Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Jesus was a Buddhist?

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Here's another very approachable film encapsulating the dozens of documents recording Jesus/Issa/Yeshua having been in the East; having studied there.

Includes ancient Eastern documents, the tomb in Khashmir (again), the Nag Hammadi texts.


It includes an interview with Elaine Pagels (Omega Institute) discussing the Gospel of Judas and the Nag Hammadi texts also.

It is absolutely well-enough documented that Jesus DID LIVE THERE;
and that the Bible is a stripped-down, mistranslated construct that SUPPRESSED a LOT of information.




posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


You love to read, and previously you mentioned that you preferred the work of scholars, so might I suggest:

"The Case for the Real Jesus", Lee Strobel. You can get a paperback on amazon for less than 5$ I think.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Thank you all for your replies!



Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


He said He was the Great I AM. There is no greater claim to being God in the Hebrew culture.

That's why they wanted Him murdered.


Consider the possibility that, like his own disciples.. his accusers did not understand what he was saying...

As I've said many times, there is absolutely no reason for Jesus to be deceptive... IF he was God he would have said I AM GOD... He would not have danced around the idea as he did...

He would not have prayed to his own God...

He would not have called himself the son of God....

He would not have said "I go to my father, and your God, and MY GOD...

He would not have asked God to "take this cup from me"

He would not have said "MY GOD why have you forsaken me?"

And of course lets not forget... the entity on the mountain that originally used the term I AM that I AM was not God, it was an "angel of the lord"... which was changed to God a few verses later.

If anything I AM is a reference to him being the essence of his Father... as any son is the essence of his parents.

Just my opinion of course

edit on 30-1-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Christ was a Buddha, and Bruce Lee was a Christ and a Buddha, somehting about being water, and flowing not stagnating, learning and overcoming, ourselves and seeing the world and its traps and being loving and good, with integrity. Bruce said, under the heavens we're one family. He also said to not believe in styles that is what separates all of us, all the ways they divide and conquer. If the real one resembling Christ and Buddha have many followers, they kill them, but also, not until they do the work they came to do. And it shouldn't be like that, the universe is very tired of martyrs, so people need to gain in numbers, together, and start to do the work they came to do, and not stagnate.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


"The Angel of the Lord" is an OT appearance of the Son of God. It's called an OT "Christophany". You'll notice when this person appears in the OT he accepts worship, and even orders men to do so like in Joshua. You'll notice that actual angels never accept worship from men and rebuke them for doing so.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Love threads like this, it gets the juices flowing in addition to letting me know how much i know, which is not much
.

First video is definitely unique. Not that much to say on it because i'm not all that knowledgeable in the aspects the videos covered. However, the bit about him not really being on the cross that long is something knew for me. I thought i was up there till he died to only find out he was there merely a fraction of the time, 3-6 hours. And the herbs that were brought being therapeutic is another good one.

Around 29:28 of that second video. Those Indian Christians are disciples of Saint Thomas. Thomas was ready to spread "the" teachings so to speak after Jesus let him know in the Gospel of Thomas. It was funny to see the professor try to explain the Gospel of Thomas (and the same professor teaching at Yale, a creme de la creme institution). Those Vedas with their outright esoteric explanation would leave modern day Christians in the dark as it did the professor because they aren't taught to think. Only to listen and obey. And that Yale professor is the quintessential example of it. I thought i'd never do it but, 1 Corinthians 1:19-21 when it comes to that guy. Heh, the video hits a home run at the 42:45 mark. What i love is that dude says "Do your own research, don't take my word on it." The Hallmark of a great seeker.

Both videos are good, definitely food for thought. It goes well with a theory i used to have that Jesus and the first Buddha was actually one and the same. The idea doesn't pan out, but it was one i had.

I will have to recommend both videos to others, thanks guys



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Interesting topic for a thread. Buddhists do believe in God. The Buddhas all believed in God. Jesus was perhaps a Buddha or Bodhisattva. Buddhas and Buddhists are not Atheists. They do not believe in all the phony religions although they accept the beliefs of everyone. They are people of faith...Buddhism is more a philosophy. I am a Buddhist by philosophy and believe in God. Buddhists believe in God. Jesus is likely to have been a Jew who also was smart enough to learn about other beliefs as that is how one learns to love everyone! Nowadays, most people know enough about other beliefs to hate others and their beliefs. It will be a fine day when everyone accepts everyone else...

Buddhists don't believe in dogma...hell, they don't even want you to carry your karma around...just take care of what is in front of you. Don't live in the past or future because neither one exists.

Do good and don't do evil. Have compassion for all human beings. Help end suffering..



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Texture
It will be a fine day when everyone accepts everyone else...


Yes indeed! That's why everyone should be a comparativist...




posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 08:13 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Thanks for posting this Akragon! I've had many conversations postulating that the unaccounted years of Jesus's life were actually spent in the far east learning with the Buddha. And now I've something to watch - many smiles!



I'll post once I've watched over the weekend.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


"The Case for the Real Jesus", Lee Strobel. You can get a paperback on amazon for less than 5$ I think.

Today I looked up Lee Strobel, and watched his public lecture in which he is hawking this book.
I didn't investigate HIM first, I just watched the video.

What I see is a man who was guilt-ridden and had spent his life acting like a jerk, who calls himself a journalist and lawyer. That part - about him studying law at Yale - made me think of the Yale Professor in the video I posted who, confronted with the Gospels of Thomas, says, "What? What does that mean?"

Yeah, so much for a Yale education in law. Law professors are unable to grasp the deeper, philosophical, mystical, ineffability of a "God" that is beyond our capability to fully grasp except as this wondrous thing that we can't grasp.

Now, for his having been a "legal editor at the Chicago Tribune" - too many journalists (and we here on ATS know this!, perhaps, more thoroughly than some of our peers) spin, doctor, and gloss over items. Strobel is clearly using a sales approach; and yes, in his lecture I heard some of the points that you, NuT, have made here many times. None of which are substantiated.

Okay. But, I continued on listening to him, trying to be neutral and pretend I didn't know anything about Jesus, and hadn't read far more qualified scholars such as Karen Armstrong and Dr Hassnain, giving Strobel the benefit of the doubt as on "equal footing" with them and others.....

at the end, I was still struck only by how a guilt-ridden, jerk managed to clean up his act by CHOOSING to ignore quite astute research, and CHOOSING to believe very dubious sources instead.

Which, for what it accomplished in HIS LIFE, is good enough FOR HIM, and great. He's now a nice RICH GUY, who thinks he's a standup comic preacher-come-author and can be paralleled with Alex Jones (in my opinion).

Last, though, after all those thoughts and reactions/responses to his lecture, I went to Google and looked critiques of LEE STROBEL in general and this "book" of his. Here is what I found, first try:
evaluatingchristianity.wordpress.com...

Let me say this: the works of Lee Strobel are one of the things that crystallized my atheism. As a Christian, as an argument for Jesus/Christianity/theism, I think he has absolutely no credibility; as a person, I think he has absolutely no scruples. Here’s my case:

Please understand that I say this because I think Christians should put their best arguments forward. I think it’s unfair, for example, to tar all Christians with having to defend Fred Phelps, and I bristle when atheists suggest that there’s no difference between Phelps and any other Christian. Of course there is.

So let me be clear: I do not think Christianity is false because Strobel is a liar. I do, however, think that Christians should be aware of the fact that Strobel is a liar, and I think that Christians should not commend his books to seekers.

Now, where’s my proof? Bear with me — this will take a while.

.....
and it proceeds to show how one of his primary "sources" - Vardaman - is considered a crackpot and has NEVER, EVER produced these so-called "coins" with their teeny-tiny writing.

Also how he was corrected during an interview and years later STILL used this totally sketchy "source" as being accurate.

Fail.

It's a sales pitch, unsubstantiated, based on conjecture and misleading "scholarship." So, sorry, my friend, but Lee Strobel is not a "scholar". He's a salesman, a preacher, a wanna-be comic, and a liar. But, I suppose if his ludicrous version of how things happened makes some people stop acting like jerks, and makes them feel less guilty and "forgiven" then...well, whatever.



edit on 4-2-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


He isn't the only one who calls himself a journalist.

The folks who gave him a Pulitzer Prize for journalism did also.


Check out the quote in my sig someday.

And I never said once he was a scholar, where did you get that? I wanted you to read the book because of the scholars he interviews.
edit on 5-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

Hiya NuT,
here's where I 'got that' idea:

You love to read, and previously you mentioned that you preferred the work of scholars, so might I suggest:

"The Case for the Real Jesus", Lee Strobel.


My mistake for reading it as him being a scholar.
And, I've looked at all of the links in your signature, over a year ago.

You see, I think it's very important to decipher where ideas originated; in this thread alone I've shown three sources, and in another one I posted some info regarding the MYTH of ORIGINAL SIN, and where that came from. It isn't in the Bible; it was dreamed up in the 5th century by Augustine. He also rassled with the idea of "Trinity", which most people in the West simply don't get.

The simplistic stories that are taught to Christians in the West are simply that: simplistic stories meant to analogize deeper meanings; because not everyone can grasp the deeper, more "heady" stuff due to their temperaments, training, or level of critical thinking skills.

I know you claimed to be a voracious reader as well; what are you currently reading?



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


In his books he plays the devils advocate and asks the world's greatest scholars, theologians, historians et cetra the hardball questions. This exact thread premise is shredded in a chapter in that particular book. There are limits to how much material can be copied from a copyrighted source that's why I asked you to check out the book. And you previously suggested you preferred the work of real, reputable scholars and that book interviews the creme de la creme.


And I didn't say to click a link or watch a video, I said to read the quote. It's just two simple sentences, but if one of the most fundamental quotes on intelligibility ever uttered.

And why do you keep bringing up the doctrine of original sin? I'm not a Catholic and most likely in that thread I likewise said it's an unbiblical concept. That people are responsible for their own sins, not Adam's sin. I don't get why you're bringing that up here or to me, it's pretty irrelevant to this topic at hand.

edit on 5-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Oh, and currently a fiction book. "Last Man Standing" I believe it's called, just picked it up a few days ago, but at the moment it's in my truck and I can't check to see if that's the precise title name.

It's a spy thriller.



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Jesus was a maverick; he didn't follow anyone and didn't adhere to any faith.

He was able to move in the world of the Jews with respect for their traditions, but with absolute clarity that they, unbeknownst to them, worshipped a psychopathic archonic pretender claiming to be a "god." the same being known as Marduk by the Sumerians, as Ra in Egyptian times, as the feathered serpent god in the early Americas. Same being, same energy, part of a corrupt family of negative beings who can move in and out of this dimension with their technology.

The Gnostic Christians, the first students of Jesus, tried to keep his understandings alive but they were killed off and driven underground.

Jesus intuitively derived his own direct understanding of Great Spirit, without needing an intermediary. Although he obviously studied and was aware of many religious traditions that preceded him, through his own insights he quickly saw that they all went off track, guiding people to giving energy to various descended masters, archonic beings, and other psychotic pretenders lurking in the lower astral.

He taught some students at an advanced level and also taught many hundreds more at a more basic, simplistic level, but his entire teaching boiled down to:

Access genuine feelings of altruistic love on a regular basis
Learn how to use this energy to send healing to others and to the Earth
And keep this energy alive at all times in your heart, both to advance your OWN evolution and to help lay out a path that others who are similarly motivated might follow in the years to come

He was a trailblazer, a maverick an individualist, and a Gnostic -- one who perceives things through direct sensing, direct knowing, not through being spoonfed anybody else's religious "truths."

But he also had great compassion and understanding for those using other tools, other faiths, and other philosophies to find a way to be good and kind in this world; so he was very gentle with them and didn't criticize their own spiritual life.



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

what quote?

As for the book by Strobel - if he can't make the case in a public 'sermon' or whatever you want to call that address (sales pitch), then why would I bother to read his book? His sources are sketchy, he does NOT give a balanced, neutral position as his premise. He's a classic "apologetics" guy...

The things he stated are all refutable, and there are numerous sites on the web that call him out for shoddy journalism, perpetuating DISINFORMATION, and failing to look deeper than he does. I've heard all of his claims before, he's not got anything new going on. He's using a standard formula and preaching at a mega-church.

I am currently re-reading Karen Armstrong's A History of God, with fresher eyes and more background knowledge...
She was for a decade a Catholic Nun, and is arguably the world's leading theology scholar....I looked at your 'suggestion' - now I would ask you, in turn, to watch or read some of her work.

another thing that bugged me about his presentation was that he said, "I looked up this stuff for two years." Big woop.

Two years makes him MAYBE a sophomore. I've been once more immersed in theology and religious issues for two and a half years straight now; and it's probably round five or six of that same level of in-depth independent study I've done before, with Wicca, Buddhism, Native American myth and legend, and many other disciplines....

this cat went from being a smartass atheist with a bully attitude and a big mouth to a convert after his wife "got religion" and he did a perfunctory once-over talking only to sources that held up what he figured he could sell. That isn't scholarship, nor is it professional journalism. It's sales.

He leaves OUT the stuff that clearly 'shreds' the Evangelical 'born-again' stuff and takes it back to kindergarten level.

In my opinion, actually, now that I think about it, he's not even a sophomore... he's the equivalent of a "second grader". Even his rant about Deists was wrong. But he doesn't care if he's wrong - he cares if his books sell, and if he's going straight to hell for what a jackass he was earlier.

No credibility except possibly for naive or desperately unhappy others who don't have a clue about any of this stuff and just want to "feel good." I understand that some people are so miserable and empty that it's the only way out for them....but that doesn't make it "true" or anything but a placebo.

In his earlier "The Case for Christ", for example, all he did was interview a bunch of apologetics people. NONE of the actual scholars, according to this review by J Lowder:

Review of Lee Strobel The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998.

Lee Strobel, an ex-investigative reporter for the Chicago Tribune who describes himself as a "former spiritual skeptic," is a teaching pastor at Willow Creek Community Church. (Willow Creek is a mega-church with more than 30,000 members and was the site of a very high profile debate--moderated by Strobel--on "Atheism vs. Christianity: Where Does the Evidence Point?" between William Lane Craig and Frank Zindler.[1]) Using his skills as a former legal affairs journalist, Strobel set out to "retrace and expand upon the spiritual journey ... [he] took for nearly two years." The Case for Christ is a summary of Strobel's interviews with thirteen leading Evangelical apologists, including Craig Blomberg, Bruze Metzger, Edwin Yamauchi, Ben Witherington III, and William Lane Craig.

In light of Strobel's frequent reminders that he used to be a hard-nosed, skeptical journalist, I skimmed the table of contents and index to see which critics of Christianity he interviewed. In so doing, I discovered [a glaring deficiency in Strobel's journalism: Strobel did not interview any critics of Christian apologetics, even though he attacks such individuals in his book


Also, check out Winston Wu's Debunking Christian Circular Arguments and Assumptions, a very approachable book about the fallacies, mindset, method, and warped ideas from the perspective of a recovering Evangelical fundamentalist. He spent "two years" slowly detangling himself from the cult, and addresses every one of your standard "claims" as apologetics people.

Friend, I know this is one of your hobbies, but you don't seem to be growing in the subject at all - you're still exactly where you were when I first met you on here..... almost two years ago.

Original sin is just as fake and contrived as the concepts of hell and eternal torment. Men are not born sinners, and the Jesus-freak cult is based on that premise as well as the myth of the resurrection.



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


The quote from Edmund Spenser.. in my signature.

And the person giving the review is a buffoon who never read the book. First off, the book never claims to interview SKEPTICS. It interviews Christian scholars, theologians, historians, and even archaeologists. Secondly, those interviewed are world-renowned in their particular fields. Strobel travels the nation and the globe to interview them personally. Thirdly, he himself takes the devils advocate position and poses to those people the arguments from the skeptics to be answered.

Clearly if the person making that review above doesn't know this he never read more than the inside cover and table of contents.

BTW, you posted a review for a completely different book than the one I asked you to read. I never asked you to read "A Case for Christ", I asked you to read "The Case for the Real Jesus". It really makes no sense to poison the well and ad hom Strobel... it's not his information I wanted you to consider.

I want you to consider the information his interviewees present.



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by LipstickMystic
Jesus was a maverick; he didn't follow anyone and didn't adhere to any faith.

He was able to move in the world of the Jews with respect for their traditions, but with absolute clarity that they, unbeknownst to them, worshipped a psychopathic archonic pretender claiming to be a "god." the same being known as Marduk by the Sumerians, as Ra in Egyptian times, as the feathered serpent god in the early Americas. Same being, same energy, part of a corrupt family of negative beings who can move in and out of this dimension with their technology.


The Gnostic Christians, the first students of Jesus, tried to keep his understandings alive but they were killed off and driven underground.

Jesus intuitively derived his own direct understanding of Great Spirit, without needing an intermediary. Although he obviously studied and was aware of many religious traditions that preceded him, through his own insights he quickly saw that they all went off track, guiding people to giving energy to various descended masters, archonic beings, and other psychotic pretenders lurking in the lower astral.

He taught some students at an advanced level and also taught many hundreds more at a more basic, simplistic level, but his entire teaching boiled down to:

Access genuine feelings of altruistic love on a regular basis
Learn how to use this energy to send healing to others and to the Earth
And keep this energy alive at all times in your heart, both to advance your OWN evolution and to help lay out a path that others who are similarly motivated might follow in the years to come

He was a trailblazer, a maverick an individualist, and a Gnostic -- one who perceives things through direct sensing, direct knowing, not through being spoonfed anybody else's religious "truths."

But he also had great compassion and understanding for those using other tools, other faiths, and other philosophies to find a way to be good and kind in this world; so he was very gentle with them and didn't criticize their own spiritual life.



“I do not accept praise from men, but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of God in your hearts. I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him." John 5:41-43


What you have done is created a version ofJesus that does not exist, a version that looks and sounds no different to the man of today. Is it any wonder that this world, as in the days in Judea, that the crowds want the murderer, insurrectionist and robber released instead of the Son of God? Your version is entirely false, from head to toe.

edit on 5-2-2013 by WhoKnows100 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


The quote from Edmund Spenser.. in my signature.

Again....which quote? I clicked on the sig link "Did Jesus claim to be God?" It's a 404.






top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join