i don't have my bible handy at the moment but i remember a story where jesus tells his disciples (traveling with 5 i believe) to go and get weapons, and to sell their clothes if they have to. the disciples reply that they have 2 swords and jesus says that is enough.

when jesus is arrested in the garden of gethsamene(sp) what does peter do? he cuts off the ear of a roman soldier.

any chance they weren't disciples so much as they were armed bodyguards?

A little of both I think! Very interesting comment though. But I think that there main reason for being with Jesus was to help him spread his word.

but did they really do this, or was it just after his death? they could have just been trying to gain fame for themselves, hence all the fueding between the early churches

and how much of christianity is based on myth and total b.s. anyway

well, like the site is called, i'm sure this will always be an unsolved mystery

check this link it explains some more on his body guard:

http://www.dumpalink.com/media/1120921538

i would check it out, but i got bunk ass dial up (technical term) and it was taking forever, but from the header it reminds me of something from the bob and tom show, where some guest said arnold should play jesus because of his catchphrases. funny stuff.

I think that was the funniest thing I have ever seen. Everyone must chech that out! LOL

Quality linkage

And to answer the original post, it's an interesting point. I can't think of a passage where Jesus tells them to buy weapons (though that doesn't mean it's not there........). I think Jesus' messages of love dispel the idea that he was a homeboy hanging out with his hoods. But that's just my opinion.

Regards, PA

lol, the gangsta aspect is just my own warped sense of humor.

but he was from the line of david right? the line of kings? and with rome controling the area, maybe he feared he was a target? i'm just bringing up the bodyguard aspect out of curiosity and to see what other people think about it.

I thought that Jesus disaproved of Peter's violence at the end.

A revolutionary/rebel against the establishment, yes. Gangsta? Hmm, no.

Don't think so, this is the man that said the law would not change by a tit or tittle. Doesn't sound revolutionary/rebel to me, more like "status quo"!

My ass it's staus quo. There's a difference between God's law and man's law. Jesus had no time for man's law, no matter how glazed over it appear to coincide with God's law. And it was man's law, not God's, that Jesus revolutionized.

The law Jesus referred to (or at least the fictional words that the author of the gospel, a non-witness writing long after the last witness died, had him speak) referred to Moses law, the law given by G-d to his people. I said status quo and that is what I meant. Doesn't matter anyway, mythology is just mythology.

I think it's a matter of the letter of the Law vs. the spirit of the Law, which is why Jesus maintained that the Law could be summed up as Love God, Love your neighbour. (though I am getting off topic here - sorry)

Being tha He was the Messiah and Son of God, keping the laws of Moses, i.e. God's law, is exactly what He would do no?

The Hebrew people had elaborated on those laws, to suit themselves, and it was that He changed and criticized them for. No doubt if He were to return today, He'd sa much the same about every single denomination of Christianity.

My favorite part of that story is when Jesus put the ear back on- healed the man completely.

We can all cause hurt, but can we all heal the hurting person again?