Jesus was a Buddhist Jew, Paul founded Xianity

I stumbled upon this and had to post it. It's not that I agree, but it's an interesting bit of writing. The hillarious "Lamb", by Christopher Moore has Jesus doing similar travel.


Before I begin, I would like to make it clear that I believe Jesus existed, whether his name was really Jesus or not. I also hold a high reverence for his teachings, which I try to live by every day. I just don't believe in hell, heaven, killing, and damnation. I have no doubt that some readers will consider me a liar who thinks he knows everything, but that is simply an untrue judgment. There is a lot I don't know and I feel that the key to progress is in embracing that idea. It is the way of education and especially science, which I hold in high regard. Failure to realize our short-comings is failure to progress.

Because I have not studied Judaism, I cannot really say factually how the Jewish people see Jesus. However, it is my understanding that he is simply regarded as a teacher. I find it odd that Jesus was a Jew, which is not argued, yet alleged followers of Jesus denounce many Jewish beliefs and traditions and harbor a new set of beliefs, not taught by Jesus. The bible states that Jesus was like man in all ways except sin. What does this mean? It seems to say that Jesus was a man, in all ways with the exception of the fact that he lived by strict morals that were scarcely found in the religious practices of that time and place. I have heard about the parallels of his teachings and those of Buddhism. Were these coincidences or something else? It is undeniable that a good portion of Jesus' young adult life is unaccounted for pursuing his teachings of logical, undeniable morals. Where did he go? Where did these new insights come from? In 1887 a respected Russian journalist named Nicolas Notovich published a book called "The Unknown Life of Jesus." The book was, obviously, called blasphemy. Notovich claimed his book was a factual account of his trip to the Himalayas in northern India to an isolated Buddhist monastery. Notovich wrote about ancient Buddhist scrolls speaking of a scholar and prophet named Issa, a foreigner from a small, Mediterranean country who arrived as a teenage boy to study the teachings of the Buddha. He was there 500 years after the death of Buddha, which coincides with the time of the lost years of Jesus' life. In 1902, a Hindu priest came to the same monastery and translated those scrolls with the same conclusion. There are many reports of Jesus visiting other countries, going as far north as ancient England to meet the Druids. It seems likely to me that the success of christianity should be attributed to the fact that, for quite some time, Jesus traveled thousands of miles, preaching all the way. The bible even states that Jesus' great uncle traveled to England often as a merchant. Joseph of Arimathea was the uncle of Mary and a successful tin merchant, which tin was abundant in England and similar in value to present-day steel. It was quite likely that Jesus accompanied him at least once. Loyal great uncle, Joseph, carried on Jesus' teachings after the crucifixion.

Jesus was brilliant in the respect that instead of preaching to the leaders of countries who would have surely persecuted him (oh yeah, they did), he preached to the poor, telling them they will inherit the kingdom of heaven. In his later days, he claimed to be the son of god, which originally could have simply meant that he obeyed, honored, and taught what god would teach like a good son would do, but later was blatantly a claim to be of god's seed. I would attribute this to egotism because at this point, Jesus was considered a leader and a savior in the sense that Gandhi was savior to his people. I mean no disrespect, but let's be honest. If Jesus is capable of anger and hostility (his persecution of the merchants), then why not egotism and perhaps a deliberate lie, albeit for the greater good. In fact, the alleged lost books of the bible speak of how Jesus was even capable of murder. Keep in mind that I do not consider these ideas as facts, but there is just as much evidence, if not more in some cases, as the truth of the complete works of the bible.

The bible also states that Jesus followed the practices of Judaism in every regard. This means that Jesus was circumcised, which makes a man worthy of marriage, and also means that he took a wife, which is necessary in Judaism in order to be a rabbi (priest/teacher). It is obvious if you read the new testament that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, whom his disciples were jealous of and whom Jesus kissed all the time. There is also a story of a wedding in which it doesn't say specifically who was married, but Jesus and Mary were in charge of. Obviously, this was a method in catholicism to portray the purity of Jesus, but it would have been sacrilegious in those times. Also in catholicism, Mary is portrayed as pure, even though the bible states Jesus had four brothers and at least two sisters (because of the use of the plural "sisters"). It was his brother, James, who also attempted to continue the ministries of Jesus.

Considering that Jesus was a devout Jew, why is it that his life spawned a new religion altogether? Do you really believe that this is was Jesus wanted? Why is it that most christians don't know that Paul, previously known as Saul, was Jesus' adversary. He only claimed an alliance with Jesus' teachings after Jesus was crucified. It was only then that he claimed to continue the teachings of Jesus, although he had radically different opinions on how to obtain the kingdom of heaven.