/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>Their life story may have been based on the life of the Gautama Buddha.

>Their life story may have been based

>Their life story may

>may

As always, OP is a fag.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Manichaeism.html

>>741867

>may have been based on Buddha

>"Goyim these stories are similar, just like Jesus and (insert pagan god here), I guess this proves Christianity is wrong and you should go live as a degenerate"

>>741880

No ones saying that in this thread, it's actually the other away around.

>>741889

It's obvious that it is the spirit of Anti-Christ. The whole end time purpose for Satan is to make people believe everything is universal so they will accept the Abomination of Desolation and turn from the true Christ.

>>741876

>may means it's not

Do you speak English?

>>741889

There literally is no proof that St. Josaphat is Buddha, deal with it.

>>741911

>may means it is

Do you?

>>741915

>no proof

<Ioasaph (Georgian Iodasaph, Arabic Yūdhasaf or Būdhasaf) is derived from the Sanskrit Bodhisattva.[4][5][12] The Sanskrit word was changed to Bodisav in Persian texts in the 6th or 7th century, then to Budhasaf or Yudasaf in an 8th-century Arabic document (possibly Arabic initial "b" ﺑ changed to "y" ﻳ by duplication of a dot in handwriting).[13] This became Iodasaph in Georgia in the 10th century, and that name was adapted as Ioasaph in Greece in the 11th century, and then was assimilated to Iosaphat/Josaphat in Latin.[14]

<The tale derives from a second to fourth century Sanskrit Mahayana Buddhist text, via a Manichaean version, then the Arabic Kitab Bilawhar wa-Yudasaf (Book of Bilawhar and Yudasaf), current in Baghdad in the eighth century, from where it entered into Middle Eastern Christian circles before appearing in European versions. The two were entered in the Eastern Orthodox calendar with a feast-day on 26 August,[3] and in the Roman Martyrology in the Western Church as "Barlaam and Josaphat" on the date of 27 November.[4]

>>741917

You call that "proof"?

>>741918

Ok keep moving the goal post.

>>741919

I ask for proof and you give me some convoluted story translated several times over from a non-Christian source and that's supposed to be proof that Buddha is a Christian saint. Go home.

>>741922

>moving the goal post

>personal incredulity

Logical fallacy the post.

>>741923

There is literally no proof that Buddha is a Christian saint, stay mad.

>>741924

>i have no argument the post

>>741925

Buddha is not, was not, and never will be a Christian saint. This makes you buttmad, that's ok though, God still loves you even though you hate Him.

>>741928

no u

>>741940

no u

>>741948

Baby's first insult.

>>741951

no u

>>741953

Why are you tagging me? I thought that was another anon? People would never ip Switch…right…. right? Oh well.

>>741953

No u.

>>741867

Man, even the Catholic Encyclopedia knew this.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encyclopedia_(1913)/Barlaam_and_Josaphat

>>741867

They were never officially canonized and are just stories Christians thought were true and these stories just happened to be loosely based off of the buddha. Buddha is (most likely) not in heaven and Josaphat isnt a saint.

>>741893

Which is funny, because all Satan needs people to do is sin without repenting, and they'll be judged accordingly by Christ.

>legendary "saints" are now real people

Just.

And btw Buddha is very very likely in hell unless he had some last minute repentance.

>>741876

This. Faggotry is a sin OP, repent now.

>>741867

So why would Buddha be split in two?

Language explanation like this >>741917 is not proof but conjecture.

Medieval Christians had news of Buddha, yet nobody did the connection, I wonder why? Marco Polo in his book mentioned Buddha but no one made the connection even though Polo's book was widespread.

St.Clemens of Alexandria and St.Hyppolitus of Rome in their books mention the religions of India, including the religion of "Butta", yet no one reading them made any connection to Barlaam and Josaphat.

In the age of discoveries the portuguese established trade in India, and other nations did the same later, yet no one made the connection.

It's only with skeptical criticism in the 19th century someone said "oh this is Buddha, not a christian".

>this thread after I posted about meditation

Just to be clear, these are two different OPs.

Apart from the childlike fighting derailing the thread, I'm actually curious to discuss this, no I don't think he is a saint, but the legend in question could be based off his story.

I'm curious if anyone around actually knows the legend of buddha, what it was about and what his teachings were.