J
Janet1983
Guest
How come? Virgin births in and of themselves generally don’t seem to be too uncommon for Hinduism… (Link to Wikipedia)
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
G
Good_Fella
Guest
:dancing:How come? Virgin births in and of themselves generally don’t seem to be too uncommon for Hinduism… (Link to Wikipedia)
R
rcscwc
Guest
Uncommomn is an understatement. I have not found any mention of virgin birth in any Book. Wiki entries can be inaccurate. In this it is unreliable.How come? Virgin births in and of themselves generally don’t seem to be too uncommon for Hinduism… (Link to Wikipedia)
J
Janet1983
Guest
Sure… there are more sources than just Wikipedia… Here… There (about Ganesh)… and of course here (about Krishna).Uncommomn is an understatement. I have not found any mention of virgin birth in any Book. Wiki entries can be inaccurate. In this it is unreliable.
I definitely like this one:
After creating the sky, waters, and the earth, the supreme spirit of the Lord almighty thought “I created the worlds. Now to provide for and to save these worlds I have to create a savior.” Thinking thus He gave birth to a man from himself. (Ithareya Upanishad 1.1.3)
Comment: Thus a Savior is promised.
In Bharath Khand of Bhavishya Puranas it clearly mentions about the name of Jesus Christ:
Yeesh moorti parapta nitya shuddha shivakari: Yeesha masih itticha mam nama prathishtatham
Meaning: The revelation of God who is eternal, Holy, Compassionate and giver of Salvation; who dwells within our heart is manifested. His name is Yeesha (Jesus) Masih (Christ).
Balwaan raja gaurang shweta vastrakam Yeesh putra, Kumari garbha sambhavam, and Satya Varatha Paraayanam
Meaning: Sovereign king in a holy person robed in white Son of God one who is born of a virgin one who is the sustainer of the path of truth).
There are many Terms used in the Vedas so clearly about the Savior:
Prajapathirdevebhyam Athmanam Yagnam Kruthva Prayaschittaha.
Meaning: God offered Himself as the sacrifice for atonement of sins of the world.
Yagnovy Bhuvanasya Nabhi.
Meaning: Sacrifice is the most important backbone of the world.
Sarvapapa Pariharo Rakthaprokshanamavasyam. Thadraktham Paramathmeva Punyadana Baliyagam.
Meaning: Blood sprinkling is necessary for cleansing of sins. This blood is the result of God Himself offering His own blood through a sacrifice.
Prajapathiryagnaha.
Meaning: God Himself was the sacrifice.
Nakarmana Manushtanairna Danasthapasavya Kaivalyam Labhathe Marthyah.
Meaning: Cleansing of sins is not possible by baths, pilgrimages, giving dana or by following dharma.
Yagnovaa Avathi Thasya Chaya Kriyathe.
Meaning: Sacrifices being practiced are the shadow of the Supreme Sacrifice.
The Saviour was prophesied about even in Hindu scriptures… SourceAtharva Veda 13-3-4 Koumaro loko ajanishta’ putrah nwarvhethan wai uttaravoth
Translation - A son will be born to a virgin in this world, take ye hold that (son) is what is superior (than everyone) ’ born in a cattle shed ’ Rig Veda 355 –1
But I forgot… Hinduism is a religion o pick and choose… there would be too many gods to worship (or even know) them all anyways…
R
rcscwc
Guest
[edit] Hinduism
Vishnu: His avatars were believed to be virgin births.
Virgin birth is not the same as non vaginal birth. Vishu’s earlier avatars were self manifesting.
Karna: Was the result of Queen Kunti asking the god Surya for a child, without taking Kunti’s virginity, just before she married King Pandu.
Kunti was unmarried when Karna was born. Surya who impregnated Kunti granted her a boon that post birth her virginity would be restored. Virginity was cherished at time of marriage.
The Pandavas: Brahmin laid a curse upon King Pandu, telling him not to touch either of his two wives sexually or he’d die. Queen Kunti, ever resourceful, simply asked the other gods to give she and her co-wife children. The gods gave them the Pandavas.
The implication is that Karna and his five siblings - the Pandavas - were all of virgin birth.
Again, there is mention that Kunti indeed was a virgin. Gods did not give her those in a basket, but through coitus.
Incidentally, Bhavishya Purana also mentions that Jesus was sighted in Kashmir, married, had children and is buried there.
There is NO Ithareya Upanishad. Period. But there is an Aitareya Upanishad.
1.1.3 reads:
There is no Rig Veda hymn 355
Athurva Veda 13.3.4 does mention a virgin world [newly created], but no virgin birth of a son. Period.
That David has got is wrong on purpose [read distorted]. After he is a missionary with nearly zero credibility.
Saviours are the avatars of Vishnu, and we know the definite time when the 10th Lord Kalki is to appear.
PS: If these verses are as you believe then why not incorporate them in your bible. After all they predate OT even.
Vishnu: His avatars were believed to be virgin births.
Virgin birth is not the same as non vaginal birth. Vishu’s earlier avatars were self manifesting.
Karna: Was the result of Queen Kunti asking the god Surya for a child, without taking Kunti’s virginity, just before she married King Pandu.
Kunti was unmarried when Karna was born. Surya who impregnated Kunti granted her a boon that post birth her virginity would be restored. Virginity was cherished at time of marriage.
The Pandavas: Brahmin laid a curse upon King Pandu, telling him not to touch either of his two wives sexually or he’d die. Queen Kunti, ever resourceful, simply asked the other gods to give she and her co-wife children. The gods gave them the Pandavas.
The implication is that Karna and his five siblings - the Pandavas - were all of virgin birth.
Again, there is mention that Kunti indeed was a virgin. Gods did not give her those in a basket, but through coitus.
Incidentally, Bhavishya Purana also mentions that Jesus was sighted in Kashmir, married, had children and is buried there.
There is NO Ithareya Upanishad. Period. But there is an Aitareya Upanishad.
1.1.3 reads:
- He bethought Himself: “Here now are the worlds. Let Me now create world - guardians.” Right from the waters He drew forth the Person in the form of a lump and gave Him a shape.
There is no Rig Veda hymn 355
Athurva Veda 13.3.4 does mention a virgin world [newly created], but no virgin birth of a son. Period.
That David has got is wrong on purpose [read distorted]. After he is a missionary with nearly zero credibility.
Saviours are the avatars of Vishnu, and we know the definite time when the 10th Lord Kalki is to appear.
PS: If these verses are as you believe then why not incorporate them in your bible. After all they predate OT even.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.