deank

As you all know, the three accounts of his life have Jesus saying two different things when he dies.

"Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? (My God, My God, why hast though forsaken me?)" and "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit."

So, what did he say? Why the discrepancy?

GunnerJ

There was also, "It is finished." Of course, the answer, you foolish unbeliever, is all three. Mysterious are the last words of the Lord. [/sarcasm]

Amos

The descrepancy is a matter of perspective (religious and onmiscient).

In reality it is the conscious mind telling the subconscious mind to take over. Remember here that only the ego was crucified because "the man" had been set free under the name of Barabbas.

These same words can be found in Joyces "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man" in the very last line on the very last page. Prior to this a count-down takes place for 40 days. These words were spoken on April 27 after which he went underground for 3 days to awaken as a new creation on May 1--which is symbolic for the day when new life begins.

Amos

jupstin

I don't see a problem with this alleged discrepancy. It's obvious that the gospels are incomplete accounts of Christ's life. With this in mind, if one author quotes Christ saying, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani" before he dies, and another quotes Christ as saying "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit" they can both be correct in the same way that I could say, "I logged onto the internet and then replied to this post," or I could say, "I went to www.infidels.org and then replied to this post." Both statements are true. Isn't it conceivable that Christ said all of these things before he died?

[ October 06, 2001: Message edited by: jupstin ]

Amos

There is no descrepancy.

From the religious perspective God has forsaken the ego now being crucified. This is needed for the staging of a potential tragedy.

From the omniscient perspective the soul now commits to existence completely void of rational assistance. Needed for the staging of a potential comedy which is in the works or these words would not be there.

Masaccio's "The Holy Trinity with Mary and St. John" is a perfect example of the omniscient perspective here. It shows the triumphant Mary and John the Baptist at the foot of the cross after their mission had been completed, which was the liberation of Mary and after this the subjugation of the minor serpent (Eve).

The differences in the four Gosples can all be explained on this basis, including the different women at the tomb.

Amos

GunnerJ

Amos, you never cease to amaze me. Someday, i hope, you can explain to me the full mysteries of your theology.

Amos

It is called philosophy and the finest of fine arts. It has little value on the surface.

The Resistance

No, you fools, Jesus said "Hmm, I wonder if I left the oven on."

britinusa

"Agggghhhh, fuck it! That HURTS!!!" Then he broke into a rendition of Eric Idle's Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life.
Then he died.

aikido7

One would think that the early Christian news media would have got those quotes right. And all four of them didn't even get the sign on the cross the same way...

Of course, funamentalist apologetics likes to say something like "different witnesses remember different details." But the common-sense view--and the scholarly accepted one--is that each gospel is not a biography but a theologically-driven interpretation of Jesus.

[ October 16, 2001: Message edited by: aikido7 ]