Need Help Resolving Crucifixion Questions

[Kris]

Hey Ex-Christians,

 

It has been a while since I have written. I had been rolling along in my ex-christian life fairly well, but every once in a while, a bump would come my way. Unfortunately, it seems that when I get depressed, I tend to question what I believe or don't believe. I then spiral down and find myself forgetting about all of the progress I have made away from christianity, and how happy I was finally getting, and find my self diving back into researching christianity and getting all worked up again. Usually, I end up looking at biblical prophecy crap, and scaring the hell out of myself, but this time, things went a bit different.

 

My descent back into weirdness started with finding out the the guy who supposedly forged information on the "James Ossuary" was found innocent. This doesen't mean that the forgery's were not done by him, but rather that the judge could not conclusively prove that the forgeries occured. Mounds of evidence was provided, but one thing that freaked me out a bit had to do with a supposed picture that showed the ossuary with the "brother of jesus" line in it. An FBI expert testified that the photograph appeared to be from around 1976-- which went against the prosecutions claim that the forgeries were more recent. That got me to thinking-- what if there really was a Jesus.

 

I then tried to remind myself of the lack of historical evidence, but got caught up in certain freaky things like the supposed ending of God being pleased with the Jews and not accepting their animal sacrifices (a whole other thread that I wrote a while back!), the supposed earthquake and darkness that occured, and all of the other things that support the crucifixion in some people's eyes. I then found myself having a hard time reconciling my lack of belief with what seemed to be evidence--- of course. I had already gone over some of the "evidence" when I was deconverting, such as conflicting dates, no reports of darkness (except by Thallus and Phelgon as quote by apologists) and the fact that the jews did not accept Jesus. But I have to admit, I got a bit freaked out by the lunar eclipse that seemed to have occured on April 3, 33 and whether or not this could account for the darkness, etc. because a lot of christian sources were pointing to this. They mentioned the "blood moon" as significant due to Joel, etc.

 

So, now I am asking you all to help me work through this. I feel that I could accept that there was a historical Jesus who may have even been crucified in some manner, but need assistance in believing that this was not at all supernaturally validated in any way-- no fantastic darkness and earthquakes with zombies, no big deal if there was an eclipse on the day of his death--they happen all the time, no big deal if a rock was rolled away. I am trying to get back to my thought pattern in which I was convinced that there was not any validiation that Jesus was anything more than a man who may have thought he was god. Any help you can provide me will be GREATLY appreciated. --- Kris

[florduh]

Anyone's guess is as good as anyone's guess. The story was made up decades after the supposed incident. There is no historical reference to any of it. It would be just as valid for me to write a tale today claiming the Flying Spaghetti Monster opened the stripper poles in Heaven on that lunar occasion.

[Ouroboros]

My descent back into weirdness started with finding out the the guy who supposedly forged information on the "James Ossuary" was found innocent. This doesen't mean that the forgery's were not done by him, but rather that the judge could not conclusively prove that the forgeries occured. Mounds of evidence was provided, but one thing that freaked me out a bit had to do with a supposed picture that showed the ossuary with the "brother of jesus" line in it. An FBI expert testified that the photograph appeared to be from around 1976-- which went against the prosecutions claim that the forgeries were more recent. That got me to thinking-- what if there really was a Jesus.

The problem is that Jesus was a very common name in those days. So which "Jesus" was it? Perhaps another Jesus was very famous in that village at the time and had nothing to do with the Biblical Jesus. Consider that Christianity wasn't that big for a very long time, and Jesus wasn't that famous for a while, so it's our interpretation (after the fact) to assign it to the only Jesus we know about, i.e. the Bible one, but it could just as well been someone else.

 

Edit: At least 71 burial caves have been found with the name Jesus from that time, but it was probably even more common than that. Jesus is the same name as Joshua, Yeshua.

 

I then tried to remind myself of the lack of historical evidence, but got caught up in certain freaky things like the supposed ending of God being pleased with the Jews and not accepting their animal sacrifices (a whole other thread that I wrote a while back!), the supposed earthquake and darkness that occured, and all of the other things that support the crucifixion in some people's eyes. I then found myself having a hard time reconciling my lack of belief with what seemed to be evidence--- of course. I had already gone over some of the "evidence" when I was deconverting, such as conflicting dates, no reports of darkness (except by Thallus and Phelgon as quote by apologists) and the fact that the jews did not accept Jesus. But I have to admit, I got a bit freaked out by the lunar eclipse that seemed to have occured on April 3, 33 and whether or not this could account for the darkness, etc. because a lot of christian sources were pointing to this. They mentioned the "blood moon" as significant due to Joel, etc.

It was only a partial eclipse. God was a bit cheap there not making it a full eclipse.

 

I've seen several "blood moons" in my life. Nothing particular happened. Blue moons too. Moon rings. And more. It's not as uncommon as people think.

 

So, now I am asking you all to help me work through this. I feel that I could accept that there was a historical Jesus who may have even been crucified in some manner, but need assistance in believing that this was not at all supernaturally validated in any way-- no fantastic darkness and earthquakes with zombies, no big deal if there was an eclipse on the day of his death--they happen all the time, no big deal if a rock was rolled away. I am trying to get back to my thought pattern in which I was convinced that there was not any validiation that Jesus was anything more than a man who may have thought he was god. Any help you can provide me will be GREATLY appreciated. --- Kris

Augustus died on a full lunar eclipse just 20 years earlier. Wouldn't that make his death more special?

[mymistake]

That got me to thinking-- what if there really was a Jesus.

 

Not only was there a Jesus. There were dozens of them.

 

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/surfeit.htm

 

My favorite was the one who wrote the book Wisdom of Jesus. He lives like 150 years before the Romans took over Jerusalem, which was a few hundred years after the Old Testament was written. Jesus ben Sirach live around 180 bc.

 

 

I then tried to remind myself of the lack of historical evidence, but got caught up in certain freaky things like the supposed ending of God being pleased with the Jews and not accepting their animal sacrifices (a whole other thread that I wrote a while back!), the supposed earthquake and darkness that occured, and all of the other things that support the crucifixion in some people's eyes. I then found myself having a hard time reconciling my lack of belief with what seemed to be evidence--- of course. I had already gone over some of the "evidence" when I was deconverting, such as conflicting dates, no reports of darkness (except by Thallus and Phelgon as quote by apologists) and the fact that the jews did not accept Jesus. But I have to admit, I got a bit freaked out by the lunar eclipse that seemed to have occured on April 3, 33 and whether or not this could account for the darkness, etc. because a lot of christian sources were pointing to this. They mentioned the "blood moon" as significant due to Joel, etc.

 

So, now I am asking you all to help me work through this. I feel that I could accept that there was a historical Jesus who may have even been crucified in some manner, but need assistance in believing that this was not at all supernaturally validated in any way-- no fantastic darkness and earthquakes with zombies, no big deal if there was an eclipse on the day of his death--they happen all the time, no big deal if a rock was rolled away. I am trying to get back to my thought pattern in which I was convinced that there was not any validiation that Jesus was anything more than a man who may have thought he was god. Any help you can provide me will be GREATLY appreciated. --- Kris

 

I don't have a problem with the idea that a rabbi named Jesus was an Ebonite teacher and was executed by Rome. It may very well have happened. Romans would not have returned the body afterwards.

[Kris]

Thank you for your quick responses. I agree that there were many Jesus's and that the stories down the line proabably pieced together several different occurances, or people. I just feel that my strong belief that Jesus was just a man has been somewhat shaken-- probably due to going on Christian sites that do nothing but tell you how accurate the bible was, and how it can be validated by astonomy, other sources, etc. Of course, the sources are usually other Christian writers, but I have to admit, I did get a bit freaked out when I read the stories of Thallus and Phelgon. I do however, think that they were talking about the eclipse and earthquake that probably happend in 29 ad. That being said, what if they weren't and they were somehow validating the mysterious occurances written about in the gospels-- that would be some sort of evidence, would it not?

[Suzy]

Evidence for what?

 

Why is there no independent record of things like people being raised from dead and walking around in Jerusalem? That's more of a supernatural and unique event than quakes and eclipses. And something that certainly would not have gone unnoticed and unrecorded had it really happened.

 

As for the brother of Jesus thing. Both Jesus and James were very common names at the time. Josephus Flavius mentions two brothers named Jesus and James. Some Christians would like us to believe they were THE Jesus and James but when you read the passage in context their parents are named too and it turns out they are not Joseph and Mary and that this Jesus and James were some high priests in Jerusalem at the time. See, the names Jesus and James were this common!

[JoeCoastie]

Using the ol' Occam's razor that Christians love to abuse, what's more likely... That somebody did find the actual ossuary of The Jesus Christ's brother, or that some jackass forged an inscription to make a buck?

[Kris]

Thanks for that input Suzy- it is much appreciated. One of the comments that I read regarding the "ossusary" is that because it says something to the effect of James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus, that the odds would be astronomical that it is not referring to the James, Joseph and Jesus of the bible. I am not sure how accurate that statement is. I am fairly convinced that the ossuary was forged, along with some other things that were discussed in Odad Golen's trial. I think that there was way too much to indicate that this guy was a real shuckster who was trying to make some big money. I even think that the picture that was used to show that he had the ossuary for a long time may have been fabricated. The FBI only validated that the paper that the picture was printed on was from 1976-- couldn't you use old photo paper and develop a more recent photo on it? But even if he had it for a while, I think that this guy was trying to "age" his merchandise and was just looking for the right time to put his box on the market. I honestly do not think that this box proves the validity of Jesus. However, if is somehow is valid, it only proves that there was a guy named Jesus who was alive and apparently the brother of James, and a son of Joseph. Not that he was the son of god, or the messiah.

 

Still looking for a bit more help regarding the crucifixion, however. I really want to fill my mind with good reasons as to why this story cannot logically be supported by history. The zombie angle is definitely a good one!!

[Margee]

Hi Kris! Good to hear from you! I don't know a lot about ancient astrology and all the details about how they concocted and created some of their myths, but I love learning about it. I found this article really interesting. It's quite long but worth looking over. I sure hope it helps a little!

 

Quote: Problematically, the gospels themselves, upon which the paradigm and conception of the familiar, personal, human figure of Jesus Christ is based, may have been originally constructed with deliberate astrological associations.

 

The post is based on the book “Jesus Potter Harry Christ”

 

http://blog.world-my...yth-hypothesis/

[Kris]

Hey Margee-- thanks for this link. I will definitely check it out. I have also given myself some homework in that I will be reconciling any lunar eclipses that occur during our next century with passover. That way, I can show myself that this occurance is not a big deal at all, if it happens enough times. As far as I can tell by some really weird christian sites that I found by accident who believe that the fact that there will be tetrads (series of blood moons) in the near future, 2015 or so, that the world will be ending. they did however, show that there are at least two passovers in the next couple of years that will have lunar eclipses!! So disregarding all the nutty stuff, I am at least trying to find a way to reason with myself!! I did this same thing with red heifers because this was something that really bothered me. I found that there are lots of diffrent types of red cows in the world today, some of which came from early lines out of Africa and Egypt. That helped me to find a way to reconcile the mysterious red heifer prophecy business. There are lots of types of red cows in the world today-- and apparently in places other than Israel long ago. I try to do stuff like that so my mind can focus itself on something else other than the "religious" crap that we constantly seem to hear.

[Margee]

Hey Margee-- thanks for this link. I will definitely check it out. I have also given myself some homework in that I will be reconciling any lunar eclipses that occur during our next century with passover. That way, I can show myself that this occurance is not a big deal at all, if it happens enough times. As far as I can tell by some really weird christian sites that I found by accident who believe that the fact that there will be tetrads (series of blood moons) in the near future, 2015 or so, that the world will be ending. they did however, show that there are at least two passovers in the next couple of years that will have lunar eclipses!! So disregarding all the nutty stuff, I am at least trying to find a way to reason with myself!! I did this same thing with red heifers because this was something that really bothered me. I found that there are lots of diffrent types of red cows in the world today, some of which came from early lines out of Africa and Egypt. That helped me to find a way to reconcile the mysterious red heifer prophecy business. There are lots of types of red cows in the world today-- and apparently in places other than Israel long ago. I try to do stuff like that so my mind can focus itself on something else other than the "religious" crap that we constantly seem to hear.

Isn't it absolutely amazing that we have to do all this friggin' work to convince ourselves that christianity is all a lie? Why don't we just keep going back to the book of Genesis and read about the talking snake and walk away!!!!

 

Imagine... us x-er's, having to spend all kinds of precious time studying the different cows in the world, to convince us that something isn't true.!!

 

.... so much time wasted on all this bullshit......I"m goin' for a walk to smell the roses!! You comin' with me?? .

[Dory]

I think I'm getting to a similar stage your at now, where I've just resolved that I can't go back to Christianity, even if I think there's some truth in it, because of things that have happened over the past couple of years. But now I need to intellectually understand why I don't want to be involved in the religion any more. The whole crucifixion thing is a good example.

 

I still have good ol' 'fear of hell' moments that take me by surprise, like today when talking to a Christian friend- but I'm so early in my transition that hopefully that will go in time.

[Kris]

Margee-- I would love to take a walk with you-- you are so awesome!! And Dory, I can definitely feel you! I can't go back either. I actually hate the christian belief system and feel that it has ruined my life. I am now trying to get it back. So, I will never return. That is why these moments where I get weak really bother me. I love reading about evolution and the age of the universe because these are things that make me feel that religion is not the only answer. I feel relief when I think that their is not some angry god waiting to condemn me because I refused to believe his crap-- then for whatever reason, I seem to get sucked back into some worry that entangles me and causes me to "doubt my doubt"! I definitely would like to move to a place in my mind where this no longer happens. It does seem like it happens less and less-- but not less enough for me!!

[centauri]

I think I'm getting to a similar stage your at now, where I've just resolved that I can't go back to Christianity, even if I think there's some truth in it, because of things that have happened over the past couple of years. But now I need to intellectually understand why I don't want to be involved in the religion any more. The whole crucifixion thing is a good example.

 

I still have good ol' 'fear of hell' moments that take me by surprise, like today when talking to a Christian friend- but I'm so early in my transition that hopefully that will go in time.

Considering that according to the New Testament, the resurrected Jesus only appeared to cult members and to none of the public, I see no reason to consider the crucifixion accounts as compelling evidence.

 

Also according to the New Testament, Jesus was very famous during his lifetime.

Yet there is nothing about him mentioned by contemporary writers of that time such as Philo or Pliny the Elder.

 

The final nail in the coffin of Jesus is that even if he existed as described by the New Testament, he was a false prophet, predicting his glorious return and end time judgment to happen within the lifetimes of his associates.

That prophecy flat out failed, rendering the author a liar, a person hardly qualified to represent an all-powerful God.

There's no reason to be afraid of scary messages that rest on a foundation of failure and hype.

[Margee]

Margee-- I would love to take a walk with you-- you are so awesome!! And Dory, I can definitely feel you! I can't go back either. I actually hate the christian belief system and feel that it has ruined my life. I am now trying to get it back. So, I will never return. That is why these moments where I get weak really bother me. I love reading about evolution and the age of the universe because these are things that make me feel that religion is not the only answer. I feel relief when I think that their is not some angry god waiting to condemn me because I refused to believe his crap-- then for whatever reason, I seem to get sucked back into some worry that entangles me and causes me to "doubt my doubt"! I definitely would like to move to a place in my mind where this no longer happens. It does seem like it happens less and less-- but not less enough for me!!

ya know Kris.......This is a slight bit off topic but, I look at this link http://nineplanets.org/tour/ and I ask myself....''Is the christian god of the bible, the same god of all these other planets? Did jesus die for the whole entire huge, humungus, universe out there .... is there a heaven and hell on these planets too?.......... OR does he just 'babysit' earth??

These are all the questions I go through, so don't ever feel bad!!

[JoeCoastie]

Also remember forging holy relics is nothing new. They've been at it for centuries. Shroud of Turin, pieces of the arc, cross, 6 churches own the head of John the Baptist.

[Margee]

Sometimes Kris, it helps if we know a little bit more information at why natural things occur in the universe. i love doing research and it sounds like you to do!

 

I was doing a little reading tonight (you have my interest peaked!) and it seems tha the intensity of the colour of

a 'blood-red moon' depends upon the amount of high levels of atmospheric matter in the sky....the more matter.... the bloodier the moon seems.

 

The moon's light is refracted by the earth's shadow which shines through the matter of the atmosphere, causing the effect of the 'blood red moon'...... much the same as the refracted light of a setting sun that shines through the exact same stuff in the atmosphere......gives us the red sky sunsets we all love. this seems to be the simple scientific explanation of a blood-red, totally eclipsed moon. Ancient thinkers and writers didn't have scientific explanations, and so a blood-red moon was the cause for much god speculation and dread.

 

Here's a little interesting article from science that i found. Quote from article:

 

''A third – and dramatic – way to get a red moon is during a lunar eclipse. During a lunar eclipse, the Moon passes behind the Earth’s shadow, which darkens it. If you could take a look at the Earth from inside its shadow, you would see that the atmosphere around the edge of the entire planet glows red. Once again, this is because large amounts of atmosphere will scatter away the blue/green light and let the red light go straight through. During a lunar eclipse, the Moon passes fully into the shadow of the Earth and it’s no longer being illuminated by the Sun; however, this red light passing through the Earth’s atmosphere does reach the Moon, and shines on it''.

 

http://www.universet...19969/red-moon/

 

A lot of this stuff is completely natural in our wonderful universe!! Hug for you tonight!!

[par4dcourse]

Isn't it absolutely amazing that we have to do all this friggin' work to convince ourselves that christianity is all a lie? Why don't we just keep going back to the book of Genesis and read about the talking snake and walk away!!!!

 

 

 

Even the synoptic gospels tell different stories, down to different last words. You would think somebody would have written something but oops!, even god forgot to jot anything down.

[Ouroboros]

Thank you for your quick responses. I agree that there were many Jesus's and that the stories down the line proabably pieced together several different occurances, or people. I just feel that my strong belief that Jesus was just a man has been somewhat shaken-- probably due to going on Christian sites that do nothing but tell you how accurate the bible was, and how it can be validated by astonomy, other sources, etc.

Signs in the sky = astrology and paganism. That's my view. Why would God confirm his divine intervention in an event with signs that used to be pagan? Just doesn't make sense... unless...

 

Of course, the sources are usually other Christian writers, but I have to admit, I did get a bit freaked out when I read the stories of Thallus and Phelgon. I do however, think that they were talking about the eclipse and earthquake that probably happend in 29 ad. That being said, what if they weren't and they were somehow validating the mysterious occurances written about in the gospels-- that would be some sort of evidence, would it not?

Or they knew about those events years after they happened and put the myth/legend within those events to make them seem valid.

 

I could write a story about things that happened during the last solar eclipse, but does it really mean anything?

 

Btw, lunar eclipse isn't the same as solar eclipse. Isn't the Gospel story a solar eclipse?

[mwc]

But I have to admit, I got a bit freaked out by the lunar eclipse that seemed to have occured on April 3, 33 and whether or not this could account for the darkness, etc. because a lot of christian sources were pointing to this. They mentioned the "blood moon" as significant due to Joel, etc.

NASA reports the following solar eclipses in Jerusalem: 29-Nov-24 P 09:22:15 29 - 10:44:13 37 167 - 12:12:06 37 0.921 0.906 - 32-Apr-28 P 07:28:14 31 - 07:47:21 35 096 - 08:06:51 39 0.038 0.009 - 33-Sep-12 P 10:54:49 62 - 11:58:21 63 192 - 12:59:29 57 0.198 0.101 - 34-Sep-01 P 11:46:40 67 - 12:58:19 61 224 - 14:06:27 49 0.321 0.205

-

 

So only April of 32 comes close and that's not a contender that anyone uses for the crucifixion since it doesn't fall on a Friday (I didn't look but I don't think that's even close to the calculated Passover for that year as it's rather late). It's also only a partial eclipse that ends at ~8 am local time. Way too early for the story. The others occur in the fall. Wrong feast.

 

Now for lunar eclipses in early (around Passover) 33 there are two:

Mar 19 10:38 T Mar 26 10:33 Apr 3 14:51 p Apr 11 03:45

The one on March 19 is total (during the new moon) and on April 3 there is a partial eclipse. Time here is UT so I believe that Jerusalem is +2 UT which puts the times at about noon and 5pm. Too early and too late for the story.

 

So it's clear that there were any number of "darkness" events. They happen all the time. Earthquakes also happen in the region quite often. It's on a fault system like California or pretty much the entire Pacific Rim is. That entire region happens to have tectonic activity. There's nothing unusual going on because these things happen.

 

EDIT: My nifty chart from NASA pasted nicely but once I posted the whole thing got all screwed up. I don't know why.

NOTHER EDIT: Forget what I said about the total lunar eclipse. That can't be right. I'm not thinking straight. I'm going to bed.

mwc

[MikeMo]

Hey Kris, I have been the same way. I have made a reasonable decision to deconvert too, yet the decision is a process that requires the re-overcoming of some things I thought I was already satisfied about. And somehow, there are times when I continue to need more proof...and then more proof.

 

There was something that you said that caught my attention: "significant due to Joel."

 

The traditions of the Old and New Testaments are SHARED stories among the ancient nations. The Hebrews shared many common ideas with the ancient nations and made them specific to their heritage. Furthermore, the New Testament is merely a rewriting of Old Testament stories...applied to Jesus. And so, why was the event significant in the first place? Not even for its own sake, but because Joel could be applied to it...an Old Testament story. It was by the rewriting of the Old Testament that Jesus became significant...he became the embodiment of the entire mythology of the Hebrews. Every New Testament story can be found in the Old Testament.

 

Look more into the information that Margee posted...the astrological significance of Hebrew belief and how Jesus was the fulfillment of common ancient astrological beliefs. The very foundation of the Scripture is based upon astronomically derived numerical patterns, which were interpreted astrologically. Jesus is referred to in the Old and New Testaments as the Sun of God (in addition to the Son of God). As the Sun rises in the east, so Jesus was born in the East. As 30 and 40 mark particular solar processions, so Jesus did not begin his ministry until age 30 and until he fasted for forty days and forty nights. As the Sun ascends to its height in the north (where the Sky runs tangent to Heaven), so the Sky split and the Ghost descended from Heaven upon Jesus. As the Sun sets in the west, so Jesus died upon the cross (where there is some commonly held principle that the angle of the Sun with the celestial equator forms a cross). Finally, as the Sun descends to its depth in the south (where the Sun was believed to circuit underfoot and run tangent to Hell), so Jesus was preaching to spirits in prison before he ascended from Hell back to earth (the three days being astronomically significant too, where the angle of the Sun remains at the same degree before rising above the celestial equator). Then came the resurrection, where the cycle starts again (for the second coming), and where Jesus had to remain 40 days upon earth before ascending to his throne in the north.

 

Everything has astronomical significance. 12 hours of night preceding 12 hours of day...the 24 elders before the throne...the 12 Tribes of the Moon and the 12 Apostles of the Sun. The 10 commandments I personally believe were derived from the perceived ten phases of the Moon (of which contemporary society often counts nine). Seven days within a week: the first three days being the Form to the Formless and the latter three days being the corresponding Fullness to the Void. The set apart seventh day is due to the fact that in the seventh month the angle of the Sun drops below the celestial equator (6 months of spring and summer...the seventh month being the beginning of autumn and winter). There were four weeks in a month...four being relevant to seasons and compass points (four rivers, four kings, four beasts, four angels coming out of one of the four rivers, etc.). There were twelve months in the year...similar to the division of hours in one day (12 sons of Nahor, 12 sons of Ishmael, 12 sons of Jacob, 12 Judges over Israel, 12 Disciples, 12 Apostles, etc.). The first chapter of the Bible is based upon these INTERPRETATIONS, so how much more everything that must fulfill it as the first chapter recycles over and over again.

 

INTERPRETATIONS are a matter of PREFERENCE, and will never be generally ABSOLUTE (because preferences are relative and change over time). Even we, along with every other theologian of sorts, are interpreting interpretations...attempting to come to the most satisfying conclusions according to our own preferences. Even those with the professed Spirit of God come to very diverse interpretations of the same material (making the Spirit of God different in the end than in the means...not the same Spirit in practice as in profession...not being able to derive the same conclusions for all who use him to the book he supposedly inspired). Ultimately, if you do not like the taste of Christianity anymore, then stop eating it. If you like some of it, then taste the portions you enjoy of it. I still enjoy some parts of the Bible, as I enjoy pieces of all ancient sources of interpretation. Some people really need their interpretation of the gospel to survive...those who feel victimized or guilty or orphaned or lonely or poor or uncertain (making faith in particular principles a virtue)...and they gain empowerment from it...like certain children afraid of the dark being given a blanket (being uncertain of the dark, but sure of the blanket). I suppose many of us who struggle with these issues of "proof" are still partially suffering from the predisposition we were indoctrinated with to regard this doctrine as generally ABSOLUTE (meaning that it governs all, whether we believe or disbelieve). And we are not generally satisfied with partial deconstructions of its absolution (for we desire to be more than partially free from the discovered tyranny of the ABSOLUTE that we once at least tried to take comfort in and conform to), but desire to make it generally anti-ABSOLUTE (meaning that it governs nobody, whether we believe or disbelieve). Ultimately, I suppose that many of us are trying to discover, perhaps for the the first time, our individual preferences, which may not be, and do not have to be, driven by the indoctrinated ABSOLUTE. And by discovering our preferences we can prove the ABSOLUTE to be relative...not so demanding and enslaving to some of us who thought we had to be a part...or else.

 

I hope this helps...I think some of the last paragraph I wrote because I needed it for myself.

 

I think part of my process is understanding that I no longer prefer the gospel because I do not require the doctrines contained within it. I used to need the Father because I felt orphaned by my own father. I used to need the ABSOLUTE love because I felt like I had only transitory love. I used to enjoy the blessings to the poor because I was low-income. Honestly, most of the essential doctrines of Jesus were foreign to me during my belief in God (I picked them up really late in my indoctrination)...if I was so fucked up because of what Adam did 6000 years ago, then God must be really shitty at creating things...and maybe you can believe in that God, but I am going to have to believe in a different one...a good and perfect God who creates a history of shit? How can I overcome this nature he created me to have? Hopefully, God will walk into this huge orphanage called earth and pick me in order to fulfill his foreknowledge of righteousness...since I cannot change my own diaper filled with demons. Furthermore, the will of God is that the majority of his, and so the responsibility of none other, unchanged children (because he did not empower them by his foreknowing agency) will spend everlasting time being chastised due to their unchanged diapers, which even my forsaking earthly father would have changed before he left. And if the cross was effective for sins, actually placing all sins upon Jesus as he was put to death, shedding the eternal blood of the covenant, then from whence does sin remain? If Jesus put sin to death with himself, then how is there any sin left at all? And the coverage of the cross would not be dependent upon faith or attention because it would be the effectual reality...a universal salvation by necessity. It is precisely when faith puts the death of Jesus into effect, rather than the death of Jesus putting the death of Jesus into effect, that concerns me. And I can go on and on now about the things I do not prefer about it...they do not satisfy me. And the greatest struggle is learning how to overcome the habit of forcing it to satisfy me when it does not...and this is the indoctrination of the ABSOLUTE...to force it to satisfy...or else. I feel like I have outgrown the doctrine, but sometimes I am still in the habit of forcing myself to fit into it...as if it were my duty to continue with it...although it is merely a changed preference...and I am maturing beyond the need for those systematic equations of inherited shame and supernatural redemption.

 

I talk too much.

[Suzy]

Thanks for that input Suzy- it is much appreciated. One of the comments that I read regarding the "ossusary" is that because it says something to the effect of James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus, that the odds would be astronomical that it is not referring to the James, Joseph and Jesus of the bible.

 

I don't know about this specific case but even if this ossuary would be real (which is, as I hear from you, questionable in itself) I don't think the chances of a Jesus, brother of James, son of Joseph being another Jesus than the Bible's would be astronomically low. Like I said Flavius mentions a Jesus and a James who were brothers, but definitely weren't the Biblical Jesus and James. So both were very common names in 1st century Palestine and the constellation having two brothers with those names was not rare. And I think Joseph was a common name too. I would think there are many, many families in the US where the father is called Joseph and he has sons named, say, John and James. (See most common American male names: http://names.mongaba.../male_names.htm ) I don't think the chances of finding MANY such families would be astronomically low. On the contrary. So this is similar in my opinion.

 

Having said this. I would not have a problem with it if at the core of the Bible story a historical Jesus with a brother James and a father Joseph, and who was some religious cult leader or teacher with 12 desciples, really existed. That would not shake my current view of the Bible and Christianity in general. In fact, for long after my deconversion I believed Jesus as written about in the Bible (minus the supernatural claims, resurrection etc.) to be a historical fact. That did not stop me from realizing that Christianity and it's supernatural claims are a myth. But I believed that most of the figures mentioned in the Bible were real historical figures. Now, after reading a bit, I know better. I know how little evidence (or none at all) there is for even the existence of many figures mentioned in it: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses etc. etc. How history does not support the account of the Exodus, among many other things. And so on.

 

I know the historicity of Jesus is a controversial issue among scholars. Evan non-Christian scholars, such as Bart Ehrman argue for the existence of a historical Jesus. I know he has a book about it, but I haven't read it. I may one day. On the other hand I read the Jesus Never Existed website and many of its arguments are worth pondering. As I read it the argument is not really that it's impossible that some historical figure existed around whom the myth was built up. The argument is that the Jesus we know today from the Bible never existed. And that is true. Some elements may be true. Many others are composites made of many other historical or mythical figures - and later forgeries (for example, the famous story of the adulterous woman is a later addition to the Gospel, since it wasn't in the earliest manuscripts). So Jesus is basically a composite figure. I personally find this argument compelling based on the many many similarities with pagan myths and gods, demi-gods, and also with real, historical figures, such as some of the real Jesuses who lived around that time:

 

Josephus, the first century Jewish historian mentions no fewer than nineteen different Yeshuas/Jesii, about half of them contemporaries of the supposed Christ! In his Antiquities, of the twenty-eight high priests who held office from the reign of Herod the Great to the fall of the Temple, no fewer than four bore the name Jesus: Jesus ben Phiabi, Jesus ben Sec, Jesus ben Damneus and Jesus ben Gamaliel. Even Saint Paul makes reference to a rival magician, preaching ‘another Jesus’ (2 Corinthians 11,4). The surfeit of early Jesuses includes:

 

 

Jesus ben Sirach. This Jesus was reputedly the author of the Book of Sirach (aka 'Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach'), part of Old Testament Apocrypha. Ben Sirach, writing in Greek about 180 BC, brought together Jewish 'wisdom' and Homeric-style heroes.

 

Jesus ben Pandira. A wonder-worker during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (106-79 BC), one of the most ruthless of the Maccabean kings. Imprudently, this Jesus launched into a career of end-time prophecy and agitation which upset the king. He met his own premature end-time by being hung on a tree – and on the eve of a Passover. Scholars have speculated this Jesus founded the Essene sect.

 

Jesus ben Ananias. Beginning in 62AD, this Jesus had caused disquiet in Jerusalem with a non-stop doom-laden mantra of ‘Woe to the city’. He prophesied rather vaguely:

 

"A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against the whole people."

 

– Josephus, Wars 6.3.

 

 

Arrested and flogged by the Romans, Jesus ben Ananias was released as nothing more dangerous than a mad man. He died during the siege of Jerusalem from a rock hurled by a Roman catapult.

 

Jesus ben Saphat. In the insurrection of 68AD that wrought havoc in Galilee, this Jesus had led the rebels in Tiberias ("the leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people" – Josephus, Life 12.66). When the city was about to fall to Vespasian’s legionaries he fled north to Tarichea on the Sea of Galilee.

 

Jesus ben Gamala. During 68/69 AD this Jesus was a leader of the ‘peace party’ in the civil war wrecking Judaea. From the walls of Jerusalem he had remonstrated with the besieging Idumeans (led by ‘James and John, sons of Susa’). It did him no good. When the Idumeans breached the walls he was put to death and his body thrown to the dogs and carrion birds.

 

Jesus ben Thebuth. A priest who, in the final capitulation of the upper city in 69AD, saved his own skin by surrendering the treasures of the Temple, which included two holy candlesticks, goblets of pure gold, sacred curtains and robes of the high priests. The booty figured prominently in the Triumph held for Vespasian and his son Titus.

 

http://www.jesusneve...com/surfeit.htm

 

You also have to wonder: how come we have historical evidence for these Jesuses, but not a single one of the Jesus which, according to the Bible, was the most famous of them all? And, according the Bible, Jesus of Nazareth impressed not only his followers but also Roman leaders, such as Pontius Pilate. He performed huge miracles, raising dead and all. Yet no record or mention of it in any contemporary Roman or Jewish record? Odd, to say the very least.

 

But the bottom line is, it would not bother me if some evidence for a rabbi or cult leader Jesus with a similar life story as in the Bible (minus supernatural claims) would pop up somehow. That would only mean there was some historical figure at the core of the story but that doesn't mean he really was the Son of God and he was really resurrected. Mohamed really existed, no doubt about that, yet we don't believe that means that he really talked to God and that God's angel dictated the Quran to him, do we? (Unless you are a Muslim, of course.) But the problem is that there is not even such an earthly evidence for Jesus - but there's plenty of evidence of Christians borrowing elements of the story from elsewhere. So there is room for much scepticism, at the very least.

 

And you also have to consider what Centauri wrote: did Jesus fulfill the OT prophecies? That's a big fat NO! That's why Christians had to invent the concept of a Second Coming which is nowhere to be found in the OT! The OT Messiah (who by the way is fully human with human parents) will put things right at first attempt and won't need a second chance! Jesus did not bring about world peace, Jesus did not bring about a global observence of the Torah, Jesus did not gather all the Jews back to Israel (on contrary, they got driven out not long after his ministry) and so on and so forth. Jesus basically failed at every point expected from the Jewish Messiah! Jews rightly call him a false prophet!

[qadeshet]

The Gospel story of Jesus is a myth describing the journey of the Sun through the 12 signs of the Zodiac over the course of the year. There may have been a first century carpenter named Yeshua, who did little and accomplished nothing. However, the miracle working, Gospel Jesus should have been mentioned by one of his contemporaries. The Sun god is crucified on the cross of the heavens.

[Kris]

Thanks so much for everyone's responses-- I love filling my brain with good info. I did my homework and found that in the last few hundred years, there were a number of lunar eclipses that fell on either Nissan 14 or 15-- which is the day before Passover, or the first day of Passover. As many of you know, there is a dispute as to whether or not Christ was killed the day before (as the sacrifice) or the day of as assested in 3 of the gosples. It is not a real stretch to think that you would see lunar eclipses related to Passover, since the celebration itself is tied to the moon! In fact, it happened around 5 times in the last 100 years and about that same amountin the prior century. So, over a 2000 year period, this could occur 100 times in 2000 years-- kind of makes it less exciting, huh!!

[MikeMo]

I am currently reading a book called BIBLE MYTHS AND THEIR PARALLELS IN OTHER RELIGIONS (1882) by T.W. Doane. This is what this author has to say in relation to this topic, including the darkness that covered the land:

 

“The Jews had already, long before Christ’s day, dabbled in astrology, and the various forms of magic which became connected with it…They were much given to cast horoscopes from the numerical value of a name. Everywhere throughout the whole Roman Empire, Jewish magicians, dream expounders, and sorcerers, were found…‘The life and portion of children,’ says the Talmud, ‘hang not on righteousness, but on their star’…The moment of every man’s birth being supposed to determine every circumstance in his life, it was only necessary to find out in what mode the celestial bodies—supposed to be the primary wheels to the universal machine—operated at that moment, in order to discover all that would happen to him afterward…‘It was, indeed, universally believed, that extraordinary events, especially the birth and death of great men, were heralded by appearances of stars, and still more of comets, or by conjunctions of the heavenly bodies…His star having shone at the time of his birth, and his having been born in a miraculous manner, it was necessary that at the death of Christ Jesus, something miraculous should happen. Something of an unusual nature had happened at the time of the death of other supernatural beings, therefore something must happen at his death; the myth would not have been complete without it…‘The darkness from the sixth to the ninth hour, the rending of the temple veil, the earthquake, the rending of rocks, are altogether like the prodigies attending the decease of other great men’…‘It is impossible to explain the origin of this darkness. The passover moon was then at the full, so that it could not have been an eclipse. The early Fathers, relying on a notice of an eclipse that seemed to coincide in time, though it really did not, fancied that the darkness was caused by it, but incorrectly’…At the time of the death of the Hindoo Saviour Crishna, there came calamities and bad omens of every kind. A black circle surrounded the moon, and the sun was darkened at noon-day; the sky rained fire and ashes; flames burned dusky and livid; demons committed depredations on the earth; at sunrise and sunset, thousands of figures were seen skirmishing in the air; spirits were to be seen on all sides. When the conflict began between Buddha, the Saviour of the World, and the Prince of Evil, a thousand appalling meteors fell; clouds and darkness prevailed. Even this earth, with the oceans and mountains it contains, though it is unconscious, quaked like a conscious being…the very sun enveloped itself in awful darkness, and a host of headless spirits filled the air. When Prometheus was crucified on Mount Caucasus, the whole frame of nature became convulsed…the birth and death of great men were announced by celestial signs. We therefore find that at the death of Romulus, the founder of Rome, the sun was darkened, and there was darkness over the face of the earth for the space of six hours. When Julius Caesar, whowas the son of a god, was murdered, there was a darkness over the earth, the sun being eclipsed for the space of six hours. When Hercules was dying…darkness was on the face of the earth; from the high heaven came down the thick cloud, and the din of its thunder crashed through the air…There he now sits, clothed in a white robe, with a crown upon his head…The Romans had a god called Quirinius…He was torn to pieces at his death, when he ascended into heaven; upon which the sun was eclipsed or darkened. When Alexander the Great died, similar prodigies are said to have happened; again, when foul murders were committed, it is said that the sun seemed to hide its face…At that time, the sun, unable to endure a sight so horrible, ‘turned his course backward and withdrew its light’…At the time of the death of the virgin-born Quetzalcoatle, the Mexican crucified Saviour, the sun was darkened, and withheld its light…‘Under the reign of Tiberius, the whole earth, or at least the celebrated province of the Roman empire, was involved in a perpetual darkness of three hours. Even this miraculous event, which ought to have excited the wonder, the curiosity, and the devotion of mankind, passed without notice in an age of science and history. It happened during the life-time of Seneca and the elder Pliny, who must have experienced the immediate effects, or received the earliest intelligence, of the prodigy’…The favorite theory is that it was a natural eclipse of the sun, which happened to take place at that particular time, but, if this was the case, there was nothing supernatural in the event, and it had nothing whatever to do with the death of Jesus. Again, it would be necessary to prove from other sources that such an event happened at that time, but this cannot be done. The argument from the duration of the darkness—three hours—is also of great force against such an occurrence having happened, for an eclipse seldom lasts in great intensity more than six minutes…Shakespeare has embalmed some traditions of the kind exactly analogous to the present case…‘The graves stood tenantless, and the sheeted dead did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets.’ Belief in the influence of the stars over life and death, and in special portents at the death of great men, survived, indeed, to recent times…Shakespeare tells us: ‘When beggars die there are no comets seen; The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.’ It would seem that this superstition survives even to the present day, for it is well known that the dark and yellow atmosphere which settled over so much of the country, on the day of the removal of President Garfield from Washington to Long Branch, was sincerely held by hundreds of persons to be a death-warning sent from heaven, and there were numerous predictions that dissolution would take place before the train arrived at its destination.”