07-23-2006, 09:30 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Â Â * He abolished idolatry, was a "sower of the word," and preached "the establishment of a kingdom of righteousness."38d
  * Buddha was considered the "Good Shepherd"39, the "Carpenter"40, the "Infinite and Everlasting."40a
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While there is no doubt that Isaism has borrowed a lot from Buddhism, even in the above quote the Abrahamistic bias in interpretting things is seen. Buddha did not abolish "idolatory". In fact bauddhas like their AstIka cousins are worshipers of images. They worship images of the buddha, his bodily relics and so on.
Nor was the buddha caled a good Shepherd or carpenter anywhere, as Jesus is in the Isaistic texts. Given all the fudging that has gone on with early Christian history and its dates, there is more myth than history in all event concerning the life of Jesus. There is nothing unusual in this, and all other cultures tend to mix myth and history. But the real problem is the Abrahamistic insistence that this is the real history and important over all else. According to professional Israeli archaeologists themselves Joshiah onwards the kings of Israel, including Dawid, Solomon and the Maccabees were local rulers with no pan-Middle Eastern influence or even aspirations. So it is really tragic if ex-Hindus and other ex-heathens are now swearing by events and characters that has no connection to them geographically or otherwise.
  * Buddha was considered the "Good Shepherd"39, the "Carpenter"40, the "Infinite and Everlasting."40a
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While there is no doubt that Isaism has borrowed a lot from Buddhism, even in the above quote the Abrahamistic bias in interpretting things is seen. Buddha did not abolish "idolatory". In fact bauddhas like their AstIka cousins are worshipers of images. They worship images of the buddha, his bodily relics and so on.
Nor was the buddha caled a good Shepherd or carpenter anywhere, as Jesus is in the Isaistic texts. Given all the fudging that has gone on with early Christian history and its dates, there is more myth than history in all event concerning the life of Jesus. There is nothing unusual in this, and all other cultures tend to mix myth and history. But the real problem is the Abrahamistic insistence that this is the real history and important over all else. According to professional Israeli archaeologists themselves Joshiah onwards the kings of Israel, including Dawid, Solomon and the Maccabees were local rulers with no pan-Middle Eastern influence or even aspirations. So it is really tragic if ex-Hindus and other ex-heathens are now swearing by events and characters that has no connection to them geographically or otherwise.