An article from archaeologynewsnetwork.com was recently sent to me for review and comment. The article was BBC Documentary: Jesus Was a Buddhist Monk (Accounts for the missing years). Here is the link to this article: https://archaeologynewsnetwork.com/2022/09/12/bbc-documentary-jesus-was-a-buddhist-monk-accounts-for-the-missing-years/
The article is based on a documentary aired by the BBC that suggests that Jesus fled and escaped death to Afghanistan with several Jewish settlers. They claim that local stories seem to confirm the theory suggesting that Jesus spent years in the Kashmir Valley and remained there until He died at 80. You can find that “documentary” here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY0Ib3aPG6Y&list=PLGqKcon1r9KcRWVqwB_HX-UQA7GV-gwTB
This is a quote from the article.
“A thought-provoking documentary suggests Jesus Christ — a Jewish preacher and religious leader who became the central figure of Christianity — was a Buddhist Monk. The documentary indicates that Jesus was not crucified and that he spent decades travelling and was ultimately laid to rest after His death at the Roza Bal Shrine located in Srinagar, Kashmir.”
For many years, novels and movies have been created to suggest that Jesus escaped the cross, such as the Davinci Code or Holy Blood Holy Grail. These works are based on mere fiction, lending suggestions to the idea that somehow Jesus escaped the cross and lived a life that is not accounted for in the gospels.
This notion is laughable for anyone who has taken the time to study the teaching of Jesus and the history of Christianity. Yet, the archaeologynewsnetwork.com documentary publication makes that exact claim based on a BBC YouTube documentary taking its cues from a book called The Original Jesus: The Buddhist Sources of Christianity written by Elmar R. Gruber (Author), Holger Kersten (Author.)
This is not a new claim
Although the BBC Documentary echoed by archologynewsnetwork.com makes it sound like Gruber and Kersten are two scholars on the front line of breaking new Christian research, the claim that "Jesus escaped the cross” (and to be clear, this is at the heart of their argument) is not new. However, adding a focused tag claiming “that Jesus became a Buddhist monk” is an interesting creative twist to the debunked claim. Frankly, BBC should be ashamed of themselves.
A blatant attack on Christianity
Although the article desperately tries to come off as “a matter of fact” and objective, it simply can’t hide its anti-Christian bias and is, in fact, an outright attack on the primary tenant of the historic Christian faith-the resurrection.
The article based on BBC’s documentary offers no counterarguments by any other notable scholars; however, they offer: “For some or even many true believers, the fact that Jesus was crucified, died, rose again and ascended into heaven can be considered as definitive truth.”
For some believers? Can you name a Christian who adheres to the historic Christian faith that would not agree that the doctrine of the resurrection is not considered definitive truth? The fact that both BBC and archaeologynewsnetwork.com did not present opposing viewpoints from other respected scholars suggests a bias against Christianity.
This article seems intended to sow doubt about the accuracy of the gospels. Considering the lack of balance from these sources, we will provide a more balanced perspective here.
Rejected By Biblical Scholars
Several scholars have refuted the claims of authors Gruber and Kersten that Jesus lived in India, including Richard Bauckham and Geza Vermes, J.N.D. Anderson and Marcus Borg. And while they may not represent all of our views, they certainly do concerning the current topic. Each of these is accomplished in New Testament studies and all authors.
Bauckham, for instance, is a New Testament scholar who has criticized the claims made by Gruber and Kersten. He argues that the idea that Jesus travelled to India is not supported by historical evidence. In his book Jesus: A Very Short Introduction, Bauckham argues that no reliable evidence supports the idea of Jesus travelling to India or any other far-off lands.
On page 99, he states, "There is no historical evidence whatever to support the idea that Jesus travelled to India or anywhere else outside Palestine." In another article entitled The Relatives of Jesus published in the Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus, Bauckham criticizes the idea that Jesus had relatives who travelled to India and founded a Christian community there. On page 153, he argues that this claim is "wholly without historical foundation."
Vermes is a professor of Jewish studies who has written extensively on Jesus and Judaism. On page 19 of The Authentic Gospel of Jesus, he discusses the claims made by Andreas Faber-Kaiser and Holger Kersten that Jesus travelled to India. Vermes states that these claims are "fantastic" and not supported by any credible historical evidence.
Anderson is another New Testament scholar who wrote extensively on the historical Jesus. In his book, The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, He addressed the claims made by Gruber and Kersten about Jesus travelling to India. In Chapter 11, Anderson critiques Gruber and Kersten's theories. On pages 165-167, he argues that their evidence is not convincing and that their theories rely on speculation rather than historical facts. Anderson concludes on page 167 that "There is no evidence whatever that Jesus Christ ever visited India, or that he spent any considerable time anywhere other than in Palestine."
Finally, Borg, a prominent scholar who wrote extensively on the historical Jesus, while not explicitly addressing the claim that Jesus travelled to India, does discuss the importance of historical evidence in evaluating claims about Jesus' life. In his book Jesus: A New Vision, Borg emphasizes the importance of approaching the historical Jesus with a critical eye and relying on reliable evidence to understand his life and teachings. On page 25, he writes, “claims about Jesus that lack historical evidence must be treated with great skepticism."
Of course, this is not a complete roster of distinguished scholars who unequivocally refute the assertions of Jesus evading the crucifixion, travelling to India, or becoming a Buddhist monk, but it makes the point.
How they form their argument
What is the basis for BBC's theological heroes to challenge a fundamental tenet of the Christian faith? The article they authored relies on three arguments. Firstly, they point to gaps in Jesus' life; secondly, they draw parallels between the teachings of Jesus and Buddha; and thirdly, they cite Islamic writers as authorities. Let us examine each argument in turn.
Gaping Holes?
Regarding the gaps in Jesus' life, Gruber and Kersten assert that these periods represent his time in India, specifically between the ages of 13 and 29. However, no conclusive evidence supports this claim and it cannot be proven.
Similar Teachings?
Gruber and Kersten assert similarities between the teachings of Jesus and Buddha. They focus on superficial similarities, such as the shared value of being kind to others, while disregarding the significant differences between the two religions. In their attempt to draw parallels between the teachings of Jesus and Buddhism, they will try to persuade their readers that Jesus was influenced by Buddhist philosophy.
Gruber and Kersten cite Buddhist scriptures such as the "Lalita Vistara Sutra" and the "Lotus Sutra" in their book The Jesus Conspiracy to support their theory that Buddhist teachings may have influenced Jesus. The "Lalita Vistara Sutra" is a revered Mahayana Buddhist text that chronicles the life of Gautama Buddha, including his birth, enlightenment, and teachings.
While there are some similarities between the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament and the "Lalita Vistara Sutra" and "Lotus Sutra" in Mahayana Buddhism, significant differences render the hypothesis that Jesus learned and taught Buddhism untenable.
Did Jesus escape and survive the crucifixion?
They argue that Jesus survived a roman crucifixion. Of course, this is at the heart of the argument. Gruber and Kersten suggest that Jesus did not die on the cross but was resuscitated in the tomb and went on to live as a Buddhist in India.
Refuting these Claims
There are no gaping holes.
To claim that there are "gaping holes" in Jesus' life story implies that he did not follow Judaism during this time. However, this assertion lacks support from either historical or religious texts. Furthermore, suggesting that Buddhism influenced Jesus is an anachronism since Buddhism did not exist in the region where Jesus lived during that era. Nonetheless, the statement is crafted to imply that the lack of information about Jesus during this period is significant, even though ancient texts often omit details about a person's life, as is the case with Julius Caesar. Despite many historical texts about his life and achievements, there is limited information about his childhood and early adulthood. The absence of information does not necessarily indicate "gaping holes" in his life story but merely suggests that certain aspects of his life are not well-documented.
Buddhism did not influence Jesus.
The historical problem with this claim is that Buddhism did not exist in the region where Jesus lived during this period, making that claim an anachronism. While there may be some similarities between the teachings of Jesus and Buddhism, such as the emphasis on compassion and selflessness, their fundamental differences make them incompatible.
Christianity is based on the belief in a personal God who created the world, loves humanity, and sent his son, Jesus Christ, to redeem humanity from sin and death. The central message of Christianity is that faith in Jesus Christ leads to salvation and eternal life. In contrast, Buddhism focuses on the Four Noble Truths and the path to enlightenment, which involves realizing the true nature of reality and attaining freedom from suffering.
The differences between the teachings of Jesus and Buddha are vast. The Lalita Vistara and Lotus Sutras focus more on Buddha-nature and attaining enlightenment through meditation and realizing emptiness. Jesus' teachings, on the other hand, focus on faith in God, salvation through faith in himself as the Christ or Messiah, and the relationship between God and humanity. The Lalita Vistara and Lotus Sutras emphasize the importance of the Buddha's teachings and the Sangha, while Jesus' teachings highlight his own teachings and the church.
Although some similarities exist between the teachings of Jesus and Buddhism, their fundamental differences make them incompatible. The Buddhist concept of non-self (anatta) and the Christian belief in the soul and personal identity differ significantly. The Buddhist path to enlightenment through meditation and mindfulness contrasts with the Christian emphasis on faith, prayer, and the grace of God. Furthermore, the Buddhist belief in reincarnation and multiple worlds and realms differs from the Christian belief in a single afterlife and the final judgment. Therefore, the claim that Buddhism greatly influenced Jesus is unfounded, and the teachings of Jesus and Buddha are fundamentally incompatible.
Jesus died as a matter of historical fact!
The most crucial claim of the Christian faith is that Jesus rose from the grave. So, one can see that the claim that Jesus died and did not resurrect is highly offensive to Christians. If true, it would render the Christian faith baseless and meaningless, as Paul emphasized in his letter to the Corinthians. Historical records show that Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem by the Roman authorities, and there is no evidence to support the claim that he escaped the cross.
Although the Bible is the primary source of Christian doctrine and repeatedly affirms the resurrection of Jesus. Other sources also attest to the resurrection of Jesus.
For example, the Roman historian Tacitus, who was not a Christian, wrote about Jesus and his followers in his Annals of Imperial Rome. He affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea and that his followers believed he had risen from the dead (Annals 15.44)
The Jewish historian Josephus, writing in the late first century, provides an account of Jesus and his inspired movement, including his crucifixion and his followers’ belief in his resurrection (Antiquities of the Jews, 18.3.3).
The swoon theory has been long debunk
As mentioned, the theory that Jesus survived the cross is not new. This theory is known as the Swoon Theory, which proposes that Jesus did not die on the cross but passed out and later regained consciousness in the tomb. This theory is often used by Muslim theologians and others who seek to question the validity of the New Testament. This theory claims that Jesus' crucifixion was only an apparent death and that he survived the ordeal, appearing to his followers before eventually dying a natural death.
The origin of the Swoon Theory is unclear. Still, it has been proposed by various individuals throughout history, including German theologian Karl Friedrich Bahrdt in the late 18th century and German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche in the late 19th century.
The idea that someone could survive the brutal Roman practice of crucifixion is implausible. Crucifixion was designed to be a slow and agonizing death, and crucified people typically died from suffocation, shock, or heart failure. Moreover, the Roman soldiers who carried out the crucifixion were experts in their craft and would have been unlikely to make a mistake in ensuring Jesus was dead before removing him from the cross.
The Gospels' eyewitness accounts of Jesus' death and burial do not indicate his possibility of surviving the ordeal. The soldiers who crucified him were seasoned professionals, with the Gospel writers noting that one of them pierced Jesus' side with a spear to verify his demise. Notably, the documentary overlooks this fact, raising questions as to why. It's conceivable that the account of the pierced water and blood coming out, as reported by the Gospel writers, doesn't align with the BBC's documentary's premise. This information doesn't support their argument, which explains why it's been omitted.
Water and blood prove Jesus was dead!
According to medical experts, when a person dies by crucifixion, their body undergoes physiological changes. One of these changes is that the heart eventually fails and stops beating, leading to fluid buildup around the heart and lungs.
In the case of Jesus, the Roman soldier who pierced his side with a spear likely ruptured his heart or a major blood vessel, causing blood to flow out of the wound. The presence of water, or clear fluid, is also significant because it indicates fluid has accumulated around the heart and lungs, a condition known as pleural effusion. This is common in crucifixion victims due to the stress placed on the body during the prolonged ordeal.
The combination of blood and water flowing out of Jesus' side provides medical evidence that he was dead at the time of the piercing. This is an essential detail because some had suggested that Jesus may have only been unconscious or in a coma, rather than dead, when he was taken down from the cross. However, the medical evidence strongly suggests that Jesus had indeed died from the trauma of the crucifixion.
Wrapping it up
The claim that Jesus was a Buddhist Monk who fled and lived in India is not new and has been refuted by several notable scholars in New Testament studies and Jewish studies. The recent BBC Documentary echoed by archaeologynewsnetwork.com is nothing but a blatant attack on Christianity and an attempt to sow doubt about the accuracy of the gospels. The article's lack of balance and opposing viewpoints suggests a bias against Christianity. The claim is a laughable attempt to undermine the central tenant of the Christian faith, the resurrection. It is time to recognize such works as mere fiction and focus on legitimate research that will lead to a deeper understanding of the history and teachings of Jesus Christ.
Comments