Easter Sunday Special, The truth behind the resusrection??

Despite the fact that the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refer to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus. This was discovered in Jerusalem in 1968. It is not necessarily surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archaeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular individual a customary burial.


Source: Wikipedia.com

reply to post by piedsniper


The thing that I don't get is why it is necessary for Jesus to have died and been resurrected.

Doesn't it say that he whosoever believes in him shall have everlasting life, that was before the Resurrection and makes no mention of the death or sacrifice of Jesus (though it does say God "gave" his begotten son). So apparently getting eternal life has nothing to do with Jesus coming back to life. Why would he need to die and be brought back in order to forgive sins? He's God right, well, one third of God anyway, and God is All-Powerful and can forgive sins whenever he wants so what is stopping him from just forgiving anyone who asks for forgiveness or even those that don't ask for forgiveness?

You mean to tell me the best plan an All-Mighty omniscient being can come up with is to let one third of himself be born of a virgin and die horrifically on a cross????

It seems like so many people concentrate their beliefs solely on the unsubstantiated supernatural parts of the story instead of focusing on Jesus's teachings.

[edit on 4-4-2010 by Titen-Sxull]

First, one has to grapple with the facts: the original Galilean Aramaic dialect that carried the original 'easter/oestre' message is no longer spoken on the planet the way it was in those days - and the texts that modern Christians (say in America) read are bad English translations from bad Greek - several steps away from the original language used.

No where does it actually say 'he rose' - it said (to the effect), 'he was exalted according to the scriptures' (whichever ones they meant at the time, which included books no longer considered part of the 'scriptures' today Jews and Christians, e.g. 'the Scroll of the Book of the Words of Henoch the Son of Jared' quoted as 'scripture' in Jude 1:14 etc.

'he was raised (Galilean Aramaic re-translated means something akin to = 'he was exalted to the right hand of the the Most High').

So there is no 'physical resurection' in the earliest kergygma ('proclamation') of the earliest Nazorean 'christian' messianists, all of whom were Jews.

The empty tomb story in the 2nd canonical Greek gospel ('Mark' whoever he was - chapter 16 which ends in mid sentence by the way at verse 8: 'the women said nothing to no man: they were afraid, because of....')

The empty tomb story at any rate only suggests that the corpse was stolen and possibly even later disfigured after death (e.g. being dragged around the city by the authorities until nothing was left, e.g. tied to the back of a horse, etc.) = proves nothing. Just a stray tradition of the tomb he was supposed to have been laid to rest in was empty - or that they did not know where the body was - or that the real resting place was hidden from the crowds (for good reason !).

Interestingly the word in the 2nd Gospel was SOMA that was 'taken down from the cross' (i.e. live body) not PTOMA ('corpse') so he was technically still breathing when he was ransomed (by 'Yosef', whoever he was, who paid off the Roman Praefect Pontius Pilatus - nothing out of character for him who was accused of 'taking bribes and summarily executing seditionists, without trial or witnesses' at least according to Philo of Alexandria who knew people who knew this Pilate person, who was recalled to Rome the next year, to be saved from exile only by the handy death of Tiberius...)

As far as the 'appearances' are concerned, again, Galiean aramaic can be reconstructed from the impossible Greek syntax of the gospel narratives who are quite contradictory about the 'resurrection stories' if you line them up and look at them closely SIDE BY SIDE (called 'close horizontal reading'): hardly any real points in common other than an empty tomb and a young man (or two) talking to some women in the middle of the night.

The Greek does not say 'they saw him' (e.g. as we would say to-day, e.g. 'I went to the store and I saw Mike...') it says 'he was manifested unto them...'

Which is the kind of Mystery School language a Mystes (a baptised initiate) would say when they glimpsed the sight of a god or goddess, e.g. Isis or Osiris, or Attis or Mithras etc. 'whereupon the god was manifested to my sight..')

One does not say, e.g. ("I went to the store this morning, and Mike was manifested unto me...")

Sometimes the bad translations from the Greek into English (far away from the Galilean Aramaic of the original followers of this executed seditionist rabbi) say 'he appeared to them' but that does violence to the syntax of the Greek which is always passsive ('he was made apparent to them...', 'he was manifested to them...', and NOT 'they saw him....')

Also no NON-BELIEVERS ever claimed that he manifested himself to them: manifestations ONLY took place among believers who were expecting miracles from the get go.

So we are not dealing with 'eye-witness testimony' by any stretch, but badly written Greek documents from several generations AFTER the execution of their hero by believers who had a clear AGENDA:

The 4th canonical Gospel ('according to Yohanon' whoever he was) 'THESE THINGS WERE WRITTEN SO THAT YOU MIGHT BELIEVE THAT IESOUS IS THE MESSIAH AND BY BELIEVING YOU MIGHT HAVE LIFE IN HIS NAME..'

Modern 'history books' e.g. in schools, for what they are worth, do not normally conclude their history topic sections, say on the Womens Rights' movements of the 1920s by sentences like: 'THESE THINGS WERE WRITTEN SO THAT YOU MIGHT BELIEVE THAT WOMEN DESERVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE AND BY BELIEVING YOU WILL TREAT WOMEN AS EQUALS IN SOCIETY'...

Such a statement pre-supposes a clear AGENDA, which in the case of the canonical Greek gospels, are what to-day we would call PROPAGANDA LITERATURE which is always AGENDA driven.

So, language is important when looking at the Resurrection Pericopes ('sections') in the gospels.

l. They contradict each other grossly in deails i.e. they don't match each other, unlike the (comparatively !) more coherent crucifixion narratives, which seem like they were harmonised early on via controls based on LITURGICAL (i.e. ritual) considerations (e.g. 2nd Gospel's 3-hour divisions e.g. it was the 3rd hour and they nailed him up, and it was the 6th hour and darkness was upon the face of the Land [of Israel], and it was the 9th hour, and he screams, I am thirsty !) etc.

To prove this fact to sceptics, as an exercise, cut and paste the 4 so-called 'resurrection narratives' side by side and compare and contrast them. The contradictions between them are enormous. None of these 4 accounts of 'what happened' would ever stand up in any courtroom worthy of the name -- too many key differences between them.

2. The accounts DO NOT USE everyday nouns and verbs (e.g. they do not say: 'they saw him', or 'he rose'), but INSTEAD they use pagan Greek Mystery Cult technical jargon (e.g. 'he was manifested unto them' / 'he was exalted to the right hand of the Most High' i.e. died a martyr's death, like a suicide bomber and his 24 virgin reward &tc. )

3. Even Paul says: e.g. ('he finally was manifested unto me..') and he knows NOTHING of an empty tomb. That came later.

(see the 4th Canonical Greek gospel chapte 14:22 = when Judah Thomas i.e. Thomas Judas Didymos, the brother of Iesous, called the Twin) complains that Iesous will not 'manifest himself' to those outside the circle of initiates or mystes (to use Mystery Cult language)

And Judas said (in the margin: Not Iscariot) why, my lord the king, will you NOT manifest yourself to outsiders but only to us standing here now?

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


I understand your confusion. However, do understand that the death of Jesus was a symbol of the Lamb offered as sacrifice to defeat death in the Jewish Passover. Jesus as the Lamb was offered to defeat death in a new covenant with the Jews that believed and became Christians.

The path of Jesus the week prior to Passover follows the path of the Passover Lamb...choosing, sanctification and cleansing, avoiding contamination, celebration of life, and then sacrifice... the blood is used to protect from death.

Jesus was chosen, cleansed with the washing of his feet and his head annointed with fine oils, as He entered Jerusalem his path was paved with palms to avoid contamination with the soil, He had the celebratory dinner/Last Supper...and then sacrifice...in the Passover, the lambs blood was smeared on the door to the right and left and above..the same layout as the crucifix and as the making of the symbol of the cross...

The blood of the lamb freed the Israelites from death, the blood of Jesus freed all people from death...not physical death, but spiritual death...the second death.

Jesus' death was to illustrate God's love for man....would you give one of your offspring to save me or another ATS member...or a Jew..or Muslim..or a non-believer? God did...

The victory comes in the ressurection... Jesus was transformed, as we all will be.... sure, there are other faiths and beliefs that parallel what we as Chritians believe.... fine, but I have the peace and joy of knowing.

Peace be unto you.......

reply to post by Sigismundus


There are contradictions of Jesus life, crucifixian, and death...and ressurection...

How many people saw the Twin Towers go down, even have footage...and have differing accounts of what happened? Likewise, how different should the accounts of Jesus' cricifixian and death be when seperated by time, miles, distance, and memory of 4 witnesses over the course of 30-70 years.

Remember that Paul earlier was Saul... he was out killing Christians. What changed his mind?

The disciples were cowering, in hiding after Jesus death...what changed their minds?

What could change men hidding in fear into heroically facing imprisonment, exile, and death? What did they possibly have to gain?

By most accounts, almost all suffered for preaching the word and did not gain wealth...certainly not in this world?

So what was it that caused a non-believer and persecutor of "the way" to change and die in prison? What could cause a man...a conspirator if you will.... to lose everything and live in exile on a desolate island...all for a lie.

I say to you it was not a lie. They know what they saw, and experienced...and they were stoned to death, executed, crucified, tortured, imprisoned, starved, ....all for a lie? Nay, but for the truth...Jesus lives.

Hi Already Gone -

The four council approved 'Greek' gospels circulated for nearly 150 years or more without titles, i.e. they circulated anonymously, and only later did names become to be attached to them, mainly to get them 'voted into the Greek NT canon' at the later (often raucous) Bishopric Councils.

So we cannot speak of the 4 council approved Greek Gospels being witnesses to anything.

There was a Yohanon the Elder (whoever he was, possibly Yohanon of Ephesus?) who claims to have been in Jerusalem at Pesach in 36 CE after the failed Insurrection against Rome at the 100th anniversary of the Invasion of Pompey in 63 BCE - who claims to have told the writer of the 4th canonical Greek gospel ('according to Yohanon' whoever he was) that a centurion took a lance (in Greek a spear is 'Longeh', hence the Centurion was nicknames 'Longinus' according to later oral tradition) and pierced 'the side' (pericardum?) of R. Yehoshua as he struggled to breath on the cross, and 'out flowed blood and urine' (or more politely, 'water'), to which the 'gospel' states: 'this is the disciple who witnessed both of these things.' and a marginalium reads: Amen, for We know that HIS testimony is the Truth' whoever WE are)...

But we have no proof of who wrote the 4 caonical Greek council approved 'gospels' that bear various names...and not only do we NOT know who wrote them, we ALSO do NOT know what form they took 'originally' in the text as it left the hands of the author(s) and went out into the world to be hand copied to be 'read in the churches'

e.g. the 2nd canonical gospel cicrulcated in at least TWO versions (possibly for 2 different audiences by the same author(s)?) i.e. Secret Gospel of 'Mark' (whoever he was) and 'The Gospel according to Mark' (ditto)--the secret Gospel of Mark was apparently for 'those who were more spiritually advanced in the faith' whatever that means or entails.

Apparently the 'Secret Gospel of Mark' was much longer than the rather cut-down / trimmed version in to-day's Greek NT bibles read by Christians in today's churches. Most parishioners are not told of these little matters, or that the end of 'Mark' ends at 16:8 in the middle of a sentence:

'The women said nothing to no man: they were afraid because of ...'

Presumably the rest of the sentence was cut off at the end of the codex or the scroll or was supressed by the authorities as being later considered 'heretical' or maybe it was just lost through rough handling, who knows - the ending might have been quite harmless ('they were afraid of the Judaeans who were out to arrest them for starting a fire/riot in the temple' as it says in the Gospel of Peter --which might have some greek material as old as Mark (or even older)...

But we are clearly NOT dealing with eye-witness accounts. Matthew (or Mathathiah) was not named in the other 3 gospels as one of the 12, but the 3rd canonical gospel (whose writer also penned Acts of the Apostles as the 2nd half of his dedication to His Excellency Theophilos, whoever he was) mentions that after the removal of Yehudah bar Shimeon Ish Keryiota (Judas Iscariot) from the group, it was necessary 'to fill up the number 12', so they chose Matathiah by lots to replace him.

If 'Matthew' indeed was the 13th replacement disciple, he would not have been privy to the 'oracles of R. Yehoshua' so naturally would have had to learn the teaching from the others - and if they chose a man who could read and write (useful but rare among fishermen from the Galilee) it would have been natural for a man like Matathiah ('Matthew') to start compiling the Oracles of Yehoshua (maybe the LOGIA that Papias mentions had some basis in history, who knows - although this was collected in Aramaic, and 'everyone then translated the LOGIA as they were capable').

Greek has LOGOI for 'words' and LOGIA for 'oracles' i.e. old testament prophecies that were fulfilled in R. Yehoshua ('Iesous') - we found some fulfillment texts 'in the last days' among the dead sea scrolls, so these kinds of collections in Aramaic were quite common at the time.

This would explain why the 1st canonical Gospel has so many phrases like 'this was done to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet so and so...'

But we are still NOT talking about eyewitnesses.

In the 1st canonical gospel, the ending has also been tampered with (the last verses have been added to a shorter text, like the gospel of 'Mark' e.g. Mark 16:9-16 which is in a later and more adult Greek style than the book itself of 'Mark' which is written in bad baby-Greek)

Moreover close inspection of 'Matthew' shows that he took over large chunks of 'Mark's gospel' and cleaned up the latter's baby Greek (being sofull of grammatical and syntactical 'howlers') - but keeping to the language of Mark as close as he could - and Eyewitnesses DO NOT TEND TO COPY from non-Eyewitnesses--at least not in the real world.

I trust that none of this is NEWS to you? If it is, bring this thread to your pastor and ask him to explain it to you, that is, if has been educated in Hebrew and Greek as part of his training.

If he refutes any of these facts, he is either ignorant of the conclusions of more than 10,000 scholars who have worked dilligently within higher form-textual and source-textual-criticism of the past 150 years on this very material (99% of which is unknown to the masses, alas) ---or he is a liar.

reply to post by Sigismundus


I completely agree with your information but you should post up some sources that people can take in your information as factual as well.

[edit on 4/5/2010 by TheBloodRed]

reply to post by piedsniper


That's a good video.
I can appreciate that.
But...correct me if I'm wrong (which I'm not)...but...easter is the christian annexation of the Norse fertility festival.
Bunnies and eggs are symbols of fertility and the spring renewal.
Does it say anywhere in the bible that bunnies and eggs are a symbol of jesus rising from the grave?
And on that note, celebrating the zombification of a mythical figure seems...well...downright creepy.

Originally posted by St Udio
reply to post by troubleshooter

 

on the contrary, i got schooled, saw the light....

primitive ~ to techno ~ Shamanism is the real connect with the higher-power way

So you threw the bath out as well...sad, very sad!

reply to post by Sigismundus


wow thanks for that post, absolutely fascinating. You make an excellent point about translating a passive language in to a non-passive language. From studying Hindi I can appreciate how some things can be difficult to directly translate from passive to active, now add hundreds of years and several other translations along the way...it's easy to see how twisted the original can become.

Thanks again.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Hi Already Gone -

The four council approved 'Greek' gospels circulated for nearly 150 years or more without titles, i.e. they circulated anonymously, and only later did names become to be attached to them, mainly to get them 'voted into the Greek NT canon' at the later (often raucous) Bishopric Councils.

So we cannot speak of the 4 council approved Greek Gospels being witnesses to anything.

There was a Yohanon the Elder (whoever he was, possibly Yohanon of Ephesus?) who claims to have been in Jerusalem at Pesach in 36 CE after the failed Insurrection against Rome at the 100th anniversary of the Invasion of Pompey in 63 BCE - who claims to have told the writer of the 4th canonical Greek gospel ('according to Yohanon' whoever he was) that a centurion took a lance (in Greek a spear is 'Longeh', hence the Centurion was nicknames 'Longinus' according to later oral tradition) and pierced 'the side' (pericardum?) of R. Yehoshua as he struggled to breath on the cross, and 'out flowed blood and urine' (or more politely, 'water'), to which the 'gospel' states: 'this is the disciple who witnessed both of these things.' and a marginalium reads: Amen, for We know that HIS testimony is the Truth' whoever WE are)...

But we have no proof of who wrote the 4 caonical Greek council approved 'gospels' that bear various names...and not only do we NOT know who wrote them, we ALSO do NOT know what form they took 'originally' in the text as it left the hands of the author(s) and went out into the world to be hand copied to be 'read in the churches'

e.g. the 2nd canonical gospel cicrulcated in at least TWO versions (possibly for 2 different audiences by the same author(s)?) i.e. Secret Gospel of 'Mark' (whoever he was) and 'The Gospel according to Mark' (ditto)--the secret Gospel of Mark was apparently for 'those who were more spiritually advanced in the faith' whatever that means or entails.

Apparently the 'Secret Gospel of Mark' was much longer than the rather cut-down / trimmed version in to-day's Greek NT bibles read by Christians in today's churches. Most parishioners are not told of these little matters, or that the end of 'Mark' ends at 16:8 in the middle of a sentence:

'The women said nothing to no man: they were afraid because of ...'

Presumably the rest of the sentence was cut off at the end of the codex or the scroll or was supressed by the authorities as being later considered 'heretical' or maybe it was just lost through rough handling, who knows - the ending might have been quite harmless ('they were afraid of the Judaeans who were out to arrest them for starting a fire/riot in the temple' as it says in the Gospel of Peter --which might have some greek material as old as Mark (or even older)...

But we are clearly NOT dealing with eye-witness accounts. Matthew (or Mathathiah) was not named in the other 3 gospels as one of the 12, but the 3rd canonical gospel (whose writer also penned Acts of the Apostles as the 2nd half of his dedication to His Excellency Theophilos, whoever he was) mentions that after the removal of Yehudah bar Shimeon Ish Keryiota (Judas Iscariot) from the group, it was necessary 'to fill up the number 12', so they chose Matathiah by lots to replace him.

If 'Matthew' indeed was the 13th replacement disciple, he would not have been privy to the 'oracles of R. Yehoshua' so naturally would have had to learn the teaching from the others - and if they chose a man who could read and write (useful but rare among fishermen from the Galilee) it would have been natural for a man like Matathiah ('Matthew') to start compiling the Oracles of Yehoshua (maybe the LOGIA that Papias mentions had some basis in history, who knows - although this was collected in Aramaic, and 'everyone then translated the LOGIA as they were capable').

Greek has LOGOI for 'words' and LOGIA for 'oracles' i.e. old testament prophecies that were fulfilled in R. Yehoshua ('Iesous') - we found some fulfillment texts 'in the last days' among the dead sea scrolls, so these kinds of collections in Aramaic were quite common at the time.

This would explain why the 1st canonical Gospel has so many phrases like 'this was done to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet so and so...'

But we are still NOT talking about eyewitnesses.

In the 1st canonical gospel, the ending has also been tampered with (the last verses have been added to a shorter text, like the gospel of 'Mark' e.g. Mark 16:9-16 which is in a later and more adult Greek style than the book itself of 'Mark' which is written in bad baby-Greek)

Moreover close inspection of 'Matthew' shows that he took over large chunks of 'Mark's gospel' and cleaned up the latter's baby Greek (being sofull of grammatical and syntactical 'howlers') - but keeping to the language of Mark as close as he could - and Eyewitnesses DO NOT TEND TO COPY from non-Eyewitnesses--at least not in the real world.

I trust that none of this is NEWS to you? If it is, bring this thread to your pastor and ask him to explain it to you, that is, if has been educated in Hebrew and Greek as part of his training.

If he refutes any of these facts, he is either ignorant of the conclusions of more than 10,000 scholars who have worked dilligently within higher form-textual and source-textual-criticism of the past 150 years on this very material (99% of which is unknown to the masses, alas) ---or he is a liar.

Matthew 13:4 "And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:"

I have seen theologian's absorbed in their own definition of brilliance, 'devoured by fowls'...
...please don't become another one Sigismundus!.

Originally posted by troubleshooter

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Hi Already Gone -

The four council approved 'Greek' gospels circulated for nearly 150 years or more without titles, i.e. they circulated anonymously, and only later did names become to be attached to them, mainly to get them 'voted into the Greek NT canon' at the later (often raucous) Bishopric Councils.

So we cannot speak of the 4 council approved Greek Gospels being witnesses to anything.

There was a Yohanon the Elder (whoever he was, possibly Yohanon of Ephesus?) who claims to have been in Jerusalem at Pesach in 36 CE after the failed Insurrection against Rome at the 100th anniversary of the Invasion of Pompey in 63 BCE - who claims to have told the writer of the 4th canonical Greek gospel ('according to Yohanon' whoever he was) that a centurion took a lance (in Greek a spear is 'Longeh', hence the Centurion was nicknames 'Longinus' according to later oral tradition) and pierced 'the side' (pericardum?) of R. Yehoshua as he struggled to breath on the cross, and 'out flowed blood and urine' (or more politely, 'water'), to which the 'gospel' states: 'this is the disciple who witnessed both of these things.' and a marginalium reads: Amen, for We know that HIS testimony is the Truth' whoever WE are)...

But we have no proof of who wrote the 4 caonical Greek council approved 'gospels' that bear various names...and not only do we NOT know who wrote them, we ALSO do NOT know what form they took 'originally' in the text as it left the hands of the author(s) and went out into the world to be hand copied to be 'read in the churches'

e.g. the 2nd canonical gospel cicrulcated in at least TWO versions (possibly for 2 different audiences by the same author(s)?) i.e. Secret Gospel of 'Mark' (whoever he was) and 'The Gospel according to Mark' (ditto)--the secret Gospel of Mark was apparently for 'those who were more spiritually advanced in the faith' whatever that means or entails.

Apparently the 'Secret Gospel of Mark' was much longer than the rather cut-down / trimmed version in to-day's Greek NT bibles read by Christians in today's churches. Most parishioners are not told of these little matters, or that the end of 'Mark' ends at 16:8 in the middle of a sentence:

'The women said nothing to no man: they were afraid because of ...'

Presumably the rest of the sentence was cut off at the end of the codex or the scroll or was supressed by the authorities as being later considered 'heretical' or maybe it was just lost through rough handling, who knows - the ending might have been quite harmless ('they were afraid of the Judaeans who were out to arrest them for starting a fire/riot in the temple' as it says in the Gospel of Peter --which might have some greek material as old as Mark (or even older)...

But we are clearly NOT dealing with eye-witness accounts. Matthew (or Mathathiah) was not named in the other 3 gospels as one of the 12, but the 3rd canonical gospel (whose writer also penned Acts of the Apostles as the 2nd half of his dedication to His Excellency Theophilos, whoever he was) mentions that after the removal of Yehudah bar Shimeon Ish Keryiota (Judas Iscariot) from the group, it was necessary 'to fill up the number 12', so they chose Matathiah by lots to replace him.

If 'Matthew' indeed was the 13th replacement disciple, he would not have been privy to the 'oracles of R. Yehoshua' so naturally would have had to learn the teaching from the others - and if they chose a man who could read and write (useful but rare among fishermen from the Galilee) it would have been natural for a man like Matathiah ('Matthew') to start compiling the Oracles of Yehoshua (maybe the LOGIA that Papias mentions had some basis in history, who knows - although this was collected in Aramaic, and 'everyone then translated the LOGIA as they were capable').

Greek has LOGOI for 'words' and LOGIA for 'oracles' i.e. old testament prophecies that were fulfilled in R. Yehoshua ('Iesous') - we found some fulfillment texts 'in the last days' among the dead sea scrolls, so these kinds of collections in Aramaic were quite common at the time.

This would explain why the 1st canonical Gospel has so many phrases like 'this was done to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet so and so...'

But we are still NOT talking about eyewitnesses.

In the 1st canonical gospel, the ending has also been tampered with (the last verses have been added to a shorter text, like the gospel of 'Mark' e.g. Mark 16:9-16 which is in a later and more adult Greek style than the book itself of 'Mark' which is written in bad baby-Greek)

Moreover close inspection of 'Matthew' shows that he took over large chunks of 'Mark's gospel' and cleaned up the latter's baby Greek (being sofull of grammatical and syntactical 'howlers') - but keeping to the language of Mark as close as he could - and Eyewitnesses DO NOT TEND TO COPY from non-Eyewitnesses--at least not in the real world.

I trust that none of this is NEWS to you? If it is, bring this thread to your pastor and ask him to explain it to you, that is, if has been educated in Hebrew and Greek as part of his training.

If he refutes any of these facts, he is either ignorant of the conclusions of more than 10,000 scholars who have worked dilligently within higher form-textual and source-textual-criticism of the past 150 years on this very material (99% of which is unknown to the masses, alas) ---or he is a liar.

Matthew 13:4 "And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:"

I have seen theologian's absorbed in their own definition of brilliance, 'devoured by fowls'...
...please don't become another one Sigismundus!.


The only devouring that will be going on will be the sheep being devoured by the wolves, being lured and lulled by thier religious propaganda.

Before Jeebus, God was irritable. "You do what I sez, or I'll bake, boil, fry and drown the lot o' ya!"

After Jeebus, who went on a suicidal weekend bender, a labrynthine bureaucracy was created to manage the people's lives through a giant guilt-trip.

The ironic part of the whole Catholic guilt trip is that all you have to do is say you're sorry and fool your local priest into accepting your apology and viola! you're forgiven!!!

I think that my primary inability to be down with Jeebus comes from my stubborn tendency to own up to the sh*tty things I occasionally do, instead of running to the guy in the black dress with the smoking metal purse and the magical water so he can pat me on the head and tell me it's okay.

If god would go back to being more of a curmudgeon and less of a hippie, I might respect him more. I would most likely get fried before the week was out, but I would have the solace of knowing where I stand.

Hi Blood Red:

Nothing I have posted on ATS from the beginning is outside the realm of main-stream modern biblical textual scholarship.

This might come as quite a shock to some persons on this thread but the fact is that 99% of the English Speaking Population on this planet is UNAWARE of even the basic historical underpinnings of the origins of Christianity (e.g. knowledge of the various Essenoid Dead Sea Scroll related Apocalyptic movements in Palestine between 170 BCE and 68 CE , the Roman Occupation of the 1st Century Palestine, fluency in 1st century Koine Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic, and the Weltanschauung of the Mystery Schools, with which Saul of Tarsus was intimate & which influenced his own Diaspora Gentile Friendly Gospel of Christianity as it stood in opposition to the original followers of Iesous - the Ebionim (whose own long ling of (later 'heretical') bishops descended by blood from the relatives of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir aka 'Iesous', beginning with his own brother Yakkov - James--who was NOT one of the 12, yet took over the original movement after the execution of his brother for armed sedition against the State in 36 CE during an Insurrection at the 100th Anniversary of the Invasion of the Roman Army in 63 BCE by General Pompey)

To get persons on this thread 'up to speed' as it were, per your suggestion, I have incuded below a VERY SMALL reading list (I say 'small' because the actual list of books you would have to read to know enough to discuss this topic at length would be c. 1,500 books by over 1000 scholars in the field).

These listed below are SOME of the most important biblical scholars and theologians in their field from over the past 100 years :

There are many, many, many MORE wonderfully talented scholars from several different countries (especially from Germany, that bastion of inventive deep-thinking scholars) that I could add to this list, but I would have to post 10 or 15 different times on separate ATS postings !

But one has to start somewhere - and this is where I would start if I wanted to learn what modern textual New Testament scholarship has to say:

Most of the authors mentioned below have written a number of excellent books not listed next to their names: these are marked &tc &tc...

Google the name of the author to read of their other contributions to this evolving study -- which is kept from the common masses (although serious biblical scholars are familiar not only with the names listed below, but like myself, hundreds of other highly valued scholars in the field)

So this is a very partial 'starter's list to BEGIN with (and nothing more) - most of my comments on this thread ref: the 'resurrection' pericopes are digested / extracted from the latest text research from those scholars listed below:

C.K. Barrett (Jesus & the Gospel Tradition, Luke the Historian in Recent Studies, The Gospel According to St John: An Introduction & Commentary & Notes on the Greek Text (2nd Edition) The New Testament Background: Selected Documents, Q: A Re=Examination &tc. &tc.)

Burton L Mack (Who Wrote the New Testament, &tc. &tc.)

Anthony Gelston (New Heaven & New Earth: Prophecy & The Millenium)

James H. Charlesworth (The Pseudipigrapha (in 2 Vols),The Historical Jesus: An Essential Guide, Jesus & Archaeology, Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls)

Joachim Jeremias (The Problem of the Historical Jesus, The Parables of Jesus, Re-Discovering the Parables, New Testament Theology: The Proclamation of Jesus, &tc. &tc. )

John Joseph Collins (Apocalypticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Commentary on the Book of Daniel, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel, The Apocalyptic Imagination)

Rudolf Karl Bultmann (The New Testament & Mythology, The Theology of the New Testament, &tc. &tc. )

F. F. Bruce (The Hard Sayings of Jesus)

Michael Owen Wise (The First Messiah: Investigating the Saviour Before Christ)

Bishop John Shelby Spong (Resurrection: Myth or Reality? Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, Why Christianity Must Change: Or Die, Liberating the Gospels, The Sins of Scripture, The Once and Future Jesus &tc. &tc.)

Joseph Blenkinsopp (Prophecy & Canon, A History of Prophecy in Ancient Israel, &tc. &tc. )

H.H. Rowley (Jewish Apocalyptic and the Dead Sea Scrolls, &tc. &tc. )

Adolf von Harnack (New Testament Studies, Mission & Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centurites, &tc.)

C.H. Dodd (The Authority of the Bible, About the Gospels, The Parables of the Kingdom, Historical Tradition in the 4th Gospel, &tc.)

Matthew Black (An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels & Acts)

Geza Vermes (The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, The Changing Faces of Jesus, &tc. &tc.)

Elaine Pagels (The Gnostic Gospels, Beyond Belief, the Secret Gospel of Thomas, The Inner Journey, Views from the Christian Tradition)

Robert Funk (The Five Gospels, The Resurrection of Jesus: A SourceBook, &tc. )

Mark S Goodacre (The Synoptic Problem: A Way through the Maze, &tc.)

Peter M Head (Christology and the Synoptic Problem)

Bruce Chilton (Rabbi Jesus, 8tc. )

John Dominic Crosson (The Historical Jesus the Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant, The Essential Jesus &tc. &tc. )

John Rogerson (The Old Testament World, &tc. &tc. )

Phillip R Davies (The Complete World of the Dead Sea Scrolls)
Gerald Massey (The Historical Jesus & the Mythical Christ, &tc. &tc.)

Raymond Brown (An Introduction to the New Testament, A Risen Christ at Eastertime: Essays on the Gospel Narratives)

John P Meier (A Marginal Jew: Re-thinking the Historical Jesous)

Robert Eisenman ( James, the Brother of Jesus, &tc.)

John Marco Allegro (The Dead Sea Scrolls & The Christian Myth, the Mystery of the Dead Sea Scrolls Revealed, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Re=appraisal, &tc.)

Bart D. Ehrman (MisQuoting Jesus, Jesus: An Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium)

John Robinson (Re-Dating the New Testament &tc.)

James M. Robinson (The Sayings of Jesus, The Kerygma and the Historical Jesus, &tc.)

Florentio Garcia Martinez (The Dead Sea Scrolls : Study Edition)

Robert Walter Funk (The Parables of Jesus: part of the Jesus Seminar Series)

For any serious student of the Gospel material & of NT theoloy in general (and of the origins of Christianity) the above reference book-list should serve as a kind of beginner's Core Library for study from which to branch out to even more daring research !




[edit on 5-4-2010 by Sigismundus]

reply to post by Matthew Dark

And on that note, celebrating the zombification of a mythical figure seems...well...downright creepy.

Encouraging children to mimic or revere drinking blood and eating flesh is equally a repugnant IMHO.


Imagine this, our children come home one day to inform us that, their teacher had given them a glass of milk and a cookie. The teacher then had the children imagine that they were drinking the blood and eating the flesh of a dead man that the teacher happened to revere.

The whole thing is pretty darn disgusting from making a child feel guilty yet paradoxically happy about the torture and murder of man the never had or never would meet, to pretend cannibalism. uchafi!

reply to post by nomorecruelty

Why, oh why, does mankind continue to try, in vain, to find some small shred of justification for their rejection of Jesus Christ - and their sinful choices.

Simply because their "sinful choices" are but you arrogant opinion which you base on the contents of some books written centuries ago by authors unknown and accept as true without the evidence to back it up.

This guy is not unlike every other non believer, over the many centuries, that has taken verses out of context from the Bible in an attempt to make it appear that the message is distorted.

I note with interest you have not offered your opinion of how the "conflicting " passages should be contextually read .

Non believers have, unsuccessfully, tried this for two thousand years - you would think they would know that the Bible has always stood the test of validity, and the attack of mere man.

Ahum, did you miss the bit where xtianity has been on the decline for the last couple of centuries ????

The bible has withstood the test of validity ???
Dude when chrsitians were finally dissuaded from torturing and murdering anyone who questioned the bibles it soon became apparent that men didn't really live inside a big fish nor the sun revolved around the earth.

I, too, can take any book, select parts/sentences/comments, and then make it appear to contradict itself -

Far more practical in this case that you take your very contradictory book and explain how an obvious contradiction is not a contradiction.

How many women came to the sepulcher?
John 20:1 Only one woman went, Mary Magdalene.

Matthew 28:1 Mary Magdalene and the "other Mary" (Jesus’ mother) went.

Mark 16:2 It was sunrise when the two women went to the sepulcher.

John 20:1 It was still dark (before sunrise) when Mary Magdalene went alone to the sepulcher.

There were two angels seen by the women at the sepulcher and they were standing up. Luke 24:4

There was only one angel seen and he was sitting down. Mark 28:2-5 31)

How many angels were within the sepulcher?
John 20:11-12 two,
Mark 16:5 one.

The Holy Ghost bestowed at Pentecost.Acts 1:5-8 & 2:1-4 The holy Ghost bestowed before Pentecost.
John 20:22
Where did Jesus first appear to the eleven disciples? In a room in Jerusalem. Luke 24:32-37 On a mountain in Galilee. Matthew 28:15-17 3

Where did Christ ascend from? From Mount Olivet. Acts 1:9-12 From Bethany. Luke 24:50-51

Can all sins be forgiven?

(Acts 13:39) All sins can be forgiven.

(Mark 3:29) Cursing or blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unforgivable.

The Elijah mystery:

(Malachi 4:5) Elijah must return before the final days of the world. (Matthew 11:12-14) Jesus said that John the Baptist was Elijah.

(Matthew 17:12- 13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come, and everyone understood him to mean John the Baptist.

(Mark 9:13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come.

(John 1:21) John the Baptist maintained that he was not Elijah.


Who purchased the potter’s field?

Acts 1:18 The field was purchased by Judas. John 20:1 The potter’s field was purchased by the chief priests. 38) Paul’s attendants heard the miraculous voice and stood speechless. Acts 9:7 Paul’s attendants did not hear the voice and were prostrate. Acts 22:9 & 26:14 39)

Who bought the Sepulcher? Jacob, Josh 24:32 Abraham, Acts 7:16

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Hi Blood Red:

Nothing I have posted on ATS from the beginning is outside the realm of main-stream modern biblical textual scholarship.

This might come as quite a shock to some persons on this thread but the fact is that 99% of the English Speaking Population on this planet is UNAWARE of even the basic historical underpinnings of the origins of Christianity (e.g. knowledge of the various Essenoid Dead Sea Scroll related Apocalyptic movements in Palestine between 170 BCE and 68 CE , the Roman Occupation of the 1st Century Palestine, fluency in 1st century Koine Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic, and the Weltanschauung of the Mystery Schools, with which Saul of Tarsus was intimate & which influenced his own Diaspora Gentile Friendly Gospel of Christianity as it stood in opposition to the original followers of Iesous - the Ebionim (whose own long ling of (later 'heretical') bishops descended by blood from the relatives of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir aka 'Iesous', beginning with his own brother Yakkov - James--who was NOT one of the 12, yet took over the original movement after the execution of his brother for armed sedition against the State in 36 CE during an Insurrection at the 100th Anniversary of the Invasion of the Roman Army in 63 BCE by General Pompey)

To get persons on this thread 'up to speed' as it were, per your suggestion, I have incuded below a VERY SMALL reading list (I say 'small' because the actual list of books you would have to read to know enough to discuss this topic at length would be c. 1,500 books by over 1000 scholars in the field).

These listed below are SOME of the most important biblical scholars and theologians in their field from over the past 100 years :

There are many, many, many MORE wonderfully talented scholars from several different countries (especially from Germany, that bastion of inventive deep-thinking scholars) that I could add to this list, but I would have to post 10 or 15 different times on separate ATS postings !

But one has to start somewhere - and this is where I would start if I wanted to learn what modern textual New Testament scholarship has to say:

Most of the authors mentioned below have written a number of excellent books not listed next to their names: these are marked &tc &tc...

Google the name of the author to read of their other contributions to this evolving study -- which is kept from the common masses (although serious biblical scholars are familiar not only with the names listed below, but like myself, hundreds of other highly valued scholars in the field)

So this is a very partial 'starter's list to BEGIN with (and nothing more) - most of my comments on this thread ref: the 'resurrection' pericopes are digested / extracted from the latest text research from those scholars listed below:

C.K. Barrett (Jesus & the Gospel Tradition, Luke the Historian in Recent Studies, The Gospel According to St John: An Introduction & Commentary & Notes on the Greek Text (2nd Edition) The New Testament Background: Selected Documents, Q: A Re=Examination &tc. &tc.)

Burton L Mack (Who Wrote the New Testament, &tc. &tc.)

Anthony Gelston (New Heaven & New Earth: Prophecy & The Millenium)

James H. Charlesworth (The Pseudipigrapha (in 2 Vols),The Historical Jesus: An Essential Guide, Jesus & Archaeology, Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls)

Joachim Jeremias (The Problem of the Historical Jesus, The Parables of Jesus, Re-Discovering the Parables, New Testament Theology: The Proclamation of Jesus, &tc. &tc. )

John Joseph Collins (Apocalypticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Commentary on the Book of Daniel, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel, The Apocalyptic Imagination)

Rudolf Karl Bultmann (The New Testament & Mythology, The Theology of the New Testament, &tc. &tc. )

F. F. Bruce (The Hard Sayings of Jesus)

Michael Owen Wise (The First Messiah: Investigating the Saviour Before Christ)

Bishop John Shelby Spong (Resurrection: Myth or Reality? Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, Why Christianity Must Change: Or Die, Liberating the Gospels, The Sins of Scripture, The Once and Future Jesus &tc. &tc.)

Joseph Blenkinsopp (Prophecy & Canon, A History of Prophecy in Ancient Israel, &tc. &tc. )

H.H. Rowley (Jewish Apocalyptic and the Dead Sea Scrolls, &tc. &tc. )

Adolf von Harnack (New Testament Studies, Mission & Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centurites, &tc.)

C.H. Dodd (The Authority of the Bible, About the Gospels, The Parables of the Kingdom, Historical Tradition in the 4th Gospel, &tc.)

Matthew Black (An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels & Acts)

Geza Vermes (The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, The Changing Faces of Jesus, &tc. &tc.)

Elaine Pagels (The Gnostic Gospels, Beyond Belief, the Secret Gospel of Thomas, The Inner Journey, Views from the Christian Tradition)

Robert Funk (The Five Gospels, The Resurrection of Jesus: A SourceBook, &tc. )

Mark S Goodacre (The Synoptic Problem: A Way through the Maze, &tc.)

Peter M Head (Christology and the Synoptic Problem)

Bruce Chilton (Rabbi Jesus, 8tc. )

John Dominic Crosson (The Historical Jesus the Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant, The Essential Jesus &tc. &tc. )

John Rogerson (The Old Testament World, &tc. &tc. )

Phillip R Davies (The Complete World of the Dead Sea Scrolls)
Gerald Massey (The Historical Jesus & the Mythical Christ, &tc. &tc.)

Raymond Brown (An Introduction to the New Testament, A Risen Christ at Eastertime: Essays on the Gospel Narratives)

John P Meier (A Marginal Jew: Re-thinking the Historical Jesous)

Robert Eisenman ( James, the Brother of Jesus, &tc.)

John Marco Allegro (The Dead Sea Scrolls & The Christian Myth, the Mystery of the Dead Sea Scrolls Revealed, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Re=appraisal, &tc.)

Bart D. Ehrman (MisQuoting Jesus, Jesus: An Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium)

John Robinson (Re-Dating the New Testament &tc.)

James M. Robinson (The Sayings of Jesus, The Kerygma and the Historical Jesus, &tc.)

Florentio Garcia Martinez (The Dead Sea Scrolls : Study Edition)

Robert Walter Funk (The Parables of Jesus: part of the Jesus Seminar Series)

For any serious student of the Gospel material & of NT theoloy in general (and of the origins of Christianity) the above reference book-list should serve as a kind of beginner's Core Library for study from which to branch out to even more daring research !

What does it profit a man if he should gain the whole world of biblical scholarship and then lose his own soul?

Hi Trouble

I believe your mis-translation from the Koine Greek (which shows you cannot even read it) should read more like the Aramaic underlay:

'What good would it do a man if he were suddenly to come into possession of all the Mammonah in this world--then lose his life?"

I'm not sure where you get this 'soul' business...but then again, you can't read Greek (Psuche) ....or understand the Aramaic underlay (Naphshah).

At any rate, modern textual biblical Scholarship helps you understand these nuances...so you won't get your head twisted around your ankles, like you often do on these threads.

You should be VERY VERY careful about WHY you believe what you do. And if you CANNOT read the texts you purport to 'believe in' then you cannot possibly believe in them. You have to KNOW what it says FIRST, THEN you can believe what is being said.

But if you DON'T KNOW what is being said, then HOW can you possibly believe it?

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Hi Trouble

I believe your mis-translation from the Koine Greek (which shows you cannot even read it) should read more like the Aramaic underlay:

'What good would it do a man if he were suddenly to come into possession of all the Mammonah in this world--then lose his life?"

I'm not sure where you get this 'soul' business...but then again, you can't read Greek (Psuche) ....or understand the Aramaic underlay (Naphshah).

At any rate, modern textual biblical Scholarship helps you understand these nuances...so you won't get your head twisted around your ankles, like you often do on these threads.

You should be VERY VERY careful about WHY you believe what you do. And if you CANNOT read the texts you purport to 'believe in' then you cannot possibly believe in them. You have to KNOW what it says FIRST, THEN you can believe what is being said.

But if you DON'T KNOW what is being said, then HOW can you possibly believe it?

"ἐραυνᾶτε τὰς γραφάς, ὅτι ὑμεῖς δοκεῖτε ἐν αὐταῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἔχειν: καὶ ἐκεῖναί εἰσιν αἱ μαρτυροῦσαι περὶ ἐμοῦ: καὶ οὐ θέλετε ἐλθεῖν πρός με ἵνα ζωὴν ἔχητε."

Also, did Mary Magdalene see Jesus at the tomb (John 20: 14-16...when he appeared as a gardener at first) or did he appear to her later on (Matthew 28: 5-9)?