It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
That is a good thought but wouldn't that have been unlawful to Jewish custom? Not sure if that covers all of the dead or simply those who die upon a tree. I assume that some have died a natural death on Sabbath but don't know the procedure in that case.
Ah, I see you have learnt a new term. Arbitrary conjecture.
originally posted by: Collateral
I'm not a Christian, but I have a lot of time and respect for Jesus Christ & his teachings...
This theory would mean that Jesus essentially turned his back on all his own teachings but still allowed himself to be captured and crucified (though not killed).
Plus, most accounts have Judas as dead via suicide (hanging) or that Judas was the actual one who was crucified.
Utnapisjtim: I refer to the biblical accounts, where Judas is described as hanging himself, and apparently he later bursts open. The same thing (except the hanging part) later happens to Arius «Pope of Alexandria» and a few others during the controvercies leading up to the Nicea council.
originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: NOTurTypical
I know quite well what it is. I just fail to see how your remarks were relevant, I still fail to see that to be honest....
a reply to: SlapMonkey
What I find highly amusing to critics of posts like these is that they try to rationalise how or why it couldn't happen, yet readily accept that Jesus turned water into wine, or raised Lazarus from the dead, divided a small amount of fish and bread to feed thousands.
Because OP's or theories like this are purely arbitrary conjecture. The account in the Bible are not,
is a woman, and both her and Jesus, and even Judas, carry their tunics like Roman elites:
(a single collection of books put together nearly 2000 years ago and translated many times since)
The Lollard Bible was the first comprehensive English translation, produced late in the 14th century. It is associated with the movement of John Wycliffe, whose adherents were nicknamed Lollards "and were treated by the Church as heretics. John Wycliffe (c. 1328–1384) was himself responsible, though not necessarily as a translator, for the earlier version made from the Latin."
William Tyndale is credited with producing the first translation of the Pentateuch into English, directly from the Hebrew and Greek.
originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
In the famous motif below, the last supper scene, Peter, while holding a knife behind his back, asks Mary Magdalen AKA «the disciple whom Jesus loved» to ask Jesus who it is who will betray him. The story behind the picture is found in John 13.
“Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.”
“It is he to whom I will give this morsel of bread when I have dipped it.”
Now what exactly did Jesus dip his morsel into before giving it to Judas? I’ll explain by another word of Jesus: “Watch and beware of the leaven”
I believe Jesus dipped the bread in either A: Baking soda, or, B: Leaven, which explains why Jesus straight away orders Judas to do what he knows he has to do, and to do so quickly. I believe that something he urged Judas to do, was one out of two things:
A: If baking soda: Drink hydrated active carbon. Why? If Jesus dipped the bread in baking soda, the sodium bicarbonate would react with the acid in the stomach and start producing CO2, this is potentially life threatening. Baking soda was used in ancient Egypt and extracted from naturally mined natron, and active carbon was known and used by the Egyptians as early as 1500 BC.
B: If yeast: Drink vast amounts of liqueur. Why? If Jesus gave Judas a piece of sourdough or dipped unleavened bread into hydrated yeast large amounts of liqueur could cancel out the fermenting process, if you are quick and lucky enough to have liqueur. This is also a potentially lethal prank.
Unless he’d do so, worst case scenario would be to suffer a terrible death, and eventually, literally «burst asunder in the midst» to quote scripture. But as the story goes, only after he’d hanged himself, probably due to terrible pains and no hope in sight. I believe that when Judas realised what Jesus had done to him, he probably first tried to cure himself, but at some point he must have understood that he was unable to do so, and then summoned a Roman magistrate and had Jesus arrested.
Another person also ended his life in this exact same manner. Arius, presbyter in Alexandria, who said that «Jesus is more than man, but less than God, who existed before the Son» and was the primus motor of the «Arian controversy». Around the time of Nicea one Athanasius writes to one Serapion concerning the death of Arius:
While Eusebius and his fellows threatened, the Bishop prayed; but Arius, who had great confidence in Eusebius and his fellows, and talked very wildly, urged by the necessities of nature withdrew, and suddenly, in the language of Scripture, ‘falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst,’ and immediately expired as he lay, and was deprived both of communion and of his life together.
Source: Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Ser. II, Vol. IV: Athanasius: Select Works and Letters, full text at sacred-texts.com
I does sort of make sense...
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Utnapisjtim
Keep up the good work. Its not easy unraveling 1500 years of deception, kept tightly in check by those who would enslave humanity for their own temporal gains. The christian (Pauline based) apologists would keep mans soul enslaved till eternity.
Thank the gods we live in an information based society. Not one where the dogma is spoken and enforced by a central "pope" "bishop" or to all intents and purposes a temporal "god" sharing power with monarchy over humanities fate.