The whole deal with Jesus and the Crucifixion had all to do with his actually birthday, not if he ever lived or not. There is plenty of collaborating evidence. You can start by looking in the Koran of all places, because they talk about him there. Koran also contains the “Book of Mary” which is conveniently missing from the New Testament (wonder why?) Addittionally, the Koran (chapter 4 entitled Women) specifies that Jesus did not die, but his was represeneted by one in his likeness who was crucified.

In Hebrew rites and rituals, resurrection (symbolically) is rite to undo an “Excommunication.”

Also in Hebrew tradition, sex between husband and wife occurs in December. That means you would be around harvest time in September or early October. Jesus’ Actually birthday is January 7th, sometime between 4 and 7 BC. (the reason no one can agree on the year is an entirely separate discussion) The Vatican quietly celebrates January 7th, even though Constantine the Great (and self proclaim Apostle) change the date to the Winter Solstice (now observed as Dec. 25). What Constantine did was no big deal in the contemporary world, George Washington, The Queen, etc.. none actually celebrates there birthday on the actually day, instead it is changed to a more covenant day to coincide with more important social customs and events . However, for hard core orthodox Hebrew of the old days (and even now) the heir of King David, first son of Joseph needs to be born in the most holy and correct month of September. Jesus was of course, not born in September however, his brother James was born in September, so started the forever Hebrew argument on who was the “actual” king under the law. Proclaiming Jesus the Christ (king)! Met you are acknowledging Jesus as the rightful heir. Most Hellenistic Jews did acknowledge Jesus however, the more traditional and orthodox Pharisees had a major problem with it. (Peter and Paul were converted Pharisees) Pharisees could be compared to the Mennonites of Christian faith. This situation became desperate in 26AD (Jesus would be around 29-32) when Joseph died. Logically, Jesus, as the rightful king, started his ministry of the Jewish Faith acting officially as the David (title of the King) Hence the subsequent polarization and persecution. However, since the Magi confirmed Jesus birth happened under the symbolic alignment of the planets (as predicted in the old testament, sign of the Star of the King –Star of David- will signal the birth of the Messiah and he will reign supreme). The Messiah, is actually, the Priest King, in one person, where as normally, there is the David and the Zodak (high priest) who rule separately. John the Baptist was in fact the Zodak of Jesus’ reign. He died, Judas Iscariot (7th Demon priest and Chief Scribe of the Temple) wanted to be Zodak, but Simon Zealots was next in line. Simon was excommunicated by the Temple Council but Jesus, claiming his rite as the David, resurrected him, putting him back in contention. A lot of other priest were also attempting to be the Zodak, and Jesus complicated things by claiming he was the Messiah! Which met he was both Priest and King, AKA the Fisher King. Technically, under the law, Jesus has a very good case, and the Magi Astronomers, as a third party, were collaborating Jesus’ claim. However, before Jesus could be official, he would have to complete several test, all of which are discussed in the New Testament, which culminate to a ritual (symbolic) crucifixion then rising from the dead in 3 days.


[Edited on 22-4-2004 by Keena]

Originally posted by worldwatcher
after watching "Quest for Truth" on TLC or was it Discovery...

I remember the program. The part that settled it for me was the demonstration. They put paint on the face of a bust, then wrapped it in linen. When the shroud was unwrapped the image was distorted and hardly recognizable. The only way they could duplicate results similar to the shroud was through either making a stamp or the photographic process mentioned previously.

I watched a show on PBS which supported the photograph theory. They performed a test:

This theory concludes that the raw materials to produce photography not only existed inmedieval times, but that a medieval photographer created a light sensitive emulsion,coated it onto linen cloth and "exposed" this medieval "film" using a room sized cameraobscura and a dead body hanging in front of its crystal lens as the subject matter.1He goes on to claim that one half of the Shroud image was exposed at a time, first theventral and then the dorsal half. He further concludes that it would take about four daysto properly expose each half of the cloth, needing at least eight days to complete theentire task. Recently, he modified his theory to include a third exposure for the face,made with a different lens.2To prevent the decay of the body during more than a week ofexposure to the bright sunlight necessary for adequate exposure of the "film," Allensuggests that the camera obscura was located in a cold climate.
(From www.shroud.com/pdfs/orvieto.pdf)