It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9 things you think you know about Jesus that are probably wrong

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

It was a horrible way to die. More reasonable accounts in more modern films show Jesus carrying a cross-beam through the streets, which is then hoisted up onto the pole (or the "tree").

Nails through the hands wouldn't hold anyone up on anything for more than a few minutes. If He was nailed, it would have been through His wrists.

The important thing is the hanging suspended with the arms spread-eagle. That posture compresses the lungs when the person is too physically exhausted to hold themselves up any longer.

Cruxifiction is, in the end, a long death of slow asphyxiation. That's why the Romans broke the legs of the victims as well as stabbing them in the sides, so that they would die faster. An odd bit of "mercy" in the process.

And as usual when thinking about this garbage, I want to regurgitate now.




posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Rex282

He wasn't all that young when he died though, was he? Relatively speaking, considering the what the lifespans probably were in that era? There is scientific evidence for that bit, isn't there?

I would like suggestions on where to do more reading on this. But like you said, if billions can't agree, and if even the different Christian factions disagree among themselves...like, Gryph said, it's probably not going to happen. Shame too.

I still think the Vatican is hiding something about this.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 07:13 PM
link   
Considereing the source I would take what she says with a grain of salt.
a reply to: ~Lucidity



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Not sure if this is conspiracy or just folklore but thought it was interesting.


[Source]

Jesus has been described as the best known figure in history, and also the least known. If you mentioned the name “Jesus” and someone asked Jesus who, you might blink. Or laugh. Even people who don’t think Jesus was God mostly believe they know a fair bit about him. You might be surprised that some of your most basic assumptions about Jesus are probably wrong.

1. Married, not single.
2. Cropped hair, not long.
3. Hung on a pole, not necessarily a cross.
4. Short, not tall.
5. Born in a house, not a stable.
6. Named Joshua, not Jesus.
7. Number of apostles (12) from astrology, not history.
8. Prophecies recalled, not foretold.
9. Some Jesus quotes not from Jesus; others uncertain.

More to read at source. I've actually read quite a bit about the pole vs cross part and also lean toward the possibility that he was married and probably had children. Never heard of some of these others though.

Mythology? Just things getting changed up through time?


The biggest misconception is that he actually lived. There's not an iota of contemporaneous documentation (ie. historical evidence) proving that he lived.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   
This is like arguing about whether the hair on Frodo's feet was straight or curly. If you can't prove Jesus actually lived, the rest is moot. In fact, I think the rest is designed to distract you from noticing that there's no evidence that he lived.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

What are you arguing? The thread isn't about whether or not he existed or are you just trying to poke Christians again?

But yes weather he had long hair or not is pointless same with all the other points on the list. It really doesn't even matter if he was married. I think the message is the most important part not the features of his life.

And why would the Romans/Jews write anything down about a man they humiliated and mocked? To further unrest in the region? Jesus mostly associated with the poor who I'm sure the vast majority could not write



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 08:01 PM
link   
#10: He existed in the first place.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine
The biggest misconception is that he actually lived. There's not an iota of contemporaneous documentation (ie. historical evidence) proving that he lived.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
I do believe that one of the secrets the Vatican is guarding is the fact that they know who his direct descendants are and where they are.

Because maybe Lucidity is correct?

a reply to: Rex282


originally posted by: Rex282
If he knew he was going to die young it makes no sense to have wife and kids and leave them...

If I were in that position then I'd probably do what's necessary to keep my wife and children safe. Who knows, maybe Henry Tudor kept his son alive by sending him to America?


if they can’t even get the “name” right...

What's in a name?



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Jesus calls believers his bride? So his "bride" consists of not only males, but numerous males. Homosexuality?

He also calls many women his bride. Adultery? Yeah , the whole thing about the church being his bride doesn't make a whole lot of sense, both logically and theologically when you consider other doctrines of Christianity.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Joneselius

What you fail to notice is that the Bible is full of nonsense whereas science and history are generally not.
Jesus was married
He is coming back his bride ? really an earthly woman ?? A god ?
LOLOLOLOLOL
Christianity has by far done way more evil than good,
That s a fact
But I doubt you can question the Bible ,any certainly doubt you would put your faith aside and accept the facts



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Joneselius
You come into this thread hurling your Christian wrath around, and you're insulted? You're certainly spreading the love of god around, aren't you? I'm sure he's feeling so glorified right now by you.



It says IN the Bible that our saviour didn't have long hair as it was an abomination. Yet the Catholic church would have us believe he's this beautiful long haired man. This isn't a 'none known fact' it's common sense to those who KNOW the scripture.

There is no scripture anywhere that says Jesus had short hair. Nor does the bible say it was an abomination. I thought you knew scripture. And BTW, Samson had long hair.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: JDmOKI
a reply to: Tangerine

What are you arguing? The thread isn't about whether or not he existed or are you just trying to poke Christians again?

But yes weather he had long hair or not is pointless same with all the other points on the list. It really doesn't even matter if he was married. I think the message is the most important part not the features of his life.

And why would the Romans/Jews write anything down about a man they humiliated and mocked? To further unrest in the region? Jesus mostly associated with the poor who I'm sure the vast majority could not write


I know it's inconvenient for believers to have to face the fact that there's not an iota of contemporaneous documentation proving that Jesus lived. This thread is about things you think you know about Jesus that are wrong. What could possibly be more pertinent to this thread?



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Klassified




And BTW, Samson had long hair.


So did John The Baptist. And so did Paul, at one point, because even Paul took the long haired "Nazirite Oath"! LOL

Acts 18:18
Paul stayed on in Corinth for some time. Then he left the brothers and sisters and sailed for Syria, accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila. Before he sailed, he had his hair cut off at Cenchreae because of a vow he had taken.


edit on 27-2-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Not sure if this is conspiracy or just folklore but thought it was interesting.


[Source]

Jesus has been described as the best known figure in history, and also the least known. If you mentioned the name “Jesus” and someone asked Jesus who, you might blink. Or laugh. Even people who don’t think Jesus was God mostly believe they know a fair bit about him. You might be surprised that some of your most basic assumptions about Jesus are probably wrong.

1. Married, not single.
2. Cropped hair, not long.
3. Hung on a pole, not necessarily a cross.
4. Short, not tall.
5. Born in a house, not a stable.
6. Named Joshua, not Jesus.
7. Number of apostles (12) from astrology, not history.
8. Prophecies recalled, not foretold.
9. Some Jesus quotes not from Jesus; others uncertain.

More to read at source. I've actually read quite a bit about the pole vs cross part and also lean toward the possibility that he was married and probably had children. Never heard of some of these others though.

Mythology? Just things getting changed up through time?


The biggest misconception is that he actually lived. There's not an iota of contemporaneous documentation (ie. historical evidence) proving that he lived.



The biggest misconception is the idea that billions of people followed and believed Jesus' words at the time and thought it was worth scribing...
Followed by the misconception that everybody at the time was not only a scribe of some sort but also literate...
Followed by the ignorance to the fact that the Jews and Romans would not have destroyed anything pertaining to Jesus' Prophethood...

Given the era, the turmoil, and the outrage of the whole saga...
The "misconception" you're pushing on behalf of the ultra non-believers not only pales in comparison, but ignores everything that was happening at the time.

It's not a "misconception"...
It is just denial.



Edit: Beaten to the punch by JDmOKi... So the sense is common... I'm pleased!
edit on 27-2-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-2-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: RosaMaria


What you fail to notice is that the Bible is full of nonsense whereas science and history are generally not.




That's a good one!!!



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: windword
He probably didn't think of those, because he was too busy calling down fire from heaven on Lucidity and Gryphon. Heathens that they are.


More on topic though, and mentioned in the OP's article is Tammuz. Which I think should have been elaborated on more by the author.

Tammuz was a god of Assyria, Babylonia and Sumeria where he was known as Dumuzi. He is commemorated in the name of the month of June, Du’uzu, the fourth month of a year which begins at the spring equinox. The fullest history extant of this saviour is probably that of Ctesias (400 BC), author of Persika. The poet has perpetuated his memory in rhyme.

Trust, ye saints, your Lord restored,
Trust ye in your risen Lord;
For the pains which Tammuz endured
Our salvation have procured.

Tammuz was crucified as an atonement offering: “Trust ye in God, for out of his loins salvation has come unto us.” Julius Firmicus speaks of this God rising from the dead for the salvation of the world. This saviour which long preceded the advent of Christ, filled the same role in sacred history.

Also worth including would be Prometheus Circa 800BC...

With shackles and inescapable fetters Zeus riveted Prometheus on a pillar...

Lo! streaming from the fatal tree
His all atoning blood,
Is this the Infinite?—Yes, ’tis he,
Prometheus, and a god!

Well might the sun in darkness hide,
And veil his glories in,
When God, the great Prometheus, died
For man the creature’s sin.

Hmmm. That all sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Note: Ignore the Shakespeare style. Someone must have thought it would be amusing to leave the translation in KJV English.
edit on 2/27/2015 by Klassified because: eta

edit on 2/27/2015 by Klassified because: reword for clarity



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Not sure if this is conspiracy or just folklore but thought it was interesting.


[Source]

Jesus has been described as the best known figure in history, and also the least known. If you mentioned the name “Jesus” and someone asked Jesus who, you might blink. Or laugh. Even people who don’t think Jesus was God mostly believe they know a fair bit about him. You might be surprised that some of your most basic assumptions about Jesus are probably wrong.

1. Married, not single.
2. Cropped hair, not long.
3. Hung on a pole, not necessarily a cross.
4. Short, not tall.
5. Born in a house, not a stable.
6. Named Joshua, not Jesus.
7. Number of apostles (12) from astrology, not history.
8. Prophecies recalled, not foretold.
9. Some Jesus quotes not from Jesus; others uncertain.

More to read at source. I've actually read quite a bit about the pole vs cross part and also lean toward the possibility that he was married and probably had children. Never heard of some of these others though.

Mythology? Just things getting changed up through time?


The biggest misconception is that he actually lived. There's not an iota of contemporaneous documentation (ie. historical evidence) proving that he lived.



The biggest misconception is the idea that billions of people followed and believed Jesus' words at the time and thought it was worth scribing...
Followed by the misconception that everybody at the time was not only a scribe of some sort but also literate...
Followed by the ignorance to the fact that the Jews and Romans would not have destroyed anything pertaining to Jesus' Prophethood...

Given the era, the turmoil, and the outrage of the whole saga...
The "misconception" you're pushing on behalf of the ultra non-believers not only pales in comparison, but ignores everything that was happening at the time.

It's not a "misconception"...
It is just denial.



Edit: Beaten to the punch by JDmOKi... So the sense is common... I'm pleased!


Is that your argument in favor of Zeus and Gandalf having lived, too?



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 10:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Not sure if this is conspiracy or just folklore but thought it was interesting.


[Source]

Jesus has been described as the best known figure in history, and also the least known. If you mentioned the name “Jesus” and someone asked Jesus who, you might blink. Or laugh. Even people who don’t think Jesus was God mostly believe they know a fair bit about him. You might be surprised that some of your most basic assumptions about Jesus are probably wrong.

1. Married, not single.
2. Cropped hair, not long.
3. Hung on a pole, not necessarily a cross.
4. Short, not tall.
5. Born in a house, not a stable.
6. Named Joshua, not Jesus.
7. Number of apostles (12) from astrology, not history.
8. Prophecies recalled, not foretold.
9. Some Jesus quotes not from Jesus; others uncertain.

More to read at source. I've actually read quite a bit about the pole vs cross part and also lean toward the possibility that he was married and probably had children. Never heard of some of these others though.

Mythology? Just things getting changed up through time?


The biggest misconception is that he actually lived. There's not an iota of contemporaneous documentation (ie. historical evidence) proving that he lived.


There is no evidence that these folk lived either.
King Arthur
Pythagoras
John Henry
Homer
Robin Hood
Lycurgus



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

I take it you don't have a decent rebuttal to the three misconceptions I offered to explain your doubts about Jesus having lived?


You may as well have not responded...

But a sly dig in the absence of logic is always welcome!



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine


I know it's inconvenient for believers to have to face the fact that there's not an iota of contemporaneous documentation proving that Jesus lived.

It's much more convenient to say he didn't, life would be easier that way. Wouldn't you say?

I reckon nobody wrote this down either, but it don't mean it ain't true...


originally posted by: VigiliaProcuratio

Who knows, maybe Henry Tudor kept his son alive by sending him to America?
 
edit on 27-2-2015 by VigiliaProcuratio because:  



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join