I think those traits are a type of generic goodness that end up in most religious faiths because those things are good for the preservation of our species as a whole and are things that we value and respect. The Golden Rule, for example, shows up in many religious texts, some of which predate the Gospels by centuries.
It just demonstrates that people are a lot alike. Most cultures also have flood myths and many unconnected places even have similar mythological creatures, like dragons.
It doesn’t mean that a Great Flood or dragons actually existed.
Jesus, if there was such a person, was Jewish.
That’s not to say that there wasn’t a fair amount of crossover among a variety of faiths and traditions. But I wouldn’t say that Jesus was a Buddhist. A Buddhist wouldn’t say that the sole means of salvation is through a belief in one person.
_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess
Its possible that Christ might have been a rogue Jew whose take on Judaism was influenced by Gentile ideas from farther east, like Buddhism, or more likely, by Persian Zaroastrianism.
There is at least one U Tube vid that pushes a theory that Jesus traveled to India as a youth. Seems a bit far fetched to me, but whatever.
But basically the whole Christian afterlife (heaven and hell, and a future day of judgment)comes from Zorastrianism (everything in Christianity that isn't Jewish is Zorastrian). Persian Zorastian priests were called "Magi". The Christian folktale about the Magi visiting the baby Christ (which goes back to Roman times) maybe a distorted memory of a young Jesus actually sitting at the feet of Persian sages. Or that's my speculation.
It’s interesting in that even Plato had a similar notion of an afterlife (in Phaedo) - that the bad would be punished and the good would be rewarded. Perhaps it aligns with humans’ notion of justice and their desire for fairness.
Anyway, it’s a shame that Jesus relied on others to write down what he said and did.
_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess
Jesus might have been the type to let his actions “speak” for him.
He could have acquired Buddhist thought through Buddhists traveling in his region. Or he could have spoken to somebody who encountered Buddhist thought. Who knows?
Up to the early 19th century, it was considered undignified for US Presidents to campaign for themselves. Maybe Jesus wanted someone else to chronicle his deeds—because he felt it was undignified for Him to have done it Himself.
Last edited by kraftiekortie on 10 Dec 2019, 9:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
As far as casting out demons and multiplying loaves of bread and the number of fish to feed a crowd?
Anyway, this way it’s hard to know what Jesus actually said and what words were put into his mouth.
As I discussed in another thread, not everything Jesus supposedly said was positive. I abhor various things he’s said about family.
Luke 14:26: “If you come to me but will not leave your family, you cannot be my follower. You must love me more than your father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters - even more than your own life.”
Matthew 10:34, 35: “I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household.”
Matthew 10:37: “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.”
Mark 10:29, 30: “Truly I tell you,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields - with persecutions - and in the age to come eternal life.”
Matthew 8: 21, 22: “Another disciple said to him, “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” But Jesus told him, “Follow me, and let the dead bury their dead.”
These are just a few examples. There are many more throughout the New Testament.
If I thought Jesus actually said these things, I would say that he was rather narcissistic and unfeeling.
I couldn’t love anyone more than my own child, and I tend to value family values overall.
_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess
Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 10 Dec 2019, 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
I feel like Jesus was similar to those who wanted a return to the “essence” of their religion, in order to get away from the trimmings and pretensions of that religion.
Jesus and Martin Luther are similar---except that Luther was more angry about it.
Last edited by kraftiekortie on 10 Dec 2019, 9:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
I don’t mean to belabor a point, but I think that underscoring familial relationships is a huge error.
Most people believe that there is nothing more important than family and loved ones, and I’d have to agree.
We often focus on the positive stuff in the Gospels (and New Testament overall), but by looking at the accounts as a whole, it shows a less than ideal image.
_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess
Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 10 Dec 2019, 9:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Joseph Campbell did a whole essay about how both Buddha and Christ had "three temptations". The temptations were not exactly the same. But its a similar story. Probably has more to do with universal archtypes reappearing than with actual influence of one on the other.
Joseph Campbell did a whole essay about how both Buddha and Christ had "three temptations". The temptations were not exactly the same. But its a similar story. Probably has more to do with universal archtypes reappearing than with actual influence of one on the other.
Still, sometimes I wonder if the Romans wrote the Gospels in order to make the People of the Bible more Pacifist and easier to rule. Something to think about!
I don't believe there was an "autocratic" intention in seeking to actively make people "passive" so they can be "ruled" easier. I don't sense that.
I sense that the Christians in Roman times just wanted to live a more moral, less decadent life.
Last edited by kraftiekortie on 10 Dec 2019, 10:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Joseph Campbell did a whole essay about how both Buddha and Christ had "three temptations". The temptations were not exactly the same. But its a similar story. Probably has more to do with universal archtypes reappearing than with actual influence of one on the other.
Still, sometimes I wonder if the Romans wrote the Gospels in order to make the People of the Bible more Pacifist and easier to rule. Something to think about!
I think it’s more likely that later rulers urged Christianity for that reason than actually writing them in the first place.
Rulers in other places also push the Qu’ran for similar reasons.
_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven. – Satan and TwilightPrincess
I sense that the Christians in Roman times just wanted to live a more moral, less decadent life.
I beg to differ. There is much that is suspicious about The Gospels. Have you read Caesar's Messiah? I wonder. Some even claim that Jesus Christ never existed.