted over 1,000 posts in just a few months, it appears that you are writing more than you reading. I just sigh in despair for you.

I don’t think I can offer any more advice to you. And I don’t think you have anything more to offer us.

Hi Charlie Zeaiter!

Our Protestant friend Excalibur argued that the history of 2000+4000 years is against me, please see his post:

It seems like you have 2,000 years of history going against you–4,000+

So I have to take up things from start of the 6000 years, he asked for it, so I did not change the subject rather on his demand I came right in the centre of the subject and I will remain in the centre, and I am not shy of that. Thanks for you appreciation.

If GodAllahYHWH could talk to Noah, there is **none to restrict **God from talking to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the PromisedMessiah.

GodAllahYHWH talked to the PromisedMessiah and informed him that the Catholics/Protestants and Muslims are at fault in understanding the true fulfillment of Second Coming of Jesus, the time has come and **We have Sent Thee **in fulfillment of the Prophecy of Jesus and Muhammad and you are the PromisedMessiah. Jesus was **never killed on Cross **and **never ascended to skand much wicked. If God decided and told Noah that the earth would be wiped out from those people, so is the case now. God’s ways don’t change if He was to destroy the populace of the Earth so must he now.

GodAllahYHWH told Noah to make an Arch**, so he made, and only his family and followers were to be saved. Noah was not to fight with anybody he had just to obey what God told him.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote a book in Urdu titled “Kishte-e-Noah” or in English** “Noah’s Arch” **and he mentioned all these things in that book.

I think it is sufficient for today. Peace

Thanks

paarsurrey, that’s not the point.

The point we’re trying to make is stop living in the past. Stop living in a world where you think prophecy is still being written. Come join the future. Come join our world where prophecy is fulfilled.

I don’t understand why you doubt the prophecies that have been fulfilled.

Did Mirza Ghulam Ahmad ever part the sea? Did he ever walk on water? Did he perform any miracle at all? Why do you place so much blind faith in him? I just don’t get it.

Roman soldiers were under the penalty of death by crucifixtion themselves if they let a condemned prisoner escape. Botching an execution was considered the same as allowing him to escape. Roman soldiers were expert killers. John’s gospel clearly states they rammed a spear (“pilum”–the heavy killing lance of the legions) up into his chest–the same gospel records an outflow of “water” from the spear thrust (pericardium fluid and lymph) and blood–a near absolute guarantee Jesus was already dead before the thrust.

Those crucifiction survivals were almost all from commuted sentances–they got the poor souls down before they died–and the the exceptions?–those incompetant executioners were up there as well

I know of five books and many letters written within living memory of the event you deny as being true that say nothing of Jesus going to India. I call that as much proof as you are going to get, and call it satisfactory proof since similar accepted facts are proven about other events that took place around the same time and place.

I think that is a reasonable response.

Hi

Jesus went secretly, he had not to announce it publictly as Jews could chase him.

Christian who deserted him ; how could he trust them?

Paul and company were his enemies; why should he have informed them?

You could believe whatever you want, I am at peace with you.

Thanks

The ultimate truth about Jesus is:
(Firstly), JesusYeshuaIssa did not leave anything revealed on him from GodAllahYHWH in the form of written stone tablets as was in case of Moses, (Secondly) or anything written by JesusYeshuaIssa himself when he left from Galilee, after the incident of Crucifixion, alongwith his mother Mary in search of the lost ten tribes of the house of Israel, he died natural and peaceful death in Kashmir, India.
Jesus left nothing behind authenticated by him, in possession of the Church.
We do respect the NTGospels which (Thirdly) have account of Jesus life, but it does not have much utility, more value than a book of history subject to scrutiny, internal as well as external, for each event for truth on merit.

What 1st century source do you have to suggest that?

Christian who deserted him ; how could he trust them?

Not all deserted Him- the one whom Jesus loved- John, remained both in the high priests house, and at the cross when Jesus was crucified. Along with many of the women to include His mother Mary.

Paul and company were his enemies; why should he have informed them?

Paul was His enemy at least after He died and rose again. Before that he wasn’t mentioned.

You could believe whatever you want, I am at peace with you.

I believe what seems most plausible. Beyond the power of the word of mouth story- being the description of the Passion of Jesus Christ, His resurrection, and most importantly the Good News of what He taught to His Disciples that swept the world starting in 1st century Judea- they wrote it down.

If what they said were untrue the people of the day who did not believe it would have disputed it. Many people heard what Jesus said when He said it, and saw the miracles performed when He did them. Many saw how the Disciples preached, healed and were molested by the religious authorites. It is why many believed. Extraordinary things took place such as Pauls conversion a few years after Christ ascended to Heaven. Why would such men as the Disciples, to eventually include Paul, go to their deaths for a lie? Why would so many others do the same over the next 300 years?

The ultimate truth about Jesus is:
(Firstly), JesusYeshuaIssa did not leave anything revealed on him from GodAllahYHWH in the form of written stone tablets as was in case of Moses,

He left something better- personal experience as an example, and words of wisdom and truth.

(Secondly) or anything written by JesusYeshuaIssa himself when he left from Galilee, after the incident of Crucifixion, alongwith his mother Mary in search of the lost ten tribes of the house of Israel, he died natural and peaceful death in Kashmir, India.
Jesus left nothing behind authenticated by him, in possession of the Church.
We do respect the NTGospels which

allah and/or the unidentified spirit speaking to mohamed also left nothing beyond the word of mohamed; being the quran which is not trustworthy.

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.