19 replies to this topic

[Toadie]

So been reading book 30 pieces of silver. I have not yet finished book. Has anyone read it?

Long story short.
Jesus believe he was son of God and as did his family and friends. Judas was really good friend his best friend and along with his mother they planned his arrest and resurrection. Then he was only on cross for few hours not enough to kill him, none of his wounds where life threatening.
Claim his mother gave him drink so Romans assumed he died so left him alone. Back in those times you where allowed to cut people down off the cross on sabbath day. They planned Jesus arrest so he would not be on the cross for a long time..

[and then]

The story that Jesus did not die on the cross is widely believed in Islam.  They think Judas was substituted for him and that He was taken to heaven alive to await the last days.  He will then return to Damascus and help the Mahdi with his Christian and Jewish problem.  And I believe that fiction about as much as I believe this one. But hey, makes for an interesting story for those who choose not to believe.  Was the book written as something factual or was it intended as fiction?  Forgive the tone, I'm not trying to be an ass about it.  Just curious.

Edited by and then, 11 September 2012 - 08:58 AM.

[tyrant lizard]

My own personal belief is that Jesus really did think he was the son of god, and thought all along that god would rescue him. And his cry of "why have you forsaken me" was his genuine panic and fear that he'd been wrong about the whole thing.

And I think he died there, and I think the rest of it is made up by is disciples.

[and then]

tyrant lizard, on 11 September 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

My own personal belief is that Jesus really did think he was the son of god, and thought all along that god would rescue him. And his cry of "why have you forsaken me" was his genuine panic and fear that he'd been wrong about the whole thing.

And I think he died there, and I think the rest of it is made up by is disciples.

If you read Psalm 22, written by King David hundreds of years before the crucifixion, you can see that the Lord Jesus was teaching and confirming prophecy as He died.  Read it and remember that it was written hundreds of years before the event.

[tyrant lizard]

and then, on 11 September 2012 - 10:15 AM, said:

If you read Psalm 22, written by King David hundreds of years before the crucifixion, you can see that the Lord Jesus was teaching and confirming prophecy as He died.  Read it and remember that it was written hundreds of years before the event.

Yes but if I took everything in the bible to be true I wouldn't have the theory that I do, so reading that probably isn't going to help me.

[and then]

tyrant lizard, on 11 September 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

Yes but if I took everything in the bible to be true I wouldn't have the theory that I do, so reading that probably isn't going to help me.

Hence the reason to try reading it.  It's kind of difficult for me to understand people who reject things without even investigating.  If you found some ancient papyrus scroll that described a weapon that would be brighter than a thousand suns and cast a cloud over the earth for many leagues..... I imagine you'd find that pretty interesting.  If it also describes radiation sickness the average person would be very impressed, even excited at such a profound discovery.  But if you tell them it's in the Bible - lights off, no one home - instantly.  It's just not rational imo.

[tyrant lizard]

and then, on 11 September 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Hence the reason to try reading it.  It's kind of difficult for me to understand people who reject things without even investigating.  If you found some ancient papyrus scroll that described a weapon that would be brighter than a thousand suns and cast a cloud over the earth for many leagues..... I imagine you'd find that pretty interesting.  If it also describes radiation sickness the average person would be very impressed, even excited at such a profound discovery.  But if you tell them it's in the Bible - lights off, no one home - instantly.  It's just not rational imo.

Hey listen, this is coming from a total heathen. I admit I've never read the Bible, I just know the general gist of it. I don't switch off when I hear Bible stories, I'm pretty certain most of them are based on true events. All I'm saying is that there have been 2000 years and more worth of Chinese whispers, and the facts may have changed somewhat.

That light thing you was talking about - is that in the Bible? Is that what took out Sodom or am I getting my facts mixed up?

P.S please don't get your shillelagh, I've got a sore head as it is

[Neognosis]

No evidence for any of those claims, nor really any evidence for what is in the bible. So, in my opinion, this is all worthless conjecture.

[Dr. D]

As a personal addition to the tale, permit me to suggest something that happened earlier.

Jesus was told that the priests were hunting for him and planned to kill him.  He went to Bethany which is about two miles from Jerusalem but it is also where the house of Martha, Mary and Lazarus was located.  There is no reason to believe that Jesus and his group would have gone to Bethany without visiting since it is believed by many experts that they were cousins.

Later, Jesus and the disciples are there when Martha and Mary come with the news that Lazarus is sick.  Jesus says something very strange, “This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God’s glory so that God’s Son may be glorified through it.”  One must question how the illness of Lazarus could give glory to Jesus but many believe he meant that it gave him the opportunity to perform a miracle.

Even though Martha and Mary had told him of Lazarus being sick, he stayed for two more days before suddenly announcing that they would return to Judea.  The disciples were alarmed because, after all, people were waiting there to kill him.

He then tells the disciples, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.”  It is important to note that Jesus clearly refers to “sleep.”

The disciples stated that if he was asleep, he should get better but then the situation changes as Jesus states, “Lazarus is dead,  and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”

So we go from being asleep to being dead and they leave to go to the house of Lazarus.  The rest is well known, Jesus goes to the tomb, does not enter but calls for Lazarus to exit and he does with all the wrappings used for a corpse.

The coincidences in this tale are that they lead to certain suspicions if we think like detectives.

• Jesus visits Lazarus upon entering Bethany
  
• Lazarus falls ill
  
• Jesus waits two days (Martha and Mary informed him of the illness and he waited 2 days, making a total of three days)
  
• Jesus suddenly is not afraid to return to Jerusalem
  
• Lazarus is “raised from the dead”
  
• Jesus is arrested and tried and crucified
  
• He “dies” within six hours, immediately after a sponge with some liquid is raised to his lips
  
• He is placed in a tomb and Nicodemus brings aloe, usually used to heal wounds
  
• He arises three days later, the same time Lazarus was in the tomb

The plot emerges as a suspicion that perhaps there was a potion, perhaps opium, given in sufficient quantities to imitate death.  Lazarus agrees to test the potion so that Jesus will know how long it will last.  Applying it makes him oblivious to pain.  Three days later he emerges from the tomb.

What reasons do we have to hold these suspicions?  In Mat 27:34 Jesus is offered the drink and refuses.  It could easily have been someone not wanting him to suffer any longer than necessary.  “They gave him [Jesus] vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. “

The Gospels do not agree on many details, including Jesus’ last words, but they all agree that Jesus drank from the lifted sponge and in that moment, instantly “died.”  We also learn from Scripture that it was rumored by the people that the disciples had stolen Jesus’ “body” from the tomb.  The disciple John many years later tells Polycarp that he had seen Jesus long after the crucifixion.  Other accounts have Jesus dying at an advanced age.

It would appear that everyone involved in this fled from Israel.  Joseph of Arimathea went to England, as evidence by the church he built at Glastonbury.  Mary Magdalena reportedly went to France and is still held as the nation’s patron saint.  The disciples, with the exception of Peter and James, disappeared and are known afterward only in legend and church tradition.  Mary, mother of Jesus, totally disappears.

Just a thought, but I think worth thinking.

[Neognosis]

where in the bible does it say anything about aloe?

It also says that the soldiers offered the condemned some bad wine to drink.

If it was a conconction to make it look like death had occurred, why mention it at all?

Christ was also scourged. Most did not survive roman scourgings anyhow.

None of the gospels have christ "instantly dying" after drinking from the sponge either.

There aren't any reliable accounts of jesus dying of old age years later either.

There is also no evidence whatsoever of anyone leaving judea and settling in europe, beyond specultion based on too many dan brown novels and circumstantial stories. Not even evidence, but stories.

So, maybe your theory has meritt, but you are clearly placing emphasis on some very sketchy accounts and disregarding others to fit your idea.

[tyrant lizard]

Dr. D, on 11 September 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

As a personal addition to the tale, permit me to suggest something that happened earlier.

Jesus was told that the priests were hunting for him and planned to kill him.  He went to Bethany which is about two miles from Jerusalem but it is also where the house of Martha, Mary and Lazarus was located.  There is no reason to believe that Jesus and his group would have gone to Bethany without visiting since it is believed by many experts that they were cousins.

Later, Jesus and the disciples are there when Martha and Mary come with the news that Lazarus is sick.  Jesus says something very strange, “This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God’s glory so that God’s Son may be glorified through it.”  One must question how the illness of Lazarus could give glory to Jesus but many believe he meant that it gave him the opportunity to perform a miracle.

Even though Martha and Mary had told him of Lazarus being sick, he stayed for two more days before suddenly announcing that they would return to Judea.  The disciples were alarmed because, after all, people were waiting there to kill him.

He then tells the disciples, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.”  It is important to note that Jesus clearly refers to “sleep.”

The disciples stated that if he was asleep, he should get better but then the situation changes as Jesus states, “Lazarus is dead,  and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”

So we go from being asleep to being dead and they leave to go to the house of Lazarus.  The rest is well known, Jesus goes to the tomb, does not enter but calls for Lazarus to exit and he does with all the wrappings used for a corpse.

The coincidences in this tale are that they lead to certain suspicions if we think like detectives.

• Jesus visits Lazarus upon entering Bethany
  
• Lazarus falls ill
  
• Jesus waits two days (Martha and Mary informed him of the illness and he waited 2 days, making a total of three days)
  
• Jesus suddenly is not afraid to return to Jerusalem
  
• Lazarus is “raised from the dead”
  
• Jesus is arrested and tried and crucified
  
• He “dies” within six hours, immediately after a sponge with some liquid is raised to his lips
  
• He is placed in a tomb and Nicodemus brings aloe, usually used to heal wounds
  
• He arises three days later, the same time Lazarus was in the tomb

The plot emerges as a suspicion that perhaps there was a potion, perhaps opium, given in sufficient quantities to imitate death.  Lazarus agrees to test the potion so that Jesus will know how long it will last.  Applying it makes him oblivious to pain.  Three days later he emerges from the tomb.

What reasons do we have to hold these suspicions?  In Mat 27:34 Jesus is offered the drink and refuses.  It could easily have been someone not wanting him to suffer any longer than necessary.  “They gave him [Jesus] vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. “

The Gospels do not agree on many details, including Jesus’ last words, but they all agree that Jesus drank from the lifted sponge and in that moment, instantly “died.”  We also learn from Scripture that it was rumored by the people that the disciples had stolen Jesus’ “body” from the tomb.  The disciple John many years later tells Polycarp that he had seen Jesus long after the crucifixion.  Other accounts have Jesus dying at an advanced age.

It would appear that everyone involved in this fled from Israel.  Joseph of Arimathea went to England, as evidence by the church he built at Glastonbury.  Mary Magdalena reportedly went to France and is still held as the nation’s patron saint.  The disciples, with the exception of Peter and James, disappeared and are known afterward only in legend and church tradition.  Mary, mother of Jesus, totally disappears.

Just a thought, but I think worth thinking.

Eat your heart out Columbo...

..There was just one more thing...

[Dr. D]

where in the bible does it say anything about aloe?

John 19:39 “He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds.”

If it was a conconction to make it look like death had occurred, why mention it at all?

There would be no reason if you assume the writers of the gospels were aware of the conspiracy.  If they were not, however, it would be a detail worth including.

Christ was also scourged. Most did not survive roman scourgings anyhow.

Josephus tells us that scourgings were part of the pre-crucifixion process.  I have never found anything to support your claim that most did not survive them.  Josephus also tells of a man who survived crucifixion and there were cases of people on the cross for a week.

None of the gospels have christ "instantly dying" after drinking from the sponge either.

Mat 27:48 And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge [sponge], and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed [stick], and gave him [Jesus] to drink.
Mat 27:49 The rest said, Let be [leave him alone], let us see whether Elias [Elijah] will come to save him [Jesus].
Mat 27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost [gave up his spirit].

Mark 15:36  Someone ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink. “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to take him down,” he said.
Mark 15:37 With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last.

John 19:29 Now a vessel full of sour wine was sitting there; and they filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on hyssop, and put it to His mouth.
John 19:30So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.

There aren't any reliable accounts of jesus dying of old age years later either.

There are no reliable accounts concerning Jesus, including those found in the New Testament but to assume that some become more credible than others because of personal belief is not acceptable research.

There is also no evidence whatsoever of anyone leaving judea and settling in europe, beyond specultion based on too many dan brown novels and circumstantial stories. Not even evidence, but stories.

Once again, cannot cherry pick our evidences and evaluate them according to our beliefs.  First of all, we have the words of Baronius telling us that Joseph of Arimathea and his group was put into exile on a ship without sails.  He was in charge of the Vatican’s secret library for years.  If not true, we have to explain how the gospels reached England at such an early period.  Eusebius tells us that some of the disciples of Jesus “crossed the Ocean and reached the isles of Britain.”  Certainly Mary Magdalena was known to Joseph and it would not be illogical to believe she arrived in French during the same voyage.  The interesting study of students from Cyprus testing the currents of the Mediterranean had bouys leaving Haifa and arriving at Marseilles, just as a vessel without sails would have done.  Hippolytus seemed to be aware of Joseph being in England and wrote of it.  Maurus later wrote that Joseph of Arimathea arrived in England in the company of Lazarus, Martha, Mary and Mary Magdalene.

These writers were not Dan Brown.  Cesar Baronius was a noted scholar and historian and noted that Joseph of Arimathea had gone to England Lazarus, Mary Magdalene, Martha, Marcella and others.  You can find it in his Annales Ecclesiastici, volume 1, section 35.  

So, maybe your theory has meritt, but you are clearly placing emphasis on some very sketchy accounts and disregarding others to fit your idea.

I think that I have presented my theory are far better evidences than you have offered your denial.

[Neognosis]

You are right about dying after the wine, I concede.

Quote

There are no reliable accounts concerning Jesus, including those found in the New Testament but to assume that some become more credible than others because of personal belief is not acceptable research.

which goes back to my original statement, that there is:

Quote

No evidence for any of those claims, nor really any evidence for what is in the bible. So, in my opinion, this is all worthless conjecture.

Quote

Once again, cannot cherry pick our evidences and evaluate them according to our beliefs.  First of all, we have the words of Baronius telling us that Joseph of Arimathea and his group was put into exile on a ship without sails.  He was in charge of the Vatican’s secret library for years.  If not true, we have to explain how the gospels reached England at such an early period.  Eusebius tells us that some of the disciples of Jesus “crossed the Ocean and reached the isles of Britain.”  Certainly Mary Magdalena was known to Joseph and it would not be illogical to believe she arrived in French during the same voyage.  The interesting study of students from Cyprus testing the currents of the Mediterranean had bouys leaving Haifa and arriving at Marseilles, just as a vessel without sails would have done.  Hippolytus seemed to be aware of Joseph being in England and wrote of it.  Maurus later wrote that Joseph of Arimathea arrived in England in the company of Lazarus, Martha, Mary and Mary Magdalene.

you are just building another layer of cards on an already shaky house of cards.
WHo the heck is Baronious? Is this a person who lived one thousand five hundred years after the death of christ?

all this conspiracy stuff seems like a fun hobby to me, but I put no faith in it at all.

Also, as a point, you can't prove a negative. You can only prove a positive. And while your ideas are interesting, there really is no proof of any of them, beyond conjecture, IMO.


But you are right about the timeline with the wine and about he aloe, I was mistaken.

[Dr. D]

Permit me first to say that it is a delight to have a discussion with someone who accepts countering evidences and admits errors.  That is unfortunately a rarity in most cases here.

which goes back to my original statement, that there is:
No evidence for any of those claims, nor really any evidence for what is in the bible. So, in my opinion, this is all worthless conjecture.

I am inclined to agree that there is an anemia of evidence, however, it is a worthy effort to investigate things like this if nothing more in response to the historic impact such beliefs have had on man and his societies.  I would say there is little evidence to support the tales of the New Testament, however that is not equally true with the Old.  Archaeology has given credence to many of the OT stories but that is not the case with the NT.

you are just building another layer of cards on an already shaky house of cards.
WHo the heck is Baronious? Is this a person who lived one thousand five hundred years after the death of christ?

Yes, but he had access to ancient documents and stated that the story of Joseph of Arimathea came from writings contemporary to that time.  If it is not true, then we must question why a representative of the church, subject to harsh disciplines, would have so willingly lied for literally nothing to gain.

all this conspiracy stuff seems like a fun hobby to me, but I put no faith in it at all.

Perhaps it is but it establishes a culture of question that is often valuable to generations yet unborn.  If we keep our curiosity and willingness to probe alive, then perhaps one day we will have answers to the death of JFK, the mysterious collapse of three World Trade Towers and countless other dubious events deserving attention.

Also, as a point, you can't prove a negative. You can only prove a positive. And while your ideas are interesting, there really is no proof of any of them, beyond conjecture, IMO.

Whether negative or not, we cannot prove anything about the New Testament.  We don’t even know who wrote the Gospels or when.  But we can try to understand how, apart from military force, Christianity grew out of this unsubstantiated tale imitating prior messiahs so completely and took control of the western world.  We can try to understand how writings from various generations somehow supported one another without knowledge of the other’s existence.  And if we are to demand proof for all things we probe, all the fun would be diluted and we would fall into the boredom of be sure of everything.

[Neognosis]

Quote

I am inclined to agree that there is an anemia of evidence, however, it is a worthy effort to investigate things like this if nothing more in response to the historic impact such beliefs have had on man and his societies.  I would say there is little evidence to support the tales of the New Testament, however that is not equally true with the Old.  Archaeology has given credence to many of the OT stories but that is not the case with the NT.

I agree, with some GLARING exceptions. For instance, there is no evidence of the Jews being captive in Egypt. That's pretty glaring. You would expect SOMETHING at this point.

Quote

Yes, but he had access to ancient documents and stated that the story of Joseph of Arimathea came from writings contemporary to that time.  If it is not true, then we must question why a representative of the church, subject to harsh disciplines, would have so willingly lied for literally nothing to gain.

I don't know what he said or didn't say, or what the context was, or how he meant anything. Or what ancient documents he saw, or what was in them. I don't think anyone does, though.

Quote

Perhaps it is but it establishes a culture of question that is often valuable to generations yet unborn.  If we keep our curiosity and willingness to probe alive, then perhaps one day we will have answers to the death of JFK, the mysterious collapse of three World Trade Towers and countless other dubious events deserving attention.

I agree, with the exceptions that we already know the answers to the death of JFK, and the world trade towers. There comes a point where fantastical imagination and willing misinterpretation of facts is contrary to the goal you just stated. I question your questioning, so to speak.

Quote

Whether negative or not, we cannot prove anything about the New Testament.  We don’t even know who wrote the Gospels or when.  But we can try to understand how, apart from military force, Christianity grew out of this unsubstantiated tale imitating prior messiahs so completely and took control of the western world.  We can try to understand how writings from various generations somehow supported one another without knowledge of the other’s existence.  And if we are to demand proof for all things we probe, all the fun would be diluted and we would fall into the boredom of be sure of everything.

Ok, I'll give you that, for sure.

with the exception that we aren't QUITE as clueless about the orgins of the gospels as one might believe. But yes, we don't know exactly who wrote what.

Edited by Neognosis, 11 September 2012 - 06:00 PM.