5 Real Deleted Bible Scenes In Which Jesus Kicks Some Butt

Originally posted by eazyriderl_l
reply to post by Char-Lee

 

Im not so sure that is the case. Remember that there were taxes and tax men. Someone wanted a physical record of the money he was owed. They would be written records.

Some of the apostles were fishermen, yet they wrote letters to different cities, peoples and congregations. Some wrote epic poems. Us considering them illiterate and ignorant is both naive and arrogant.

Well that is the thing, fishermen would not have been able to read and write. Maybe Jesus taught them but he didn't have a lot of time. I would say they dictated it to some of the educated, that like you said included tax collectors so Paul (aka Saul of Tarsus) would have been able to read and write probably not just tally.

Remember all we have of their so called writings come from at least 70-100 years after Jesus dies.
The disciples would have been dead at the time the books with their names were written.

Originally posted by FrostForests
Lots of stories are....excluded from the modern interpretation of the bible.

I remember Glen Danzig talking about the incident where Jesus killed the boy in an interview, talking about a book in his collection.

I saw that interview and i am guessing so did someone at cracked.com.

Most likely the writers at cracked saw the youtube interview and said "hey we can make an article about that. we can add some drawings and everyone will laugh...ah ha ha ha...and we dont have to attibute anything to Glenn. Who will know?"

Who will know? We got Google too. According to Wikipedia it, superhero or bad boy Jesus, is a pseudepigraph.

Pseudepigraph

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by lobotomizemecapin
reply to post by chr0naut

 

Yss let me rephrase that... "excluded from the official story"

Written hundreds of years later by extremely unreliable sources = never part of the official story.

I think that if it wasn't written before AD 80, it was not written by eyewitnesses (even extremely long lived ones).

Before that time, quite possibly, but even then Paul, Peter and James in their letters note that there were others who were not eyewitnesses but were claiming all sorts of stuff just short decades after Jesus death & resurrection.

There were pseudo-Jews, gnostics, nicolitans, mithramists and all sorts early enough that they were included in the texts of the apostles letters. If you knew some of the issues (even only those recorded in the later books of the Bible) then you might have a clearer historical view and would understand that stuff written centuries later and that does not agree with anything else in the Bible is obvious fiction.

edit on 27/8/2012 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)

The sources of all the written texts are unreliable. Very little is truly known at all. I don't see how people can decide and pick and choose from ancient texts. The "church" choose what would back their belief system to pack into the "bible".

Actually, the lost years of Jesus' life are no longer a mystery.

According to Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal, you get the whole story.

Over a span of roughly twenty years, Joshua learns a great deal about human nature, world religions, and how he is able to translate those into his teachings. At each point, Joshua surpasses the abilities of the wise men by incorporating his own beliefs into theirs. The story takes a fantastical twist on Joshua's miracles as well: he learns to multiply food from one of the Wise Men and learns to become invisible from another; however, his ability to resurrect the dead figures strongly into his first meeting with Biff when both boys are six years old. Biff, for himself, is sarcastic, practical and endlessly loyal. While it would seem that such traits, as well as the fact that he was the Messiah's best friend for nearly thirty years, would ensure his place in the Gospels, there are reasons, as revealed in the final chapter, why Biff was essentially "cut out" of the story.

lamb


For the record, Cracked is a bit late on the humor and treading in already perfected territory.

The book can be found everywhere and it's hysterical.

and now, off to the humor section we go

Originally posted by borntowatch
One wonders what else you dismiss because it was written before your birth???

I dismiss anything that sounds like a myth, as probably a myth. I also wonder why not everyone does that.

Whether it was written before my birth or not is irrelevant. There are modern day myths too like this one:

Man goes without eating for 70 years

Thomas Jefferson even wrote a version of the bible which left out the supernatural stuff:

The Jefferson Bible, or The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth as it is formally titled, was a book constructed by Thomas Jefferson in the latter years of his life by cutting and pasting numerous sections from various Bibles as extractions of the doctrine of Jesus. Jefferson's composition excluded sections of the New Testament containing supernatural aspects....

I wonder why he did that?

Originally posted by chr0naut
Luke, himself, may not have been an apostle (he definitely was not one of the twelve disciples), but wrote so early and with so much technical detail (from a Greek physicians standpoint) that his testimony is not doubted.

Surely there must be some scholars who have some doubts? I think there are at least a few.

However I agree that the stories about the childhood of Jesus aren't considered historically accurate by scholars, and I'm not aware of any who feel otherwise.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by borntowatch
One wonders what else you dismiss because it was written before your birth???

I dismiss anything that sounds like a myth, as probably a myth. I also wonder why not everyone does that.

Whether it was written before my birth or not is irrelevant. There are modern day myths too like this one:

Man goes without eating for 70 years

Thomas Jefferson even wrote a version of the bible which left out the supernatural stuff:

The Jefferson Bible, or The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth as it is formally titled, was a book constructed by Thomas Jefferson in the latter years of his life by cutting and pasting numerous sections from various Bibles as extractions of the doctrine of Jesus. Jefferson's composition excluded sections of the New Testament containing supernatural aspects....

I wonder why he did that?

Originally posted by chr0naut
Luke, himself, may not have been an apostle (he definitely was not one of the twelve disciples), but wrote so early and with so much technical detail (from a Greek physicians standpoint) that his testimony is not doubted.

Surely there must be some scholars who have some doubts? I think there are at least a few.

However I agree that the stories about the childhood of Jesus aren't considered historically accurate by scholars, and I'm not aware of any who feel otherwise.

You can't really dismiss MYTH="Myths are stories that are based on tradition. Some may have factual origins, while others are completely fictional. "

www.pbs.org...
Realizing there is often some truth and some important messages preserved in myth.

Originally posted by Shadowcast
The bible was written edited and tailored for men. Whatever the "chosen" at Nicaea decided would be cannon was, little is mentioned abOut what didn't go into the book because not much is left, whatever they didn't like they burned. Check out the dead sea scrolls and the Gospel of Mary for some interesting tidbits.

The first council of Nicea was in 325 AD. That is, 325 years after Christ's birth. The Canon of the Bible was already decided well before then (the first "official canon was declared in 140 AD). If you search the Wikipedia entry for the Biblical canon you will find that the word Nicea does not occur. The reason is that no determination of the canon was done at either Council of Nicea.

The First Council of Nicea was also very well documented. It made no determinations about texts. It was convened due to concerns about some very specific heresies and to determine if, in fact, those ideas were heretical at all.

The outcome of the council was the Nicene Creed which clarified Christian belief to its simplest elements and so prevented it from being misconstrued.

Please read a little of the historical accounts prior to rehashing some shoddily researched Dan Brown fiction as if it were fact.

To some this post is funny, to others its blasphemy. But when the source of the info comes from cracked, well then i think im going to have to just belive this is 100% the truth and start preaching it on the streets! lol, great post op made my day!

Originally posted by skepticconwatcher

Originally posted by lobotomizemecapin
So I was reading this becasue I love cracked and found this a bit disturbing. I mean christians claim Jesus was without sin but this shows a different story.

I imagine that is why it was deleted from the bible

Maybe you should look up the word satire

.............and gullible.

My thoughts exactly

and from the comments section

I can't wait for your article on the prophet Muhammad and all his crazy adventures, www.cracked.com...

But of course this will never happen as it would be classed as hate speach

reply to post by reficul

the council of nicea is a good start!!!!!!!

The Council of Nicea? You mean the Council where the canon wasn't discussed at all and the Arian controversy was put to rest? Can you please explain to me how that has anything to do with the Bible itself?

reply to post by lobotomizemecapin


I am a Christian and am familiar with those old stories. The Nicene Council would have put a stop to this stuff. You can't believe everything you hear, unless you're the type who believe every article in gossip mags. However, the article is really funny. I laughed, which is something I haven't done for several days. I needed that!

> Christianity consisted of many sects. By converting Constantine > (The Great) the Paul heresy triumphed as the concept of trinity and the ending of the > Mosaic law (which made swine flesh permissible) brought this version of > Christianity very close to the Hellenic paganism that was practiced in Rome > and Greece. At Nicea Constantine had 300 versions of the Bible burnt, thus > legitimising and patronizing only the Paulic heresy.

reply to post by octotom


you mean this council?!!! where the roman overlords basterdized the true teaching of the christ,made a whole new religion,and made the christ a god?
well yes,i guess thats the one!

Also, we do know that there were many books of supposed prophets > floating around up until 312 CE when the Council of Nicea decided > which books were scripture and which ones were burned. Thanks to > the notorious habit of early Christian leaders of destroying > books/scrolls, we may never know what doctrine existed before the > Council of Nicea.

Originally posted by lobotomizemecapin
So I was reading this becasue I love cracked and found this a bit disturbing. I mean christians claim Jesus was without sin but this shows a different story.

I imagine that is why it was deleted from the bible

The fact that you believed this web site to be real or accurate in any way explains soooooo much about some of the post I have seen from you. That being said... Cracked.com is not a news site. You should not expect anything you read there to hold an ounce of truth, except in the same way a Comedian would tell you the truth to make a joke. Purposely over the top and exaggerated- and made for laughs.

Cracked.com is the most visited humor website in the world, with over 300 million monthly page views. The award-winning site was founded in 2007 by Jack O’Brien and is currently a property under Demand Media.

Originally posted by reficul

> Christianity consisted of many sects. By converting Constantine > (The Great) the Paul heresy triumphed as the concept of trinity and the ending of the > Mosaic law (which made swine flesh permissible) brought this version of > Christianity very close to the Hellenic paganism that was practiced in Rome > and Greece. At Nicea Constantine had 300 versions of the Bible burnt, thus > legitimising and patronizing only the Paulic heresy.

reply to post by octotom

 

you mean this council?!!! where the roman overlords basterdized the true teaching of the christ,made a whole new religion,and made the christ a god?
well yes,i guess thats the one!

Also, we do know that there were many books of supposed prophets > floating around up until 312 CE when the Council of Nicea decided > which books were scripture and which ones were burned. Thanks to > the notorious habit of early Christian leaders of destroying > books/scrolls, we may never know what doctrine existed before the > Council of Nicea.

Firstly, the concept of the trinity actually comes from the words of Christ, not of Paul. In the great commission, Christ said "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" [Mt 28:19].

Please also review these texts where the persons of the trinity are referred to as separate and which were not authored by Paul: [Mt 3:16–17], [Mk 1:10–11], [Luke 3:22 & 1:35], [John 1:32], [Heb 9:14] (note authorship of Hebrews may have been Paul but is unknown), [Acts 7:55] (written by Luke) and [Rev] (written by John).

Similarly, the Pauline writings are in full accord with the rest of scripture and therefore contain no heresies.

The only texts which Constantine burned, after the First Council of Nicea, were copies of the "Thalia", the text which Arius had outlined his defense of the Arian heresy. The first Nicean Council was convened explicitly to combat this heresy. No bibles or other documents were burned.

The Nicean council did NOT determine the canon of scripture.

The first "official" published canon of scripture was determined in 140 AD. The first Nicean Council was convened nearly 200 years later.

reply to post by chr0naut

Similarly, the Pauline writings are in full accord with the rest of scripture and therefore contain no heresies.

Really? I disagree. Here are few of the ones that bother me the most, but there are many more.

Jesus:

Matt.23
[9] And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.

Paul:

1Cor.4
[15] For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.

Jesus:

Matt.23
[8] But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren.

Paul:

Eph.4
[11] And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers,
1Tim.2
[7] For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.
2Tim.1
[11] For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher,

Jesus:

John.5
[24] Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

Paul:

Hebrews 9:27
And as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Jesus:

Matt.6
[14] For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you;
[15] but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Paul:

Eph.1
[7] In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace
Rom.4
[25] who was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification.

Jesus:

Luke.16
[15] But he said to them, You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts; for what is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God.
Luke.6
[26] Woe to you, when all men speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets.

Paul:

Rom.14
[18] he who thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men.
1Cor.10
[33] just as I try to please all men in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved.

Heresy! I say, Heresy!

reply to post by chr0naut


your just silly!!!! they pick 4 gospels and claim 'these are the true words of the christ',out of countless other gospels written in and around the same time as the '4'!!!! all ,at the earliest,70 years,and the others more like 120 years after christ died!!!!! and you expect me to believe they are accurate!!!!???
the authers of the gospels weren't even alive when christ was,even if they were,they were young children!!!
in todays courts,that would be called hearsay,and inadmissible!
well i heard that she heard that rumor has it that he did this ........ !
none of the christs followers even wrote down anything! never mind jesus himself!
but i find it odd that the romans wrote down EVERYTHING!!!!! from petty loans,to taxes paid all the way to,and after the council of nicea!!! they were good at deystroying other peoples belifs,and history as well.
i don't pretend to be christian,religious,or an expert.
but i do study history,and the history of rome,constantine,and their pathetic new religion they created to make the warring tribes of the middle east to fall in line for rome,so they could be controlled easier.
rome gave them freedom to believe in christ (god[!]) without being killed,or worse revolt against rome.
and rome made this new religion with lots of paganism in it for the romans to feel comfy too.
constantine had no choice,his empire was falling. 'sol invictus' indeed! invincible SUN! not son!
want a real hoot,see how the christians wrote their own history after rome fell,and up through the dark ages!!!
(oh i miss the inquisition so!!!) 'thou shall not suffer a witch to live!' (or an old lady that uses herbs to heal a wound,instead of the power of jesus--- she must be a witch! burn her!)
yes,history is written by the victors,but their is truth in there too.

Pope Leo X had confessed in the early sixteenth century that "It has served us well, this myth of Christ".55 Now that the myth was getting exploded, Pope Pius X condemned in 1907 the Modernists who "were working within the framework of the Church" and "an anti-Modernist oath was introduced in 1910".56 But that did not stop the Modernists. The last nail in the coffin which carried the Jesus of history was hammered home by Rudolf Bultmann, Professor in the Marburg University of Germany and acknowledged as the greatest New Testament theologian of the twentieth century. "I do indeed think," he concluded in 1958, "that we can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus, since the early Christian sources show no interest in either, are moreover fragmentary and legendary."57

reply to post by reficul


and just for a giggle, the actual quote says 'thou shall not suffer a poisoner to live" not 'witch'!!!
oh that sneaky roman church!

reply to post by windword


here here! excellent job! i wish these people would stop using the bible as a word for word 'this is actual history' book!
Paul was teaching his own version of christ's message,and NOT the law of moses!
acts 21-27-30.
even james,the head of the 'church' in jerusalem told him to purify him self for his sins a few times!

reply to post by MrWendal


Cracked.com does many real stories and puts a lot of it in a humorous light. so whats your point?

Originally posted by reficul
reply to post by chr0naut

 

your just silly!!!! they pick 4 gospels and claim 'these are the true words of the christ',out of countless other gospels written in and around the same time as the '4'!!!! all ,at the earliest,70 years,and the others more like 120 years after christ died!!!!! and you expect me to believe they are accurate!!!!???
the authers of the gospels weren't even alive when christ was,even if they were,they were young children!!!
in todays courts,that would be called hearsay,and inadmissible!
well i heard that she heard that rumor has it that he did this ........ !
none of the christs followers even wrote down anything! never mind jesus himself!
but i find it odd that the romans wrote down EVERYTHING!!!!! from petty loans,to taxes paid all the way to,and after the council of nicea!!! they were good at deystroying other peoples belifs,and history as well.
i don't pretend to be christian,religious,or an expert.
but i do study history,and the history of rome,constantine,and their pathetic new religion they created to make the warring tribes of the middle east to fall in line for rome,so they could be controlled easier.
rome gave them freedom to believe in christ (god[!]) without being killed,or worse revolt against rome.
and rome made this new religion with lots of paganism in it for the romans to feel comfy too.
constantine had no choice,his empire was falling. 'sol invictus' indeed! invincible SUN! not son!
want a real hoot,see how the christians wrote their own history after rome fell,and up through the dark ages!!!
(oh i miss the inquisition so!!!) 'thou shall not suffer a witch to live!' (or an old lady that uses herbs to heal a wound,instead of the power of jesus--- she must be a witch! burn her!)
yes,history is written by the victors,but their is truth in there too.

Pope Leo X had confessed in the early sixteenth century that "It has served us well, this myth of Christ".55 Now that the myth was getting exploded, Pope Pius X condemned in 1907 the Modernists who "were working within the framework of the Church" and "an anti-Modernist oath was introduced in 1910".56 But that did not stop the Modernists. The last nail in the coffin which carried the Jesus of history was hammered home by Rudolf Bultmann, Professor in the Marburg University of Germany and acknowledged as the greatest New Testament theologian of the twentieth century. "I do indeed think," he concluded in 1958, "that we can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus, since the early Christian sources show no interest in either, are moreover fragmentary and legendary."57

37 years after Jesus death, in March of 70 AD, Titus (who was later to be Roman Emperor), besieged Jerusalem for 7 months and it eventually fell to the Romans. In the process, the temple was burnt down and the Romans, not wanting to waste any of its riches, even dug up the foundations to get at any gold that may have melted into the cracks. Reports from eyewitnesses put the casualties at more than one million. It also put an end to the four year old Jewish Rebellion.

None of these gospel or letter writers seem to have noticed?

... or perhaps all these texts, included in the canon but who fail to mention it the fall of Jerusalem, were written before it happened. Which do you think is the most likely?

Paul himself was executed by the Romans in 65 AD, which means that even the stuff that he wrote had to have been complete before then (that implies that ALL the Pauline writings were completed less than 32 years after Jesus death).

Again, I'll restate that the only texts likely to have been written by eyewitnesses, had to have been written before 80 AD. The later ones are, most probably, junk. The only exception to this rule would have been works by the Apostle John, who we know died in Ephesus at the age of 106 (@ 100 AD).

Your dating of some canonical works at 120 years after Jesus death is highly suspect and does not accord with the facts. Perhaps you could refer to this link for the dating of the canonical gospels and letters.

Rudolf Bultmann may have been considered "ultra-grand-wizard-super-supreme" by his buddies back in '57 but we're in the 21st century now and few current theologians agree.