“One is completely overwhelmed with astonishment upon reading Dr. Lundy’s Monumental Christianity. It would be difficult to say whether an admiration for the author’s erudition, or amazement at his serene and unparalleled sophistry is stronger. He has gathered a world of facts which prove that the religions, far more ancient than Christianity, of Christna, Buddha, and Osiris, had anticipated even its minutest symbols. His materials come from no forged papyri, no interpolated Gospels, but from sculptures on the walls of ancient temples, from monuments, inscriptions, and other archaic relics, only mutilated by the hammers of iconoclasts, the cannon of fanatics, and the effects of time. He shows us Christna and Apollo as good shepherds; Christna holding the cruciform chank and the chakra, and Christna “crucified in space”, as he calls it (Monumental Christianity, figure 72).
Of this figure – borrowed by Dr. Lundy from Moor’s Hindu Pantheon – it may be truly said that it is calculated to petrify a Christian with astonishment, for it is the crucified Christ of Romish art to the last degree of resemblance. Not a feature is lacking; and the author says of it himself:
“This representation I believe to be anterior to Christianity. It looks like a Christian crucifix in many respects. …The drawing, the attitude, the nail marks in hands and feet, indicate a Christian origin, while the Parthian coronet of seven points, the absence of the wood, and of the usual inscription, and the rays of glory above, would seem to point to some other than a Christian origin. Can it be the victim-man, or the priest and victim both in one, of the Hindu Mythology, who offered himself a sacrifice before the worlds were? Can it be Plato’s Second God who impressed himself on the universe in the form of the cross? Or is it his divine man who would be scourged, tormented, fettered; have his eyes burnt out; and lastly… would be crucified?” (Republic c., ii., page 52, Spens., Translation).
It is all that and much more; Archaic Religious Philosophy was universal. As it is, Dr. Lundy contradicts Moor, and maintains that this figure is that of Wittoba, one of the avatars of Vishnu, hence Christna, and anterior to Christianity, which is a fact not very easily to be put down. And yet, although he finds it prophetic of Christianity, he thinks it has no relation whatever to Christ! His only reason is that “in a Christian crucifix the glory always comes from the sacred head; here it is from above and beyond. …The Pundit’s Wittoba then, given to Moor, would seem to be the crucified Krishna, the shepherd-god of Mathura… a Saviour – the Lord of the Covenant, as well as Lord of Heaven and earth – pure and impure, light and dark, good and bad, peaceful and war-like, amiable and wrathful, mild and turbulent, forgiving and vindictive, God and a strange mixture of man; but not the Christ of the Gospels.”
Now all these qualities must pertain to Jesus as well as to Christna. The very fact that Jesus was a man upon the mother’s side – even though he were a God, implies as much. His behavior toward the fig-tree, and his self-contradictions in Matthew, where at one time he promises peace on earth, and at another the sword, etc., are proofs in this direction. Undoubtedly this cut was never intended to represent Jesus of Nazareth. It was Wittoba, as Moor was told, and as moreover the Hindu Sacred Scriptures state, Brahma, the sacrificer who is “at once both sacrificer and victim”; it is “Brahma, victim in His Son Christna, who came to die on earth for our salvation; who Himself accomplishes the solemn sacrifice (of the Sarvameda).” And yet it is the man Jesus as well as the man Christna, for both were united to their Chrestos. Thus, we have either to admit periodical “incarnations”, or, let Christianity go as the greatest imposture and plagiarism of the ages!”
H. P. Blavatsky
The Mark Of God: Understanding Your "I AM Presence" 