john-da-gothalo, it amuses me how you fail to see the paradoxes in your own statements... you seem to follow the 'arrogance is bliss' philosophy... the ignorance in your views altimately discredits any rationality in them, and therefore proves you to be a hypocrite... your statement: 'I dont blive in all those things which has no proof' dude are you kiddin' me? so where is proof that god exists? where is proof of jesus being the son of god? just because it says so in the bible? if you believe the bible, then why not the gita, the koran, the torah...? your statement: 'anyway if krishna came first where is he ?' where is jesus then? your statement: 'then why do we read A.D ( After death ) or B.C.( before christ )' we 'nepalis' don't read AD or BC. It is only an accepted form in the western civilization. It is accepted widely now because of the spread of western cultural influence. There's no before/after krishna, because we're not that narrow minded. we accept the fact that the earth has existed for millions of years and not just 2000 +. your statement: ram 'wasnt he enough strong to face ravan the demon?' yes he was actually, and he defeated him. whereas, jesus, was nailed to the cross like any other common criminal and died there. wow, that shows the almighty power of god. what was the logic behind that, 'i'm gonna let them kick my ass, and nail me to a piller, that should prove that i'm the son of god' ? what the f@#*%? and ultimate question: how do u prove solid evidence, mr. i-need-proof, that jesus was the son of god? It says that god impregnated mary while she was asleep, and if u don't believe in non-sense, then do you believe in 'cyper-impregnation'? dude isn't that rape anywayz? i could write a book on this, but let me stop... i think the point has been made...