After reading some of the life and works of Jesus I didn’t find any original thoughts or deeds in the New or Old Testament. I didn’t find looking upon its horizons any plantings of any new spiritual flags either. I’am not that fond of labels but if I were to be labeled I would accept the nametag of an Afrocentrist. The working definition of a Afrocentrist: attempting to use my pupils as an Observatory tower using all 360 degrees of a vision of trying to understand many spiritual teachings in the world and how they relate to my self as an African-American man. I believe that Jesus character was modeled in part after an Egyptian character called Horus. I will attempt to explore this hypothesis from Genesis to Revelations. King Tut embraced Horus the same way the historical Cleopatra wanted to be the living image of Isis or Catholic Nun’s having the Virgin Mary as their role model. Some scholars compare the Mary and Isis as being the same. But as a pupil of history , with limited vision , I will attempt to eliminate the fiction from the truth for and from my eyes. No man has seen God but only its attributes and effects. At the Creation Not all Christians think alike. Some believe that the Doctrine of the Trinity doctrine is Christianity’s self-inflicted wound. Anthony buzzard wrote: “ There is nothing here which implies that Jesus created the heaven and earth. What is said that one God, who on his own testimony, as we have seen, was alone at creation p.73 (Isa 44:24)”. Solomon implies, following in the path of the Egyptian god Thoth, would boast that he helped god create the heavens and the earth ( Proverbs 8:27-30) Now as we travel back to Genesis God said let us make man in our image after our likeness. The “us” was Elohim (gods). The Hebrew’s described Elohim as “ruach”, the wind which they exchanged from the Egyptian god’s name of Amen. The Hebrews copied the Egyptian creation story and separated the Egyptian deity from nature. For example in the first book of Genesis in the Bible we have these four components: 1. Earth taking up space without form and void is Egyptian Huh and Hauhet 2. Darkness is Egyptian Kuj and Kauket =darkness upon the face of waters (nun) 3. A watery deep is Egyptian Nun and Naunet 4. A wind/spirit over the waters is Egyptian Amen and Amenet-the invisible wind (see James, 1954, p.75) The spirit of God that hovered upon the dark abyss of the sea apparently was given its true name from Elohim to Amen in the book of Revelation 3:14 “The Amen (Jesus), the faithful and true witness the source of God’s creation”. Psalm says “When you send your spirit, they are created” (Psalm 104:30). Just as a side note Psalm 104 is a replica of Pharaoh Akhenaton’s hymn to Aton. In John’s Gospel Amen is The Word of that creative force. In Egypt this was old spiritual theology. Before Moses wrote the Bible he learned all the wisdom of the Egyptians. Thousands of years before Moses the Egyptians wrote that Amen created Maat (truth) the first divine matter which gave birth to other matter. The Koran said the same thing (14:19). Before Christians were called “vulgarly called Christians” says Tacitus they were also known as “The Way” according to the book of Acts. Some Egyptologist equate Maat with the term “The way”. In the OT it was written “But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteouness will rise with healing in its wings” (MalachI 4:2/Luke1:78). In Egypt Maat is pictured as a winged angel of truth, justice, righteousness. We know that Jesus word was truth, he is truth and that truth (John 1:1-15)was the word that was with Amen at the time of creation.But in Egypt thousands of years ago Horus played a role with the heart/mind and tongue/words of Amen that helped to create the world. There are over 200 individual items linking Jesus with Horus. The most famous one being turning water into wine at a fictional city called Cana. Cana didn’t become Cana until long after Jesus lived and died. Horus is known to have made grape-water at a Canal in Egypt. Cana is the Canal in Egypt. Cana is called the Nest in the Bible dictionary but most likely named after Net, the goddess of canals in Egypt. I once saw a prominent Jewish attorney, Alan Dershowitz , claim on TV that people who called his God a god of nature were following people like Thomas Jefferson who believed that the Biblical God was a god of nature. I sent him a email to his Harvard email address and he never got back in touch with me. God is nature but isn’t limited within it. God is our breath,light and river of life but isn’t bound in it. Christian formed a Council of Chalcedon in 451 saying Christ was to be worshiped in two natures. How could they say Jesus is God and that God isn’t a God in nature. Christians were also called “The poor”. When Jesus said: “Blessed are the poor (Christians) in spirit” (Matthew 5:3) The poor could be interchanged into Christians. I believe God to be spirit and truth that’s the two natures we worship him in(John 4:23). In Egypt the Blessed were “true of voice” (Rev 1:3) that were judged from the double Halls of Maat/Truth. Paul tells us we are judged according to the truth. Because the word Amen has the attributes and functions of bless, truth, faith and spirit. Paul never separated the spirit with Amen (1 Cor 14:16). Nehemiah 8:6 used the Egyptian symbol of spirit with two hands lifted up when talking about Amen, Amen. I believe that we are to worship and pray to God in his name of Amen. Tertullian an early Christian teacher said: “We little fishes, after the image of our Christ are born in the water”. Tertullian may have been alluding to the fact the two fishes, Pisces follows or comes out of Aquarius. I’ve been told the Hebrew word for man is “ish” one word missing from Fish. Another word for Man is ha-adam. In another Egyptian creation story it’s “Ptah-Nun, the father of Atum/sun/light”. Atum and Adam, the D and T are interchangeable. John’s Gospels does say God at creation: “in him was life, and that life was the light of men” (John 1:4). Nun in Aramaic meant fish the symbol for Jesus and Christianity. Some say Joshua the sun of nun is Jesus Christ with both names meaning the same thing. It appears the Bible took various Egyptian creation stories. God didn’t say he created man (ish) but ha-adam maybe in his image. I say maybe because Isaiah says: “To whom, then will you compare God? What image will you compare him to?” (Isaiah 40:18). Then he goes on to say: “Apart from me there is no God Who then is like me? (Isaiah 44:7). Apparently Jesus was “I’am” the root word for Jehovah and in Egypt “Am” is the sun. When the vowels of the Egyptian Sun God Aten were added, YHWH became Y(A)HW(E)H... When the vowels of the Sun God Adonai were added, YHWH became Y(A)H(O)W(A)H, which finally became “JEHOVAH,” which translates “I am” and “The Eternal One” in Hebrew .We are Children of light in the image of Jesus and God in the image of spiritual light not physical because God took on the forms of clouds and fire. Maybe when we become Angels taking on a shining majesty in a city of lights that need no lights because they went through the way of light with Jesus the sunlight with healing in his wings. PSALMS, Chapter 104, Verse 24; thus: How manifold are thy works, O Ywh! All of them thou hast made by wisdom, The earth is full of thy creations.
In the original text by AKHENATEN [in praise of his God] I found a "HYMN TO ATEN/Aton" : How numerous is that which you have created and hidden from view! You, only God, there is no other like you. You did create the earth according to your own will, being alone.
So Akhenaton agreed with the Bible that God alone created the Heavens and the earth.There are some Egyptologist who say Akhenaton and Moses are one and the same person. For a long time it was illegal to mention the name Akhenaton. When I read the Zondervan Handbook to the Bible on p.99 and it said that Jesus said in Luke 24:44 that Moses wrote about him in the law of Moses. Christians say Moses wrote about Jesus in Deuteronomy 18:20 says in part I have not commanded him (Jesus) to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death”. Would this be applicable to what Moses said in Exodus of having no other gods before me and not misuse the name of God? (Exodus 20:3;7). Akhenaton’s original name was Amenophis. He had the root word of Amen. When he got older and more mature Akhenaton turned away from from the Egyptian God Amen to Aton. Egyptologist also say that Jesus is the historical King Tutankhamen who changed his name from Tutankaton. Moses and Akhenaton had two priest with the same names of Pinehas and Merari.The Talmud states that Phinehas a contemporary of Moses killed Jesus (Tutankhamen) for practicing magic. According to Moses Jesus was killed for calling upon God in other names (Deut 18). Could this be a clue to Magic? Well in the Egyptian magic naming is extremely important in their experience and it is the ability to name all the gods and objects encountered that proves one has acquired enough magic to sit with the gods. Language, and particularly naming, carries a substantial magical power in Egyptian thought. (Self-Identification with a God and Voices Magic in Ancient Egyptian. What the Bible calls signs and wonders of Jesus the Rabbis called Egyptian magic, not miracles. This was rightly true considering Jesus first miracle was based on Horus. So if Jesus called himself son of God this would be self-identification with the deity god. Jesus claimed he was sun of the sun god Amen-Ra. And for this with other crimes many crave his death. Now Son of God may have meant a son of light or a son of heaven which would of made Jesus an Angel. But very few Christians except for Jehovah’s Witnesses consider Jesus an Angel. On April 17, 6 BC the moon blocked the planet Jupiter (Zeus/Amen) and people used this date and made coins with a ram looking back at a star for the birth of Jesus. Even Justin Martyr recognized the analogies between Christianity and Paganism. To the Pagans, he wrote: "When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)." [First Apology, Chapter. 21] . Zeus and Jupiter original Egyptian name is Amen. See Herodotus book 2 for Zeus and Amen comparison. I’am not buying it because I think Jesus was already born sometime in 1330 BC. As a matter of fact the ram was another word for Amen in Egypt. It was in reference to the spirit of Amen being hidden, unseen like the air we breathe. Amen was the breathe and life giving force in Egypt creation stories. We know this life giving force as the ghost/spirit. When they say Jesus died on a cross or tree they say he gave up the Ghost (breathing) and called out to Eli (Elohim). The Apocrypha writings of Peter has Jesus yelling My power has forsaken me. The Bible dictionary says El means power or majesty. All I’m trying to say is that Moses was correct to say Jesus was killed for calling upon the names of other gods because Moses being Akhetanton or his priest wanted to call God Aton/Adon. Jesus being King Tutankhamen rejected his original name of Aton now claims to be the living image of the lord. Like I said before While Jesus was on the cross he cried out to Eli (Elohim) the power of air to breathe. Now Easter in Egypt was called a “breathe of life festival“. Before Jesus dies in Luke he says I give my spirit to God. Now some Christians say the Jews were cutting and eating them Lamb/Ram at the Passover at the very time Jesus was on the cross/tree. So it appears on the face of it that the spirit of God temporarily left his presence from Jesus while he was on the cross. If that is true than the Jesus from Isaiah and the New Testament aren’t the same individuals. For example: “And he that sent me is with me; the father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him” (John 8:29). Now compare this quote with another. “ And he (Jesus) made his grave with the wicked and with the rich in his death... yet it pleased the lord to bruise him... when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin” (Isaiah 53:5-10). These two verses contradict Jesus’ statement when he was hanging on the cross allegedly saying: “My God (eli) my God (eli), why hast thou forsaken, me? (Matthew 27:46). If Jesus were one with God he wouldn’t have needed to ask God why he left him. Jesus couldn’t of asked this question because it makes the other two Bible verses untrue. Now if we back up to Isaiah 52:14 we find out that Jesus was disfigured and his form was marred. This fits King Tut’s body of having a spine disease and being tortured to death. Isaiah wasn’t talking about someone who would die but a person who already lived and died. Isaiah’s faith in his poetry can’t fit into New Testament writings because its contradicts. Christians have for a long time mixed up the time and place for the birth and death of Jesus. They self inflicted themselves with a misunderstanding of the trinity. They left the components of the family out of the trinity which consisted of God the father, the son and the feminine, maternal, Holy Ghost/spirit. The Bible trinity all 3 should be male and the same. There was no reason to say let us create man in Genesis if they all were the same? It wasn’t a Trinity in Genesis that created mankind but Gods and his angels (attributes and functions). Elohim was gods. The Essense called angels “spirits”, “Gods (elim)” see (Sommer, 1961, p.53). Life, death and rebirth is the natural course of the system in the nature on earth which the Koran and Egyptian philosophy teaches. Adam and Eve didn’t need a tree of good and evil to pass on original sin and death because they could of died just by not eating of the tree of life if they choose to. The Koran said “We granted not to any man before thee permanent life” (21:34). Jesus death didn’t stop physical death we are lead to believe Adam & Eve originally had. And, I’ve heard Paul read a miss translation of the bible that caused him to speak about linking physical death with original sin. There was no need for Jesus to die but Moses and Phinehas wanted him dead because he changed his name from Aton to Amen. It appears that when Rome became an empire they wanted their status uplifted and wanted everybody to think Peter gave Roman Popes the authority over the Church. “The authority given Peter is given equally to others” (Zondervan handbook to the bible p.566). Peter’s character was modeled after the Egyptian god called Pet whose upside down rock mountain/pyramids was a support for heaven. I think about God everyday. I wish that one day I could be in heaven with him in spirit or physically or both. The late Pope once said we go from “life to Light”. Sometimes I fantasize about being in heaven and being able to talk to past historical figures like Plato, King Tut and Herodotus. Hopefully my wish of looking back into history would be fulfilled. But while I’m here on the planet earth I must make my life here meaningful. For the past five years I’ve been trying to be more family orientated in my life. I was inspired by Louis Farrakhan who hosted the Million family March in 2000 in Washington DC. As a family life educator I would like to be a Master (teacher) in the form of a counselor to kids in public schools. I’m shocked and appalled that right-winged Christians used Homosexuality as a gimmick to elect a president. They should loose their wings for this. Christianity’s focused should be on the Love. A spiritual person should be heavily influenced when Paul said “But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (1 Timothy 5:8). This is proof to my satisfation that the pulpit should focus on adultery more than homosexuality and parents that neglect their children. Their pews would empty quickly if they started to focus on the sex of adultery between homosexuals; and the sheep would say to the shepherd to mind his own business. When my girlfriend lived with me for two years we all focused on her youngest helping her to recognized words and numbers. The work has paid off because her teacher wants her to skip kindergarten right into the first grade. She isn’t my daughter by blood but I don’t mind helping children out whether they are in my house or not. The world is upside down now. Children look up to hip hop rappers like Eminem who has disrespected his mother and father on the international stage. Christianity is supposed to be service orientated. The government is made up of the people which are majority Christians. The government and the people go hand and hand which all supposed to help uplift the poor; a name Christians were once called. Some how the perverse thought has prevailed that Government is the servants of the rich and the poor are at the mercy of private groups. Christians are being used to give legitimacy to our government that hasn’t shed white supremacy from its threads, more concerned with the economic plight of non-citizens than African-Americans and refuses to give an apology for the holocaust of slavery which is not very Christian like. Or maybe I’m wrong on slavery. Christianity never condemned the institution of slavery, (Titus 2:9), only that you treat slaves humanely. In my opinion the church should focus on the poor. Churches are now being asked to be cheerleaders to Supreme court Judges that would be hostile to civil rights and economic justice to people of color. Money is the root of all evil and early Christian groups like the Essenes eschewed money, were despisers of riches and refused to buy and sell to one another. Footnotes to the Zondervan bible says “Jesus has more to say about money than about almost any other topic” (Zondervan p.1101) Now it appears that overtime that money and the Republicans elites will make obsolescence of the Democratic party because they haven’t found an efficient way to pipeline funds to the black community. Republican know how to place cash directly in the hands of Black ministers through the appeal of being against gays on the surface but being for the money in their ulterior greeds. Gays aren’t the problem. The problem is the fading desire to support programs that with equip families to be able to swim and flourish in the mainstream rivers. Money clouds spirituality. It is absolutely necessary to understand the history and development of spiritual matters to be able to take a long look back for a necessity to look forward. The past generates the present coherently only if our eyes are given the full 360 degrees of sunlight. I believe the struggles of Christianity were fought over the gods of Aton vs. Amen. I believe Amen prevailed in the New Testament with Faith being a root word of the Hebrew Aman which is another spelling of Amen. Paul defined faith in belief in the unseen in which in Egypt Amen was called unseen, concealed or the hidden one. King Tut renamed himself after Amen not meaning he was the Amen. He also had five other names and Horus was one of them. In the Bible we know Jesus had links with Horus. All Egyptian Kings were the living image of Horus. Jesus life and death in the NT is an “reenactment” of the Passover when the firstborn of Egyptians offspring were killed even a Pharaoh (King Tut) that sat on a another Pharaoh’s (Moses) throne (Exodus 12:29). When you put your trust, faith and love in God you will have much more than what others can see.
References Buzzard, A. (1998). The Doctrine of the Trinity. New York: International Scholars Pub James, G. (1954). Stolen Legacy. New Jersey: Africa World Press, Inc Sommer, D. (1961). Essene Writings from Qumran. New York: The World Pub Company Zondervan Handbook to the Bible (1999). Third Edition, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan
Posts: 10 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where I think you are going wrong here is in the "assumption" that Moses and Jesus were real people. There is no evidence whatsoever outside of Holy Scripture that this is the case. How can anyone talk of any physical conditions pertaining to "persons" as yet unidentified outside of allegory and myth? And what purpose would it achieve to say that an unidentified person had gout - would that 'prove' the person existed?
Now, if one reads the story of Moses and the Story of Jesus as allegorical tales or novellos, one can begin to understand something of the Divine, which these myths are intended to do.
Osiris has a body which was torn into 14 pieces and then put back together, and he lived on (minus his penis) in the afterlife. Now I ask you, are we supposed to believe that Osiris was a real individual?
Tutankhamun, on the other hand, was a real individual as attested by the existance of his corpse. He believed that he was the Universal Mind of God, the Son of God and the Spirit of God all in the one person of his own personal being. In other words Tutankhamun did not think of himself as Gods representative on earth, but that he was in fact the Creator, and not the created. This heresy may have in fact cost him his life, as it did with Jesus in later times. There is, thus a similarity between Tutankhamun and Jesus Christ so far as this doctrine goes in this particular religious idea. Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
During a discussion of William Shakespeare, a student asked the old professor about the en vogue theory that Shakespeare did not write the plays ascribed to him.
The professor growled, "Young man, if Shakespeare did not write those plays,then they were written by someone who lived at the same time and had the same name!"
At first glance, the "Jesus-myth" seems to be a stroke of genius: To eliminate Christianity and any possibility of it being true, just eliminate the founder.
The greatest support for the "Jesus-myth" comes not from people who know the subject, but from popularizers and those who accept their work uncritically. It is this latter group that we are most likely to encounter - and sadly, arguments and evidence seldom faze them. In spite of the fact that relevant scholarly consenus is unanimous that the "Jesus-myth" is incorrect, it continues to be promulgated on a popular level as though it were absolutely proven.
Of course a consensus does not equate with evidence. But a consensus on any historical question is usually based on evidence which is analyzed by those who are recognized as authoritative in their field, and therefore may be taken at their word. If this were not the case, why should there be any criteria for someone being a historian at all? Why should we not just pick a vagrant at random off the street and let him/her compose an official history of 20th-century America for the Smithsonian archives?
Therefore, while scholarly consensus is not itself evidence, it does function as a "weighting" or "warning" sign: if one agrees with peers who are detailed-students of the same subject matter, then less evidence is needed than would be needed if we disagreed with their consensus (as a very small minority). We would require not just a "good argument" but we would also have to refute all of the consensus arguments first. In other words, evidence may be mediated through expert witness and consensus. Therefore, the argument that consensus does not count as evidence, while correct in its own way, cannot be allowed to stand as a dismissal of consensus, nor as a leveling of the playing field. It is almost like the criteria, "extraordinarily bizarre positions require extraordinary evidence," that operates in scholarly circles. Such a minority position as the "Jesus-myth" is not courageous, but foolhardy - unless one has considerably stronger evidence than the majority; and even then, speculation about alternate views of historical references, such as is commonly found in "Jesus-myth" circles, is not going to keep the sawed-off limb up in the air!
If proponents of the "Jesus-myth" were either qualified historians or had equivalent knowledge, then their counter-consenus position might deserve to be taken more seriously. However, the overwhelming prevalance of tortured explanations, inventive theories, arguments from silence, and outright misrepresentations to get around the evidence that Jesus existed mitigates strongly against offering the Jesus-mythers any scholastic solace. The fact that we have as much information as we do about Jesus from non-Christian sources is amazing in itself.
1. As far as the historians of the day were concerned, he was just a "blip" on the screen. Jesus was not considered to be historically significant by historians of his time. He did not address the Roman Senate, or write extensive Greek philosophical treatises; He never travelled outside of the regions of Palestine, and was not a member of any known political party. It is only because Christians later made Jesus a "celebrity" that He became known. Sanders, comparing Jesus to Alexander, notes that the latter "so greatly altered the political situation in a large part of the world that the main outline of his public life is very well known indeed. Jesus did not change the social, political and economic circumstances in Palestine (Note: It was left for His followers to do that!) ..the superiority of evidence for Jesus is seen when we ask what he thought." [Sand.HistF, 3] Harris adds that "Roman writers could hardly be expected to have foreseen the subsequent influence of Christianity on the Roman Empire and therefore to have carefully documented" Christian origins. How were they to know that this minor Nazarene prophet would cause such a fuss? 2. Jesus was executed as a criminal, providing him with the ultimate marginality. This was one reason why historians would have ignored Jesus. He suffered the ultimate humiliation, both in the eyes of Jews (Deut. 21:23 - Anyone hung on a tree is cursed!) and the Romans (He died the death of slaves and rebels.). On the other hand, Jesus was a minimal threat compared to other proclaimed "Messiahs" of the time. Rome had to call out troops to quell the disturbances caused by the unnamed Egyptian referenced in the Book of Acts [Sand.HistF, 51] . In contrast, no troops were required to suppress Jesus' followers. To the Romans, the primary gatekeepers of written history at the time, Jesus during His own life would have been no different than thousands of other everyday criminals that were crucified. 3. Jesus marginalized himself by being occupied as an itinerant preacher. Of course, there was no Palestine News Network, and even if there had been one, there were no televisions to broadcast it. Jesus never used the established "news organs" of the day to spread His message. He travelled about the countryside, avoiding for the most part (and with the exception of Jerusalem) the major urban centers of the day. How would we regard someone who preached only in sites like, say, Hahira, Georgia? 4. Jesus' teachings did not always jibe with, and were sometimes offensive to, the established religious order of the day. It has been said that if Jesus appeared on the news today, it would be as a troublemaker. He certainly did not make many friends as a preacher. 5. Jesus lived an offensive lifestyle and alienated many people. He associated with the despised and rejected: Tax collectors, prostitutes, and the band of fishermen He had as disciples. 6. Jesus was a poor, rural person in a land run by wealthy urbanites. Yes, class discrimination was alive and well in the first century also!
A final consideration is that we have very little information from first-century sources to begin with. Not much has survived the test of time from A.D. 1 to today. Blaiklock has cataloged the non-Christian writings of the Roman Empire (other than those of Philo) which have survived from the first century and do not mention Jesus. These items are:
* An amateurish history of Rome by Vellius Paterculus, a retired army officer of Tiberius. It was published in 30 A.D., just when Jesus was getting started in His ministry. * An inscription that mentions Pilate. * Fables written by Phaedrus, a Macedonian freedman, in the 40s A.D. * From the 50s and 60s A.D., Blaiklock tells us: "Bookends set a foot apart on this desk where I write would enclose the works from these significant years." Included are philosophical works and letters by Seneca; a poem by his nephew Lucan; a book on agriculture by Columella, a retired soldier; fragments of the novel Satyricon by Gaius Petronius; a few lines from a Roman satirist, Persius; Pliny the Elder's Historia Naturalis; fragments of a commentary on Cicero by Asconius Pedianus, and finally, a history of Alexander the Great by Quinus Curtius.
Of all these writers, only Seneca may have conceivably had reason to refer to Jesus. But considering his personal troubles with Nero, it is doubtful that he would have had the interest or the time to do any work on the subject. * From the 70s and 80s A.D., we have some poems and epigrams by Martial, and works by Tacitus (a minor work on oratory) and Josephus (Against Apion, Wars of the Jews). None of these would have offered occasion to mention Jesus. * From the 90s, we have a poetic work by Statius; twelve books by Quintillian on oratory; Tacitus' biography of his father-in-law Agricola, and his work on Germany. [Blaik.MM, 13-16]
Thus it is misguided for the skeptic to complain that we know so little about the historical Jesus, and have so little recorded about Him in ancient pagan sources. Compared to most ancient people, we know quite a lot about Jesus, and have quite a lot recorded about Him! (For a response to a commonly-used list of writers who allegedly should have mentioned Jesus, see here.)
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mrs. Doubtfire would be more than delighted to comment on any "proof" of a historical Jesus. Despite the above, none has been profered.
Of course, the overwhelming consideration against there being an "historical" Jesus are the Gnostic gospels and the gnostic faith from which literalist Christianity emerged. The Gnostics, of course, knew that Jesus Christ was an allegory right from the beginning which is why they were so blatent in their ridicule of the early literalist Christians, in which they called "their absurd belief". When one considers it so, then surely it is absurd to think that in the entirely history of the universe that for a very short period, "God" managed to incarnate Himself into a human being which we call the Son of God, and then have himself destroyed upon a cross. Now I ask you, is not this the absurdity of absurdities?
I would be glad to reply to any references to Jesus found in any historical references if they are kindly quoted. Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic