Negative Positive
Title: Unproducable Manuscripts may as well be imagined manuscripts
Review: Simply put, an unsubstantiated manuscript for which there is no evidence of it actually existing is not proof that Jesus was ever in India. The use of such material by actual historians would be considered poor research at best. The manuscripts themselves would be considered primary evidence, but since all they have is hearsay that they even exist, they are useless for anything more than speculation and conjecture. Moreover, if one reads the Bible closely, they know beyond the shadow of a doubt that Jesus did not and does not subscribe to Buddhist, Hindu, Confucian, or Taoist thoughts and ideas. He declared Himself to be God, not "a god", but the God in the flesh. Hindus believe that we are all god, and Buddhists believe similarly. One who is being honest should not ascribe what Jesus taught to any Eastern religious influence.
Is the review positive or negative? 