Using Einstein's Theory Can Jesus still be Physically Alive?

Einstein says that if you were to travel at almost the speed of light, the observer will age faster than the traveler. The bible says that the year of the Lord is a thousand years so therefore Jesus will return in 2 days his time.

Is it possible to calculate the speed or distance to equal 2days=1000 years earth time?

How far or fast would he have to travel to make that equation work?

Did he go into space? for the bible claims he ascended into the sky.
Was he an alien?
Is our home out there?



[edit on 13-9-2009 by CaptainAmerica2012]

Just like Mary Poppins, and bugs bunny... this fairy tale is not coming back, whether you wait a million minutes, or a million years.

If he hasn't bothered to show up for the massacre of hundreds of millions, if not billions of people over the last 2000 years, what would he show up for?

reply to post by CaptainAmerica2012


It really seems like if he looked like that, he would have faced a little more discrimination.

So for an example if your ship goes at 98% of the speed of light and you take a one year journey, when you return to Earth five years have gone by.

I found this here....

according to that formula....400 years at near light speed would need to be traveled...I suppose anywhere, really....to allow for 2000 earth years to have passed when you return....

Get a big map and draw a circle around about 195 light years....and pick a place....I hear Alpha Centauri is like 4 light years away...but he would be sitting around for a long time over there waiting to catch the next bus...

I hope he took some crosswords or something.

Alpha Centauri is the closest star system to the Solar System, being only 1.34 parsecs, or 4.37 light years away from our Sun.[9]

Source

Originally posted by king9072
Just like Mary Poppins, and bugs bunny... this fairy tale is not coming back, whether you wait a million minutes, or a million years.

If he hasn't bothered to show up for the massacre of hundreds of millions, if not billions of people over the last 2000 years, what would he show up for?

As I was able to figure out he is waiting for the end of a curse. Hosea 6 verses 1 and 2. The days mentioned are thousand year periods of time.

So inferring what the entire book of Hosea says then the 3rd thousand years are the day of Jezreel. Therefore he is scheduled to appear at the end of the 2 thousand years.

Best date I am able to figure out is the spring of 2029 is the last possible date for this day of Jezreel. But it could happen up to 10 years before that.

You asked.

Not that you're serious, but you're assuming that he just kept on traveling up?

He ascended into Heaven...he didn't embark on a space flight to the final frontier.

After he ascended, he was seated next to the Father...ten days later, he sent the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. Since then he sits on his throne, governing the Earth and shaping history. The atrocities you see, and the good things you see are serving his purposes in building his kingdom. (Even the braying from the atheists serve his purposes.)

He'll remain in Heaven until all his enemies have been made his footstool...so count on thousands more years until the Second Coming. (This assumes things chug along at the current rate...the subjugation of his enemies could be sped up, of course.) And yes...there will be millions more who die in brutal wars and destruction until things lighten up. He has a long...and I mean LOOONG...view of history. He's not coming back to rescue kittens from trees or even poor, starving children in Uganda from corrupt dictators. Good things are coming, but they arrive slowly over time.

if dr. who can do it, then its a fair bet JESUS told him how.
i reckon HE is already here,guaging public opinion from sites like this!
.........................love you jesus

Hi Praetorian Guard--

How does one 'ascend' into 'heaven' exactly? Like a hot air baloon, maybe?

Are you talking about a 'physical bodily' asension into a cloud such as what we read about in Luke (Acts chapter 1), or more of a spiritual leaving of the fleshy body behind?

What's the difference between an Ascension and an Assumption, exactly ? Did Elijah ascend or was he assumed? What about Mosheh? Do you take all those myths of ancient persons being lifted into the air as literal history?

Are you expecting people who live in the 21st centiry to take the American English words you used about 'Jeeezuzz' (Aram. 'R. Yeshu bar Yosef', the Galilean 'Nazir') literally about a dead seditionist (executed by crucifixion for armed sedition against Rome during Pesach at the 100th Anniversary Insurrection during the reigh of the Emperor Tiberius in 36 CE (counting 100 years, or 2 Jubilees from BCE 63 Pompey's occupation of Judaea) sitting on the right hand of some big clan-god in the sky, like YHWH the clan god of the Jews, waiting for some Zoroastrian End of days Judgement to separate the sheep from the goats at the blast of some Jewish 2nd Temple Shofar?

Or are you just being sarcastic?

The picture you've painted seems to reflect the jejune Weltanschauung of some 1st century illiterate Galilean fisherman, and not a 21st century modern scientific viewpoint, where the earth is no longer seen as a flat piece of realestate surrounded by a dome with fixed stars and moving planets and with various levels of 'heavens' some with water above them where angels can pop in and out at their whim.

Just what ARE you saying, exactly?

Originally posted by Sigismundus
How does one 'ascend' into 'heaven' exactly? Like a hot air baloon, maybe?

Are you talking about a 'physical bodily' asension into a cloud such as what we read about in Luke (Acts chapter 1), or more of a spiritual leaving of the fleshy body behind?

The Ascension was a physical lifting through the air until the cloud engulfed him. At that point, he physically appeared in Heaven and sat down next to the Father. The flesh was not shed, he's still incarnate.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
What's the difference between an Ascension and an Assumption, exactly ? Did Elijah ascend or was he assumed? What about Mosheh? Do you take all those myths of ancient persons being lifted into the air as literal history?

I believe Elijah and Enoch both ascended. Literal. Physical. And no death involved, apparently. Moses? Nothing in Scripture about that. It says he was buried when he died. Regarding myths...if there are non-biblical accounts of ascensions, I do not believe in those. I also do not believe the biblical accounts are myths. I believe they actually happened in time and space.

What's more, I believe that on the last day of human history, Jesus will raise everyone...believers and non-believers (including you) from the dead. The believers will then physically ascend into the physical air in their newly resurrected physical bodies to meet Jesus as he descends from Heaven to Earth. Then the judgment commences, but that's another discussion.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Are you expecting people who live in the 21st centiry to take the American English words you used about 'Jeeezuzz' (Aram. 'R. Yeshu bar Yosef', the Galilean 'Nazir') literally about a dead seditionist (executed by crucifixion for armed sedition against Rome during Pesach at the 100th Anniversary Insurrection during the reigh of the Emperor Tiberius in 36 CE (counting 100 years, or 2 Jubilees from BCE 63 Pompey's occupation of Judaea) sitting on the right hand of some big clan-god in the sky, like YHWH the clan god of the Jews, waiting for some Zoroastrian End of days Judgement to separate the sheep from the goats at the blast of some Jewish 2nd Temple Shofar?

Jesus didn't lead an armed revolt against Rome. He even rebuked Peter for trying such a thing in the garden at his arrest. If you notice, neither Herod nor Pilate found him guilty of anything. Had he been guilty of insurrection, Pilate would not have squirmed at judging him.

Also, I do not expect anything from anybody. I'm stating what I believe. If you don't believe in Yahweh, then fine. You will one day, my friend. Also, Heaven is extra-dimensional. It's outside this physical plane of existence. The sky is used as a symbolic reference because of the nature of the place...the glory of the physical sky is a glimpse into the glory of God's actual temple.

And, yes. I believe the "clan god" of the Jews really is the very Being who created everything we come into contact with and is the God to whom we will all give an account at the end of our days. And at the End of Days. Some worship him now, but all will do so after the judgment. Even you.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
The picture you've painted seems to reflect the jejune Weltanschauung of some 1st century illiterate Galilean fisherman, and not a 21st century modern scientific viewpoint, where the earth is no longer seen as a flat piece of realestate surrounded by a dome with fixed stars and moving planets and with various levels of 'heavens' some with water above them where angels can pop in and out at their whim.

He was literate. He read Hebrew from the scrolls in synagogue at the beginning of his ministry. At that time, Hebrew wasn't known by the average man on the street...it was the theological and liturgical language of the Temple. Hardly qualifies Jesus as illiterate. Also, Jesus was a carpenter. Peter and some of the others were fishermen.

And it doesn't trouble me that the writers of the Scriptures held to a phenomenological understanding of the physical cosmos. Ancient thinkers with technically incorrect views of geo-physics are simultaneously capable of receiving spiritual truth of which you yourself currently have no conception.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Just what ARE you saying, exactly?

I think I've made myself clear. My foundational beliefs include a hearty supernaturalism. Yes, I know this is 2009. Yes, I've heard of the Enlightenment. I also understand that folks like you do not believe the way I do...you even resort to belittling these ideas and scoffing at those who hold to them. Doesn't matter to me. I don't expect you to believe the way I do, but I was commenting from my worldview. Can your intellectually generous, free-thinking mind accept that, Siggie?

you even resort to belittling these ideas and scoffing at those who hold to them. Doesn't matter to me. I don't expect you to believe the way I do, but I was commenting from my worldview. Can your intellectually generous, free-thinking mind accept that, Siggie?

Burned.

Good posts, when I saw this thread I was'nt sure if the OP was making a joke or not. Especially with the picture...disgusting.

Hi Praetorian Guard--

You wrote: 'Jesus didn't lead an armed revolt against Rome. He even rebuked Peter for trying such a thing in the garden at his arrest. If you notice, neither Herod nor Pilate found him guilty of anything. Had he been guilty of insurrection, Pilate would not have squirmed at judging him....'

But how do you square what you just wrote with Liuke 22:35-40?

Also it sounds to me like you are overlooking KEY material found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls (Cave 4) which was written prior to the lifetime of R. Yehoshua bar-Yosef the Galilean which speaks of Mosheh being assumed into Heaven bodily e.g. The Scroll of the Book of the Assumption of Moses which is quoted as Scripture in Jude chapter 1: verse 9

By denying the historical seditionist who was executed by arming his disciples with REAL SWORDS (or are you assuming the right ear of the slave of the high Priest was cut off with a butter knife left over from the ‘Last Supper’ ?!!) you are also patently ignoring material evidence in the Greek canonical texts of the NT ‘bible’ that points to Armed Insurrection in Pesach of CE 36 e.g. the poignant Greek in the 3rd Canonically Approved Gospel [later called ‘Luke’ whoever he was, although his ‘gospel’ circulated for 200 years without a title—whose author(s) claimed ‘since many have written accounts of the things performed amongst us, it seemed good to me also to set down in order everything having done the research from the earliest traditions…’ an obvioius reference to Proverbs 14:15 ‘the fool believes everything he hears, but the wise man investigates first…’]

Without the context of the brutal Roman Occupation of Judeaea and the numerous Insurrections that took place since say the death of Herod in BCE 4, you cannot explain the death of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean (BCE 12 to CE 36) especially in view of his role as Messianic-Daviddic ‘pretender’ (i.e. the bloodline, hence ‘Son of David, have mercy upon me..’ and all the royal titles associated with his family (e.g. all the Mary’s surrounding him, from Miryam, ‘princess’ etc.) , combined with the 100th anniversary Insurrection Date (Mark 15:7) of the BCE 63 Invasion of the Roman General Pompey into Jerusalem, annexing Judaea for Rome: (cf: the Times of the Amorites is fulfilled, repent and believe in the Kingdom…)

NB: CRUCIFIXION WAS THE ROMAN PUNISHMENT FOR ARMED SEDITION ONLY – i.e. FOR NON ROMAN CITIZENS – a blatant BREACH OF LEX-MAIESTATIS [i.e. the socalled No-King but Caesar;’ Law..]

Here is the text from the 3rd Nicene Approved Canonical Gospel you are ignoring (and most Christians are NOT told about)

Luke 22: 35 And he said unto them, When I sent you out two by two without purse or food or sandals did you lack for anything? And they answered, Nothing, Rebbe.
36 Then said he to them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise let he who has his beggars bag let him hold it close to him: and for him who has no sword, let him sell his outer garment and go out now and purchase one immediately !
37 For Amen I say unto you, that this oracle must still be acted upon:’And he shall be reckoned among the sinners, and buried with the evil-rich when he dies’ [and this was spoken so that everything written about him may be fulfilled.] 38 And they said to him, my Lord the King, behold, right here we collected two swords. And he said unto them, Do you really think two are enough? (in the Greek MSS, this statement is an interrogative)
39 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him. 40 And when arrived at the mount, he said unto them, Pray that your spirits do not falter by temptation (i.e. of fear of battle).

The Mount of Olives War Scene is of course taken from Zechariah 14:3-10 In that Day, YHWH shall go forth to war against the Gentiles in the Day of Battle, and his feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives = all warrior language from start to finish.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
But how do you square what you just wrote with Liuke 22:35-40?

The swords were obviously for self-defense, much like a handgun is used for protection today. Two swords and 12 men were not exactly the makings of a successful armed revolt. To understand this passage properly, please take into consideration that Jesus nowhere demonstrates that he thinks of himself as a military messiah. Peter and Judas thought he should be that kind of Davidic warrior, but Jesus declined, only saying that he was to die and rise again on the third day.

If you want to revolt against Roman authority, you'd better have thousands of men with thousands of swords.

I know you don't believe it, but the power he demonstrated over this physical world was phenomenal. He stilled storms, raised the dead, healed the sick, walked on water, transmuted water into wine, multiplied a small supply of food into baskets and baskets of food, and even knew what men were thinking. Do you not think a man like this could destroy the Roman army if he wanted to? Even at his arrest, Jesus said that he could call on 12 legions of angels to defend him. (A legion during Imperial Rome was 5,200 men, according to Wikipedia. That would be over 62,000 angels.) Now, again, I know you think the supernatural stuff is all hogwash, but I find the idea of a militarily revolutionary Jesus laughable. There is nowhere in the Gospels where Jesus gives even a tiny indication that his intent was military revolt.

Let's dig a bit deeper into that passage where the fellow's ear was lopped off by one of Jesus' "swordsmen". This is from Matthew 26:52-56...

Then Jesus said to him, "Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword. Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?" At that hour Jesus said to the crowds, "Have you come out as against a robber, with swords and clubs to capture me? Day after day I sat in the temple teaching, and you did not seize me. But all this has taken place that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled." Then all the disciples left him and fled.

We discover some interesting things here about Jesus. The one who said to gather up swords, according to you for revolution, (For revolution? The text in Luke doesn't explain what the swords were for, but it also most certainly doesn't indicate they were for armed revolt. You're supplying that idea...I can certainly understand why, since there were plenty of insurrectionists in 1st century Judea. But Jesus wasn't one of them.) now says to sheath that sword.

Then he says he has tens of thousands of angels at the ready. But instead of calling on his angelic cohort, Jesus submits to arrest, rather than sparking a revolt. He even questions his captors' use of arms and points to his availability in the Temple (if he was so dangerous, why not arrest him there during the YEARS of his public teaching?) and his record of being a teacher in the Temple.

Teaching revolution? No! He taught the way of salvation and approach to God...he proclaimed a kingdom of peace and turning the other cheek. Of love for enemies...not armed revolution. Finally, this master revolutionary...this armed general leads his army...woops! Nope! They turn tail and run! LOL! Some revolt.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Also it sounds to me like you are overlooking KEY material found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls (Cave 4) which was written prior to the lifetime of R. Yehoshua bar-Yosef the Galilean which speaks of Mosheh being assumed into Heaven bodily e.g. The Scroll of the Book of the Assumption of Moses which is quoted as Scripture in Jude chapter 1: verse 9

So Jude quotes theological material. He refers only to the dispute between Michael and Satan regarding the body of Moses. And Jude's point was that even an angel as powerful as Michael didn't take it upon himself to directly take on Satan...rather he rebuked him in the Lord's name. Jude wasn't magically canonizing this text as Scripture, but simply referred to it to condemn the errant pastors he was writing against in that passage. So you can't enlist Jude to help you with the idea that Moses ascended bodily into heaven, because that's not why he cites that text.

Jude did, however, believe Deuteronomy was the word of God. And in Deuteronomy 34:5-6, we see that God himself buried Moses' body right here on planet Earth: "So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD, and he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows the place of his burial to this day."

Also, an apostle simply quoting written material from some source doesn't confer the status of Scripture or canonicity upon that quoted text. Jesus and Paul also allude to and Jude quotes Enoch...yet, neither the Jews nor the Christians receive Enoch as a canonical text. Paul quotes pagan writers...Epimenides, Aratus, Aeschylus, and Meander...so, are we to conclude that Paul thought these were canonical Scripture?

(Continued Next Post...)

[edit on 16-9-2009 by Praetorian Guard]

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Without the context of the brutal Roman Occupation of Judeaea and the numerous Insurrections that took place since say the death of Herod in BCE 4, you cannot explain the death of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean...

His arrest was prompted by the Sanhedrin. They end up convicting him of blasphemy, since no one was found to testify against him...there were two who came forward and said that Jesus had said he was going to destroy the Temple (hardly a revolt against the Romans) and raise it again in three days.

They referred to his public teaching of his death and resurrection, which on one occasion he framed in terms of the Temple...his body being the actual Temple of God, not the one Herod built. Those darned parables. (This did hearken back to an expectation that the Messiah would raze the Temple and rebuild it in a more glorious form. But again, that particular text explicitly states that Jesus was talking about his flesh and blood body, rather than the stone Temple.)

So the Jews convicted him of blasphemy, not insurrection. And Rome? Pilate wanted nothing to do with Jesus. If he were so dangerous, would Pilate not have simply signed the execution warrant and made an end of it all? But Pilate said he found no wrong in him.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
NB: CRUCIFIXION WAS THE ROMAN PUNISHMENT FOR ARMED SEDITION ONLY – i.e. FOR NON ROMAN CITIZENS – a blatant BREACH OF LEX-MAIESTATIS [i.e. the socalled No-King but Caesar;’ Law..]

I don't believe this is true. Thousands of crucifixions took place over hundreds of years across the Roman Empire. It was used on slaves, pirates, and enemies of the state, but where do you get the idea that this particular form capital punishment was reserved soley for sedition?

Originally posted by Sigismundus
The Mount of Olives War Scene is of course taken from Zechariah 14:3-10 In that Day, YHWH shall go forth to war against the Gentiles in the Day of Battle, and his feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives = all warrior language from start to finish.

I have no problem at all with seeing Yahweh as Warrior. Post-ascension, Jesus sits on his throne, waiting for his enemies to be made his footstool. As we see in Revelation, this entails divine warfare against the enemies of Christ from the ascension to the return...Jesus is seen wearing a robe soaked in the blood of his enemies.

He's on a warhorse. He's brandishing a sword. He sends judgment after judgment to destroy all who oppose him and his saints. But his role as conquering Messiah is during the age we're in now...not during his earthly ministry prior to his crucifixion. There's just no evidence of an armed revolt.

Here's another passage that shows Jesus was not interested in an armed revolt against Rome. John 18:33-36...

So Pilate entered his headquarters again and called Jesus and said to him, "Are you the King of the Jews?"

Jesus answered, "Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?"

Pilate answered, "Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me. What have you done?"

Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world."

Originally posted by king9072
Just like Mary Poppins, and bugs bunny... this fairy tale is not coming back, whether you wait a million minutes, or a million years.

If he hasn't bothered to show up for the massacre of hundreds of millions, if not billions of people over the last 2000 years, what would he show up for?

Jesus is not a fairy tale.He will return when God decides to send Him back.
I pray that it is soon!

Hi again, Praetorian—

You’ve opened up some very big cans o’worms in some of your discussion points (very common in theological discussions !) so I will try to lay some technical background for you and others on this thread who might not be conversant with the history of the 2nd Temple period in Judaea-- especially persons who style themselves ‘Christians’ who are left largely in the dark on many key matters, mainly because they have no working knowledge of the original languages in which their original documents were written (i.e. 1st century Koine Greek, and underneath the mangled Greek texts (5446 MSS now extant, no two alike) an earlier oral Galilean Aramaic and Hebrew stream) which their so-called ‘clergy’ refuses to teach them.

I point out again in this discussion to the ‘disturbing’ impact of the so-called Dead Sea Scroll Fragments (re-discovered beginning November 1946, esp the Scroll of the Book of the War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness, 1QM written / re-written between BCE 63 and 25CE) all of whose Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek texts were copied by hand between BCE 280 and 68CE and some of it copied during the very life time of R. Yeshu bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir—aka Iesous---(specifically in the Seccacah-Qumran Caves 1-11 reflecting the convoluted Messianic belief system held by the celibate members of a monastery of Levetical Zadokite priests who had separated themselves off from the ‘other’ Sons of Zadok/Zadokites (‘Saduccees’) in BCE 163 to form their own ‘Righteous Remant in the ‘wilderness of Judaea’ by a person who styled himself the ‘Teacher of Righteousness’) which texts were sealed up in June of AD 68 and thus form a kind of ‘time capsule’ of what was being actively believed among Apocalyptic Judaeans during the formative period of the earliest Christianities in Palestine before the 1st Failed Jewish War against Rome in AD 66 (the 70th anniversary of the death of Herod ‘the great’ in BCE 4 when Jerusalem was placed under direct Roman Rule.)
First, the 4 canonical ‘council approved’ Gospels in the ‘bible’ are NOT in any sense ‘positivistic history’ we speak of today (the notion of TRYING to write history of ‘what actually happened by facts and facts alone’ did not come into vogue until the 19th century, and even that lofty goal has never been fully realized even today) but are hagaddic midrashic legends which served the propaganda purposes of the growing Chrisitian communities AFTER the Jewish War against Rome in 66CE--as the writers themselves freely admit:

‘Now these things were written so that you might believe that Iesous is the Christos and by believing you might have life in his name’ (4th Gospel (‘John’, whoever he was ) chapter 20 verse31).

So what we read in them is what we today in the canonical gospel corpus falls under what we would call ‘Messianic propaganda tracts’ --assuming the literary form of Haggadic Legendary Midrash –whose main models (in addition to the ‘Sayings’ or Logia Gospel Material) were taken from the SPECIFIC format found earlier in the ‘old testament’ e.g. II Kings chapters 1 through 5 in the Elishaq’ miracle narratives (who also was a northern Galilean ‘prophet’ who likewise took over the reins for his own teacher Elijah)—a fact which few Christians are aware of, even today.

cont'd for Praetorian Guard...

Secondly, any reader of this material cannot begin to comprehend the core teachings placed into the mouth of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir in the Greek ‘canonically approved’ Nicene Gospels OUTSIDE of the context of their original Sitz im Leben (i.e. their setting in real life) i.e. the Roman Occupation of Judaea, in view of his role as Daviddic Pretender anxious to wrest the political power from the Sons of Zadok in Jerusalem and the Roman Occupational Forces under ‘Pontius Pilatus’ the Praefectus of Judaea, and to restore the ‘Daviddic Monarchy’ aka ‘The Kingdom’ in the ‘Last Days’… One only has to look at the timing of the Macabbean Revolt and the timelines that followed on its heels to see a DIRECT correlation of Timed Rebellions in a stgraight series:
BCE 163 Judah ben-Matathiah ben Hasmon (‘the Macabbee’) ‘freed’ Judaea from Antiochus IV, the Greco-Syrian King who ruled under the Seleucids, with the following period lasting nearly exactly 100 years (i.e. 2 Jubilees) until BCE 63 when Pompey, the Roman General annexed Judaea for Rome.

Then various insurrections followed (e.g. 4 BCE in the Galilee, at the death of Herod etc.) until another timed Insurrection in 36CE (at the 100th anniversary of the Roman Invasion of Pompey) mentioned in the 2nd Gospel (Mark 15:10), then besides the huge 66CE Revolt (timed to occur at the 70th Anniversary of the death of Herod), there was a 2nd Armed Revolt at the 200th anniversary of Pompey’s invasion in 136CE under R. Shimeon bar Kosiba, aka ‘Bar Kokhba’ son of the Star the name from the ‘Messianic’ verse found in Numbers 24:17 ‘A Star shall rise in Jacob, a Scepter shall arise from Yisro’el…’

All of these rebellions against Greece or Rome had specific ‘divine’ 100year (2-Jubilee) time-lines associated with them (BCE 163, BCE 63, 36CE and 136CE) precisely 100 years apart.

R. Yehoshua (Gk. Iesous) and his band of merry men armed with swords at Pesach in 36 CE were caught up in the 3rd of this Insurrectionst List above, and well, looked how that turned out.

One also has only to look at some of the overtly Zealot (i.e. insurrectionist) nick-names our failed seditionist from Galilee gave to his disciples which smack of warriorior Messiah titles e.g. Shimeon ha-Kephah (Aram. ‘Simon the Rock’, Gr. Simeon ho petros, aka Peter), ha-Benei-Regesh (lit.‘The Sons of Thunder’, Gr. Boanerges), and Shimeon ha-Zelotah (i.e. Simon the Zealot). The fact that ZELOTES is mentioned in the Greek Gospel is surprising to scholars who would have assumed that all traces of this post-failed-revolt language (the gospels circulated AFTER the war of AD 66 in Greek) would have been excised neatly from the textg (another gospel covers up ZELOTES and calls this Simon, the ‘canaanite’ using a code word to disguise ZEALOT). The list of ‘original warrior Messiah language being covered up’ could be continued if you need more examples…most of which persons who style themselves ‘Christians’ today rarely understand the import.

Clearly some of the earlier ‘warrior patina’ managed to leak through the Nicene Censors at times in certain MSS copies…something scholars call ‘the Criterion of Embarrassment’ i.e. when a particularly non-flattering / politically dangerous (‘un-sellable’) attribute was given to ‘iesous’ in the Greek gospels scholars hold that phrase or ‘event’ to be ‘more true than not’ based on the assumption that the writers would be more prone to make their hero ‘sellable’ by ‘making flattering stuff up about him’ rather than leaving in uncomfortable facts, e.g. the horrific event of the ‘crucifixion’, or some of the untoward phrases placed into his mouth in the earlier gospels...

Hi again, Praetorian---

Any meaningful discussion about the ‘biblical canon’ really involves two separate discussions, the so called OT canon and the so-called NT canon--the most important of which perhaps is the fact that the so-called OLD Testament canon was not actually firmly settled until AFTER the Bar-Kokhba Insurrection in 136CE (at which time the protoMasoretic text was clearly dominant to judge from the copies of the Dead Sea Scrolls found OUTSIDE of the caves 1-11 e.g. at Ein Gedi and Wadi Murabb’at etc. from CE 134-136).

The socalled Council of Javneh (aka Jamnia) in 90CE allowed the suppression of the Dead Sea Scroll families of old testament books which normally would have become canonical (we would not even know this if we did not have the time capsule dated 68CE for the older material found in caves 1-11 at Qumran).

All this means that when R. Yehsohua bar Yosef was alive (BCE 12 to 36CE) THERE WAS NO FIXED CANON OF HEBREW/ARAMAIC SCRIPTURES in place yet, as a single fixed book between two covers—just upwards of over 100 scrolls attributed to different individuals, including Aramaic and Hebrew copies of The Testament of the 12 Patriarchs and The Testament of Moses and the Wisdom of Yehoshua ben Sirach were all happily being copied right next to copies of Ruth and Samuel and 1 Henoch and Exodus as if there existed NO difference in ‘status’ i.e. whether or not the text ‘defiled the hands’ (i.e. was deemed somehow sacred).

After Bar-Kokhba, the canon was far more firmly ‘fixed’ both in the names of the books and the versions of those books including such writing as Esther (still being debated by the Rebbes whether or not it ‘defiled the hands’ since it makes no mention of YHWH---as late as 120CE !)

To put it bluntly, ‘Jesus’ did not have a ‘bible’ that we would recognize today, just loads of Zionist handwritten copies of various scrolls of various quality and worth, many of them Aramaic paraphrases (i.e. targums) to judge from the weird quotations of the OT placed into his mouth in the 1st canonical Greek Gospel (‘Matthew’, whoever he was) which do not match very closely in the LXX Greek (either in Aquila or Theodotion) or the Masoretic text in any text known in more than a dozen instances, e.g. see: Matt 2:6, 2:15-16, 3:1-3, 4:15-16, 15:8-9, 21:16, 22:32, 22:37, 26:31 etc.
The fact that the ‘Jesus’ and the earliest ‘Christians’ did not have a firmly set ‘canon’ of scripture (‘bible’) would also explain the Tendenz of the earliest Chrisitianities to attribute ‘non-canonical’ OT quotes into R. Yeshua’s mouth

(e.g. Testament of Naphtali, chapter 8:13 ‘The Salvation of Israel shall come from the Judaeans’ apologetically misquoted by the author(s) of the 4th canoncal ‘gospel’ to remove any reference to Israel and make it more ‘universalist’ (“John” chapter 4:22, the Woman at the Well periocope: for it is written ‘Salvation is from the Judaeans’) &tc. and of course the example in the Nicene approved ‘Epistle of Jude’ who quotes The Assumption of Moses and 1 Henoch as ‘proof texts’ (Jude 1:9-15) for their argument.

The Scroll of the Book of the Words of Henoch and the Testament of Moses (aka Jubilees) were, interestingly, both considered also ‘canonical’ in the Ethiopic Christian church until at least the 17th century.

Even the modern Roman Catholic ‘bible’ contains ‘canonical’ books that ‘Protestants’ do not recognize, and their Latin Vulgate for the Old Testament is a translation of the Greek LXX which is NOT the same text as the Masoretic Text (MT) of modern Rabinnic Jews and protestants being used today—differing in wording from the Hebrew Underlay to the LXX by as much as 24%. So you have issues that compound one another if you base your ‘faith’ on writings…especially if you cannot even read them in their original languages.

Why do many feel logical, scientifically based thought can not co-exist with metaphysics or religion? Assuming there is a Higher Power, by whichever name you prefer, who possesses omnipotence and omniscience, would scientific limits mean anything to the entity? In theory, an entity with infinite powers could bend every law as we know it at will.

The speed of light and our understanding and measurements of time would be insignificant, if both religious and scientific views are melded. Hypothetically speaking, humans would be to God what children are to parents. We give them the tools to create a decent life, yet we can not control how those tools are used, or misused, or completely thrown away. Parents do not step in every time a child makes a choice and the outcome is the less desirable one, do they?