spamandham

Most posting here are familiar with the story, but what we're interested in, is what really happened. The story is not credible on many levels, and may possibly be entirely symbolic.

There is no reason to presume any parts of it are true.

show_no_mercy

Yeah, but I think this imagery comes from a misunderstanding of Psalm 22:16 - "they pierced my hands and feet" when, according to Jews, it should be "like a lion they're at my hands and feet"; Psalm 22 has nothing to do with crucifixion. AFAIK, crucifixion victims, depending on the crime, had their wrists and ankles nailed, not their hands and feet.

There's a lot wrong with the crucifixion imagery fed to us in the modern world.

Toto

In that case, he was something of a cypher. His followers disappear from history after his supposed death, then they surface as another mystery type religion in the Roman Empire, but his teaching seems to be completely irrelevant to what has been done by 99% of his followers.

Many of his later followers connected with him through visions and visitations, without reading his supposed teachings, which were fairly cryptic at times in any case.

For the past few centuries of human history, westerners have tried to discover the real teachings of the real Jesus, with less than impressive results. Many of them seem to have started with the premise that Jesus was all good, and church history is a story of evil and corruption and warfare, so Jesus' followers must have completely misunderstood what he was saying.

spamandham

I'll have to take your word for this since I have no expertise in Hebrew or Greek, but that's interesting, because if true, does it not prove (to reasonable satisfaction) that the crucifixion story:

a. Was a constructed story
b. Was constructed from a translated text

show_no_mercy

I'm pretty sure that the crucifixion story was constructed, or some sort of after-the-fact explanation of the crucifixion of a/an historical "Joshuas".

From what I read in "The End of Biblical Studies (or via: amazon.co.uk)" (and from some Jewish friends), there's a word/verb translation problem in the text of Psalm 22:16. It either reads "pierced", "bound", or "like a lion". Reading Psalm 22 in its entirety, it seems as though "bound" would make the most sense.

Of course, the original Christians didn't read from the Hebrew version of the Hebrew text, so we don't know what word was in their LXX version of Psalm 22:16. Notice also that the beginning of Psalm 22 (My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?) is the same phrase that Jesus utters in Mark 15:34/Matthew 27:46 in Aramaic.

Elijah

Umm thanks for the wiki facts. There may have been no rebellions or visible groups that promoted equality for women but the concept of equality with men has been with the women since the beginning of their oppression. You don’t need evidence of that, only basic common sense.
What law makes it so that priests are only men? Or do you want him to make a claim that it should have said the sons and daughters of Aaron? Do you even think he intended for there to be figure like priest/rabbi in his ideal society he was trying to create? Matt 23:1-12

Yea he did say that adultery was the only reason a women could divorce but obviously would be against abusing your wives under the do unto others bit, which itself is an equality mantra. He did try to create equality by saying men shouldn’t just divorce their wives and like the women adultery was the only reason. Also didn’t believe that marriage was something we were going to be doing in the new day. Luke 20:34-36

He was forgiving of the adulterous women and told the men that even looking at a woman lustily was adultery and they are better off cutting something off/out than to do that. John 8:7 Matt 5:28

Elijah

That would be the overall point. If you understand Jesus as a messiah claimant then a change in the social order should be expected and if peace was intended equality would be necessary. Now of course I am for a rational understanding of this change in the world without the entire superstitious overlay, which can be difficult to rationalize especially when you have eternal life and a resurrection of the dead in the scenario.

fatpie42

Perhaps this ought to become a new thread, but can I just quickly ask what kind of "detailed information" you are referring to?

Does this involve astronomical details too?

andrewcriddle

The Law on adultery applied to women who cheated on their husbands and to the men they slept with. However it did not apply to married men who had affairs with single women (not currently married or bethrothed) or to the single women involved.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

You are totally wrong. There are people, lots of people who are interested in the truth.

If Jesus did not exist, he did not teach any thing. It was the author of the Jesus story who should be given the credit, not the offspring of the Holy Ghost.

Joseph Smith of Mormonism died over a hundred years ago and people still claim he was human, a human that died.