And, if you've ever read the "essene" gospels (or the more contemporary lost and hidden texts, like the dead sea scrolls, not the later versions or books written or added 100, 200, 300 years later, that constantine included, or excluded at the counsel of nicaea in 325) like siddhartha, jesus did not call himself "the" son of god, but "a" son of god. nor did he say "i" am the way, the truth, and the light. he supposedly said that he was offering "a" way, to the truth, and the "life", not light.

By the way, the actual title of this BBC documentary was "Did Jesus Really Die On The Cross", not what some subsequent sharer of the video changed the title to "jesus was a buddhist monk". i added that as a question, with other questions raised during this 49 minute video.

As for the jews killing jesus, a professional soldier would know exactly how to kill a man with one stab of a spear. therefore, he would also know how to stab a man with a spear, and not kill him. so, it's possible the jewish people were in on it, to make it look like they killed their king, in order for him to survive the ordeal, and hours later, or days later, escape the romans tyranny. of the 3 supposed public executions, the other 2 had their legs broken. which causes the outstretched arms to lead to suffocation, with the compression of the lungs. jesus legs were not broken. so, he was unlikely dead in only a few hours, as described in the text. later he was treated with aloes, and herbs, in the cave. which are medical treatments, not funerary rituals.

While i appreciate the comments, did you watch the video. it's an interesting academic approach to some of the unanswered questions. most of which would be considered heresy by christians, and or the church. for example there were 4 gospels about jesus, but only 2 of them were written by people who could have even been there, at the time. and, even in the oldest, or more contemporary gospel, by mark, there was no resurrection story, whatsoever. likewise the accession, like many of the other books, was written or added at least 100 years later. in other words, he was just a man. a radical, a leader, a teacher, and possibly or probably a healer. but, not god, or gods son. and he may, or may not have died on the cross. but, there was no resurrection. let alone an ascension. which was a political fiction. created, used, and exploited by the romans, as so called proof of jesus divinity. thus making christianity the the only path to god. it's the biggest "big lie". plus, his formative years were possibly spent in kashmir. which was relatively easy to reach, by the spice routes or silk routes, over land or sea. as was common. the 3 wise men were from the east. possibly looking for a reincarnated lama. and he may have returned to the east, for the second half of his life. so, it's possible, he was found by buddhists, taught by buddhists, and then returned to teach buddhism himself. in other words, for easter, the post is yet another fact check, that debunks the big lie, the myth of jesus as gods only son, with the power over life and death. and, if you've read other works, like the essene gospels, the people of the time had less and less vegetation, due to climate change, and they were eating more and more meat. before refrigeration. and they were eating more and more pork, in particular. so, their meat was possibly or likely infested with parasites. therefore, going to the river, to be baptized, was not simply some symbolic dipping of peoples heads in the water, to be cleansed, or reborn, but was possibly or more likely, about the using gourds to take enemas, which could explain the blind seeing again, and the crippled walking again, or jesus so called miracles. just like resuscitation, not resurrection, could be seen as, or misunderstood as, a miracle.

I don’t think the character described in the gospels had either the self-awareness or the philosophical sophistication to be a Buddhist.

Fictional characters can be anything you want them to be.