Jesus: The Lost Years
Offline I've been researching the lost 18 years of Jesus, which the New Testament pretty much skips over. I found some vague references in Luke 2:52 about how he advanced in wisdom, etc.
There is text saying that he spent time in Egypt which was the western end of the silk road. This could have lead to Jesus travelling East to learn more of the Buddhist teachings.
Does any one have some information about what might have happened to Jesus during this time? I've heard that he travelled the Middle East, in to India and then possibly to China or Tibet. This leaves a possibility to the fact that Jesus was actually influenced by Hinduism, Buddhism or other Asian beliefs. It also can explain why so many of the teachings of Jesus (like the Sermon on the Mount) parallels the Buddha's teachings.
Thanks!
- Login to post comments
Offline Personally, I'd say the most likely answer is that the later stories skip over those years for two reasons: (i) nothing much happened in them that was relevant to the theological purposes of the gospel writers...Why people think these year must have been full of exotic travel and adventures in distant lands is a mystery. Why assume anything like this?
I appreciate your personal opinion on this, thanks for posting.
What Galilean peasant ever did these things?
I don't believe peasant is the correct term you are looking for as a peasant is a European term used to describe a person who is: "A peasant, derived from 15th century French païsant meaning one from the pays, the countryside or region, which itself derives from the Latin pagus, country district, is an agricultural worker with roots in the countryside in which he or she dwells, either working for others or, more specifically, owning or renting and working by his or her own labour a small plot of ground. The term peasant today is sometimes used in a pejorative sense for impoverished farmers."
Jesus was far from being a peasant.
...This assumption strikes me as unlikely fantasy....There are later legends (much, much later) that say he went to all kinds of places. The fact that those legends arise in the very places they say he went to (Britain, India etc) means you don;t have to be a genius to work out why and how they arose. To assume they are in any way historical would be really, really naive... we have as much reason to think he went to Tibet as we have to think he went to Finland: ie none at all....
Talk about assumptions... besides I never said any thing about Finland or Britain. I'm talking about the connection between the Middle East and India/Asia. It is an indisputable fact that the silk road as well as other trade routes went straight to or near cities where Jesus traveled or lived; Egypt, Jerusalem, etc. It is known that at least one Mediterranean leaders converted to Buddhism. Buddhist and Hindu coins have been found in the Middle East, N Africa and Europe. This indicates that travellers from either those areas went to the Far East and India or travellers from those area came to the West. There are also coins, of Mediterranean creation, with Hindu and Buddhist markings on them, which also indicates that these influences existed. To say Jesus did not have any influences from other beliefs is truly naive.
Most of his teachings have no parallels in Buddhism...
Most? So are you admitting there are 49.99% of his teachings that do parallel Buddha? It is a indisputable fact that Buddha existed over 550 years before Jesus.
etc at all and are clearly Jewish in origin. Any other parallels are more easily explained by the fact that he was a human talking to humans. Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you; is not an amazing insight and is not unique to Christianity or Buddhism. Its plain common sense and it underlies just about any human system of ethics. Theres no need to assume any contact between Jesus and Buddhism to explain; such an commonplace parallel.
I don't dispute the fact that many of his teachings are from Jewish origin. I'm talking about the "Golden Age" of mankind. There are a number of religion leaders which appear about this time. They all were influenced by various religions and it stands to reason that Jesus was not an exception to this human trait. It is very reasonable to think that Jesus was influenced by more than just Jewish faith.
To say that these similarities are "human talking sot humans" or "plain common sense" undermines Christians. What you are saying is that Jesus had no divine inspiration or connection with "god". It's like saying, "Oh, do unto others..." is common sense. Every one should know this...
- Login to post comments
Offline Ebionite wrote:What Galilean peasant ever did these things?I don't believe peasant is the correct term you are looking for as a peasant is a European term used to describe a person who is: "A peasant, derived from 15th century French païsant meaning one from the pays, the countryside or region, which itself derives from the Latin pagus, country district, is an agricultural worker with roots in the countryside in which he or she dwells, either working for others or, more specifically, owning or renting and working by his or her own labour a small plot of ground. The term peasant today is sometimes used in a pejorative sense for impoverished farmers."
Jesus was far from being a peasant.
He was? What makes you think that? He was the son of a carpenter who grew up in a very small village of only a few families, who were all farmers. So what does that make him if not a peasant? Read John Dominic Crossan's The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant for a careful analysis of Jesus in his social context. He was definitely a peasant.
Talk about assumptions... besides I never said any thing about Finland or Britain.
You talked about some very late legends about what Jesus may have done in those years. There are many such legends, including ones about him living in Britain for a while. The fact that these legends arose many centuries later and that they arose in the regions that they say he visited indicates very strongly that they can't be taken as being anything other than later folktales.
So, as I said, there's as much evidence of him visiting India or Tibet as there is of him visiting Finland: ie none at all.
I'm talking about the connection between the Middle East and India/Asia. It is an indisputable fact that the silk road as well as other trade routes went straight to or near cities where Jesus traveled or lived; Egypt, Jerusalem, etc.
This is indeed a fact. It's also a fact that most people who lived in these areas didn't travel on any of these trade routes, especially peasants like Jesus. How much he was influenced by ideas coming west along those routes is hard to say, but to simply assume he was influenced is not good enough - you need some good evidence that he was. We know the impact of Buddhism on the Mediterranean was fairly minimal and its influence on devout Jews like Jesus, who weren't exactly people who dabbled in foreign religions, would be about as close to zero as you can imagine.
It is known that at least one Mediterranean leaders converted to Buddhism.
It is? Who?
Buddhist and Hindu coins have been found in the Middle East, N Africa and Europe. This indicates that travellers from either those areas went to the Far East and India or travellers from those area came to the West.
That's a no brainer. But that doesn't mean the idea of a devout Jewish peasant dabbling with Hinduism makes any more sense.
Most? So are you admitting there are 49.99% of his teachings that do parallel Buddha? It is a indisputable fact that Buddha existed over 550 years before Jesus.
Yes, but so what? What evidence do you have that this devout Jew was influenced by a religion that he would have regarded as pagan superstition and idolatrous nonsense? He wasn't a New Age hippy - he was a devout Jew. Devout Jews in this period didn't dabble with chakras.
I don't dispute the fact that many of his teachings are from Jewish origin.
"Many" of them?! Are you kidding?
I'm talking about the "Golden Age" of mankind. There are a number of religion leaders which appear about this time.
Define "about this time". "About" what time? The Buddha lived centuries before Jesus. Muhammed lived about as many centuries after him. Who are these religious leaders who appeared "about this time"?
They all were influenced by various religions and it stands to reason that Jesus was not an exception to this human trait.
That doesn't stand to reason at all - again: he was a devout Jew. That's about as exclusive and narrowly defined a religion as you can get. To think he was some kind of Buddhist is fantasy.
It is very reasonable to think that Jesus was influenced by more than just Jewish faith.
See above. And if he was influenced by other religions at all they are far more likely to be ones that were (i) closer to home and (ii) ones that we know influenced the Judaism of his time (and that definitely doesn't include Buddhism or Hinduism)
To say that these similarities are "human talking sot humans" or "plain common sense" undermines Christians.
Yes. And? You do realise you're talking to an atheist on an atheist discussion board don't you?
What you are saying is that Jesus had no divine inspiration or connection with "god".
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. See above re atheists and atheist discussion boards.
It's like saying, "Oh, do unto others..." is common sense. Every one should know this...
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. I have a three year old nephew who grasps this concept so it's not like its something too deep and profound. It's common sense and the basis for all social living. So of course you find it in Buddhism, and Christianity, and Judaism (in Leviticus to be exact). And in just about any other writing by humans about how to live with other humans. It's common sense.
"Any fool can make history, but it takes a genius to write it."
Oscar Wilde
- Login to post comments
Offline Oh, do unto others..." is common sense. Every one should know this...
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. I have a three year old nephew who grasps this concept so it's not like its something too deep and profound. It's common sense and the basis for all social living. So of course you find it in Buddhism, and Christianity, and Judaism (in Leviticus to be exact). And in just about any other writing by humans about how to live with other humans. It's common sense.
Thanks for the info and your opinions. I'll have to look else where for the facts.
- Login to post comments
Hi GOD !
umm , yeah something about god .... giggles , damn this is actually a serious wonder?
Personally, I'd say the most likely answer is that the later stories skip over those years for two reasons: (i) nothing much happened in them that was relevant to the theological purposes of the gospel writers (they weren't writing biographies after all) and (ii) not much of any signficance happened in them at all. Several chapters or even one chapter about how for several years Jesus got up at dawn, worked as a carpenter and went to bed after sunset, only to do it all again the next day, over and over again, would be dull. And irrelevant.
Why people think these year must have been full of exotic travel and adventures in distant lands is a mystery. Why assume anything like this? What Galilean peasant ever did these things? Jesus isn't even depicted doing these things in the years that are described.
This assumption strikes me as unlikely fantasy.
There are later legends (much, much later) that say he went to all kinds of places. The fact that those legends arise in the very places they say he went to (Britain, India etc) means you don't have to be a genius to work out why and how they arose. To assume they are in any way historical would be really, really naive.
See above - we have as much reason to think he went to Tibet as we have to think he went to Finland: ie none at all.
Most of his teachings have no parallels in Buddhism etc at all and are clearly Jewish in origin. Any other parallels are more easily explained by the fact that he was a human talking to humans. "Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you" is not an amazing insight and is not unique to Christianity or Buddhism. It's plain common sense and it underlies just about any human system of ethics. There's no need to assume any contact between Jesus and Buddhism to "explain" such an commonplace parallel.
"Any fool can make history, but it takes a genius to write it."
Oscar Wilde