Jesus Christ Had Two Kids With A Prostitute, ‘Lost Gospel’ Claims

a reply to: daaskapital

Ah, a filmmaker is involved. Say no more.

To my mind it seems amusing that some of those that claimed Jesus never existed are the very ones now that picture Him as a scoundrel. Then I see the more clever stone throwers who use the academia as their weapon of destroying the name of Jesus. To these people I have a question.

In the arts of academia we have ancients such as Tacitus being taught to their students. Tacitus has only three sources of manuscripts of which all three are not original. Suetonius has Two hundred, Josephus has 133, Herodotus has seventy five, Thueydides has twenty and yet these are well respected and taught in higher learning centers.

Now let us look as the same method of source before they came to be bound into one work which we call the bible. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have over five thousand seven hundred manuscripts which contain some portion of the bible that we have today. Over two thousand manuscripts contain all of the NT that we have today. This does not include other outside manuscripts and writings from other ancient authors.

Yet these manuscripts are ignored and attacked as bogus trash. Outlawed from academia as laughable literature these four gospels are over two hundred times more available to the schools of higher learning than the short list that I have mentioned above. What if a critic would separate all four of the gospels and credit each on its own merit as literature? Well, that is never going to happen due to fact that the minds of academia have already been institutionalized by the schools of secularism.

Now we see one manuscript which is not even sustained by any reliable source and some ATS members will star themselves silly as the mentally challenged they seem to be. Amazing what people will believe without any foundation whatsoever. Regardless of what you believe or do not believe in the matter of afterlife, at least judge literature by its source.

It seems like this is mostly speculation based. The researcher claims that the names in the story were Joseph and his wife, but that it had "hidden meaning".

While the document is quite old no doubt, I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

a reply to: Seede

In the arts of academia we have ancients such as Tacitus being taught to their students. Tacitus has only three sources of manuscripts of which all three are not original. Suetonius has Two hundred, Josephus has 133, Herodotus has seventy five, Thueydides has twenty and yet these are well respected and taught in higher learning centers.

And yet not one of them mentions Jesus the Nazarene, or Jesus the son of Joseph!

Now let us look as the same method of source before they came to be bound into one work which we call the bible. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have over five thousand seven hundred manuscripts which contain some portion of the bible that we have today. Over two thousand manuscripts contain all of the NT that we have today. This does not include other outside manuscripts and writings from other ancient authors.

What if we applied that reasoning to every document and manuscript ever discovered and written about Zeus and Hercules or Isis and Osiris?

a reply to: MKMoniker

Ok I read through your third link after following your directions to get it to work and I had some issues with what it was saying. For one, it doesn't source any of its links. It seems all the links in the article self reference to other articles on the same web page. I'd like to know how the author came up with this story of Jesus surviving the crucification. I also notice that the author mentioned the Shroud of Turin, but the Shroud has been debunked as a forgery.

Somebody wrote it, so it must be true.

P.S. -- I'm a hyperintelligent chimpanzee who has learned to use the Internet.

a reply to: daaskapital

eats a piece of honeycomb, the angel tells her: ‘So now you have eaten the bread of life and drunk the cup of life.’

The parallels with Christian Holy Communion, according to Jacobovici, means that this is a ‘Christian text’.

There were other religions who had the same practices some much older.
Example

The Orphics (and the Dionysians) practiced the mystery of communion long before Jesus. They had sacramental communion with their god, Zagreus-Dionysus, who had suffered, died, and arose. Justin Martyr reported that they used wine and bread in their communion:

www.egodeath.com...

An inscription to Mithras reads: "He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation."

www.religioustolerance.org...

a reply to: daaskapital

'The Ecclesiastical History of Zacharias Rhetor (of Mytilene)', mentions the Book of Asneth (Asyath) on pages 11 and 15 here , doesn't have that much to say about it, so i cannot see the point in them tossing that work into the mix, except to demonstrate it was known at the time of his writing, and that it was written in Greek from the City of Rhesaina.

The origins then obscure but seemingly Greek, though a knowledgeable work as it incorporates quite a few traditions, including Inanna not wanting to marry a shepherd, as is the case with Aseneth;

And I did not know, wretch that I am, that he is thy son, O Lord; for they told me that Joseph was a shepherd's son from the land of Canaan, and I believed them; but I was wrong, and I despised Joseph, thine elect one, and I spoke evil to him, not knowing that he is thy son. For what man ever was so handsome and who else is as wise and strong as Joseph?

In the Sumerian version it is Utu the Sun that remonstrates with her;

"I am a woman and I won't do that, I won't! I am a star ......, and I won't! I won't be the wife of a shepherd!" Her brother, the warrior youth Utu, said to holy Inana:

"My sister, let the shepherd marry you! Maiden Inana, why are you unwilling? His butter is good, his milk is good -- all the work of the shepherd's hands is splendid. Inana, let Dumuzid marry you. You who wear jewellery, who wear cuba jewels, why are you unwilling?

In Joseph and Aseneth;

And lo, the heaven was torn open near the morning star and an indescribable light appeared. And Aseneth fell on her face upon the ashes; and there came to her a man from heaven and stood at her head

A

the problem with revealing that jesus had a bride (more to the point, had carnal relations with a human) reveals a much more prominent physicality to his incarnation, which undermines the strictly spiritual campaign he represented in times to follow. divine beings do not sully themselves with the flesh of mortals. feels more like projectionism than actual expertise if you ask me. people are more attracted to an aloof and condescending deity it would seem. "you are my pet not my friend"

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: daaskapital

If it's not about 2,000 years old, then it isn't reliable. This is later than anything written in the Bible, what took them so long to write this? It's interesting how some people quickly believe this stuff and don't find that suspicious at all.

Most books of the Bible are copies of others. We do not have really any New Testament books that are "2000 years old." Even the 4 gospels are copies of earlier texts, which virtually all scholars think were written decades or even 100 years after Jesus.

It is also important to recall that around the time of the Council of Nicea, scholars decided to only put texts into the canon that supported a divine, son of God Jesus, not the Arian or Gnostic views that were prevalent at the time. After this a massive campaign of censorship and suppression of all other texts and sects was executed by the Roman Empire and Church. Others were called heretics. Texts were burned or buried. People were killed.

We didn't discover the Gnostic texts in Egypt until this past century as a result...

Christianity is mostly an amalgamation of previous ideas and pagan cults.

So much so that one of the early Church fathers had to address such charges and said that Satan had created such pre-Christian cults to confuse people.

Right....

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: daaskapital

eats a piece of honeycomb, the angel tells her: ‘So now you have eaten the bread of life and drunk the cup of life.’

The parallels with Christian Holy Communion, according to Jacobovici, means that this is a ‘Christian text’.

There were other religions who had the same practices some much older.
Example

The Orphics (and the Dionysians) practiced the mystery of communion long before Jesus. They had sacramental communion with their god, Zagreus-Dionysus, who had suffered, died, and arose. Justin Martyr reported that they used wine and bread in their communion:

www.egodeath.com...

An inscription to Mithras reads: "He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation."

www.religioustolerance.org...

You forget that the Roman Empire and Church embarked on a major campaign to eradicate all teachings, sects, and writings of "heretics" and even general pagans. A convenient oversight, but not really rationale.

As to whether or not he existed, it is immaterial. He probably did. That says nothing about the veracity of Christian theology.

originally posted by: Seede
To my mind it seems amusing that some of those that claimed Jesus never existed are the very ones now that picture Him as a scoundrel. Then I see the more clever stone throwers who use the academia as their weapon of destroying the name of Jesus. To these people I have a question.

In the arts of academia we have ancients such as Tacitus being taught to their students. Tacitus has only three sources of manuscripts of which all three are not original. Suetonius has Two hundred, Josephus has 133, Herodotus has seventy five, Thueydides has twenty and yet these are well respected and taught in higher learning centers.

Now let us look as the same method of source before they came to be bound into one work which we call the bible. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have over five thousand seven hundred manuscripts which contain some portion of the bible that we have today. Over two thousand manuscripts contain all of the NT that we have today. This does not include other outside manuscripts and writings from other ancient authors.

Yet these manuscripts are ignored and attacked as bogus trash. Outlawed from academia as laughable literature these four gospels are over two hundred times more available to the schools of higher learning than the short list that I have mentioned above. What if a critic would separate all four of the gospels and credit each on its own merit as literature? Well, that is never going to happen due to fact that the minds of academia have already been institutionalized by the schools of secularism.

Now we see one manuscript which is not even sustained by any reliable source and some ATS members will star themselves silly as the mentally challenged they seem to be. Amazing what people will believe without any foundation whatsoever. Regardless of what you believe or do not believe in the matter of afterlife, at least judge literature by its source.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
Christianity is mostly an amalgamation of previous ideas and pagan cults.

So much so that one of the early Church fathers had to address such charges and said that Satan had created such pre-Christian cults to confuse people.

Right....

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: daaskapital

eats a piece of honeycomb, the angel tells her: ‘So now you have eaten the bread of life and drunk the cup of life.’

The parallels with Christian Holy Communion, according to Jacobovici, means that this is a ‘Christian text’.

There were other religions who had the same practices some much older.
Example

The Orphics (and the Dionysians) practiced the mystery of communion long before Jesus. They had sacramental communion with their god, Zagreus-Dionysus, who had suffered, died, and arose. Justin Martyr reported that they used wine and bread in their communion:

www.egodeath.com...

An inscription to Mithras reads: "He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation."

www.religioustolerance.org...

just like fossils right?

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Grimpachi

Actually having premarital sex or children out of wedlock was NOT against Judaic teachings. Pretty much all religious views having to do with premarital sex and children out of wedlock came after the year 1500 AD. The only problem with bastard children was they were not allowed inheritance and family lines did not flow through them.

These are the only sins that were viewed of sex. Anything else was invented by humans:

www.biblegateway.com...

There is nothing there about premarital sex or having children out of wedlock.

That is not true entirely. The old testament, if I am not mistaken, prescribes death for many sexual situations out of wedlock. For example, if a Jewish man tried to take an unmarried woman, and she didn't scream or alert people, she would be as guilty as him. Sentence was death.

A lot of cultures valued virginity and also chastity, for example in ancient India or others.

originally posted by: Seede
To my mind it seems amusing that some of those that claimed Jesus never existed are the very ones now that picture Him as a scoundrel. Then I see the more clever stone throwers who use the academia as their weapon of destroying the name of Jesus. To these people I have a question.

In the arts of academia we have ancients such as Tacitus being taught to their students. Tacitus has only three sources of manuscripts of which all three are not original. Suetonius has Two hundred, Josephus has 133, Herodotus has seventy five, Thueydides has twenty and yet these are well respected and taught in higher learning centers.

Now let us look as the same method of source before they came to be bound into one work which we call the bible. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have over five thousand seven hundred manuscripts which contain some portion of the bible that we have today. Over two thousand manuscripts contain all of the NT that we have today. This does not include other outside manuscripts and writings from other ancient authors.

Yet these manuscripts are ignored and attacked as bogus trash. Outlawed from academia as laughable literature these four gospels are over two hundred times more available to the schools of higher learning than the short list that I have mentioned above. What if a critic would separate all four of the gospels and credit each on its own merit as literature? Well, that is never going to happen due to fact that the minds of academia have already been institutionalized by the schools of secularism.

Now we see one manuscript which is not even sustained by any reliable source and some ATS members will star themselves silly as the mentally challenged they seem to be. Amazing what people will believe without any foundation whatsoever. Regardless of what you believe or do not believe in the matter of afterlife, at least judge literature by its source.

did tacitus claim to be the exclusive and direct son of god and promise eternal life for our eternal worship? i dont care if you are the world's most honest person, im not taking your word for it.

originally posted by: MKMoniker
a reply to: daaskapital

Well, this is all kinds of "messed up," but I'm sure the atheists are thrilled with this perversion of the Truth.

I'm highly skeptical of any "lost book of the Bible written 1,000 years after the fact." This sounds more like a deliberate attempt to deny Christianity its profound legitimacy - if not an outright hoax. (More Hitler Diaries, anyone?)

I'd be more inclined to believe the version that Christ survived the crucifixion, and moved to early France with Mary Magdalene, who was a prostitute who could never overcome her baser behavior. Christ loved her but ultimately left her. She stayed in France for awhile, and had a girl-child by the negro Saint Michael. (There is a church in France even today, with a statue of a mulatto girl labeled as the child of Mary Magdalene.)

Christ married a royal woman of early France and had a family. His descendents are thought to have been part of the later unifying royalty of the Merovingians (the long-haired kings).

The Knights Templars are said to have kept this super-secret of Christ's survival for centuries, bringing them great wealth - and causing their downfall when it resulted in their greed and corruption.

But a too-later, "lost gospel" claiming the Virgin Mary was really Christ's wife? Oh please ....

Eh, all of what you say is possible, but no more probable and probably lesser so than what this book says.

There is not much "profound legitimacy" left for Christianity. Theology is horrific.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
Christianity is mostly an amalgamation of previous ideas and pagan cults.

So much so that one of the early Church fathers had to address such charges and said that Satan had created such pre-Christian cults to confuse people.

Right....

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: daaskapital

eats a piece of honeycomb, the angel tells her: ‘So now you have eaten the bread of life and drunk the cup of life.’

The parallels with Christian Holy Communion, according to Jacobovici, means that this is a ‘Christian text’.

There were other religions who had the same practices some much older.
Example

The Orphics (and the Dionysians) practiced the mystery of communion long before Jesus. They had sacramental communion with their god, Zagreus-Dionysus, who had suffered, died, and arose. Justin Martyr reported that they used wine and bread in their communion:

www.egodeath.com...

An inscription to Mithras reads: "He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation."

www.religioustolerance.org...

just like fossils right?

Right, I've been told that to my face by evangelical relatives. "God put those dinosaur fossils to test our faith." I'm not sure which is worse, that claim, or the convoluted exposes by evangelicals trying to prove how dinosaurs walked with man, how radiocarbon dating is wrong, how the Grand Canyon was formed by the Flood, and so on.

Your vote?

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Seede
To my mind it seems amusing that some of those that claimed Jesus never existed are the very ones now that picture Him as a scoundrel. Then I see the more clever stone throwers who use the academia as their weapon of destroying the name of Jesus. To these people I have a question.

In the arts of academia we have ancients such as Tacitus being taught to their students. Tacitus has only three sources of manuscripts of which all three are not original. Suetonius has Two hundred, Josephus has 133, Herodotus has seventy five, Thueydides has twenty and yet these are well respected and taught in higher learning centers.

Now let us look as the same method of source before they came to be bound into one work which we call the bible. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have over five thousand seven hundred manuscripts which contain some portion of the bible that we have today. Over two thousand manuscripts contain all of the NT that we have today. This does not include other outside manuscripts and writings from other ancient authors.

Yet these manuscripts are ignored and attacked as bogus trash. Outlawed from academia as laughable literature these four gospels are over two hundred times more available to the schools of higher learning than the short list that I have mentioned above. What if a critic would separate all four of the gospels and credit each on its own merit as literature? Well, that is never going to happen due to fact that the minds of academia have already been institutionalized by the schools of secularism.

Now we see one manuscript which is not even sustained by any reliable source and some ATS members will star themselves silly as the mentally challenged they seem to be. Amazing what people will believe without any foundation whatsoever. Regardless of what you believe or do not believe in the matter of afterlife, at least judge literature by its source.

did tacitus claim to be the exclusive and direct son of god and promise eternal life for our eternal worship? i dont care if you are the world's most honest person, im not taking your word for it.

But, but, the New Testament says so!!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The story of Jesus surviving the crucification first surfaced as tied to the Guardians of this Secret - the Knights Templars - when I first read about it in the last century. They were VERY secretive, and still are in their current incarnation as Scottish Rite Freemasons. I tend to believe this version, but I have nowhere to point to for "absolute proof," beyond what I've posted.

Now the trail has been obscured by wild-goose-chases for the Holy Grail and the Ark of the Covenant, and the re-styling of Mary Magdalene. Although if someone has the money to travel, the proof might very well be in France.

And since churches were usually built upon previous churches, there might have been hidden or puzzling items found in ancient vaults that the new church officials would never throw away. And France hosts at least one Knights Templar Church, as well as an old monastery with secret services in a cave.

And the Shroud of Turin is NOT a forgery. It didn't wrap Jesus, but it DID wrap another highly-spiritual man killed in the Middle Ages.

And since this thread is morph'ing into the fallacy of "no proof of Jesus outside the Bible," here are tons of non-biblical, historical references to Jesus:

beginningandend.com...
HISTORICAL EVIDENCE FOR JESUS CHRIST

And most people miss one of the best references - Jesus is mentioned in the Koran as a True Prophet deserving respect. And, to bring this discussion full-cycle, the Koran even states that Jesus was "not killed by crucification":

en.wikipedia.org...
JESUS IN ISLAM
"According to the Quran, Jesus, although appearing to have been crucified, was not killed by crucifixion or by any other means; instead, "God raised him unto Himself". In the 19th Sura of the Quran (in verses 15 and 33), Jesus is blessed on "the day he was born and the day he will die and the day he is raised alive", which clearly declares that Jesus will or did experience a natural death, and will be raised again on the day of judgment or has already been raised."