[mindy]

hmm, not sure you're on the right track here - particularly with the 'missing 18 years of Jesus' life' comment. At the end of the day the Bible is a faith document, and any attempt to treat it as a historical one is surely a category mistake - there is a big difference between the 'Jesus of history' and the 'Christ of faith'. The purpose of the Gospels is to convey the kerygma - the central elements of the Christian faith. Any irrelevant information (i.e. personal details about Jesus inluding family and life before he began his ministry) would not have been included as it would not have contributed anything useful to the finished documents & their purposes. The Bible as we know it today has been through a fairly heavy editorial process in which only select books/details have survived, and only those which best represent the agreed Christian creed. This is not to devalue the Bible or Christianity in any way - the Bible is a specific type of literature which was intended to document the beliefs of a specific people.
At the end of the day if we do try and verify aspects of the life of Jesus, and use the Bible as our main source of information about his life we are going to come unstuck. Ultimately, we have very little independent historical evidence to support the contents of the Bible (Greco-Roman references such as those by Josephus and Tacitus are disputed), and all we are ultimately fairly sure of is that a man called Jesus lived and died in that area (but as Jesus was a pretty common name at the time, this isn't much to go on) so if we are going to claim that there are 'missing years' of Jesus' life, there are ultimately around 33 of them (possibly more as historians do not know how long Jesus' ministry lasted. The Gospel of John mentions three Passovers during his ministry, but John's is regarded as the least reliable of the Gospels and its chronology differs from that of the synoptic gospels, which only mention one Passover) according to actual historical fact. He was probably quite happy raising a Jewish family and living a perfectly ordinary Jewish life before the age of 30 anyway - any claim that he began his ministry/contributed to the development of other faiths before that would be very difficult to uphold, as if Jesus did anything significant before this point, the Gospels would have recorded it! And why would a man who referred to himself as the Son of Man, and claimed that no-one could come to the Father except through him, be helping to establish other alternative faith systems anyway?

[Lynn Roberts]

In all probability Jesus was a Dalai Lama. The three wise men who sought Jesus from half way across the world were probably Buddhist monks who scour the world if necessary when a Dalai Lama passes away in order to find his reincarnation. The child, when found, is taken away for his spiritual studies far away from his home/parents till he is ready to start teaching others. According to The Rozabal Line, a novel by Shawn Haigins, there were far too many similarities between Jesus and Buddha to be ignored. More details of the similarities are posted on Shawn Haigins' blog.

[mindy]

Lynn, in response to your comment 'In all probability Jesus was a Dalai Lama', I would like to suggest that the term probability is rather too strong. Of course there are some points of similarity between Jesus and the Siddartha Gautama (emphasis on non-violence, simple life, non-attachment, parables etc), however, this in itself is far too insubstantial to be considered hard evidence that Jesus was likely to be a follower of Gautama. It points at most to a possibility that this was the case, as to claim otherwise is to ignore the fact that the central claims of both faith systems are, essentially, very different.

What we can be certain of is that there is simply no real need to suggest a Buddhist influence on Jesus. He does not do or say anything that is not understandable for a Jew. While Buddhism teaches Nirvana and anatta (cessation and no soul), Jesus taught the dependance of everything on God, eternal life in heaven, resurrection of the body (a very differenct idea to rebirth) etc, concepts which are fundamentally incompatible.

I just cannot see why people are continuing to overemphasise the similarities between Buddhism and aspects of Christianity, when the central teachings of Christianity and Buddhism are ultimately totally different. Nirvana, an impersonal concept, is not in any way the same as the Kingdom of God, which is God's rule on earth, very much a personal concept. The Buddhist concept of deity is of transitory, conditional beings, again totally different to the personal monotheism of Christianity. Buddhism and Jesus may have points of similarity, but in their fundamental claims they could hardly be more different.

Has it not occurred to you that if Jesus had been a Buddhist, particularly as you claim a Dalai Lama, his central claims would have been compatible in some way with Buddhism?

[dutchgirl]

IMHO jesus didnt have any kind of "stamp" on him....he was done......he went through all incarnation stages..all seven stages of seven stages......he came back one last time however to teach people about spirituality.....life even......on how to be a good humanbeing.....he was a human with a special task....on how to be forgiving...generous..kind......calm......eventhou gh you arent met with the same.....when people are unforgiving towards you or unkind.......these are lessons we need to learn AND teach to be a good person..... but even in those days people freaked over kindness and generosity.......

[Niesa]

Has anyone seen Zeitgeist The Movie? It has some very interesting views on Jesus and astrology. If you do a search there are quite a few sites where you can watch it, or you can go to the zeitgeistmovie. com site and watch it there.

[karen1977]

I have! been raving about it since too. And yes, it does have some 'interesting' views on JC- mainly that he didn't exist. Sorry, but its true. I know, I was also disappointed (being brought up catholic),the son of god stuff was always debatable but i always thought he existed, always thought there was archaelogical proof of it- but there isn't one single reference to him-in all history. There is a famous document which names him- but it has been known to be a fake for decades, maybe even longer. It's just that no-one has bothered to mention it. Think about it, he healed the lame, the blind, lepers, cast out devils, brought Lazarus back to life, turned water to wine, died for our sins like a common criminal(crucifixion being the usual Roman method of capital punishment), was resurrected on the third day & ascended into heaven. So many amazing, spectacular feats & not one single piece of historical evidence of his existence? Mmmmmm, how can this be? The only way is if he didn't exist. Do like Niesa& watch zeitgeist. The religion thing is only a very small part of this excellent film/documentary; give it a look& the truth shall set you free :lol:

[drusila]

i keep threatening to watch that film, still haven't.

apparently it's been debunked, but then again, most things have lol.

shall watch it asap with an open mind.

[Aglaia]

Well, I read that Jesus was in Egypt, India and Tibet in his early years, so...who knows?

[nandjoshi]

Dear all, do not disturb yourself looking at the each religions GOD. Surely Jesus, Buddha and many more in this world were seems to be like a GOD but no one is GOD. GOD is within ourselves. Sit quitely and try to understand yourself. Buddha also did the same thing. He has started a new methods of self preparation is Meditation.

Also if you read Books, Jesus, Budha has clearly mentioned Nor they are GOD, nor they are sent by GOD. They are also dependent on GOD. Thats why during his assasination Jesus requested "GOD Forgive these people, since they do not know what they are doing" This clearly simplifies that there is no GOD. There is a spiritual power whom Jesus, Budha and many more like GOD were worshiping.

GOD is someone else which no one knows....Jesus and Budha and many more they found so they could do many spiritual things

GOD Bless you ALL

[windigo]

Let's answer the topic first. Jesus was in India and China during his teens and twenties. His name there was Issa.

More important than a name is what he did. The SAME powers shown by Jesus was shown by Issa. Point is he learned of his Divine connection from the Brahmin, Buddist and Taoist monks

________________
Jesus, Budda and Lao tzu all said they were NOT superior to others. They were "fingers pointing at the moon" to quote Lao Tzu. I feel Budda said it best, "How can I put a name or a face on 'God' when there is nothing BUT God?"

All three were God. It is just that everything and everyone else is ALSO God