Debating Buddhist sources to Christianity with J. P. Holding

[DanHopkins]

J. P Holding has a page where he viciously attacks Christian Lindtner. I replied by reminding him that Dr. Lindtner was not nearly the first scholar to argue that the gospels where pirate copies from Buddhist texts. I tried to post several comments to his response but he rejected it as "spam";

Let the reader decide if my comment below was "spam"


Dear J. P Holding;

In the spirit of searching for the truth, I would like to challenge you to debate me on my assertion that any given verse from the gospels will, almost always, have a stronger parallel in pre-Christian Buddhist texts compared to any pre-Christian Jewish book. Also, the gospel authors sometimes appear to quote from OT law were there is no Jewish reference, but only a Buddhist parallel (Christ abides till end of Aeon, Buddha says same, & “living eaters shall flow from his belly”

Also, outside of textual Christianity, the legends and symbols are also directly copied from Buddhism. Richard Garb shows that the legend of St. Eustace, Christopher, and Christ as a deer & lion, were directly lifted from two Buddhist fables. The peacock, the Borrormean rings to represent the trinity/triratna, octagon altar rooms, bells to call for prayers, requisite meal of hemp seeds for the monks with shaven heads, the Rosary (from Japa-mala, ‘mumur-necklace’, or, ‘rose-necklace’ japa=murmur, japa=rose), the pentagram, the Ichthus (sometimes the Greek letters are overlapped to form the Buddhist octagon, or wheel with eight spokes referenced before), the three rabbit legs symbol, etc… were all first Buddhist.

Besides the gospels being directly copied from Buddhist texts, the several birthdays assigned to Jesus, in Alexandria, were also first said of Buddha. Later Christian tradition from Alexandria named the three wise men said to visit baby Jesus, and here they are turned into kings with names that are the same as several Kushan Buddhist kings (the Magi also said to carry a staff with a ring, same said of the Buddhists in their most ancient code (vinya)) This all makes sense if we remember that the Buddhist Therapeutae overran the Serapis academy and quickly became the leaders of early Christianity. Like the Therapeutae, Ptolemy Philadelphius was a great synchronizer, and he molded Serapis to be a figure able to deliver his pantheism. It is said that he was the first to translate the Hebrew texts to Greek and the Buddhist king Asoka inscribed the name of the same man in his edicts claiming him to have been a Buddhist convert. Matthew & Luke quote from a book commissioned by a man who Asoka’s claims was Buddhist.

The image of Jesus is also a Judaized form of Buddha. A tinge of red and gold hair, blue & fire {red} eyes (budd- deep blue, nila, but the Chinese give us ‘violet’), knot of flesh on brow between eyes, hair curling to the right, emaciated, long slender hands, long arms, deep shoulders, skinny calfs, etc.. all said first of Buddha and later seen in the depictions of Jesus, such as in the schroud of Turin.


Although he called this spam, he did agree to debate, though he wanted me to debate him at this site. He also asked that I only stick to textual Christianity and that I have my sources ready! I would appreciate if any neutral observer could judge if a particular verse from the gospel is more in tune with a Buddhist or Jewish teaching?

“” When we find among two peoples, differing from each other in race and in ideas, the same legend in a similar setting, which does not necessarily and naturally arise from the basic element of the story; and when, furthermore, this setting is strictly related to the totality of the religious conceptions of one of the two peoples, while with the other it remains in isolation, outside the habits of their symbolism, a fundamental and absolute rule of criticism compels us to conclude that the legend was transmitted from one people to the other in a literary form already fixed, and that it constitutes a foreign importation which has been superimposed upon, but not confounded with, those traditions which truly belong to the national genius of the people who received, but never invented, it.”—Oriental Origins of Christianity (Paris, 1906

[jpholding]

Let the reader decide if my comment below was "spam"

Of course it is, Hoppy. You're trying to sell your pathetic book. That's spam. Why are you even using a Holocaust denier like Linthead as a source? Can't you find any credible scholars of Buddhism to back you up?

And my, you sure cleaned up your language. Did that last toke put you in a good mood?

Now let's look at some of your asinine claims:

the gospel authors sometimes appear to quote from OT law were there is no Jewish reference, but only a Buddhist parallel (Christ abides till end of Aeon, Buddha says same, & “living eaters shall flow from his belly”

Oh my, you ARE stupid. Try this:

Witherington's commentary on John [173] notes that Sirach 24:30-32 reflects a similar saying: "As for me, I was like a canal from a river, like a water channel into a garden. I said, 'I will water my garden and drench my flower-beds' And lo, my canal became a river, and my river a sea...I will again pour out teaching like prophecy, and leave it to all future generations." This comes after a discussion of Wisdom/Torah as being a source of a river of wisdom. Note that "scripture" (graphe) is a word for any written document and does not apply exclusively to the OT.

BTW please provide a reference for that alleged Buddhist saying, as well as proving a pre-Christian date for it, including dates of any reputed manuscripts having the saying. I know that may be hard, but if you put the weed aside for a few hours, your head may clear enough to figure it out.

Also, outside of textual Christianity, the legends and symbols are also directly copied from Buddhism. Richard Garb shows that the legend of St. Eustace, Christopher, and Christ as a deer & lion, were directly lifted from two Buddhist fables.

How fascinating. Do you plan to use any sources from the 20th or 21st century? What does Richard Saloman have to say about this? Not that it matters. No one gives a crap about extrabiblical notions like those.

Besides the gospels being directly copied from Buddhist texts,

Yeah right. And the Quran is copied from Lao Tzu, too. We'll wait for the "evidence" once the smoke clears from your room.

the several birthdays assigned to Jesus, in Alexandria, were also first said of Buddha. Later Christian tradition from Alexandria named the three wise men said to visit baby Jesus, blah blah blah blah inhale pass the Doritos

Again, all late extrabiblical crap of no relevance.

Matthew & Luke quote from a book commissioned by a man who Asoka’s claims was Buddhist

Again, fascinating stuff -- John Allegro would like some of what you're smoking. We'll wait, again, for documentation, including evidence for dates and manuscripts.

The image of Jesus is also a Judaized form of Buddha. A tinge of red and gold hair, blue & fire {red} eyes (budd- deep blue, nila, but the Chinese give us ‘violet’), knot of flesh on brow between eyes, hair curling to the right, emaciated, long slender hands, long arms, deep shoulders, skinny calfs, etc.. all said first of Buddha and later seen in the depictions of Jesus, such as in the schroud of Turin.

Is that how you spell "calves" and "Shroud" after you've been high on weed for a few hours? Also, is this a vision of Jesus you got after smoking all that? Again, sounds like irrelevant extrabiblical crap to me.

He also asked that I only stick to textual Christianity and that I have my sources ready!

And you already broke that. What a maroon. Like I said, though, you're here to entertain us, so dance, monkey boy.

I would appreciate if any neutral observer could judge if a particular verse from the gospel is more in tune with a Buddhist or Jewish teaching?

As simple-minded as you are, you don't even see that it's usually far more complex than that. By chance were you once a fundy Christian? News flash: Scholarship doesn't give credence to crap from 1906 written by nobodies who need to mind their own business. Who exactly is Albert Metzger, Hoppy? And how many peer-reviewed scholarly works cite him?

I'm sure you'll have an enlightening answer.

[Hamster]

Besides the gospels being directly copied from Buddhist texts,

Pretty much all you have to read there

[DanHopkins]

J. P
Wanted to remind you that as soon as Buddhist books became available to th3e west, Christians recognized the deep parallels and automatically assumed a Buddhist borrowing. Of course, when Buddhist books became better known there were no Christians arguing for a Buddhist borrowing!

Modern Theologians and Professors of source criticism have also come under the fog of Christian partialities. And so, in his comparison of Buddha and Jesus, the Christian Dr. of philosophy Douglas Groothuis offers us grandiose interpretations not substantiated by ancient Buddhism or Christianity and when molding his Jesus figure he quotes Genesis 3 as if it describes Jesus and states as a matter of fact that Jesus was referenced in Isaiah’s Immanuel & Suffering Servant. Readers are urged to view his “comparison” of Buddha and Jesus on googlevideo so that they may see firsthand someone guilty of gross neglect or willful error. He states that the significance of Christianity (modern) is encapsulated in Jesus “ taking the penalty vicariously for us”. This of course is not the language of a scholar, but let’s not get caught up in his language which endorses Christianity. Perhaps he is not familiar with the passage in Luke where Jesus says that not everyone who calls him “Lord” will enter the heaven, or, with James words on faith vs. actions and the strong probability that Jesus was telling his followers that they would have to suffer themselves when he told them to take up their cross. Dr. Groothuis says that Buddha says, “You can come to me I am an example” and claims that Jesus did not. He holds up John 3:16 and forgets that early Christians also knew the passage about Jesus only coming for the wicked. Everything he holds up as Jesus being different from Buddha was first said about Buddha and in his defense we may suppose he has fallen victim to modern Buddhism which differs considerably from ancient Buddhism. His whole manner of speech is dishonest as is seen in his telling his audience that Jesus was “buried” before being raised. When he uses the word “buried” he means to imply “how can one be buried and still be alive? Unless…. he be the son of God?” but let us not kid ourselves into supposing that the rock rolled in front of Jesus’ tomb made his, rather spacious chamber, air tight and so it is suspicious for him to stress that Jesus was buried. He claims that the Christian heaven is eternal freedom from sin, and claims that this is opposite nirvana which he mockingly says cannot be defined (after supposing what it is not). This is all hogwash and it is absolutely correct to generally state that the goal of Buddhism is to be free from “sin” in the western sense and selfishness; this parallels Jesus prerequisite about his followers hating their family and their own lives. He claims that only later Buddhists bowed to Buddha and cites the Theravadin cannon as proof that this was so. Had he glanced at the English translations of the Theravadin cannon he would see that they also record many people circling Buddha and bowing down to him with severe reverence, as the God of gods. The lies are many with this Dr. and though he never makes distinctions between modern and ancient Christianity or even between early and later gospels (as he often quotes John, the most fabulous gospel ) he feels the need to do so with Buddhism, such as when he lies by stating, “the idea of [Buddhists] going out to the larger public was more of a Mahayana tradition of Buddhism”, perhaps he was not aware that the preeminent wheel that rolls all over the lands was a very important concept in pre-Mahayana Buddhism and maybe he has never heard of Asoka’s missionaries or the many Theravadin missionaries. He borrows Muller’s example of the main difference between Buddhism and Christianity by retelling the story of Buddha and Kisa not being able to resurrect her son without mustard seeds from a house in which no one has ever died. He holds this story up against Jesus’ resurrection of Lazarus while stating Jesus’ feeling that he was “angry with death in God’s kingdom!”, again this is why Buddha renounced his kingship and perhaps he is not familiar with the Kodha Vagga sutta where the girl Rohini was healed of leprosy when she confessed her past sins, just as in the gospels. He claims that Jesus never viewed “ethical conduct as a way to become righteous” and we may sum up his prejudices by supposing that he wrote this into his Jesus figure because he knew that Buddha did teach the previous.

As soon as Buddhism became known to the west there were scholars of comparative religion who believed Christianity borrowed from Buddhism. Without any thorough review of the materials a few of these scholars claim that Buddhism must have borrowed from Christianity. In 1804, after reading Asvaghosa’s Awakening of Faith, Dr. T Richard made the announcement “Mahayana Buddhism is embedded Christianity”[1]. Another “scholar”, who was cut from the same cloth as Dr. Richard, admits that Pope Callistus read a text on the future Buddha named Maitreya, he shows evidence suggesting that the text was brought to him from a Parthian prince (Wheat Among Tares, ch. 6[2]). The same scholar gives no evidence that Buddhists had a Christian text in their possession yet still assumes Buddhist borrowings. A further mistake copied by Dr. Alexander Harris in his unsupported assertions that the Buddhist borrowed from the Christians is that he claims that Jesus was unique in that he was not a guide, rather a source of direct merit. There is hardly an ancient Buddhist text which among its many tiresome epithets to Buddha included him as an “incalculable source of merit” and he is also mistaken in rashly assuming that the Buddhist concept of “transferring merit” was a development of later Mahayana Buddhism, it is a phrase which appears in many Pali texts and was also used frequently by the Mulasarvastivadas in what they call their “code” (Vinaya) but was more of an anthology[3]; in this book we learn that, like the Christians, merit was formally transferred at death.


Those who argue that Christianity influenced Mahayana Buddhism make several erroneous claims regarding the development of Mahayana Buddhism. They claim that the Mahayana Buddha was new in teaching that a saint should forgo their entrance into eternal peace (nirvana) in order to become familiar with, and to alleviate, sufferings[4]. Assigning this to Jesus they fail to recognize that the narrative of the earliest Buddhism (The Mahavaga of the Khandaka), for the most part, begins when the Buddha turns his back on nirvana with the goal of teaching how to overcome suffering[5]. Several of these authors, who seem to be familiar to each other, speculate that, after the said of time of Jesus, the Bodhisattva figure is identified by more of those characteristics in Isaiah’s suffering servant and that the pre-Christian Bodhisattva, along with the Buddha and his disciples, were too pure to undergo sufferings. This overlooks the common Buddhist belief, that , to overcome the suffering of “one and all alike” the Bodhisattvas become hermits and fast from the world before winning godhood. Although the Buddha escapes death nonchalantly, his fasting for six years is compared to Jesus’ fast and the suffering he experienced at his death[6] was said to be unequalled not to mention several of his lead disciples allowed people to martyr them. Another start to the early Buddha legend has him reflect when as a child he became introverted when viewing birds eat worms at his father’s plowing ceremony. The pre-Christian Buddha slept on a bed of nails and allegedly fasted a lot longer than Jesus. His ancestry begins with the account of an innocent man being crucified on a stake for murdering a prostitute, several of the Buddha’s disciples are willingly executed. All the previous themes are evolved in the Buddhist texts and are too interwoven into the pre-Christian Buddhist narratives to be interpolations.





[1] Lotus gospel, page. 10, the same doctor claims that the white horse in Revelation references Asvaghosa and his “white horse” that he sees in his name. Ancient Buddhists record that he was called this because before preaching, or entering a serious debate, on one occasion only the sound of horses could be heard. Dr. Richard’s quotes are taken from his The New Testament of Higher Buddhism. The authors of Lotus gospel and The New Testament of Higher Buddhism heavily copy from each other as authorities. Both authors only had several crude translations of Mahayana texts available to them in which they corrupted further by erronius translations (ex. translating Tathagata, which was translated as “suchness” to “God”). Both make almost no mention of the Pali texts and make mostly unsupported statements.

[2] Attempts to connect Maitreya to a giant Buddha statute in Bactria (perhaps in Afghanistan)

[3] Anthology is an interesting word to the philologist and it is also relevant here. Its etymology is said to be formed from the two roots meaning “discourse” and “flower” and this is a direct translation of the Buddhist anthology known as the Avatamsaka sutra, or the “Flower Adornment” discourse. Also we have the Buddha’s speechless sermon on the flower compared to Jesus lilies that are clothed more Buddha-fully than Solomon.

[4]. This reminds me of the earliest Buddhist Jataka where a wise father called Diga-ti (long suffering) suffers for his only son Dighavu (long live) by teaching him to love his enemies

[5] It is said that Gotama opened the gate to immortality just as it was said of Jesus.

[6] See etym. of paranirvana/.paranibbana as they are used in the titles to two separate texts on the Buddha’s end. The Mahayana points to a fake death as does the Gnostic traditions, loosely stated, the more conservative branches of Christianity and Buddhism only hint to a fake death of their hero, both with some well placed “guilt trips” which the Mahayana and Gnostic tradition explain as an expedient device to bring about salvation to the weak. The Bramanas held a similar view with Buddha and their views have been paralleled to the Buddha and the Lotus sutra which was written at an early time in a form of Bramana Sanskrit

J. P.,

Lets start off with your first line/mistake. Jesus says ""AS SCRIPTURE SAYS"...."OUT OF THE BELLY" , he does not say "Kind of like what scripture says". Nice try though! The Buddhist source is called the yamaka miracle and is depicted on Asoka's art at Sanchi which Christian scholars have recognized as pre-Christian.

Once you realize that you made a mistake, or it is argued by a neutral person that I made one, we will not move on to your next mistake/line

[Abigail]

J. P.,

Lets start off with your first line/mistake. Jesus says ""AS SCRIPTURE SAYS"...."OUT OF THE BELLY" , he does not say "Kind of like what scripture says". Nice try though! The Buddhist source is called the yamaka miracle and is depicted on Asoka's art at Sanchi which Christian scholars have recognized as pre-Christian.

Once you realize that you made a mistake, or it is argued by a neutral person that I made one, we will not move on to your next mistake/line

Hey Dan

Would you mind to put references for both the Christian and Buddhist scriptures you are equating. If it is a multiple occurrence then 1 reference for each should do.

Thank you
Abigail

[jpholding]

Lets start off with your first line/mistake. Jesus says ""AS SCRIPTURE SAYS"...."OUT OF THE BELLY" , he does not say "Kind of like what scripture says". Nice try though!

Yes, nice try you arguing with a serious scholar like Witherington, monkey boy. Tell me: In your world, when someone says, "Joe said he's going to the store to pick up the things you asked for," does that mean it's an EXACT QUOTE of Joe, and that Joe literally said, "he's going to the store to pick up the things you asked for"? Are you really that stupid?

News flash: Jewish exegesis used these things called "allusions". You might want to look up that word in your Speak n' Spell. The word "said" (eipon) is in no way semantically restricted to nothing but exact literal quotations. That's the problem with fundies like you: Stuck in black and white thinking. It's a sorrowful disease, but if we beat you with enough bananas, maybe we can knock it out of you.

And do what the lady says -- we want quotes, sources, and also argument for pre-Christian dating, and make sure they're modern, peer-reviewed sources like Richard Saloman, not some other dope-smoking wacko from the 19th century of the sort you seem to think is a legit source. And it has to be a TEXT, not some art piece.


The Buddhist source is called the yamaka miracle and is depicted on Asoka's art at Sanchi which Christian scholars have recognized as pre-Christian.

Once you realize that you made a mistake, or it is argued by a neutral person that I made one, we will not move on to your next mistake/line[/QUOTE]

[jpholding]

[FONT=Aparajita]Wanted to remind you that as soon as Buddhist books became available to th3e west, Christians recognized the deep parallels and automatically assumed a Buddhist borrowing. Of course, when Buddhist books became better known there were no Christians arguing for a Buddhist borrowing!

Actually, Hoppy, the best case for most alleged parallels is:

1) They ain't parallels. They're figments of your dopey imagination.

Followed by:

2) They're just independent expressions of the same idea, which can also be found in sources ranging from Greco-Roman lit to Egyptian stuff.

Most of the rest of this is just you whining without substance. Just to pick a few fleas off it:

This is all hogwash and it is absolutely correct to generally state that the goal of Buddhism is to be free from “sin” in the western sense and selfishness; this parallels Jesus prerequisite about his followers hating their family and their own lives

Hey stupid...do you know how many religions and philosophers have "being free from sin" as their goal? Gee, darn, and I know you were looking for one that didn't have that as a goal. Try the Fundy Latter Day Saints. And that stuff re hate of family and lives? News flash:

Now let's move into some secular works with the same sort of hyperbolic language. Fitzmeyer's Lukan commentary offers this example from Poimandes 4:6:

If you do not hate your body first, O child, you will not be able to love yourself.

Would critics suppose that this teaches literal hatred of the physical body? It does not -- it emphasizes the need to give preference to the whole self before the body alone. Literal hate of the body would have us cutting it with razors or hitting it with blunt objects -- an extreme practiced in some Eastern faiths, but not among the Greeks.

Here is another example from a war song in the Poetae Lyrici Graeci (see James Denney, "The Word 'Hate' in Lk. 14:26," Expository Times 21, 41-42): it is said that in battle, men "must count his own life his enemy for the honor of Sparta" -- is this a literal hatred of one's own life being taught? No! It is emphasizing the need to make one's life secondary for Sparta's sake. Here's a final example from Epictetus 3.3.5: "The good is preferable to every intimate relation." This is just a more abstract version of Luke 14:26!

You're such a fraud, Hoppy. In fact everyone should see what a fraud you are:

http://www.aske-skeptics.org.uk/budd...ean_words.html

Even atheists agree this guy is a fruitcake. In any event I'll argue my own case, not Groothuis' or anyone else's. So quit spamming with walls of text no one cares about.

In 1804, after reading Asvaghosa’s Awakening of Faith, Dr. T Richard made the announcement “Mahayana Buddhism is embedded Christianity”

1804 WHAT THE HELL!!!! How about you give us a source that's from at least 1970, Hoppy? And by a credible scholar like Saloman? What's this "T. Richard" a doctor of? Underwater basket weaving?

Never mind -- "T. Richard" was nothing but a missionary. In other words a non-expert running his mouth. And by the way -- he also says that Buddhism and Christianity didn't borrow from each other. They got their stuff from a common source....

...Babylon.

Are outdated nutballs like these the best you can do, Hoppy?

When Hoppy gets back he can also explain why he's using a Holocaust denier like Lindtner as a source.

Just look at the kind of spam Hoppy leaves all over the place:

Thoams Paine said, “Those who advocate for a riged government and those who advocate for a liberal government are both mistake, for they presume to have powers they do not”

Besides to many weed was the original sacriment, consider HErodotus mentions how the Scythians thre bricks of weed over a fire and trapt themselves in the smoke with a tent. I have covered all of this in my book Father and Son, East is West, The Buddhist sources to Christianity and their influence on medieval myths; in short Herodotus mentions that the Scythians, or Saka, even the Goths, did not inhale the herb to “induce euphoria” (tell this to the judge). Simarly the Buddhist, strictly for medical reasons, were allowed to take a sana sauna ( sana being weed ) and although there is no mention of them smoking da herb, the monastic code mentions pipes and bongs used to smoke herbs for medical reasons.

Wow, did you type that while high, Hoppy?

[DanHopkins]

Thanks Abigail.

He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow living waters"-John 7:37

From his upper body proceeds a flame of fire, and from his lower proceeds a torrent of water-Patisambhida-maggo, but as usual this only seems to be the best known source and the alleged miricle appears in several other Pali suttas (also found in Sanskrit texts, Pratiharya sutra, and also in Asvaghosa's poetry).

Also you should know that the phrasing "living waters" comes very close to "immortal drink" which is used to describe nirvana.

Also, John 8:34 "we have heard in the law that the Christ abideth till the end of the age"

Again, no Jewish source, many Buddhist sources mentioning that a saint could stay on earth till the end of the age"

Again, John quotes Buddhist scripture ""However, we know where this man comes from. When the Christ comes, no one will know where he is from" --John 7:27

A central point to the Lotus sutra is that none can know where Buddha originates from and a similar point is recycled throughout the Pali texts "" My doctrine is like unto water which cleanses all without distinction. My doctrine is like unto fire which consumes all things that exist between heaven and earth, great and small. My doctrine is like unto the heavens, for there is room in it, ample room for the reception of all, for men and women, boys and girls, the powerful and the lowly.
"But when I spoke, they knew me not and would say, 'Who may this be who thus speaks, a man or a god?' Then having instructed, quickened, and gladdened them with religious discourse, I would vanish away. But they knew me not, even when I vanished away."

[DanHopkins]

J P. You are all over the place! I know you must not have alot to do in your parents basement, but I suggest that we argue verse for verse so that you do not have the oppurtunity to wonder off topic.

After Jesus says he is the light of the world (said of Buddha before - so dippo lokassa nibbuta “The light of the world is exstinguished”, said at the Buddha’s paranibbana after the Buddha told Ananda and his monks “Be lights/islands to yourselves” In the Lalitavistara the Buddha is given the epithet ‘One whose light is infinite {apamanananta-rasmir}, another Buddha is called ‘Amitabha’ and, although there are several etymologies, ‘boundless light’ is the most obvious.)
Jesus says ”you are the salt of this earth, if that salt has lost its taste, how shall it be restored?”. Again, that theologians scramble for a Judaic source to this is typical, but what excuse does the scholar of comparative religion have for overlooking the Buddhist source to Jesus’ salt comparison? This is actually a main theme to the Nirvana sutra and, as always, showing its Buddhist source is the fact that the Buddhist case for salt being in everything is methodically argued for based on strictly Buddhist logic, and, that according to modern science salt cannot lose its flavor, which is a main point in the Nirvana sutra.

"O good man! The nature of salt is salty. It truly makes what is not salty [taste] salty. If there were already a salty nature in what is not salty, why would people continue to seek to possess salt? If there were no saltiness before, then that would be [a case of] what was not becoming so now. By the help of the [right] condition, we get saltiness. All things possess the nature of saltiness, but we do not feel this, on account of the smallness of the amount. This smallness in nature makes things salty. If there were not this salty nature, even salt could not bring forth [the quality of] saltiness.”
Also showing the Buddhist source is that in the pre-Christian Buddhist texts we find Buddha comparing his teaching to the taste of salt; “Just as the great ocean has one taste, the taste of salt, so does my teaching have the single taste of liberation” –Anguttaranikaya 8.19

Just as the previous quote implies the Buddhist distinguished between things that taste either salty, or non-salty, so do other suttas. Also in the same sutta we read the Buddha asking his disciple if a lump of salt in a cup would be drinkable. The disciple replies, “No”, and the Buddha asks him if that same lump of salt would be drinkable if tossed into a lake. The comparing of the saint with salt also takes us to the earliest Buddhism, such as in the Ghata sutta Sariputta says that he is like a pinch of salt compared to his good friend Mahamoggallana.


J P. You wrote that I was simple minded and that, regarding my quote above, "it's usually far more complex than that" -Now you tell me? You already agreed to these terms at your site where you slander Dr. Lindtner. I guess something so simple also took you a while to recognize. I urge viewers to visit that page and judge if the pre-Christian verse Sir WIlliam Jones offers to Christian missionaries in Asia, about forgiving your executioner, has its parallel in the gospels. ALso it has been shown that the Buddhist first preached the forgiving of sins and the idea that one could transfer merit to those weaker.

J P. Older scholars arguing for Christian borrowings often reminded us that there is nothing to directly parallel Jesus being impaled on a stake, or tree. Although all Buddhist texts have not been trans. into western languages Dr. Lindtner was the first to show the gospel dependency on the story of the first Gotama being impaled. The Christian Professor Zacharias P. Thundy studied the several texts with this story and found many other gospel parallels.

Abagail,

ALso wanted to let you know that the gospel of Thomas tells us Jesus said he started a fire and he is guarding it till it is great; Buddha also compares his gospel to a world consuming conflagration, or a holocaust.

Jesus comes from heaven with the angels of his power in flames of fire

[T-Shirt Ninja]

ALso wanted to let you know that the gospel of Thomas tells us Jesus said he started a fire and he is guarding it till it is great; Buddha also compares his gospel to a world consuming conflagration, or a holocaust.

Why are you using a text that's plainly heretical, gnostic, and rejected by the Christian church?

[DanHopkins]

Actually the Gospel ofThomas is not considered Gnostic, though it is sometimes called the Gnostic gospel of Thomas. The "Christian Church" that denied the gospel of Thomas was apart of later Christianity. Also, Buddha had a disciple who doubted his dhamma like Thomas the Twin, the doubting disciple of Buddha was also called "twin (Yamaka)"

[DanHopkins]

J P.
Regarding the paper you keep citing, which is a brief critique on a paper I sent to the author Mark Newbrook, in one instance I believe he misrepresented my claim as the paper is on the etymology to the word “God”, and who was first called “God”. I state that all other evidences are secondary to reconstructing the etymology of God. I originally told him that I myself had some doubt of my linguistic evidences and that his critique may help me view my materials more objectively. A few of his points may have merit and I tend to agree with him that some of my linguistic evidences are “massively overstated; though they are plausible and I myself state in the paper, which I should have made as half as long, that linguistic evidences should only be admitted when unique parallels are identified. If the Goths originally dwelt in central Asia and Odin was first their hero Guthan, and if we find innumerable traits of Guthan shared with Gotama, we may further consider GTHN to have first been GTMA and admit my Pali words in the Gothic language as secondary evidences supporting the etymology of “God” from “Gotama”.

also Jesus denies a drink twice and accepts the third, same with Buddha at his death. Jesus drinks "gall", no mystery why we have the wrong definition to 'gall', or Gr Khloe, i.e. gallcystis juice as found in the gallbladder, or urine, the only required Buddhist medicine was urine which is also reffered to as living waters and the Manichaeins also adopted this practice (Manchaeism in the later Roman Empire and medieval China, p.246) and the church fathers tell us Mani learned from a Buddas who, they claim, conversed with the apostles, and held Jesus to be a phantom (Mahayanists said Buddha was a phantom).

[jpholding]

From his upper body proceeds a flame of fire, and from his lower proceeds a torrent of water-Patisambhida-maggo, but as usual this only seems to be the best known source and the alleged miricle appears in several other Pali suttas (also found in Sanskrit texts, Pratiharya sutra, and also in Asvaghosa's poetry).

That's not a citation, monkey boy. Give us the NAME of the works or works, not some vague reference to various sutras, and give us the DATE of the work(s) and an argument FOR those dates. Do you have problems understanding your burden of proof here, or are you purposely not answering because you know you'll get your bottom tanned if you try?

Also you should know that the phrasing "living waters" comes very close to "immortal drink" which is used to describe nirvana.

How nice. Unfortunately, nirvana has zero to do with water imagery in Judaism as used for the Spirit of God as a personal and indwelling entity.

Also, John 8:34 "we have heard in the law that the Christ abideth till the end of the age"

I have heard that Hoppy can't quote well. John 8:34 is, "Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin." That's John 12:34, you're quoting, moron, and the word used for "law" means any custom or tradition, and there is a clear tradition in Judaism of an everlasting Messiah, as Witherington again notes (Ps. Sol. 17:4, Sib. Or. 3:49-50, 1 Enoch49:1, 62:14). Get with the scholarly program and stop smoking the ganja wrapped in 19th century fruitcakes.

Again, John quotes Buddhist scripture ""However, we know where this man comes from. When the Christ comes, no one will know where he is from" --John 7:27

Horse hockey. This an attested belief of the Jews as well; it's found reflected in Justin's Dialogue with Trypho. Reason: Because place of origin was thought to reflect something about personality, it was assumed the Messiah could not have a known origin from some human locale. Your quite from that sutra doesn't reflect any such concern of a collectivist society and in fact doesn't even come close as a parallel.

Seriously, Hoppy...get off the weed.

[jpholding]

J P. You are all over the place!

Yes, that usually happens when I deliver a beating to a monkey boy like you.

I know you must not have alot to do in your parents basement

No basements in Florida, monkey boy.

After Jesus says he is the light of the world (said of Buddha before - [FONT=Aparajita]so dippo lokassa nibbuta “The light of the world is exstinguished”, said at the

Better explanation: "Light" is a universal metaphor for enlightenment and wisdom, used by a wide variety of cultures and in a wide variety of thematic ways. But no, according to Hoppy, when Dagwood Bumstead gets a light bulb over his head to signify he has an idea for a new sandwich, it's a copy of Buddha!

Jesus says ”you are the salt of this earth, if that salt has lost its taste, how shall it be restored?”. Again, that theologians scramble for a Judaic source to this is typical,

No need to scramble. Keener, Matthew commentary: Salt was used as an image of the law by the rabbis.

but what excuse does the scholar of comparative religion have for overlooking the Buddhist source to Jesus’ salt comparison?

Uh, because monkey boys like you can't show that it should pre-date Christianity with a real argument involving hard evidence like manuscripts.

that according to modern science salt cannot lose its flavor,

Epic fail on your part again, monkey boy:

Allen notes Matthew 5:13 -- "You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again?" Allen found this puzzling, so he wrote to various salt companies and asked them whether salt ever lost its flavor. They assured him that it didn't, so Allen put down Jesus here for an error.

Rather than writing to salt companies, Allen should have picked up a commentary or a Greek concordance. The word here is moraino, meaning "to become insipid". In the context of this verse, it refers to believers being the "salt" of the world. Now believers themselves won't lose their "saltiness" except in one way - by becoming like the world. Hence, if Allen wanted to know how salt "loses" its savor, the answer is by contamination.
Salt of the Sea

In addition, Dead Sea salt, unlike our modern, refined table salt, does lose its flavor. A reader noted that the explanation may be that "ancient 'salt' wasn't pure sodium chloride, but NaCl mixed with other rock and mineral matter; if it was allowed to get moist, the NaCl would dissolve out and leave behind a pile of tasteless dirt. Thus, in order for the salt to preserve its savor, 'the world' had to be kept out of it."

It is also noteworthy that in context, this isn't salt used for consumption in the first place. Malina and Rohrbaugh note [Social-Science Commentary, 50] that the "earth" here alludes to an earthen oven outside the house which was used to bake, and had a dung heap nearby; the dung was used as fuel and was salted to use as a catalyst to make the dung burn. The reference is to salt that is so exhausted that it no longer makes the dung burn -- not to how tasty the salt is.

So, actually, the point is NOT the same as your silly little Buddha parallel, even if you do manage to show us evidence for an earlier date.

Also showing the Buddhist source is that in the pre-Christian Buddhist texts we find Buddha comparing his teaching to the taste of salt; “Just as the great ocean has one taste, the taste of salt, so does my teaching have the single taste of liberation” –Anguttaranikaya 8.19

Monkey boy, I'm going to run your face in the banana mush again: PROVE THAT IT IS PRE-CHRISTIAN. I looked into these documents, and you don't have a case whatsoever.

News flash: I've rebutted Viklund's crap already. And you're just a fraud copying him and Nazi Boy Lindtner uncriticially.

[jpholding]

J P. Older scholars arguing for Christian borrowings often reminded us that there is nothing to directly parallel Jesus being impaled on a stake, or tree. Although all Buddhist texts have not been trans. into western languages Dr. Lindtner was the first to show the gospel dependency on the story of the first Gotama being impaled. The Christian Professor Zacharias P. Thundy studied the several texts with this story and found many other gospel parallels.

You keep citing texts and calling them pre-Christian, monkey boy, but we never see an ounce of argument from you about this, and here you go again relying on fruitcakes like Nazi Boy Lindtner and Dumbbell Thundy, who is about as enlightened as a cement block:

http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/201...ightening.html

Is there ANY chance you can get any support from credible scholars like Richard Saloman or Chun-Fang Yu?

This is hilarious -- you keep opening new cans of worms each time I shove the old ones down your gullet.