Did Jesus survive the crucifixion?

[jaylemurph]

Hey Abe ... how goes ?

I believe the 'alternative' don't go very far or carry much around these here parts ..

~

I've said it before: thinking "outside the box" still requires /thinking/. Far too often "alternative" is short-hand for "lazy thinking" or "no thinking at all." Look at all the posters who cannot even master basic history or science yet go on to spew paffle. Elaborate paffle, it's true, but still paffle.

--Jaylemurph

[honey_12]

On 7/16/2014 at 7:27 PM, DieChecker said:

I had heard there was a story about Jesus being replaced by Judas on the cross. Is that the Islamic version?

http://www.gci.org/disc/07-whydie

If Jesus did not die, then he is a total Liar, as he stated several times, in various Gospels, that he was going to die soon.

Also Jesus died to fulfull the prophesy of Isaiah 53.

A lot of spin was created and stamped permanent at the first Nicene Council. Control over the masses

rather than theological agreement or individual sovereignty would be the goal. The main detriment was

the fact The Christ and his living (breathing) gift (alone) to give, would continue on in perpetuity, with or without

Christianity. This was inconvenient to the hierarchy, so enhancement of the giver, the invisiblity of the gift

of the kingdom of God literally revealed within (Holy Spirit) and the Ascension...sending gift and giver away

forever was paramount. Like taking a kid to a busstop and telling him his imaginary friend is getting on the

bus and will never be coming back. Of course the follow thru was millions of executions before the crusades

and lots of of burnings of original writings by the eyewitnesses of Jesus as the Christ. Today we know it as

"santitizing a scene".

 

[Hanslune]

30 minutes ago, honey_12 said:

A lot of spin was created and stamped permanent at the first Nicene Council. Control over the masses

rather than theological agreement or individual sovereignty would be the goal. The main detriment was

the fact The Christ and his living (breathing) gift (alone) to give, would continue on in perpetuity, with or without

Christianity. This was inconvenient to the hierarchy, so enhancement of the giver, the invisiblity of the gift

of the kingdom of God literally revealed within (Holy Spirit) and the Ascension...sending gift and giver away

forever was paramount. Like taking a kid to a busstop and telling him his imaginary friend is getting on the

bus and will never be coming back. Of course the follow thru was millions of executions before the crusades

and lots of of burnings of original writings by the eyewitnesses of Jesus as the Christ. Today we know it as

"santitizing a scene".

 

Hmmm why would a God who created the universe and has ultimate power and foresight allow that to happen - unless he wanted it too?

If you say man is the master of his own fate then that is contradicted by God withholding his 'message' until billions had come and gone then popping in his creation to announce what the plan was and that the old plan (old testament) was wrong.

Very, very sloppy Godsmanship

 

 

 

[honey_12]

42 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Hmmm why would a God who created the universe and has ultimate power and foresight allow that to happen - unless he wanted it too?

If you say man is the master of his own fate then that is contradicted by God withholding his 'message' until billions had come and gone then popping in his creation to announce what the plan was and that the old plan (old testament) was wrong.

Very, very sloppy Godsmanship

 

 

 

More like sloppy humanship. Since day one we have taken every breath freely. Not by choice however. It is

what we are given freely. And we take it for granted. Yes, some token lip service but all our chosen actions have overlooked the

perspective of knowing the intimate awareness of the actual presence of God within each one of us. Intervening in our otherwise

ignorant state of being as an outside entity is not part of the blueprint. As a wise man has noted in our time, "the ocean is in every drop". But so far the stories and their ensuing arguments and wars has outshined in man's minds, the glory which created us and sustains us. 

 

So though we have the capacity to choose wisely for ourselves thanks to this knowing, which was the primary mission of Jesus 

(the Christ part and an ongoing unbroken line of Christs) we overlook it, not at all helped in this particular respect by religion. We thoroughly overlook the thirst which can take in The Water (of life). For instance when you are reminded of Jesus' statement of the kingdom of God being within you, do you contemplate the beauty, the wonder, the splendor, the wisdom, the power, the glory of feeling, of perceiving or of intimately knowing that, or are you like the generations before you content (for some not so mysterious reasons) to believe it is impossible and go about thinking of material concerns, temporal love and maybe occasionally the existence of a god...never guessing the Kingdom is right there within you?

How that somehow outweighs the thirst has been always been the mystery to me, not the Giver and the Gift. Maybe, just maybe in our present time the inspiration is being ratcheted up a few notches equivalent to the desire and prayers perhaps, for Peace. (Personal peace obviously preceding World peace) Preferable to having the show canceled due to lack of interest in the real practicality of the union of pure life and the soul. 

So would prayers be God initiating change or is that us, finally understanding we need the help, the wisdom, the clarity, the peace that has been lying unopened in us for a very long time?

As far as history goes and what happened to Jesus after the crucifixion, we can only guess. All historical evidence is subject to change, but I find both the India and the Afghanistan theories compelling. The Ascension, well, ridiculous...convenient to catholic dogma and catechism however.

 

[back to earth]

On 7/17/2014 at 3:31 AM, Rlyeh said:

I thought he flew away?

 

[back to earth]

On 7/20/2014 at 7:18 AM, jaylemurph said:

They seemed to have left that bit out of all four gospels.

--Jaylemurph

The bit about the draught   ?      

[honey_12]

On 7/22/2014 at 9:43 PM, jaylemurph said:

I've said it before: thinking "outside the box" still requires /thinking/. Far too often "alternative" is short-hand for "lazy thinking" or "no thinking at all." Look at all the posters who cannot even master basic history or science yet go on to spew paffle. Elaborate paffle, it's true, but still paffle.

--Jaylemurph

"Outside the box" may require some 'still' thinking...thinking after spending some time in stillness, silence not brought about by a word or mantra, a silence which in reality is full of 'unstruck' sound. Goes past the limits of what we think we know...in a place where many more answers than questions exist. Neither pancakes or waffles, but with unimaginable ingrediants and surprisingly delicious, totally filling meals. And so simple, masters of anything else must approach as novices, not as experts. The common denominator?

[atalante]

The gospel of Matthew says there was only one post-resurrection appearance of Jesus, and not all of the 12 disciples/apostles witnessed that one appearance, because the appearance occurred in Galillee. 

 

The gospel of Luke disagrees completely with Matthew; Luke describes many post-resurrection appearances of Jesus, around Jerusalem.   Luke's gospel does not admit that Matthew's one post-resurrection appearance ever happened. 

 

Evidently there was a 1st century AD dispute, and rift, about which post-resurrection appearances of Jesus were valid. 

[Astral Hillbilly]

You sound like an intelligent person with quite an interest in Jesus. If what you're proposing actually occurred, then we're all doomed. Because that would mean that Jesus didn't accomplish what he came here to do, which was to die for our sins so we can enter heaven.

If that's the case, then there's no purpose in reading the Bible, worshiping God, or anything else. Case closed. Story over. Unlike us, our God is perfect, therefore I prefer to believe that he did accomplish what he came here to do. We wouldn't even have a need for a Bible if your scenario were fact.

God and Earths history can't be adjusted to our liking. We can question Man's word all we want, but not God's word.

[jaylemurph]

12 hours ago, honey_12 said:

"Outside the box" may require some 'still' thinking...thinking after spending some time in stillness, silence not brought about by a word or mantra, a silence which in reality is full of 'unstruck' sound. Goes past the limits of what we think we know...in a place where many more answers than questions exist. Neither pancakes or waffles, but with unimaginable ingrediants and surprisingly delicious, totally filling meals. And so simple, masters of anything else must approach as novices, not as experts. The common denominator?

...waffle-y, pseudo-mystical twaddle, evidently.

--Jaylemurph

[jaylemurph]

1 hour ago, Astral Hillbilly said:

We can question Man's word all we want, but not God's word.

Speak for yourself, sir. I can question's god's word -- with or without scare capitals all I want.

--Jaylemurph

[jaylemurph]

19 hours ago, back to earth said:

The bit about the draught   ?      

I don't even remember. Things like that happen when someone unfreezes a thread that ended years ago.

--Jaylemurph

[GlitterRose]

On 7/15/2014 at 1:41 PM, and then said:

It's an Islamic concept that he was not killed on the cross. It allows them to deny his deity and sonship. No Christian will ever accept this because IF the crucifixion death is a lie then any hope of resurrection is equally false. Kind of removes the whole basis for it, ya know? But a huge number of people believe this fervently and that is their right. One day we'll all know for sure.

Or we won't. I mean, if it turned out everything was bogus and there really wasn't anything after death...no one would ever know anything. 

[GlitterRose]

There would have to be an awful lot of assumptions here, not the least of which is that there was in fact an actual historical Jesus.

[MWoo7]

Well if one could travel back in time and ask the Romans, I'm sure there were no shortage of zealots screaming around just pick one.  Right place right time.

[kmt_sesh]

5 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

...waffle-y, pseudo-mystical twaddle, evidently.

--Jaylemurph

But isn't the technique of "still thinking" how you commune with your Basset Masters?

[jaylemurph]

1 hour ago, kmt_sesh said:

But isn't the technique of "still thinking" how you commune with your Basset Masters?

Naw, They speak to me chiefly through the flights of birds and the shapes of livers. Occasionally, I get gnomic messages they send after breathing volcanic fumes.

--Jaylemurph

[BigDan]

Fascinating topic 

Is Josephus considered an accurate historical account?

 

[jaylemurph]

12 hours ago, BigDan said:

Fascinating topic 

Is Josephus considered an accurate historical account?

 

All history is subjective -- history isn't a collection of facts; it's the interpretation of facts, the organization of those facts into a narrative, a process liable to pressures the writer, the audience, governments, etc. Josephus openly admits the political nature of his work: he's an apologist for the Jews and wants to demonstrate that his race was equal in antiquity and prestige to more established and  politically and culturally dominant groups, particularly the Romans.

That said, he is regarded as a dependable source.

--Jaylemurph

 

[BigDan]

Does it mention who, exactly,  he removed from the cross?

Could it really be that easy?

 

[jaylemurph]

2 hours ago, BigDan said:

Does it mention who, exactly,  he removed from the cross?

Could it really be that easy?

 

Here's the Wiki article on the subject -- I think at the time when he was writing, Josephus would have been keen to differentiate himself and his people, whom we wanted to present as decent law-abiding folk from the rag-tag band of petty criminal scofflaws called Christians, so I think much of what he wrote specifically about Jesus has been... kindly emended by later Christians. He doesn't even make mention of crucifixion in the three citations of Jesus in his work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

--Jaylemurph

Edited April 25, 2017 by jaylemurph

[+DieChecker]

On 4/23/2017 at 6:33 AM, atalante said:

The gospel of Matthew says there was only one post-resurrection appearance of Jesus, and not all of the 12 disciples/apostles witnessed that one appearance, because the appearance occurred in Galillee. 

 

The gospel of Luke disagrees completely with Matthew; Luke describes many post-resurrection appearances of Jesus, around Jerusalem.   Luke's gospel does not admit that Matthew's one post-resurrection appearance ever happened. 

 

Evidently there was a 1st century AD dispute, and rift, about which post-resurrection appearances of Jesus were valid. 

I wouldn't say there was dispute. Mathew ends right there at the first post resurrection appearance. It doesn't go on and say, "And he never appeared again.". And it doesn't mention Jesus's assension into the clouds/Heaven either. Doesn't mean there is dispute about that though.

[+DieChecker]

On 4/22/2017 at 1:14 PM, honey_12 said:

A lot of spin was created and stamped permanent at the first Nicene Council. Control over the masses

rather than theological agreement or individual sovereignty would be the goal. The main detriment was

the fact The Christ and his living (breathing) gift (alone) to give, would continue on in perpetuity, with or without

Christianity. This was inconvenient to the hierarchy, so enhancement of the giver, the invisiblity of the gift

of the kingdom of God literally revealed within (Holy Spirit) and the Ascension...sending gift and giver away

forever was paramount. Like taking a kid to a busstop and telling him his imaginary friend is getting on the

bus and will never be coming back. Of course the follow thru was millions of executions before the crusades

and lots of of burnings of original writings by the eyewitnesses of Jesus as the Christ. Today we know it as

"santitizing a scene".

 

Well, if what you are getting at is that the Bible was heavily edited after the Nicene Council, I'd have to agree to a point. Because the Bible was kind of ragtag before that point, and differing churches/towns/regions had differing books/letters in their collections. However the main points of the Four Gospels are probably very close to what was originally written. Nicene Council was in 325, and the oldest fragments of Luke and Mark are from the 1st and 2nd centuries, and match up pretty well. 

I do agree that the Church in many instances did what was good for the Church first and Humanity second. But, overall, I think it has turned out OK, with the message going out, if not with the exact same wrapper in every case.

 

[Kenemet]

On 4/23/2017 at 8:33 AM, atalante said:

The gospel of Matthew says there was only one post-resurrection appearance of Jesus, and not all of the 12 disciples/apostles witnessed that one appearance, because the appearance occurred in Galillee. 

 

The gospel of Luke disagrees completely with Matthew; Luke describes many post-resurrection appearances of Jesus, around Jerusalem.   Luke's gospel does not admit that Matthew's one post-resurrection appearance ever happened. 

 

Evidently there was a 1st century AD dispute, and rift, about which post-resurrection appearances of Jesus were valid. 

In addition, there are a number of manuscript versions of all the gospels as well as other books/manuscripts that didn't make it into the Bible.  Some of the gospels also show evidence of being rewritten in these copied manuscripts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament

I think that any real discussion has to go back to the original documents (as many as can be found, and nowadays that's pretty easy) and versions and any supporting material around it. Wikipedia has some interesting material on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion_of_Jesus#Other_accounts_and_references

 

 

[Kenemet]

On 4/23/2017 at 9:26 PM, jaylemurph said:

Naw, They speak to me chiefly through the flights of birds and the shapes of livers. Occasionally, I get gnomic messages they send after breathing volcanic fumes.

--Jaylemurph

The Cat Gods speak to us through catnip.  Much more fun than liver and volcano fumes.