Interesting, Peter Goodgame Thinks Krishna Was Nimrod/Osiris

Both Peter Goodgame and I accept death of Krishna as having happened at beginning of a correctly counted Kali Yuga.

3102 BC would be death of Krishna.

But after that, we have a difference on whether this was pre-Flood or post-Flood.

I have followed St Jerome, who considers Christ was born 2957 after the Flood (see Christmas proclamation of the Latin Rite, which, despite St Jerome having translated Vulgate from a non-LXX text, conserves his calculations in chronology from the LXX text). This makes beginning of Kali Yuga pre-Flood.

Peter Goodgame on the other hand has followed the chronology (also LXX based) by Barry Setterfield, September 1999, in his page CREATION AND CATASTROPHE CHRONOLOGY.

He says the Flood was "Approximately 2256 years after Creation or about 3536 BC" - which makes beginning of Kali Yuga post-Flood.

We do agree that Krishna has a special relation to the Hamite section of humanity. I was guessing it might be the father in law of Ham, maternal grandfather of Kush - which, like Krishna, means "the black one". But, of course, also of Chanaan and a few others. He considers it might have been Nimrod the son of Kush (of the Biblical Kush).

I for my part considered it more probable that if Nimrod came into Hindoo myth, then it was as Hanuman (the monkey god) in Ramayana. You see, Josephus says Nimrod started out as a good guy, protecting his near and dear - and Regma, a son of Kush, sounds a bit like Rama. If Nimrod was "Hanuman", he would have been helping his brother.

Not meaning Nimrod was a true monkey, of course, but ... well, there was eventually sth wrong with him and it might have shown physically.

Here is Goodgame's word on Krishna:

Turning to Indian (Hindu) histories we find the story of Krishna in the epic known as the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna appears as a foreign king instigating a great battle between Arjuna and the rest of Arjuna's family in the great Mahabharata War. Could Krishna be another historical version of Osiris?

Not quite correct. Krishna is remembered for instigating the pursuit of purpose Arjuna shows in his battle - but not for instigating the war itself. Indeed, he is remembered for trying at first to avert it, after Arjuna wants to take a dire vengeance on his cousins.

But still, if he "appeared to Arjuna in his universal form" (as a god), he practised deception, possibly by hypnosis, possibly by magic.

Nevertheless, I am not sure he was Nimrod or post-Flood.

I may, of course, have been wrong. What we can know for sure is, we ought not to worship these men.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Juliana Falconieri
19-VI-2015