To think that jesus went to India etc wont stand up to scrutiny ,the new testament has been scrutinised throughout history and would have been torn down easily by its detractors long before now. Fact is there is no more reliable book of antiquity
Bowral has not even read every book from antiquity so how could Bowral & Director make such a claim? a tree is known by its fruit
1. no account of Jesus is given in the Bible from 12 years old to 30 years old. therefore, it is possible & probable Jesus went to India because at that time Buddhism was the only world religion, which had spread throughout Persia, to Greece, Egypt, China & SE Asia. India was the centre of spiritual learning. Buddhism was respected, patronised & protected by Greek kings.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism
2. The Essenes existed in Israel, similar to Indian monks, without model in the Old Testament
3. The way of life Jesus & his apostles lived, wandering, living off the benevolence of others, has no model in the Old Testament & is that of the Indian ascetic, be it Hindu, Buddhist or Jain
4. The Bible is a book of a faith, preserved by its adherents. It certainly would not have been "torn down" by its detractors. What a ludicrous statement! Unlike today, its detractors did not simply go to the corner book store & buy a copy. Further, once Rome become Christian, the Bible has been protected ever since.
5. it is impossible the Bible is the most reliable book in antiquity because the Bible, particularly the NT, is often written in the language of metaphor.
6. The birth story of Jesus is similar to many birth stories. For example, Buddha taught a new born child has no mental conception of "self". Yet the Buddhist scriptures say Buddha's mother was impregnated during a time she did not have sex & when Buddha was born he declared: "I am the greatest in the world". The Buddhist scriptures abound with mythological stories despite the preservation of the essential teachings which are infinitely more well preserved than the story of Jesus, which is very brief.
So, Bowral's claims cannot be upheld.
The Buddhist scriptures & the Koran would be far more reliable than the Gospels, which is just two short stories that could fit into a Reader's Digest, which they turned into four Gospels in an attempt to add some clout
