I was watching Bill Maher's Documentary last night and noticed that he mentioned Krishna (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cRH-SRB5LE&feature=related go to 3:12) .He claims these things about Krishna.
1) He was born of a virgin
2) He was a carpenter
3) Baptized in a river

Is Bill Maher right or did he get his 'facts' wrong?

Edit: I did a Google search on this. Apparently, Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.3.15-17 says, "For You, therefore, there is no external or internal. You never entered the womb of Devaki; rather, You existed there already." Is this referring to a virgin birth? What does that mean? Is this a good source? or is this source not credible? Is this translation correct?


Go to 3:12

This has been repeatedly stated in western media. They want to prove their point and they tweak the truth, much like the conspiracy theorists for moon landing or sep 11.

Its a surprise that u don't remember these stuffs.
Krishna was born from basudeva and his wife, legitimately married couple, not virgin.
Krishna was a gwala, a cow herder, not a carpenter.

This Idiot Bill Liberal Maher doesn't know what he is talking about, and you tend to believe on him? its all about you.

The tree is known by its fruit..Hinduism prove to shown librals compare others.. come to worse  even said that Shree KRISHNa statements is that he is "the art of gambling among gamblers"... etcs...its like gun powder to those who want to create an explosion.....to get a good bhakta, always refer to origins Bhagavad Gita....source of dhyanam..

Krisna and Rama, they r not real people. They never walked this world. They r characters created by someone for all time bestseller books called Ramayan and Mahabharat.

Eastern culture was so strong and best of the best and longest ever and thousands of characters. Story goes so smoothly that we think it happen and all the characters were real but as Ranger said they never walked this world. The beauty is they supported every characters with other logic and myths.
Ramayan is nothing but a story of Aryan supremacy and suppression against non-Aryan ( Dravidian ).
While Ratnaker was a DAAKU and his knowledge of geography was vast. After quitting his looting and killing job his noble work , become a writer. Most ancient writing were about kings and Emperor and their novelties and curelties, bad guy and good guy. If you ask my choice which one I will prefer between Ramayan and Mahabharat, I will go with Mahabharat. It is politics and tactics, I fight within the family and his families story.
Bhagbat geeta is so philosophical and I think Arjun even did not know what Krishna was saying but just dd it as an  student, "every things happens for reason and it is written well ahead of our birth". कर्म गर फल्को आस नगर, which is impossible and we always  expect something.