The Mystery of Jesus Christ. (Page 4)

The13th: No I am not even looking for official record, but just 1 piece of unofficial written mentioning of crucification at the time of "Jesus". Or just any religious teacher that get crucify. Paper is not really a common item at that time. Some form of record will do.
You know in moment like this when the mind is in a state of shock, one can think about funny thing. I suddenly remember Mel Brookein crazy history of the world and he curse "Jesus Christ" and Jesus said "what?". And Mel said What. Haha.

The13th: James Mitchner, in one of his many thick novels, actually speculate about how religion came about, including how the term "Jehova" evolved among early people around those region. Can't remember the name, but lots of Jews history in there, including one who walk all the way from southern Russia through unknown terrain all the way to Israel to join the new country.

The13th: The Source.

ghostgeek: As far as I can see, if you want evidence that Jesus Christ was crucified, all you can do is read the New Testament. Most people think the letters of Paul, those that are considered genuine, are the earliest Christian documents but the man never saw Jesus. One thing to think about is the possibility that Jesus never died on the cross, that He may have been taken down alive. Some people maintain that his death was faked, that it was all stage managed from the beginning. So maybe He did make it back to India as some allege.

The13th: So those genuine letters of Paul, Paul who never saw Jesus, roughly when was it written and whats in it?

The thing is, we can hardly afford to consider whether Jesus died on the cross or not at this point. First we need to find an "external" piece of evidence of his existence. I thought this is not too hard. I even got a colleague whose name is Jesus at one stage. So I thought if we "google" into the documents available at that time we might find too many Jesus and dont know which one is the real one. But now apparently the fact is, there seems to be no one of that name that cause the roman so much trouble that they decide to crucify him. Now crucification is a big thing, you carry that cross and there were thousands of people watching you, people are bound to talk and write those thing down. Words separated. People just dont keep silence. You tale, good or bad, will get passed down for generation. So it would be most unusual if we draw blank. Sorry if I am asking too much, Christ, I might not be a Christian, but I thought there surely is something about that guy that I find special. OK let me go watch my DVD (no not the Mel Brooke one) again to see what this guy all about then get back here.

ghostgeek: The New Testament contains fourteen letters originally assumed to have been written by Paul. The authenticity of one of them, the letter to the Hebrews, was questioned early on, and another six have been rejected by modern scholars as being written by disciples of Paul. This leaves seven letters that are considered genuine, these being:

First Thessalonians (ca. 51 AD)

Philippians (ca. 52–54 AD)

Philemon (ca. 52–54 AD)

First Corinthians (ca. 53–54 AD)

Galatians (ca. 55 AD)

Second Corinthians (ca. 55–56 AD)

Romans (ca. 55–58 AD)

The letters were intended for public reading to the Church communities that Paul had established and were written to teach and encourage converts. They are more theological than the gospels, there is more reasoning in them and they are often about everyday matters.

When it comes to the life and death of Jesus Christ one is pretty much dependant on what's written in the Bible for information. Without the New Testament account Jesus would be invisible. There are so many different theories that strive to explain who the real Jesus was, His life, teaching and death, that it's clear nobody knows the truth. Some say He never lived, others that He died on the cross, while a few maintain He survived the crucifixion. It's my opinion that anyone would have better luck discovering Atlantis than they would of finding the real Jesus. He is one of history's greatest enigmas.

The13th: www.jesusneverexisted.com. this shock even a none believer like me. Not even Da Vincci code mention it. So for two thousand years people fight, defend, crusade, inquisit, go to all corners of the world to spread gospel, cried on good Friday, all these for some glorious nothing? Wow. So what's left? Did we get any wisdom or other goodies from the religion? I can still settle for less if there is something good I can get out of 2000 years of cover up.

ghostgeek: Strip away faith from any religion and you're left with fairy tales and myths.

ghostgeek: There is wisdom in the sayings of Jesus but much that is profound was said earlier by others. For example, Jesus taught His followers to love all their neighbours, not just Christians:

Matthew 7:12

"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

This is a sentiment that was expounded by the great Jewish Rabbi Hillel nearly a century before:

"Whatever is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow man. This is the whole Law." [Jesus The Evidence by Ian Wilson ]

Of course, you can also find this in the Old Testament:

Leviticus 19:18

"Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD"

Then again, you can find something similar being uttered by Sextus, a Pagan philosopher who florished c. 50 BC:

"Such as you wish your neighbour to be to you, such also be to your neighbour." [ A Life That Matters: Transforming Faces, Renewing Lives by Dr. Kenneth E. Salyer ]

When Jesus goes further than this and teaches that we should love our enemies, as in:

Luke 6:27-36

"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic."

Again this isn't new. Sextus expresses something similar:

"Wish that you may be able to benefit your enemies."

Celsus, the 2nd century Greek philosopher and opponent of early Christianity, has this to say on the matter:

"You Christians have a saying that goes something like this: 'Don't resist a man who insults you; even if he strikes you, offer him the other cheek as well.' This is nothing new, and it's been better said by others, especially by Plato." [ Celsus On the True Doctrine, translated by R. Joseph Hoffman, Oxford University Press, 1987 ]

The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that Jesus Christ either reiterated the precepts of others or had their insights imputed to Him by the writers of the Gospels.

The13th: I Will Be Back.

Zanjan: Boyz, it was common all over the ancient world to impale people, hang and nail them to a stake or tree to die. The accounts of such were all by non-Christians; Romans did this in the Spartan war some 75 years before Jesus.

While Romans could be creative in how they did it, remains of such executed people have been found. Israel has a heel bone from a young man with a spike driven through, then bent down on the back side so it wouldn't slip out. This fits ancient accounts.

I should think some of the wood would have to be sawed off to remove Jesus's body, and He'd be buried with it at ankles and wrists, unless they knew how to remove it.

Either way, if He had survived, He wouldn't have been able to walk and would have serious carpal tunnel syndrome. Doctors know exactly how long it would take a person to die this way, confirming Biblical accounts.

The method of Crucifixion was to painfully humiliate - why would the killer count such a victim as worthy to record their names anywhere? They could never have kept track of the thousands they killed - Jesus was only worth writing about to the Christians.

Zanjan: Ghost, the story of the stone rolled away from the tomb is certainly interesting and could easily be taken *both* literally and metaphorically as actual event. I saw the cracked rock from that earthquake when I was in Israel, it's glass-covered with a shrine built over top of it.

Just a little common sense here. If a few strong arms rolled the stone there in the first place, they could also roll it back with leverage, especially with assistance from earthquake aftershocks. The grout wouldn't even be dry yet, especially if the slurry was made hastily.

Yes, how do we know somebody - a new believer or the actual owner of the Tomb - didn't come along and pay the soldiers for the body? Who chose the soldiers - Pilate? The soldiers posted there might also have been secret Jesus sympathizers - not surprisingly, since it was noted that some soldiers were moved both before and during the crucifixion.

Did you know there was an ancient Middle Eastern belief that wild dogs wouldn't touch the corpse of a Prophet?

Anyway, if it was the soldiers who did it, if only in a temporary moment of compassion or incentive, that would be far more embarrassing to the authorities, and even more of a miracle than the unexplained.

Disciplining for heresy or neglect wouldn't change the situation; a clever political spin could offer some recovery. Who else would be able to save authorities from this embarrassment if not for the voice of the soldiers themselves?

The13th: OK a couple of things:
1. Some people don't see themselves as killer. They believe they are enforcing law and order. Roman fit this description. Law enforcer type seldom miss recording because random killing without records are unlawful and disorder that is against their very principle.
2. Sorry if I quote movie. Remember that crowe Russell movie. In there that old man said he worried that Roman is like a light that constantly risk being extinguish. So correct, they are the light of the world. This very language that I type now is their invention. Among many things that they invent and the world has benefit from ever since.
3. OK, painful public humiliation. It is public. So people should talk and write down if not drawing some pictures. The whole point of making it public is to show as many people as possible and let them talk about it.

ghostgeek: A case has been made that Jesus Christ and St Paul of Tarsus are one and the same man. The idea is that Jesus either survived or avoided the crucifiction and being sensible, put some distance between himself and Jerusalem. A change of name and he was back on the road preaching. It would certainly fit in with the view that Paul was the real architect of Christianity. So could Jesus have survived crucifiction? Josephus relates that he had three crucified men he knew taken down while still alive and one survived. It also seems to be the case that there is much uncertainty about the actual process of crucifiction. Not all victims would appear to have been nailed to the cross, some were just tied. Remember, the Gospels talk of Joseph of Arimathea taking Jesus' body down from the cross, but as the only example of a crucified man's remains attest, this was no easy thing to do if the body was nailed in place.

Zanjan: Boyz, some people just can't kill - it's not in them to do so. If one volunteers for the military, they know they can do it and are willing to serve their country this way. Then, as now, it was a career; soldiers weren't thugs or cold blooded murderers - I'm saying they did what they had to do.

Police didn't exist in ancient times - you're thinking in modern terms. The ancient military didn't have to answer to cameras or the public. When the Jewish rebellion was crushed, observers reported Jerusalem's walls were lined with crucified Jews (very public) yet where are their names now?

The crucified were left to rot on their "tree" as an example. Not so for Jesus. Unlike the others, the soldiers cast lots for His raiment and didn't break His legs. Moreover, there was no public gathering present; and, they let family take Him down soon as He passed to bury Him. Have you never wondered how this special consideration was possible?

The13th: No no, I am not talking about people who cant kill. I am talking about a type of people who persecute and keep great record. I think the Inquisition might have been well recorded, because these "church people" are simply not random killer or torturer. Stalin's purge of his military rank in 37 might have been well recorded. I heard he signed a few hundred execution sometime. Hitler's German would certainly keep some record against Jews- probably not down to every individual - since that would required proper trial. The record is probably on a more "macro" scale e.g. terminate X target in camp Y on certain date". Essentially these people believe they are do the right thing and dare history to judge them by their action. In a rebellion, when the mass is involved, there is no trial, it is impossible to have any record. So I felt sorry for those people who get hang on the Juruselam Wall. But in Jesus case, I recall in one movie he has been interoggated, punished, and at one point I thought that might be it i.e. the Roman might let him go. Now you have to know, one of the reason of keeping record is because all these Roman admin are busy with lots of other things. If you dont keep record, in a few days time you probably forgot what did I ask, what did he said, what punishment have I deliver so far, how bad this guy really is, what to do next, what option do I have. It would be a great stress to the Roman admin so there must be some record. And since there is, when the decision is finally made to crucify Jesus, they want to put it on record that they are doing the right thing. They believe their action can stand up to history's judgement.

But apparently, no record whatsoever apart from Bible. There are lesser people on earth around or before that time that has more record than Jesus, either in the form of formal record, story pass down from generation, thier own writing, what other people wrote about them.

But I guess enough has been said on this and everyone probably already know this well before me. I guess those day Christianity is just a sect, and you can exaggerate the life of its "founder" but when this thing go worldwide - at first it is just hard to verify these stories because of the ancient days when news probably travel from one place to another in years. And probably because village folks have to spend most time of the day working to keep the families feed and the village church authorities are not someone that you questioned. Now that we have a time to re-examine, we found a big vacuum of mystery.

Zanjan: I'll get to your post next, Boyz.

Ghost, where do you come up with this stuff? I wouldn’t call that at case at all, more like classic conspiracy theory junk devised to sell trash magazines.

I’m not surprised people imagine Jesus to be just like them; such are the first to accuse others of acting the same way they do because they can’t believe anyone could have a better character. Consequently, they miss the nature of these individuals and of the stories as well. One person’s mistaken identity isn’t another’s.

Is it really sensible to run? Why wait until after one is tortured? This wasn’t a game of Russian Roulette – from the beginning, Jesus knew what His own end would be and said so quite a few times.

Josephus was a Jew born in Israel after Christ was crucified – everything he heard about Him was second hand and clearly, some of his writings are questionable for authenticity. It should be noted that Josephus was a traitor, paid by the Romans. Would you trust the words of a man who lacked integrity yet be suspicious of writings by true Christians around the same time?

Medical Doctors say the restrained position of the body on the cross was more important than the wounds. They concur it would take about 6 hours to die under those particular circumstances. Indeed, Joseph of Arimethea had a difficult task, yet a mind for sacredness of duty, and possibly an adrenalin rush helped.

Zanjan: Boyz, people who persecute don't keep record of what they do because they know what they're doing is wrong; aside from modern militant terrorist groups, they wish to keep their agenda under the table if possible. Since the ancients didn't have newspapers, that was easy. However, the truth can't be hidden for very long.

This is still true in modern times; censorship is the dictator's first tactic but, thankfully, we have brave war correspondents who sacrifice to tell the true story. Always, it has been the families and friends of the persecuted who keep record and speak out about the injustice. That demonstrates the reality of a major split in a society between the good and the bad.

The Nazis - a classic dictatorship pattern on a much wider scale. They weren't into giving trials, not even so much as a kanagroo court to anyone. Regular Germans disappeared in the night too, taken by the gestapo. The first to go were the intellectuals and poets. Then came the male children, who were ripped from their crying mothers arms and conscripted into the regime. No rebellion was necessary - it was a political pre-emptive strike.

I've known Germans who lived there at the time - they didn't dare breathe a negative word about the regime since informers were everywhere - ordinary citizens, who were rewarded well for reporting. I know a woman whose elderly grandmother was sent to a concentration camp for no other reason than to remark to a friend in a grocery store she didn't like the Nazis.

These are the same stories of every other dictatorship anywhere on the planet, and there were lots of them in the 20th century.

You really need to start reading historical books to check for accuracy before watching hollywood productions. I will say the movie "Shindler's List" was totally accurate because the film makers had the survivors on set as consultants.

I'm sure that with the passage of two thousand years, much of the 20th century will be forgotten as well; even the current generation has. Unless it's the names of a gold album rock band, young people have no knowledge of the famous people we knew, despite that all being on record.

The13th: You have to understand that while the biblical tale portrait roman as the bad guy who crucify Jesus, to the roman the christian sect might be a destabilizing force in the society. All admin type really want is to put in place a system of law and order so that people live a better life, society progress, civilization can advance. Tidous work. Out west for example you have guys like Wyatt Earp. Why can't jesus make a good living by carpentry work, and sell his handicraft in front of the temple just like those small business men who sell chicken and other goodies in front of the temple, instead of chasing them away like a mad man. Bear in mind these people are just trying to feed their family. If I run the town, I will lock him up 3 days for misdemeanor.
I just feel closer to people who try make a living, and people who keep law and order to make this possible.

The13th: I don't know what eventually lead to crucification. My DVD the gospel of john has not come to that part yet. But the roman don't play dirty. They don't opt for assassination or random killing, but instead like all law abiding citizen they sentence Jesus to be crucify. There will be reports and letters exchange among the roman admin how to deal with this new christian sect.. And the consequence of not dealing with them. Another words, lots of records to justify crucification because the roman just don't play dirty. If they ate the dirty type, they will never create that civilization that make us know them even in the east.

Zanjan: ~Sigh~

ghostgeek: Don't think I dream everything up for myself Zanjan, I have help. Believe it or not, I read the occasional book. Now, for the notion that Jesus and Paul are one and the same just get yourself a copy of "The Jesus Mystery" by Lena Einhorn, a trained doctor and film-maker, and get reading. Below are some of the points she makes:

Paul's sudden passion for a person he has never met and whose disciple he has never been.

Paul's conversion takes place shortly after Jesus is crucified.

Paul's conversion takes place outside Judea and Galilee, but within the borders of the Roman Empire.

According to Jerome, Paul comes from the same area as Jesus.

Paul - like Jesus? - was born with Roman citizenship.

Paul, like Jesus, is a "Hebrew born and bred." Yet both of them have a decidedly ambivalent attitude towards the Jews.

Paul, like Jesus, travels to Jerusalem at a young age.

After this, for both Jesus and Paul, there is a "vacuum" until they are adults.

Paul, like Jesus, is unmarried.

Paul had some sort of wound.

Both focus what might seem to be an inordinate amount of attention on the Resurrection.

Paul is oddly unwilling to travel to Jerusalem - where the "home congregation" is to be found.

Both have disciples with whom they journey around.

Both have a tendency to preach while travelling and both choose, to a great degree, to preach in synagogues.

Unlike the disciples, Paul is a subject in the New Testament.

The arrest and trial of Paul are almost an exact replica of what happend to Jesus ( before the verdict ), albeit spread out over a longer time.

Surprisingly often, Paul uses the same terminology and imagery as Jesus.

Also, when Paul goes to Jerusalem for the last time, causing uproar, he has to be rescued by the Romans. The Roman commandant, speaking to him, asks:

"Are you then not the Egyptian who some time ago created turmoil and together with the four thousand sicarii went out into the wilderness?"

The "Egyptian," I'm sure you'll recall, was a renowned messiah figure mentioned by Josephus in his "War of the Jews."

Zanjan: So what? People, neighbours or not, join the religion that is most like their own views on things. That doesn't mean they are each other.

I do believe you read books - most of us choose them selectively. A discriminating taste has to be taught, apparently. At least you didn't read one by an untrained doctor. Doctor of what?

ghostgeek: Do I detect a hint of skepticism Zanjan, a smidgen of doubt? Funny how people can believe in big improbabilities, like there being a God who cares what happens on this miserable little world, but mention something a lot more believable and they kick it out of sight. Very strange. The point about Jesus Christ is that He attracts fanciful speculation simply because we know so little about Him.

Zanjan: Ghost, I trust that compiling solid evidence, not amassing pure conjecture, will lead to the truth.

What you've presented wouldn't be the slightest bit believable to me, even if I were an atheist. You may not know much about Him but I know everything that worth knowing about Him.

Life is too short for "probabilities"; there's no application for them. Many practices in the Bible are certainly outdated but not its wisdom and morals - truth is testable and stands the test if time.