8. Is it true that Jesus's teaching came from Hinduisme thinking and Buddhisme?
Yes clear untrue please! That was true was Jesus gave the teaching to us in the context Jewishness because Jesus was born, was educated and big in the Jewish environment. Did not gush out at all for Jesus to teach the East current other apart from Jewish teaching. Jesus only taught one matter that is God's Kingdom. All the matters that were sent by Jesus regarding the theme of God's Kingdom. I thought, both the Hinduisme teaching and Buddhisme were not linked with the theme that was sent Jesus Christ for the length of his work in the Israel-Palestine area. God's kingdom the Jewish version was different far with the Kingdom of gods Hindu; while with Buddhisme, I thought about being not any the big religion the other world that was the same as Buddhisme that did not know the concept of the Lord.
A. Relations with Hinduisme.
A lot of the other group that said that Jesus's teaching (or at least the Christian teaching) had many similarities with the Hinduisme teaching. I did not think too deep about this because although having the similarity but his difference really more often was felt. Apart from that was mentioned beforehand about so different him God's royal conception according to Jesus (or Jewish generally) with the Kingdom of gods Hindu, still many others that could be mentioned like Jesus's teaching (read: Christian) in no way left the tracks of the teaching about the caste like that was met in the Hinduisme teaching. The Christian trinity completely was different from Trimurti Hindu. In Trimurti, Brahman (the Lord of the Lord) had three (3) the main manifestation that is Brahma, Wisnu and Siwa in the function of the Creator, the Protector and the Vandal. In his manifestation, the three main gods could be worshipped separately. In his manifestation, the three main gods could be worshipped separately. The example: a person of Hindu could choose to worship the God Brahma, or the God Wisnu, or the God Siwa without worshipping the other god. Nevertheless, according to the person Hindu that not the form politheisme or the worship of the idol because of these gods was the manifestation of Brahman (the Lord of the Lord, Sang Hyang Widdhi). Likewise his matter with other gods apart from 3 main gods, like the God Surya, Bayu, Indra, Baruna, Ganesha, Dewi Durga, Saraswati et cetera. These gods and goddesses were the shape from the holy rays broadcast (div, from these words emerged the god's words) Brahman (that in the conviction samawi possibly was on a level with the angel or the angel's village chief) and could be worshipped separately that was symbolised by gods and goddesses's statues (pratima).
The Holy trinity was three hypostasis (I more chose to use the term hypostasis than the persona term to avoid confusion of the persona term/personal for God with the persona/personal humankind) that is God the Father, His Word (the Son) and Holy Spirit was something that was real, not only the function or the manifestation completely. Hypostasis-hypostasis could not be worshipped in a manner be separated-separated, because of God is only one, and the 3 hypostasis that was the existence azali from God's Ousia that one. A Christian only worshipped God (that in himself God the One and only this adhered His Word and His Holy Spirit in a lasting manner). This why all of the Christian Church refused to understand Arianisme the version of the Jehovah Witnesses and Christian Unitarian (for me, the Unitarian group far more dangerous because of their leading figures's skill −that in general people philosophic− far exceeded witnesses Yehuwa and also they appeared they as the group humanitarian not sectarian like the Jehovah Witnesses so as to be able to enter all the circles) that placed the Word of God (the Son) as the lower creature and outside God the Father where being during him when the Word of God (the Son) that was not yet available. Afterwards after the Word of God was available, he played a role as the intermediary (demiurgos) for God in the creation incident (creation). If the Christian Church followed the Arianisme concept as this just could be said had the similarity with Trimurti. But the Christian Church stated clearly and clearly his refusal of this Arius teaching went through the Nicea Council. This refusal was not based on thinking personally from the Church's fathers, but only stressed again the holy teaching that was accepted by the apostles from the Lord, afterwards it was continued was accepted by pupils of the apostles continually from the generation to the generation until this.
Charges of the Christian religion of taking the Hindu teaching were unfair (unjust), not only for Christian group but also Hindu group because of having the reaction of the defence from Christian group that in turn the reaction of this Christian group was rather excessive by mentioning the Hindu religion was politheisme or the idolator that definitely this was unjust for Hindu group because they understood the existence of these gods and goddesses not as the form politheisme or the worship of the idol.
