emc2

I was recently watching a show on TLC about Jesus/religion, but I kept getting interrupted and I didn't get to absorb the details.

It was about how Jesus didn't really die on the cross, but he was taken off the cross before he was dead (unconscious?), given a fake funeral(by his friends), and an elaborate story was told to the public, and then he was hidden from everyone where he lived and raised a family of his own(Mary Magdalen(sp?) was his suspected wife), with his decendants still living today.

The show was explaining the evidence, but I didn't catch it. Did anyone see this show or have any information on this topic?

CX

I beleive this story comes from the Talmudic or Rabbinic literature. There is no evidence whatsoever for the story. If Jesus existed and was crucified (which is fairly well established as much as any event from antiquity involving a minor personage can be) it is unlikely in the extreme that the Romans would have pulled him down until he was dead. Crucifixion was reserved for enemies of the state, radicals and dissidents and such. More than likely none of Jesus' followers witnessed the execution. Furthermore, it is somewhat accepted by scholars that Joseph of Arimathea GMt 27:57, GMk 15:43, and GLk 23:51 was a rhetorical invention rather than an historical personage. The Jesus Seminar for example has concluded that the entire trial, passion and empty tomb accounts are not authentic. This however is very controversial.

offa

offa, go to <a href="http://www.amazon.com" target="_blank">www.amazon.com</a> and look for thiering under books. Jesus the Man is that story.

offa

offa, Holy Blood Holy Grail tells about Jesus having descendants living today, however, I am leaning toward the mysterious bloodline belonging to Antipas.

CX

Hmmm...I have studied the New Testament for quite some time and until I had not heard of Thiering. I'll have to do some research, but on the sruface she seems like a crackpot. I'll make some enqueries amongst the practicing biblical scholars I know. I have to say I am credulous of her using the Essene format of the Pesher (a line by line commentary) to interpret the gospels through the dead sea scrolls and alleged hidden meanings contained within them. I no of no other biblical scholar including Dr. Michael Goulder who is an atheist and Bultmannian demythologizer. Still this does not stand in as an argument so I will have to do some digging.

Storm and Stress

The most famous tale of Jesus not dying, besides the Koran version of the execution, is Schofields The Passover Plot. A still highly controversial work in which Jesus attempts to fulfill certain verses in Pslams and plans a very elaborate and daring fake death on the cross. Requiring the split second timing worthy of a Mission Impossible team, Jesus must actually be crucified, but sip the spong full of vinger and mryhh..which kills the pain and allows him to also pass out. The romans mistake him for dead, and he is taken down actually alive. I am oversimplefying Schofield's theory which has been both described as laughable and possible.

jake

From everything on Roman history that i have read, it was a custom to take all persons down from the cross on Sunday. Jesus had only been on the cross for a few days then, and therefore could have been mistaken for dead or dying. (as to the sponge of vinegar and myhrr, you wouldnt pass out from it or anything like that). Therefore Jesus could haven been taken for dead and easily have spread word that he was dead, and then making the miraculous return from the dead. The only problem is that his ressurection wasnt that impressive. The Jewish community didnt embalm their dead, or do any burial rights that would make certain that a person was dead. Also, Jesus came back with his wounds still on his body... god might have been more intelligent to heal Jesus' wounds- now that would have been miraculous. Therefore, it is my belief that Jesus Christ was a fake who attempted to perpetuate his stance as the son of god and the messiah that the Jews had been waiting for, except he was denied by the Jews because there were many discrepancies over his demeanor (not being a "ruler by the sword"). If that does not answer your question, e-mail me... i have much more on the subject

svensky

CowboyX under the surface thering is still a crackpot. I've read Jesus the Man, dont bother.

Jason

Amos

Read Mt. 27:62-66. Jesus was most certainly death because Pilate had been informed that Jesus was an imposter and all were concerned that if Jesus' apostels would steal him before three days the final imposter would be worse.

Careful reading tells us that Jesus was an imposter and if he was an imposter he was not real. He was therefore the persona of "the man" that Pilate could see no fault with. The persona was Jesus-the-Jew who was therefore also convicted by Judaic law and "the man" (the Christ idenity) was set free under Bar-abbas (son of man).

Had Jesus not died on the cross he would have become the "final imposter" and wander in the desert for 40 years like his ancestors and die nonetheless. This means that the second nature unto whom the firstborn Christ nature is reborn
must be crucified or resurrection will not follow the event-- which therefore will become a tragedy instead of a comedy.

It's a parable and only real because it is a parable.

Amos

[ December 09, 2001: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

emc2

Amos:

You mentioned in my Noah's Ark debate that that also was a parable- Is that your answer for everything?

I'll play along, but let me further analyze this.

You are now saying that the story of Jesus is a parable. So that means that he didn't really die on the cross, which in turn means he didn't die for anyones sins. Doesn't this throw the entire Christianity foundation upside down?