Is Buddhism so dogmatic there is no shades of grey or possibilities of grey areas? Any input here?
In a way, there is no such thing as "Buddhism"--there are only a great variety of Buddhists. If Buddhism makes you wiser, kinder, and more open-minded, then I guess that's the main thing. (It can be hard finding a whole group like that, I know.)
Although I understand what you're saying, Tewi, to a degree, and appreciate the sentiment in which I think you said it--I will disagree. For, if there were no such "thing" as Buddhism (on the conventional level of appearances, mind you, where we will be able to discuss such things), then anyone could call themselves a Buddhist. Right? I mean, there are some criteria by which we can identify Buddhists--and we can discuss those criteria, of course--see the Steven Batchelor "Buddhism Without Beliefs" thread for examples--but there are lines to be drawn.
On a very basic level, Buddhism has distinguishing characteristics which set it apart from other Religious Traditions. First, whether or not Buddhists are theists--some are, some are not, and there are shades of grey -no Buddhist subscribes to the notion of a Creator God, who is singular, All-Powerful, Etc, and especially, Salvific. This basic characteristic distinguishes Buddhists from followers or adherents of Monotheistic religious traditions. Further, whatever "Jesus," the historical person, preached or believed, the mainstream teachings of all the Christian sects agree that Jesus was the "Son of God," and the prophet of God. "Jesus," regardless of who he REALLY was, has become symbolic. I think the definition of a Christian, simply stated, is someone who believes that "accepting Jesus" as savior is a defining factor, no matter what the sect. These views are, frankly, antithetical to the VAST majority of Buddhists, of whatever sect. There are a multitude of other factors, issues, and examples that we could discuss, but I don't think "compare and contrast" is really the function of Dharma Wheel, or of this thread. For the record, though, the Four Noble Truths, D.O., and the Truth of Enlightenment of the Buddha, are issues on which all Buddhists are pretty much in agreement. Rebirth, too, despite what Batchelor and his supporters would claim.
So, no, Jesus was not a Buddhist. Even if he were familiar with Buddhism, even if he studied Buddhism, he did not teach Buddhism, and there is no evidence whatsoever that he practiced Buddhism. Wishing does not make it so.