The Historical Jesus

[Danustouch]

I'd like to start this thread to discuss Jesus as a Historical and Philosophical figure. This should be a thread in which people can discuss historical facts, or legends, surrounding Jesus...as well as their views on differen't aspects of his philosophy. I'd hope that we can discuss this Man, as we could discuss every other religious icon of our world, without digressing into arguments about predjudice, or how people have been hurt by specific followers of Christ..etc, etc. This is simply to discuss the Historical Figure himself. And please, Just to prevent a recent argument from happening again..could we please spell Christian...CHRISTIAN? heheh. Thank you.

[MistOfTheSea86]

Danus. Is it true that Jesus Worshipped alongside the druids as a brother? I think it is, but I want to clarify what I read. I could have once again fallen victim to a hoax:eek:

[Mairwen]

It is also said that he studied with the Essenes ~ remember his "40 day" disappearance into the desert which no one can seem to explain?

[bloodstone20]

no comment. cookie to danus.

[Danustouch]

I don't know for a fact that Jesus studied amongst the druids. But it is definately one story regarding him. Joseph of Arimethea was a Tin Trader, and made frequent trips to that part of Europe, or so the story goes (need to brush up on this a bit..am pulling this all from memory). So, it is entirely possible, due to their closeness, that while Jesus was young, he might have made one of these trips with Joseph of Arimathea, and encountered some of the Druids. There are some similarities in the teachings, as far as I can see. But..then..I also see similarities between his teachings, and the teachings of Bhudda. However, Irish legend and Irish poets have made quite a story out of Jesus visiting there. I believe that Yeats wrote a poem about it. But don't quote me on that.

[Danustouch]

As for the Essenes, I think that is a VERY probable theory. He did dissappear for a long time before he began his travels, from the annals of time. John the Baptist, was after all, an Essene, and they were VERY close. Oh GODS I wish I had the book that I used to have on the subject. There is a book called "The Historical Jesus" and I can't remember the author. Will find out for you though. It basically lists the theories as to who Jesus really was, historically. And this theory is certainly one of them. Jesus seemed to constantly contradict the government of his time. Both romans, and Jews...but mainly the Jewish government (he did say render unto ceasar....). The Essenes were a militant group of radicals trying to reform their religion. They also were trying to overthrow Rome. This gives me my only "glitch" in the thought. Because The Essenes seemed to want to overthrow Roman Rule, but Jesus himself didn't seem motivated by that desire, as much as the desire to reform Jewish Law and Society at the time. Let me do some checking into this, and I'll get back to you!

[Danustouch]

I found one book, which might lend more credence to the fact that Jesus may have studied amongst the Druids. The book is called..."Druid Mysteries, and the Dawn of Christianity" and it is by Gordon Strachan. Looks interesting.

I'm not an expert on Druidism, by any means. But I have heard that many Druids believe themselves to be derived from the original tribes of Judah. That their mysteries contained prophecies of the coming of Yesu. So it would make sense, that if Joseph of Arimithea thought Jesus Christ to be this...Yesu...he may have brought Jesus to them, for additional training, or verification.

[Revelation]

I'm exploring the possibility of there being no historical Jesus right now.

[Emerald Sky]

Originally posted by Revelation
I'm exploring the possibility of there being no historical Jesus right now.

What do you mean, Rev? Like perhaps he wasn't a real figure in history? ... more like a mythical creature?

[Draeconin]

There are a lot of theories and a lot of controversy regarding this man, and it's a virtual certainty that he existed - not as Jesus Christ, but as Rabbi Yeshua ben Yoseph. He is rumored to have been a member of the royal family as well as a political and religious leader. He disappears from history from approximately the age of 12 to about age 30, when he reappears. Where he spent that time is a matter of great debate. Some say Britain, others say India. There is evidence on both sides. In that 18 or so years it is quite possible that he spent time in both countries.

There is also evidence that he did not die on the cross. According to some of the scholars, he took poison while on the cross (sponge dipped in vinegar [mixed w/ poison]) and was given aloes to purge it from his system later. It is thought he probably went to one of the cities (or back to Britain) and taught in secret while raising a family. There are families in Britain that trace their lineage back to him.

I'm not asserting that any of this is absolutely true - just that these are some of the things that I've come across.

[Danustouch]

Okay..the book I was referring to earlier, regarding differen't theories as to the historical Jesus, and what his purpose, what his teachings, etc, were...is not "the Historical Jesus..". The book is entitled "Jesus Before Christianity" (I SOOOOOOO love that title.) and it's by a Catholic Priest Fr. Albert Nolan. It's published by Varsity Press. The book is ABSOLUTELY terriffic.

Another book I would highly reccomend, for people who are looking for information on Jesus that the bible itsself might not supply, Is the book.."Bloodline of the Holy Grail" by, I think..Thomas Moore. Explains many of the theories of how Jesus may have married the Magdalene, etc, etc. Interesting read.

[Revelation]

Originally posted by Emerald Sky


What do you mean, Rev? Like perhaps he wasn't a real figure in history? ... more like a mythical creature?

Something like that, yes. Or, more probably, that the storises we hear that are associated with JEsus are just that--stoies, possibly based on a person who did exist, but in no way actually biographically true of the person named Yehoshua ben Yosef. I think its more likely that there were several such political ativists who became martyred and worshipped and their stories came together to form the history or one man (because one man doing all these great things is far more interesting that several people doin a few things!). But as for the Jesus of the Bible as an actual person who actually existed in the manner portrayed in the NT--I just don't buy it.

[Danustouch]

Well..so far in my travels on the net, looking for good articles about Jesus studying amongst the Druids, i've found little info. A couple of articles, that hint at it. But none in depth. Most of the articles I have read, have stated that the Druids had a prophecy regarding a being named Yesu or Hesus...who was supposed to teach love, and tolerance, etc. So, when later, Joseph of Arimethea went to Great Britain (after Jesus was already ..."dead") the Druids embraced the teachings of Christ, because he seemed to fulfill their prophecies.

[Danustouch]

I found a TERRIFFIC set of Articles pertaining to Jesus the Historical figure at this website (PBS..had to be, right?)

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/jesus/tikkun.html

you'll probably have to type in the link..because it's very long. But it is SOOOOOOOOO worth the read. Really interesting.

[Lilu]

Originally posted by Danustouch
The Essenes were a militant group of radicals trying to reform their religion. They also were trying to overthrow Rome. This gives me my only "glitch" in the thought. Because The Essenes seemed to want to overthrow Roman Rule, but Jesus himself didn't seem motivated by that desire, as much as the desire to reform Jewish Law and Society at the time.

It's always possible that somewhere along the lines either the values and priorities of the Essenes changed, and Jesus went his own way when they did, teaching what he believed to be a better way than anarchy.

Lilu

[Lilu]

Originally posted by Danustouch
Another book I would highly reccomend, for people who are looking for information on Jesus that the bible itsself might not supply, Is the book.."Bloodline of the Holy Grail" by, I think..Thomas Moore. Explains many of the theories of how Jesus may have married the Magdalene, etc, etc. Interesting read.

Bloodline of the Holy Grail was written by Laurence Gardner :)

Lilu

[Danustouch]

Thanks Lilu...

Couldn't find my book to check on the author...and have NO clue where I came up with Thomas Moore..lol..Thanks again.

[Lilith Rain]

I`m doing a theroy essay for my contempory arts studies class and wondered if you`d mind answering some questions. Anyone else reading this is welcome to answer them. Email me back the answers. Thanx. 1. Should there be a Black Jesus? 2. Where is the black Jesus? 3. How do we represent Jesus? 4. How has the Church defined Christ? 5. How do people occociated with the Church view Christ? 6. How do you view Christ?
I'd appreciate it if you got your answers back to me ASAP. Thanx.
8O

Hope you all enjoy the Jon William Waterhouse painting.

[Spirahl]

I've been told that the bible mentions Jesus as having hair curly with the texture of wool, and skin the colour of a copper penny that had been darkened in a furnace. But that is secondhand info. Actually, I think I read it in a biography of Malcom X, but I don't want to turn this thread into a thread about whether or not Malcom X was a great leader or a racist himself.
But anyway, it always surprises me that people can get so riled about this subject. If Jesus is about love and acceptance, it shouldn't matter if he was purple with green polka dots. Myself, I think he would have looked Arabic.

[Kiya]

He said that Jesus 'was nailed to a tree after saying wouldn't it be good if we were all nice to each other for a change'

I think that's from Life, the Universe and Everything. Or possibly So Long and Thanks for All the Fish.

[Danustouch]

I agree..I personally think he would look arabic...or at least, middle eastern.

[Mairwen]

I never could figure out the blonde and blue eyed Jesus, myself. I would have thought he would have been more Middle Eastern-ish, personally.

Maybe we could move this to Gods and Goddesses and merge it with the Historical Jesus thread?:)

[Semele]

Originally posted by Mairwen
I never could figure out the blonde and blue eyed Jesus, myself. I would have thought he would have been more Middle Eastern-ish, personally.

Maybe we could move this to Gods and Goddesses and merge it with the Historical Jesus thread?:)

I moved it for ya...now you can merge it wherever you see fit girl!!

[Mairwen]

Many blessings, Semele!! :D

[mol]

Originally posted by Mairwen
Many blessings, Semele!! :D

I wouldnt merge them...this thread is not quite the same as the other. ;)

[Margie]

My boyfriend and I were talking about this last night. Not a full blown conversation or debate or anything...I said that I think there may have been a man, his name may have been Jesus, and he may have had the power to heal and that. However I feel that it was pretty arrogant of him to call himself the son of a god.

[Danustouch]

Hmmmmmm...but then....aren't we all sons and daughters of the Source?

I've often thought that Jesus was speaking metaphorically, when he called himself the Son of God. I used to have a translation on this....but...can't find it.

Personally, I think that there were many Sons of God. In one sense, we all are. In another sense, people like Ghandi, Jesus, Bhuddah, Martin Luther King....those who do great things to point mankind on a path of Love, and tolerance, and peace....They are Sons of God, Gods, Goddess, Goddesses.

And here is another point. Was there never anyone in your life, whom you felt was your Father, or Mother. That kind of bond, even though there was no blood relation? A father figure? Perhaps this is what Jesus meant...

That because he did Gods Will (and I say this in the most generic of terms, meaning, he was loving, tolerant, healing, etc) and because he loved "God" (as in, perhaps, the creator, or the creation, ie..the SOURCE), and because he felt a certain closeness..that he was a Son of God?

I often think of myself as one of the Goddess' daughters. It doesn't mean that I am the only one, and Jesus himself said he wasn't the only Son of God. He didn't even claim to have any powers that we, ourselves could not have "These things you will do, and even greater". In short, I think that his followers were the ones to proclaim him the one and only Son of God. The only way to heaven..etc. Not he himself. The Jesus I have learned through research, was just a man with a message, and a passion for mankind :)

[Myst]

Good point, Danustouch.

We think of ourselves as the children of the Goddess and Her Consort, so why shouldn't have Jesus called himself Son of God? And don't we call that God Father as well?

[Mairwen]

Originally posted by mol
I wouldnt merge them...this thread is not quite the same as the other. ;)


Too late. Done did. Because I felt they were related. So there. :p

[Mairwen]

Originally posted by Danustouch
Hmmmmmm...but then....aren't we all sons and daughters of the Source? I've often thought that Jesus was speaking metaphorically, when he called himself the Son of God.

Right. Like some use the term in literature "Daughter of Eve" or "Son of Adam" to mean "woman" or "man". I think that people forget that most religious texts are myths, meant to be read for their highly concept-symbol and metaphorical content. Not to be taken literally.

[Danustouch]

I SOOOOOOOOO agree Mairwen. Most religious myths are just allegories. Most of Jesus biggest lessons were given in parable form. So..perhaps even him calling himself a "Son of God" was another parable?

A little OT...but...it's funny. My mother was the very first person to tell me that I could not take everything that the bible said, literally, as much of it was allegorical. And yet, the second I told her I was pagan...LOL..She feared for my eternal soul!!!!!!!! That just hit me. I totally forgot that memory of her telling me not to take it literally. LOL.

[Rævyn Cigány]

Originally posted by Kiya
He said that Jesus 'was nailed to a tree after saying wouldn't it be good if we were all nice to each other for a change'

I think that's from Life, the Universe and Everything. Or possibly So Long and Thanks for All the Fish.



Hmmm....my hubby is a Douglas Adams fan...will ask him which one exactly, okay? :D

BB

Rae )0(

[Rævyn Cigány]

To touch on the theory that Jesus was married....

I believe this could be true. I mean just think of it (Kabbalah and jewish backgrounded people back me up here)...Jesus was a Jew, and in order to be considered a 'good Jew', in those days (and possibly in these days too), you were expected to be married. And the only reason the bible makes Mary Magdalene out to be a prostitute is because women behind the men in power were looked on no differently than if they were prostitutes.

Another thing that I got into a rather animated discussion with a friend one time was the fact that sure, Mary might have been a virgin when she conceived Jesus, but does one really believe that she lived celibate all her life? I mean, she was 'betrothed' to Joseph, and he raised Jesus as his own son...does that mean that Jesus was an only child?! I should think not!! Jesus more than likely had several siblings (unless Joseph and Mary were expected not to consumate their marriage). Another argument would be that, in the bible, when it says she conceived 'immaculately', that it only meant that she wasn't married when she conceived, therefore, technically, she would be a virgin...does that make any sense?

Okay I've babbled on long enough...I'm starting to not understand what I'm saying....

BB

Rae )0(

p.s. just for the record, I believe there was a Jesus...I believe that he walked the earth for thirty-some-odd years and tried to teach tolerance, peace, love and charity...and I think if the world would put aside their pettiness and intolerance and follow the REAL teachings of Jesus, then we would live in a much better world! Okay I'm done now.... :D

[Myst]

Jesus did have brothers and sisters that were mentioned in the bible, as I recall.

And way back when virgin meant "belonging to no man" or "unmarried"... just food for thought...

[Danustouch]

Willow took the words right outta my mouth! LOL. Yep...Virgin meant a woman who was not married. There are two forms of the word Virgin in the bible. One meaning for virgin, is a woman who was complete without a man, thus..single. And the term virgin- "intacta"...would mean a biological virgin. This term for virgin was NOT the term used in the bible to describe Mary.

Jesus did have brothers...one of them being James...as shown in the Bible.

And about Jesus marrying the Magdalene...entirely possible! I mean..after all..in the ressurection story..she WAS the first one he appeared to!

[marevard]

Originally posted by Lilu


Bloodline of the Holy Grail was written by Laurence Gardner :)

Lilu

Alright, Lilu and Danustouch have confessed me. The book I have is called "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" by Michael Baigent, Ricahard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln.
It talks about the same thing. So, the question is, am I missing a book about the subject?

[Danustouch]

LOL..their are probably MANY books on the topic. The author of Bloodline of the Holy Grail, though, also wrote a book called "Genesis of the Grail Kings" ...which is basically more about the ancient lineage of Jesus..and of the Tribes. Laurence Gardner, I believe, has three books with "Grail" in the title.

[Danustouch]

I just finished watching a made for tv movie on the Pax channell (yes..I know it's a christian network)...about Mary Magdalene. The guy that played the part of Jesus was SOOOOOOOO cute. If I had been Mary..I'd have converted too. Sorry..just one of those random thoughts I had to share.

[EasternPriest]

Originally posted by Danustouch
As for the Essenes, I think that is a VERY probable theory. He did dissappear for a long time before he began his travels, from the annals of time. John the Baptist, was after all, an Essene, and they were VERY close. Oh GODS I wish I had the book that I used to have on the subject. There is a book called "The Historical Jesus" and I can't remember the author. Will find out for you though. It basically lists the theories as to who Jesus really was, historically. And this theory is certainly one of them. Jesus seemed to constantly contradict the government of his time. Both romans, and Jews...but mainly the Jewish government (he did say render unto ceasar....). The Essenes were a militant group of radicals trying to reform their religion. They also were trying to overthrow Rome. This gives me my only "glitch" in the thought. Because The Essenes seemed to want to overthrow Roman Rule, but Jesus himself didn't seem motivated by that desire, as much as the desire to reform Jewish Law and Society at the time. Let me do some checking into this, and I'll get back to you!


It is true that the Essenes were in conflict with most of the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem.

Actually, it was the Zealot sect of Judaism that was working to overthrow Rome. Mary and Joseph were Essenes, as was Jesus. Jesus and John the Baptist were second cousins.

Render unto Ceaser wasn't aimed specifically at Rome...He used that as an example for any civil authority.

[BrightStar]

Hi all!
It seems where Jesus lived,Nazareth/The Middle East,has always been kind of a crossroads.Africans,Europeans,and Asians all would have travelled throught the area.Probably many different ethnic groups lived in the area.So he would have had contact with all kinds of religions and beliefs.He'd have known of the Greek humanists,Pagans,Romans,Hindus,Buddhists,Zoroastrians,and probably many others.So he would have gotten many of the ideas that really made the Jewish establishment angry from all over the world.
I always felt he was using "Son of God" in the sense that we all are Sons and Daughters of God,or even the Goddess.
There is a legend that Mary Magdalene was a disciple and later an apostle.Apparently whole churches grew up based upon her teachings.But patriarchy couldn't stand that and she was made into something less.Jesus certainly liked her and treated her as an equal.
The whole 13 thing is kinda cool.Jesus plus 12 equals 13.Or Jacob who becomes Israel plus 12 sons equals 13.Or in Genesis, that before Jacob died he blessed Joseph's 2 sons,Ephraim and Manasseh,forming 2 tribes from Joseph so there were 13 tribes of Israel.Sounds kind of like a coven.
Peace and Love
BrightStar

[Happydog]

In the New Testament, you have Jesus being called "Rabbi" several times. And the thing is, you had to be *married* in order to be called Rabbi, in those days. So...either the Pharisees were being sarcastic when they called him "Rabbi," or...

Secondly, one of the differences between Protestants and Catholics is that Catholics absolutely insist that Mary remained a virgin and didn't have sex with Joseph, even after Jesus' birth. (But technically, having Jesus would rupture the hymen, so Mary really wouldn't be a technical virgin anymore. But I digress.)

Protestants on the other hand believe that Jesus had brothers and sisters, based on a story in the NT where Jesus is teaching in a house and his family comes to see him, specifically, by name, his mother and brothers/sisters. Kind of hard to beat that evidence, but there you go.

[Danustouch]

Bump****

[Mnemosyne]

I didn't know that there was a thread on the historical Jesus in this forum, Danustouch. I noticed that Jesus and Christianity threads have been popping up here at MW recently. Since I am not too clever on the subject, I really don't write on the subject, mainly because I don't want to offend anyone.

Anyway, I have a question for you guys. Do you think that Jesus made it all the way up to Glastonbury, UK? According to legend, Joseph took Jesus there. Read this link.

http://www.fionabroome.com/history/glast1-chr.htm

[Danustouch]

Mnemosyne, I bumped the thread for Mol. In response to his response to my thread about the burial ossuary find with words "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" on it. :)

Hmmm...do I think it's POSSIBLE? I think if Jesus did indeed exist, anything is possible. He was missing for so many years. I've seen this debunked a couple of times on the History Channell, I think, but I can't remember all the details of why. But..many of the documentaries come from a skeptical point of view on him, anyway, unless you tune into the Religious Network, or the Education Channells around the holidays.

[Mnemosyne]

Yes, Danustouch, I read the thread in the History Forum about the burial ossary of James. As people have mentioned, some of these names used such as James, were quite common in the time, so it does not neccessary prove that James was THE brother of Jesus. Joseph was a common name too. I'll point out that when I suggested that when Joseph supposedly took Jesus to Glastonbury, the Joseph was probably his great uncle and not his stepdad Joseph. Sorry, I'm not the most up-to-date person on these stories, so I am getting info wrong, please correct me.

Well, I don't know if I believe that Jesus actually made up to Britain. I believe that the story is more fiction. I was just wondering what you guys think about the subject, since I am quite fascinated about Glastonbury.

[Veli]

I think that Jesus may have been one of the most well publicized and notorious pagans of all times. If you read the New Testament with a mind set that excludes the beliefs of his bigot followers, his principals are very similar to my own. We can't be so harsh to him based on what his supporters did. I respect him very much, although I certainly don't think his is a deity.
Also, the crimes carried out "in his name" were done by people who saw that religion as one growing in popularity, and a perfect one to ensnare the minds of the government's subjects; which is, after all, the main purpose of "the world religions."
We should be thankfull that Jesus was a cool guy (nothing else) and that our spirituality isn't run by people who subdue us.

*end rant*

[Rose Sunny Rionach]

Possibly when the Bible talks about Jesus having a brother could it have been kind of like just a term? Nowadays and I think even then when they said 'brother' it didn't exactly mean you were related, but more of like a brother figure.
I also have to argue about him having healing powers. At the times of Jesus the place was full of havoc and I think for the most part when word got around about the 'Son of God' then didn't feel like they had any choice but to believe in him. So, most of them were pretty enthusiastic about the whole ordeal. And sometimes when the human mind believes in something so much 'miraculous' things can happen. If they believed he could really heal then they could possibly have healed themselves just by having so much faith in this guy.
I gotta rant a bit too.. its a bit OT but.. Why do some people refuse to let their kids go out on Samhain? They say because its a Pagan holiday. Which is really stoopid.. If they are so 'Christain' and what not then why don't they know Jesus was Pagan or that even Christmas is a Pagan? If they do know it they why celebrate Christmas and but Samhain?

[Happydog]

//If they are so 'Christain' and what not then why don't they know Jesus was Pagan//

Well, Jesus wasn't 'pagan' at all. He was Jewish. He was called "Rabbi," and taught in the Temple. He was circumcised, which no one but Jews did in those days, went to Temple, and observed the Jewish dietary laws. When Jesus taught in the temple, it's worth noting that the Jews only let Jewish people teach in the temple. Further, they didn't even let women in that inner part of the Temple, which is where the services were held. They certainly wouldn't have let a Pagan in there, leave alone teach there.

As a matter of fact one of the most notorious acts the Roman empire committed against the Jews was when they destroyed the temple at Jerusalem in 70 CE and a Pagan entered the Holy of Holies, which was considered the ultimate desecration.

The Jews considered themselves superior to the Pagans, which was why they never got along with the Romans. Which was why they kept staging revolts under Roman rule, which eventually led to the Roman empire destroying the temple at Jerusalem in 70 CE, as well as the rest of Jerusalem. The Jews were too much trouble to allow them even a puppet government.

The Romans, for their part, regarded the Jews as insane religious fanatics whose odd, one-god faith was distasteful, not least due to the fact that the Jews "mutilated themselves," as the Roman author of the "Historia Augusta" put it. He was referring of course to the practice of circumcision.

So, Jesus would not have taken well to being called a Pagan, and it is most probable he did not at all consider himself one. To refer to him as a Pagan would be a mistake. He was Jewish till the day he died.

[Happydog]

// I think for the most part when word got around about the 'Son of God' then didn't feel like they had any choice but to believe in him.//

On the contrary, there were quite a few Messiahs around that time. Most of them were military messiahs whose goal was to throw out the hated Romans, and most of them ended up on a crucifix. The Jewish people of Jesus' day were not really interested in a Messiah who could bring them spiritual peace. They wanted one who could throw the Romans out.

At the time of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans, in 70 CE, one of the rebel leaders, Simon bar Giora, was most likely considered the Messiah by the troops that he led. His rival, John of Gischala, may well have been believed to be the Messiah by his troops, which may be why John and Simon's factions fought with each other before uniting against the Romans.

Check this site for a partial list of Messiahs:

http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/messianic_claimants00.html

It's worth noting that Jesus himself was always completely ambiguous whenever he was questioned about his being the Messiah.

The miracles attributed to Jesus might well be later interpolations into the text. Early Christianity drew a great deal from the mystery religions of the time and from Mithraism, which also featured a savior who performed miracles of healing and feeding.

[Caelin]

There's been considerable debate over how much, if any of Jesus' teachings were informed by the beliefs of the Essenes. The Essene community was a rather insular one, which fanatically adhered to the Law in preparation for the coming of the Messiah, which they expected soon.

The Essenes (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=478&letter=E&search=essenes) article from the Jewish Encyclopaedia.
The Catholic Encyclopaedia Entry (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05546a.htm)
(Both of the above were written before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Some of the DSS texts are online here (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~humm/Resources/Texts/dss.html).)

John the Baptist seems to have been more of a candidate for membership of the Essenes, what with living in the desert and everything, but if Jesus was an Essene, he left them before the beginning of his ministry, as they did not mix with ordinary folk.

Mary Magdalene was a highly popular mediaeval saint, and patron of cosmetics, and known as the "Apostle to the Apostles" because of her role in telling the disciples the news of Jesus' resurrection. She seems to have been more of a people's saint, as more down-to-earth and peasant-like in her iconography than the Virgin Mary who is (somewhat unrealistically) always portrayed as a lady, not sunburnt or anything. The Gnostics embraced her with a passion in the early church, considering her to be the ultimate apostle, much more important than the others, and she is mentioned in their scriptures much more often. She was considered to be his consort : There were three who always walked with the Lord: Mary, his mother, and her sister, and Magdalene, the one who was called his companion. (The Gospel of Philip (http://www.webcom.com/gnosis/naghamm/gop.html)). She seems to be having a rise in popularity in the feminst sections of Christianity today, as is the concept of Sophia (Wisdom).

There have been, and no doubt always will be, a wide variety of theories about Jesus, who he was, where he got his ideas, whether he lived or died or had children or whatever. I don't think we can ever really know - we have what the Gospels say, but IMO its not a terribly good idea to try to separate Jesus' sayings from the Gospels and then say that he said anything differently to the Church of the NT. The trouble is that the Gospels are rather later than the letters of Paul, and Luke is supposed to have been an associate of him, whereas Mark and Matthew seem to get their ideas from Peter. All the instances and sayings they relate (particularly John) are informed and changed by the writer's ideas about Jesus and about the Church, they were not written to academic audiences, they were written for churches already established, to guide them and tell them more about what they had heard before the last of the eyewitnesses died.

You might want to check out The Quest for the Historical Jesus by Schweitzer.

[dnatree]

The preacher and lawyer have taken my bride and by their veiw she is made to abide, is this the reason that I died,, it's love across time,,, get ready for the ride!!!! This is my passion play
half of poem by Stephentree

Wild Hearts the time is right
the son is chasing away the night
and the battle will be won without a fight
cause no one's wrong cause no one's right
you see the baptist (john)was no wind swept reed
his heart was sown from a WILD SEED!!!!
and everywhere that JESUS went, few understood what he really meant.
but there is comeing a time, and it is drawing near
when within their hearts all men will peer
no longer will they say the truth is out there-------
for the word of God has been very near,
even in our mouths and in our hearts and we do not need a teacher
Stephentree.com

I am the life (jesus)
I am your life (spirit)
There has always only been YOU and I, my life(Stephentree)

[Happydog]

No evangelizing please...

Especially in verse.

[dnatree]

That is not evangelising, the poem is pointing out what religion overlooks. I thought that such perspectives would be welcome here. Especially since.. well you will find out. Is it that we have to be either pagan or christian? On the side of this interpretation or that? Does the "veil of interpretation" blind both sides as to whom we are? There is only you and I, such as in christian and pagan and this veil of interpretation that separates. But when the veil of this flesh is lifted,,,,,,, you and I are one.

[Mnemosyne]

Reminder
There is one rule at MW: Respect Everyone!

Hi again, DNATree! Your poem is nice. This site does accept all different beliefs. If you are interested in the links between Christianity and paganism, there is a good thread in the Theology and Philosophy Forum.

[Jax]

BUT, my theory is that to cover up her 'shame' of becoming pregnant out of wedlock, Mary concocted this bizaar story that the child she carried was, as we all 'know', the son of God! Now, as Jesus was a real man and not a 'god' or entitiy the whole christian faith is, from my point of view, a contradiction and falsehood as it states very clearly that they shall not worship a prophet! And as 'he' was real, he was most def one! Anyone agree with me???!!!

[Happydog]

//Now, as Jesus was a real man and not a 'god' or entitiy//

You know, outside of Josephus, there's no historical proof that Jesus existed at all, so it's questionable as to whether he was even a "real" person. And there are some who say that Josephus' testimony is not reliable.

//BUT, my theory is that to cover up her 'shame' of becoming pregnant out of wedlock, Mary concocted this bizaar story that the child she carried was, as we all 'know', the son of God!//

Well, that's a good theory, except for the fact that if Mary had gone around claiming this she would have been stoned to death for blasphemy, as well as being stoned to death for having a child out of wedlock. She could have claimed that in our time and our culture, but not hers.

// the whole christian faith is, from my point of view, a contradiction and falsehood//

I'm not a big fan of Christianity, but at the same time I think it's unwise to go around saying someone else's faith is a "falsehood."

I think it's important to remember faith is not history. The Divine is outside of time and transcends fact. As Alan Moore says in Promethea, "All myths are true, Sophie. Given that they last longer, they're even truer than the so called 'real world.' "

[Jax]

Originally posted by Happydog
//Now, as Jesus was a real man and not a 'god' or entitiy//

You know, outside of Josephus, there's no historical proof that Jesus existed at all, so it's questionable as to whether he was even a "real" person. And there are some who say that Josephus' testimony is not reliable.

//BUT, my theory is that to cover up her 'shame' of becoming pregnant out of wedlock, Mary concocted this bizaar story that the child she carried was, as we all 'know', the son of God!//

Well, that's a good theory, except for the fact that if Mary had gone around claiming this she would have been stoned to death for blasphemy, as well as being stoned to death for having a child out of wedlock. She could have claimed that in our time and our culture, but not hers.

// the whole christian faith is, from my point of view, a contradiction and falsehood//

I'm not a big fan of Christianity, but at the same time I think it's unwise to go around saying someone else's faith is a "falsehood."

I think it's important to remember faith is not history. The Divine is outside of time and transcends fact. As Alan Moore says in Promethea, "All myths are true, Sophie. Given that they last longer, they're even truer than the so called 'real world.' "

Hi HappyDog,
I'm not in the habit of 'flaming' anyone, even christians (my hubby is a Catholic! poor thing!roflmao!!)! I'm just pointing out a few of my 'theories' etc:rolleyes: . We all need faith/religion and I applaud anyone who subscribes to any! On the contrary, there is ALOT of evidence that Jesus was a 'real' man, and as soon as I can find it amongst my 'library' i'll post it!;)
After all, if we all thought the same and were stopped or shunned etc for expressing our own thoughts, wouldn't it be a boring and mundane world in which to dwell???? I do profoundly and profusely apologise if I have upset anyone as it was totally unintentional.
BB and chill out!!!!:D

[Happydog]

I know you weren't flaming anyone. My post was meant to be taken just as information and not as a lecture or chiding, of course. Sorry if it came across that way.

[dnatree]

The wonderful thing about Christianity is that Jesus took away the power of religion to control people. I know it does not look like it now but that will be the end of it. You see the smallest of points overlooked in the EQUATION can alter it and render all the interpretations meaningless, thus removing the RIGHT from the Right people. That smallest of points is more evident in Paganism than in Christianity. That smallest of points is the Spirit, the one Spirit. For there is only you and I and this veil of interpretation which separates us. I believe Mary did get pregnant by a Roman Soldier. But I believe she did know because of her synchronicities that he would be special, and that he would become the smalllest of points which would alter the equation. You know Jesus was setting up the very control freeks that preach "who is right" nowadays... because there are none right, no not one... that is a wonderful thing. That is why he spoke in parables, and the OWNERS of the book actually stole the garments from the bottom of the cross, they will be shown to be theives and robbers. Those that put on the VEIL of Christianity and turn and tell you to worship their interpretation,,,,, do not know the spirit that they speak of, for it is the same spirit that is called upon in wicca. For there has always only been YOU and I. Ok. that is enough..hehe

[Chibi-Fallon]

In Jesus's time he wasn't the only one running around healing people claiming to be "sent by God", "son of God", etc. There were lots of people doing that.
Jesus just got kinda lucky. Lots of guys came "back from the dead", healed the sick and whatnot. Jesus wasn't even one of the more popular ones. We got to watch a video on it in SS last year (actually it was about Rome).
That was one of the parts I wasn't asleep for. :D

[Veli]

Originally posted by dnatree
The wonderful thing about Christianity is that Jesus took away the power of religion to control people.
I have to disagree. I think he spurred on more intolerant religious persecution than any figure in history (indirectly). The Romans stopped killing the followers of Christ when they saw it gaining huge ground on the existing "pagan" faith. They even made it their own religion and wrote their own text, they realized how easily they could manipulate the masses.
If you control someone's body, their mind will rebel.
If you control someone's mind, they may realize how wrong the control is in their soul.
But if you can control someone's very soul, and influence their views on life and ath afterlife, they will submit of their own free will.
And then you can have the money!

[Happydog]

//The Romans stopped killing the followers of Christ when they saw it gaining huge ground on the existing "pagan" faith. They even made it their own religion and wrote their own text, they realized how easily they could manipulate the masses.//

I have to disagree on this point. It was more of a case of the Christians infiltrating the Roman ruling class than the Romans realizing Christianity was gaining ground. During the waning days of the Empire, they stopped persecuting Christians simply because the Empire was falling apart and they had other things to worry about. They had to expend all their energy on keeping all the revolts down and maintaining some sort of order.

The leading Christians then presented themselves as a "law and order" group, kinda saying "See? We abide by all the laws and rules!" Which made the Roman authorities happy, since they had a lot of revolts in those days. The Christians then began infiltrating the government, taking positions that would benefit Christians and pushing legislation that would benefit Christians (sound familiar?) By the time Constantine became emperor, Christianity and Christians had made the recognizance of Christianity as the state religion almost inevitable. If Constantine hadn't done it, someone else would have.

[Veli]

Point well taken!

[dnatree]

You misconstrooo my INTENT.. hehe
As mathew 10:24 says I did not come to bring peace but war,, for brother shall rise against brother.. yes it would seem that Jesus was adding to the control freakish nature of the fearful and unbelieving, but it was through this that he was to take away forever the power of the "right people" and give it back to the individual. For the "right people" rightness is not the rightness of God. For the rightness of God comes through being made right even if I was wrong as "even when I fall I fall on gold" and "even if I am wrong, through faith God would make me right". This has happened over and over in my life in the company of so called Christians. Yes.. what the "right people" have overlooked will again become the "cornerstone of the heart" which will put spirituality back in the closet between the individual and his God. That is the primary relationship that is most important.

The preacher and lawyer have taken my bride
and by their view she is made to abide
Is this the reason that I died..
It's love across time get ready for the ride
This is my passion play

As Jesus said,, the first according to being right in interpretation will become the last and the last (those thought foolish by the first,,, such as pagans) will become first. For soon the smallest of points AGAIN overlooked will alter the entire equation of reality and render all the interpretations meaningless!!!

[Mnemosyne]

My, my! This thread is loaded with loads of info. I think that a few of you will be interested in it at the moment. :)

[Equinox]

Hi-

I’ve done some research on the historical Jesus, and some of it is surprising and some isn’t. To find out a lot about the evidence available by listening in your car, here is a very good class by a leading scholar (it’s not preachy either!).

http://www.teach12.com/ttc/Assets/courseDescriptions/643.asp


First of all, there is very little reliable info on Jesus aside from the Bible. Just Josephus, Tacitus, and few others. All of those that I’ve just mentioned make little more than passing reference, and all were written well after his death by people who weren’t there. Similarly, the Gospels were written by people who weren’t eyewitnesses and had never met Jesus. They were written decades after his death by people with a vested interest in the story, so all our sources are somewhat suspect. It is possible that there never was a Jesus, though on the balance I’d have to say that it looks likely that Jesus did exist.

So with this dearth of information, some speculation is allowable (and we have certainly speculated a lot on this thread so far!). The long process of taking each source into account and teasing out our best guess as to the truth led me to my current stance – that Jesus was an itinerant Jewish preacher who expected the end of the world in a short period of time (Months or years, but not more than a few decades). Paul changed things a lot, as did many power brokers after that. But that is another story.

I don’t think he thought he was God – after all, he avoids claiming that in the synoptics, but proclaims it only in John. This makes sense since John was the latest one written, and therefore most influenced by Paul and the early church. Other conclusions can be defended based on the evidence we have, but I’ll stop now – this post is too long already!

Have a fun day!

-Equinox

P. S. - Happydog, thanks for the good link!

[I, Brian]

Hi-

I’ve done some research on the historical Jesus, and some of it is surprising and some isn’t. To find out a lot about the evidence available by listening in your car, here is a very good class by a leading scholar (it’s not preachy either!).

http://www.teach12.com/ttc/Assets/courseDescriptions/643.asp


First of all, there is very little reliable info on Jesus aside from the Bible. Just Josephus, Tacitus, and few others. All of those that I’ve just mentioned make little more than passing reference, and all were written well after his death by people who weren’t there. Similarly, the Gospels were written by people who weren’t eyewitnesses and had never met Jesus. They were written decades after his death by people with a vested interest in the story, so all our sources are somewhat suspect. It is possible that there never was a Jesus, though on the balance I’d have to say that it looks likely that Jesus did exist.

So with this dearth of information, some speculation is allowable (and we have certainly speculated a lot on this thread so far!). The long process of taking each source into account and teasing out our best guess as to the truth led me to my current stance – that Jesus was an itinerant Jewish preacher who expected the end of the world in a short period of time (Months or years, but not more than a few decades). Paul changed things a lot, as did many power brokers after that. But that is another story.

I don’t think he thought he was God – after all, he avoids claiming that in the synoptics, but proclaims it only in John. This makes sense since John was the latest one written, and therefore most influenced by Paul and the early church. Other conclusions can be defended based on the evidence we have, but I’ll stop now – this post is too long already!

Have a fun day!

-Equinox

P. S. - Happydog, thanks for the good link!


Thank goodness for that! A sane post amongst all the...other stuff (extreme speculation, for lack of a more diplomatic term!).

[mol]

I have to disagree. I think he spurred on more intolerant religious persecution than any figure in history (indirectly). The Romans stopped killing the followers of Christ when they saw it gaining huge ground on the existing "pagan" faith. They even made it their own religion and wrote their own text, they realized how easily they could manipulate the masses.

Jesus was a bit nieve. Its unfortunate that he thought mankind could handle the message of peace and love that he brought with him. Instead mankind twisted it for their own use and that is a shame.

Great thread!

[Seren Mara]

I would imagine He is horrified at the violence and bigotry that is being perpetrated in His name. I do believe he came to bring peace to the earth, not a sword. Unfortunately I don't think it will ever happen.

[Vehcklox]

Right. Like some use the term in literature "Daughter of Eve" or "Son of Adam" to mean "woman" or "man". I think that people forget that most religious texts are myths, meant to be read for their highly concept-symbol and metaphorical content. Not to be taken literally.

What is literal is also figurative, and vice versa. Thoughts spawn reality, and reality has given birth to mind. Jesus is our brother and yes we are all children from the ineffable all, but he is the firstborn and comes at the last. He is our "elder" brother. As it was prophesied of him as "Horus the falcon", son of Isis and Osiris in Egyptian mythology. I believe strongly that Wicca is the woman described in the gospel of St. Thomas, who is to be the bride of christ, the divine Sophia, because she is described as "wisdom". That the marriage of Wiccanism and Christianity must come together in Gnosticism, and that the Norse vikings were the first authors of the book of revelation through the prediction of the Gotterdammerung "Doom of the Gods":

http://bfforums.proboards13.com/index.cgi?board=ClanTalk&num=1062046727&action=display&start=0

Gnosticism may very well be the greatest way to bridge the differences between the two religions, like lovers who have fought one another and begin to hug.

http://www.christianwicca.com/gnostic.html

[mol]

I would imagine He is horrified at the violence and bigotry that is being perpetrated in His name. I do believe he came to bring peace to the earth, not a sword. Unfortunately I don't think it will ever happen.
Well, I dont think it would shock him anymore. I imagine he would be quite numb to it now.

[WinterArcher]

:RuNew:
I get to learn about the Historical Jesus in my History of Christianity Class. The History of Christianity is not popular with the christian groups on campus because it mentions everything that the christians do not want to be mentioned. I am not sure if anyone wants to hear some of the stuff.

[ravenhawk]

MM
Winter Archer;

Yes, I would love to hear what you have learned. I watched a documentary about the Historical Jesus on The Discovery Channel just last week. I find it interesting how things can get so twisted with time.

BB
ravenhawk