The lost years of Jesus

I hope this doesn't bother people but, I had a thought the other day and I have wondered if the rumors of Jesus being in China I think it said or parts Asia were true. Perhaps he transcended and became a Buddha? Perhaps what his follows saw him? Just curious what anyone thinks

Jesus in China? Nigh impossible, do you realize how far away China is from Israel? Even by sea it would be a suicidal journey. Perhaps if Jesus had been an ancient Hebrew mogul, it would be more plausible, but considering he was a Middle Eastern hobo and under the rule of the Roman Empire, it seems a lot less likely. Also keep in mind that there are a few hundred years separating Buddha from Jesus (Buddha was about 500 years prior to the birth of Jesus). Also, while the Qur'an insists that Jesus did not die on the cross, the Roman historian named Tacitus certainly didn't think of it as a myth.

Well, Israel and China are both in Asia. I don't see it being an impossible journey. Perhaps obnoxious, but not impossible. Less than 6000 miles, and if he did it by horseback he could go ~35 miles per day. It would take approximately half of a year of travel to make it to China, and if we assume he rested along the way, he could probably make it in a year. But I think that it is doubtful, as no accounts of Jesus mention him participating in any traditions which resemble those of China or India, and he was apparently well versed in the holy scripture of Judaism. It is likely that during the missing portion, Jesus is receiving informal education in Judaism or working, or both. It's important to note that Jesus didn't receive a formal education and was never officially a rabbi, so we can assume that he didn't go to rabbinical schooling, or if he did, he didn't finish it.

I don't personally believe in the events of the Bible but it's fun to think about.

Sven One wrote: ...rumors of Jesus being in China...

The rumors actually involve area controlled by what we now call India between Israel and the subcontinent proper. This makes them slightly more likely, and would explain the nature of Christ's temporal teachings being similar to that of some Buddhist doctrines.

That said, it still doesn't hold a lot of water.

My uncle and I were actually talking about this on the phone the other night. He's a firm believer that Jesus was influenced by Buddhism (which may very well have made it as far as Egypt by the first century AD) and travelled to India and so on. But he's also a rather opinionated Buddhist who thinks it's his way or the highway, though he is usually respectful of my views.

While the idea of Jesus having travelled so far is fairly new (c. 19th century), I remember reading that when Europeans encountered Buddhism during the Middle Ages, they were struck by how similar it was to certain forms of Christianity. In some corners I think this led to the notion that Christianity had spread further than it actually had - hence the concept of figures like Prester John, who was said to be a Christian king in the far east and was confused with the warlord Genghis Khan by some chroniclers when the Mongols started conquering Muslim kingdoms.

But I don't think anyone actually made the argument that Jesus actually travelled to India until modern times, and historians have debunked this at every opportunity since then. There is no evidence for it, not even suggestions of it. And it would not have been a cakewalk to travel from Judea to the Indian subcontinent and back in the first century AD (or at any time before the modern era.) My uncle said that by doubting this, I was doubting the divinity of Christ that would make such a journey a breeze - but I couldn't help but wonder, why would he need to travel to India at all in that case?

The bigger question to me, though, is why does it matter? Jesus and the Buddha taught some similar things, though how similar depends on the tradition. Jesus (whether your view of Jesus is the Christian view or not) needn't have travelled to India and been exposed to Buddhism to teach truths that are as important and relevant as those taught by the Buddha. And for a Christian or a Buddhist, it shouldn't matter at all, since whether he did or didn't doesn't change those traditions and their reality.

All wonderful I love discussions. But, coming from Adi I am not merely asking about Either religions or, trying to find evidence he did but, what if for example he was baptized by John and went into the wilderness for 40 days and nights no food, tempted of the devil what is to say he didnt achieve Nirvana? I believe in the divinity of Christ but, I am also open to discussions I am not closed. After all tgere a alot of books banned from The Bible we currently have.

Sven One wrote: what if for example he was baptized by John and went into the wilderness for 40 days and nights no food, tempted of the devil what is to say he didnt achieve Nirvana?

An interesting idea, but what do you mean when you say Nirvana? I think there are a lot of different ideas about what that concept is.

Well, I am talking about the enlightenment, the perfect peace, universal understanding, ect. It is obvious regardless all that Jesus was an amazing teacher if not one of the best the world has ever known whether your a Christian or not gotta give him props. Even well renown scientists have said his knowledge for not being born into a wealthy family or, logistical background and knowing what he knew is astounding.

You're trying to force a label that doesn't need to be. If he portrays similar traits to similar ideas, that doesn't make him one thing over another. One could argue that he was a Jedi too.

Since Jesus is an old myth, we can't fully say what part was the man and what part was the legend. I think it's more important to recognize the similarities rather than trying to tie in another title.

We can't even say what the extent of his knowledge was. The books weren't written by him.

Thats true.