It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Crucifixion cover-up

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 12:14 PM
One of the Gnostic texts even makes the astounding claim that the man on the cross between the two thieves was not in fact Jesus, but Simon of Cyrene, acting as a remarkably generous stand-in. So instead of there being a conspiracy between Pharisees and Romans to get rid of Jesus, the conspirators were in fact Jesus and his own followers, staging a dramatic endgame scene to fool the onlookers. The Second Treatise Of The Great Seth has Jesus saying: "It was another, Simon, who bore the cross on his shoulder. It was another upon whom they placed the crown of thorns. But I was rejoicing in the height over ... their error ... And I was laughing at their ignorance."

The Gnostic Apocalypse Of Peter takes a slightly different line, claiming that while the crucifixion took place, it was only of a "Living Jesus", a kind of physi¬cal projection of the real, divine Jesus projected onto earth for the benefit of humanity, thus keeping the wicked flesh and pure spirit nicely separate, in the Docetic tradition. "He whom you see above the tree, glad and laughing, is the living Jesus", the Apocalypse of Peter adds. "But he into whose hands and feet they are driving the nails is his fleshy part, which is the substitute." This story seems to be the origin of a theory common in Muslim countries, and found in the tenth-century Quran commentary of Tabari, that a switch was made, and someone else was crucified in Jesus's place ( According to some Muslim traditions, the substitute was a disciple-volunteer; according to another it was a divine punishment for a would-be assassin; elsewhere it's said that God made all the disciples look the same as Jesus and the Romans crucified only one of them - which wasn't altogether cunning.

The Acts Of John - a Gnostic text which the fifth-century Pope, Leo the Great, wanted "not only forbidden, but entirely destroyed and burned with fire" - finds the bodily crucifixion and resurrection similarly distasteful. It argues that Jesus was a pure¬ly spiritual rather than a physical figure, whose appearance changed depending on who was looking at him. He was a man who left no footprints and who never blinked.

[edit on 7-4-2007 by cosmoglobe]

posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 12:43 PM
That would certainly throw all the dogma into chaos and breathe new meaning into a living Christ.

It wouldn't change the buoyant message in the gospels, or it's appeal to the heart of humanity as good news and a message of hope and justice.

That there is a kingdom of truth beyond this veil of tears and illusion that not only kings are privy to after dying.

That it's not the material riches alone that define the value of a man, but that there is a spiritual path we are all welcome to take and it requires nothing but to act out of love.

It's truly stunning how attached people get to dogma and how irrelevant it is, in the long run, to living a good life. Dogma takes all forms and shapes. Inculcated as it is into all manner of propaganda and political subterfuge.

It becomes an attachment to power and wealth. Good way to recognize when something is no longer working. When it pays off big time to people with more interest in perpetuating a status quo in order to maintain a position.

[edit on 7-4-2007 by clearwater]


log in