Was Jesus a Buddhist?

Jesus never existed.

Could have been - though probably not - the message has been incredibly distorted over the years if he was. More likely he had contact with Hinduism rather than Buddhism. Alexander the Great had a Brahman Priest in his retinue. 500 years after the Buddha's death Buddhism underwent a few changes in India due to the successful resurgence of Hinduism which incorporated and developed a lot of the Buddhist philosophy into its own system. Buddhism responded by becoming more like Hinduism - developing a hierarchy of Gods, Bodhisattvas and Deities for the ordinary people to worship.

Perhaps those ideas were developed into a western form of Buddhism that was subverted into Christianity. After all a culture that crucifies its holy men and women is probably capable of anything!

This is from one of the earliest known Christian documents written before the word Christian was used to describe Jesus' associates. It was called the Gospel of Thomas by translators and was dug up near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in December 1945. It is from a Coptic manuscript which was probably transcribed from Greek during the 4th century, but thought to be written by the Apostle Thomas perhaps during and after Jesus' ministry.

I am quoting from verse 13:

13. Jesus asked his disciples, "Compare me to something and tell me what I am like?"

Simon Peter said to him, "You are like a just messenger."

Matthew said to him, "You are like a wise philosopher."

Thomas said to him, "Teacher, my mouth is utterly unable to say what you are like."

Jesus said, "I am not your teacher. Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring that I have tended."

So I ask you: was "the Buddha" actually Buddhist, or is that only a representation of the man which his followers codified into thought?

No, Jesus was not a Buddhist. But, He employed the same principals, techniques and attitudes as the Buddha which was an affront to His earthly tribal affiliations

"One by one the tide of time engulfed the sects of the early centuries, until of the whole number only one survived in its primitive integrity. That one still exists, still teaches the doctrine of its founder, still exemplifies its faith in works of power. The quicksands which swallowed up

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Vol. 2, Page]] 290 ISIS UNVEILED.

every other outgrowth of the religious agitation of the times of Jesus, with its records, relics, and traditions, proved firm ground for this. Driven from their native land, its members found refuge in Persia, and to-day the anxious traveller may converse with the direct descendants of the "Disciples of John," who listened, on the Jordan's shore, to the "man sent from God," and were baptized and believed. This curious people, numbering 30,000 or more, are miscalled "Christians of St. John," but in fact should be known by their old name of Nazareans, or their new one of Mendaeans.

To term them Christians, is wholly unwarranted. They neither believe in Jesus as Christ, nor accept his atonement, nor adhere to his Church, nor revere its "Holy Scriptures." Neither do they worship the Jehovah-God of the Jews and Christians, a circumstance which of course proves that their founder, John the Baptist, did not worship him either. And if not, what right has he to a place in the Bible, or in the portrait-gallery of Christian saints? Still further, if Ferho was his God, and he was "a man sent by God," he must have been sent by Lord Ferho, and in his name baptized and preached? Now, if Jesus was baptized by John, the inference is that he was baptized according to his own faith; therefore, Jesus too, was a believer in Ferho, or Faho, as they call him; a conclusion that seems the more warranted by his silence as to the name of his "Father." And why should the hypothesis that Faho is but one of the many corruptions of Fho or Fo, as the Thibetans and Chinese call Buddha, appear ridiculous? In the North of Nepaul, Buddha is more often called Fo than Buddha."

If Jesus was a Buddhist, he would not have mentioned the GOD.

Buddhists never bother if the GOD exists.