The sound "Ch" can be "K" as well as "Sh" (see my first posting).
The verb root is "Kri", which means to attract.
If you want to make a past participle, which acts like a noun, adjective, and verbal, it would be
"Krisht", as dental "s" after "i" would become cerebral "sh".
So "Krisht" means something that attracted. Now if you have any westerner, even Indian child brought up in the west, he or she would say the sound "K" as "Kh". And there are "Sanskrit Sandhi" rules were Guttural can become Palatals and vice-versa. To cut the whole story short, it can be written as "Christ" as well.
If we take the root "Kri" and make itr a present participle, which acts like a noun, adjective, and verbal, it would have forms like "Krishan(a)", "Krishant(a)", "Krishat(a)", which are Subjective Singular, and general base words for strong and weak forms to decline the word into different cases for Singular, Dual and Plural.
So "Kirshna" means someone who is attracting. So does "Krishta" means, or "Christ"!
Krishna also means something that is black and the God which had a dark complexion.
Is is not weird that we know that the color black attracts or absorbs most radiation and white attracts or absorbs the least radiation!
This gives a clue in the mindset of the ancients, that were also aware of the basic sciences.
In another article, I would show how Christ and Christna have similar stories!