Geologist: ''Jesus was married with a child and tomb found''

a reply to: Seede

I would suggest that you do a read on the Munich Talmud b. San. 43a and you will find your evidence of acknowledgement of Jesus outside the bible of the Greeks and the Hebrews both. The word Christ is not written in the Munich Talmud.

How about you cite it for me. You do know, however, that text was written centuries after the advent, right?

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

You remember those old games where if you were close, it's hot, well this location is close but not hot, they know exactly where the tomb is and this is not it!

a reply to: Akragon

That's what I understood as well.
Thanks

a reply to: Agartha

I am sorry but you are wrong.

For example, the Roman historian and Senator Tacitus mentions the "execution of Christ" (Christus) as the beginning of Christianity, which he wrote in the "Annals" on book 15 chapter 44.

This work was published in 116 AD, and is considered by historians as authentic and a non-Christian Roman source that verifies that Jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate.

...
The Annals passage (15.44), which has been subjected to much scholarly analysis, follows a description of the six-day Great Fire of Rome that burned much of Rome in July 64 AD.[3]

The key part of the passage reads as follows (translation from Latin by A. J. Church and W. J. Brodribb, 1876):

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind".

(In Latin:[2] ergo abolendo rumori Nero subdidit reos et quaesitissimis poenis adfecit, quos per flagitia invisos vulgus Chrestianos appellabat. auctor nominis eius Christus Tibero imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat; repressaque in praesens exitiablilis superstitio rursum erumpebat, non modo per Iudaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam, quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt celebranturque. igitur primum correpti qui fatebantur, deinde indicio eorum multitudo ingens haud proinde in crimine incendii quam odio humani generis convicti sunt.)
...

en.wikipedia.org...

As for the Shroud of Besançon?... It was the shroud of Turin. It was only one. The name reflects the town where the shroud was kept at the time. This is why the Sudarium is called "the Sudarium of Oviedo", because it is kept in Oviedo. The name does not tell us where it was made, but where it was/is kept.

The shroud has been kept in many cities throughout it's 2,000 year existence, and to every place it was kept, the name of the city where it was kept was included when talking/writing about it.

The shroud is now called "The Shroud of Turin" because now it is being kept in Turin, not because it was made there.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Wrong, again, I showed the "latest scientific tests" (and some older ones) that were done to it. I am not spreading rumors. I am presenting the facts. It is you, among some others who simply wants to deny because you don't want to accept that you are wrong.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs


GAH!!!! No! - see?!! - you had me with your "concept" statements.
But; then you brought up "sin".

NO.

Just - no. "Sin" is a concept as well as a construct - It is imagined, described, devised and implemented BY WANNA-BE LEADERS to scare people into submission.

no.

To sin has been defined as "to miss the mark".
The 'mark' is the target in archery.
If one has not realized that there is only the presence of God then one has missed the mark.

When presence is found to be all then who could be scared? The divided live in the 'there and then' but really there is nothing divided - nothing separate. Presence is doing and knowing the present.
It is the belief in 'something other' than presence which gives rise to fear and then one can be controlled.

The true Christians did not believe in death (death is a concept that arises as life) - if there is no fear of death then no one would submit to 'wanna be leaders'.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Agartha

I am sorry but you are wrong.

For example, the Roman historian and Senator Tacitus mentions the "execution of Christ" (Christus) as the beginning of Christianity, which he wrote in the "Annals" on book 15 chapter 44.

This work was published in 116 AD, and is considered by historians as authentic and a non-Christian Roman source that verifies that Jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate.



As for the Shroud of Besançon?... It was the shroud of Turin. It was only one. The name reflects the town where the shroud was kept at the time. This is why the Sudarium is called "the Sudarium of Oviedo", because it is kept in Oviedo. The name does not tell us where it was made, but where it was/is kept.

The shroud has been kept in many cities throughout it's 2,000 year existence, and to every place it was kept, the name of the city where it was kept was included when talking/writing about it.

The shroud is now called "The Shroud of Turin" because now it is being kept in Turin, not because it was made there.

Blimey, Electricuniverse, you are soooo wrong, my friend.

That passage by Tacitus is considered by historians / experts a hoax. Tacitus wrote about the vast multitudes of Christians that started the fire in Rome in 64AD. Well, I have news for you: in 64 CE there were no multitudes of Christians in Rome, there were not even multitudes of Christians in Judea, in fact the name Christians was not adopted until the following century.
Other BIG errors which show that passage by Tacitus is a forgery added centuries later are the fact that Tacitus was an imperial writer, he would have never called Jesus 'Christ' but by his full name. Also, Pilate was a PREFECT, not a procurator, Tacitus of all people would have never ever made that mistake!! So Tacitus is not proof of the historical figure of Jesus.

The Besancon shroud was not the Turin's one. The Turin's shroud was in Lirey, then Savoy (where the fire happened) and then brought by the Savoy family to Turin where it has remained ever since. There were other shrouds: Besancon, Cadouin, Champiegne, Xabregas, etc. The Turin shroud was never in all those places.

a reply to: windword

How about you cite it for me. You do know, however, that text was written centuries after the advent, right?

Talmud was completed about 200 CE but some manuscripts of which Talmud were compiled are much earlier than 200 CE.and in fact some predate Jesus' birth. Compiled and originated are two entirely different discussions. The Munich Talmud was compiled in 1342 and in 1553 the gracious pope ordered all Talmuds burned. Most all were destroyed. One wich survived was sold in London in 1628 for 26 lbs (about $6,000 value today). Talmuds of today (Soncino) are the censored Talmuds. Bomberg's Munich Talmud is the uncensored Talmud.

"Munich Talmud – b. San 43a
On the eve of Passover they hung Yeshu the Notzarine. And the herald went out before Him for 40 days [saying]: "Yeshu the Notzarine will go out to be stoned for sorcery and misleading and enticing Israel [to idolatry]. Any who knows [anything] in His defense must come and declare concerning Him." But no one came to His defense so they hung Him on the eve of Passover."

I do not understand why so many uninformed people will not believe fact. By showing the existence of Yahusha does not prove deity. It is still theology and most all true Christians that I know are well aware of this. It is almost as though a Christian is insulting the world to show that Yahusha actually did exist as the manuscripts show. What is the hang up of deniers of Jesus to know that He was a person who did exist?

Here in the Munich Talmud are Jews who despised Him and rejected Him and yet they acknowledge that He lived and died as Greek manuscripts depict. Tell me why is the modern age of intelligence so determined to deny the very same people such as Plato in one portion and then quote him in another portion? To me that is the most double minded attitude that exists today.

Simply because I defend certain literature is not to say that I defend the religion that is privy to that literature. That is stupid reasoning. In fact I subscribe to no denomination of any religion. But to censor anyone from fact or fiction is the same as the pope burning all Talmud’s and that is what is foremost in many threads and posts.

Now you said that there is nothing outside of the bible that cites Jesus as existing and that is not true at all but I will also agree that there is no proof of His deity. The first century Christians realized this and even admits that the entire movement is by faith. But then all religions are by the same requirements are they not?

a reply to: Seede

I do not understand why so many uninformed people will not believe fact.

Because, the facts are that this text has been highly censored and edited by Christians, and dates well after any supposed advent! Besides, do you any idea how many "Jesuses" lived and were persecuted in and around the 1st century?

a reply to: windword

Because, the facts are that this text has been highly censored and edited by Christians, and dates well after any supposed advent! Besides, do you any idea how many "Jesuses" lived and were persecuted in and around the 1st century?

You are wrong on the assumption that the Munich Talmud was censored by Christians. It was never tampered with by Christians. In fact it was Talmudic scholars who censored their own work and removed Jesus from their manuscripts and substituted the Munish Talmud with the Soncino Talmud. There are also references and given names of the Apostles of this Jesus in the Munich Talmud. What are the odds that two or more Jesus' the Nazarene were hung on Passover eve? What are the odds that Jesus was hung on Passover eve had and the same name as the Notzarine Jesus. Can you find another Jesus the Notzarine even in secular history? I think not. Facts are facts.

a reply to: Seede

The Nazotites were an Essene sect. Do you mean this Jesus?

“That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.” – Hillel the Elder, c. 100 BCE.

“Jesus” was a common name in the Second Temple time period. I’m going to list a couple of them that eerily share a lot with the Jesus of Christianity.

Yeshu ha-Notzri was a member of a Jewish sect called “Notzrim” around 100 BCE. He was charged with practicing sorcery and tried by the Sanhedrin. For 40 days a town crier was sent out into the streets of Jerusalem asking if anyone would come forth and speak in his defense. When no one came, he was executed; he was hanged on the eve of Passover. He apparently also had five disciples. How much of that is true or false, no one knows. It’s one of the many notes on Sanhedrin trials found in the Jewish Talmud. As you know, Jesus’ actual name is “Yeshua”. Translating this directly into English is “Joshua”, not “Jesus”.
deusdiapente.wordpress.com...

Sounds like the Biblical Jesus, but he's about 100 years too early

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Abednego

Wait. If Yosef is written for Joseph? Then why isn't Yeshua written for Jesus? It's common knowledge that Jesus was actually named Joshua.

Someone forged the names on the tomb apparently if thats the case. The guy is going for soemthing most will believe but not everyone.

The letter "J" never existed in the Hebrew alphabet and didn't exist in English until the 15th-16th century A.D.

theletterj.followersofyah.com...

a reply to: whitewave

The letter "J" never existed in the Hebrew alphabet and didn't exist in English until the 15th-16th century A.D.

Nice try. Don't have a Hebrew key board but will have to agree that it would not be on the Hebrew keyboard and it would not read from left to right either. So what is your point? Are you saying that the translation, transliteration and interpretation from Hebrew to English is wrong? You need to face reality and not the spin doctors.

a reply to: windword

Yeshu ha-Notzri was a member of a Jewish sect called “Notzrim” around 100 BCE. He was charged with practicing sorcery and tried by the Sanhedrin. For 40 days a town crier was sent out into the streets of Jerusalem asking if anyone would come forth and speak in his defense. When no one came, he was executed; he was hanged on the eve of Passover. He apparently also had five disciples. How much of that is true or false, no one knows. It’s one of the many notes on Sanhedrin trials found in the Jewish Talmud. As you know, Jesus’ actual name is “Yeshua”. Translating this directly into English is “Joshua”, not “Jesus”.

Nice spin but not even in the ball park.

The subject matter is lost by your attempt to derail facts. The manuscripts and opines of Mishnah were compiled about 200 CE. Not written in 200 CE. The Gemara (Gemora, Gemarah, Gemorra) are the opinions and facts of Mishnah and both comprise the Talmud. The translation from Hebrew (Aramaic) to English is within the structure of the Talmud which is compiled by Talmudic scholars and published as the Talmud. The original compilation consisted of Yahusha (Jesu, Jesus) being hung on the eve of the Passover following the trial of a man called Yahusha (pronounced as Ya-hoo-sha) following the trial of Hewn Stone called the Sanhedrin. This and other information concerning Yahusha were entered into the Talmud and published as shown in the Munich Talmud. This entry was deleted in the later edition of Talmud such as the Soncino Talmud but is shown in the earlier Talmud such as the Bomberg Talmud.

The entirety of my post was to state that there was evidence that Yahusha did exist in literature. Not proving any deity whatsoever but that He did exist in ancient literature. That is a fact and the proof lies in the Munich Talmud. All the rest of your spin is nothing but smoke and mirrors.

a reply to: Seede

What evidence do you have to challenge the accepted date for Jesus Ben Pandira's life being about 100 years earlier than Jesus of Nazareth's? As per the link: deusdiapente.wordpress.com...

What date/year does that Munich Talmud placing on the "Eve of the Passover"? Do you have a link that gives us a reliable date as to this "Passover Eve" execution?

a reply to: Seede

I don't read Hebrew so I wouldn't be qualified to determine if the translation were correct or not.
The point, totally unrelated to spin doctors, was that the person we call "Jesus" would not have
been called that in his time. Joshua (or Yeshua) would not have the letter "J" in the spelling. For
that matter, Jehovah wouldn't be a word either; more like a bad translation of YHWH. I'm not sure
what "James" would be but, again, no letter "J".

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Lol now you are bringing up hoax number 2 The Sudarium which has been Carbon dated to 700 AD. You are really falling into the "I DESPERATELY want to believe camp".

BTW, did you even read from that blog you posted?...

Let me help you.

Is the Shroud real? Probably.

The Shroud of Turin may be the real burial cloth of Jesus. The carbon dating, once seemingly proving it was a medieval fake, is now widely thought of as suspect and meaningless. Even the famous Atheist Richard Dawkins admits it is controversial. Christopher Ramsey, the director of the Oxford Radiocarbon Laboratory, thinks more testing is needed. So do many other scientists and archeologists. This is because there are significant scientific and non-religious reasons to doubt the validity of the tests. Chemical analysis, all nicely peer-reviewed in scientific journals and subsequently confirmed by numerous chemists, shows that samples tested are chemically unlike the whole cloth. It was probably a mixture of older threads and newer threads woven into the cloth as part of a medieval repair. Recent robust statistical studies add weight to this theory. Philip Ball, the former physical science editor for Nature when the carbon dating results were published, recently wrote: “It’s fair to say that, despite the seemingly definitive tests in 1988, the status of the Shroud of Turin is murkier than ever.” If we wish to be scientific we must admit we do not know how old the cloth is. But if the newer thread is about half of what was tested – and some evidence suggests that – it is possible that the cloth is from the time of Christ.

No one has a good idea how front and back images of a crucified man came to be on the cloth. Yes, it is possible to create images that look similar. But no one has created images that match the chemistry, peculiar superficiality and profoundly mysterious three-dimensional information content of the images on the Shroud. Again, this is all published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
...

shroudstory.com...

You, and some others still are not understanding that the shroud and the Sudarium have been in many cities throughout Europe, and in the Middle East. Both had been handled by multitudes of nobles and high members of the clergy which would have tainted the cloth with their sweat, skin oils, and fibers from their own clothes.

Think about it. To this day no one can imprint with ancient technology the image of a person in 2 micro-fibers of a piece of cloth. 2 micro-fibers are smaller than one single hair. But somehow, you among some others want to claim this was "forged" in Medieval times?...

In any court of law evidence that is tainted with the dna in sweat and skin oils of hundreds of people would not be accepted as "evidence".

In fact what the carbon dating of the Sudarium proves is that the Sudarium existed and was handled in the 600s-800s AD. It doesn't prove that it was made then.

The same thing for the Shroud of Turin.

Thermochimica Acta 425 (2005) 189–194
Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin
Raymond N. Rogers
Los Alamos National Laboratory, University of California, 1961 Cumbres Patio, Los Alamos, NM 87544, USA
Received 14 April 2004; received in revised form 14 April 2004; accepted 12 September 2004
Abstract

In 1988, radiocarbon laboratories at Arizona, Cambridge, and Zurich determined the age of a sample from the Shroud of Turin. They reported that the date of the cloth’s production lay between a.d. 1260 and 1390 with 95% confidence. This came as a surprise in view of the technology used to produce the cloth, its chemical composition, and the lack of vanillin in its lignin. The results prompted questions about the validity of the sample.
Preliminary estimates of the kinetics constants for the loss of vanillin from lignin indicate a much older age for the cloth than the radiocarbon analyses. The radiocarbon sampling area is uniquely coated with a yellow–brown plant gum containing dye lakes. Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud.
© 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Shroud of Turin; Lignin kinetics; Pyrolysis/mass spectrometry; Flax fiber analyses
...

www.shroud.it...

Who Raymond Roger was.

Raymond Rogers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other people named Ray Rogers, see Ray Rogers (disambiguation).

Raymond N. Rogers (1927–2005) was an American chemist who was considered a leading expert in thermal analysis. To the general public, however, he was best known for his work on the Shroud of Turin.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

What happens when dozens, or even hundreds of people handle and touch a piece of cloth without gloves? Their sweat, and their skin oils are transferred unto the piece of cloth.

You see, what many people fail to understand is that unlike other artifacts which have been excavated by archeologists, who follow rigorous steps to not taint whatever artifact they uncover, the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium have been handled for centuries by people who did not follow the rigorous steps used to date when excavating archeological artifacts.

a reply to: windword

a reply to: Seede What evidence do you have to challenge the accepted date for Jesus Ben Pandira's life being about 100 years earlier than Jesus of Nazareth's? As per the link: deusdiapente.wordpress.com... What date/year does that Munich Talmud placing on the "Eve of the Passover"? Do you have a link that gives us a reliable date as to this "Passover Eve" execution?

windword,
I believe that the following will put this matter to rest--
I do not have the Munich Talmud but I do follow the Soncino Talmud. In the Soncino Talmud I have an enormous amount of information of which I chose the one that would rest this confusion of Ben Stada with Yahusha.

Within the Soncino Talmud there are well over thirty (30) conversations of Jesus by the various talmudists and this is the source that I have in addition to Dr. David Instone Brewer, Senior Research Fellow in Rabbinics and the New Testament- Tyndale House, Cambridge --

Soncino b Talmud- Sanhedrin 67a

12) In the uncensored editions of the Talmud there follows this important passage (supplied from D.S. on the authority of the Munich and Oxford Mss. and the older editions) ‘And this they did to Ben Stada in Lydda (suk), and they hung him on the eve of Passover. Ben Stada was Ben Padira. R. Hisda said: ‘The husband was Stada, the paramour Pandira. But was nor the husband Pappos b. Judah? — His mother's name was Stada. But his mother was Miriam, a dresser of woman's hair? (thab tksdn megaddela neshayia): — As they say in Pumbaditha, This woman has turned away (satath da) from her husband, (i.e., committed adultery).’ T. Herford, in ‘Christianity in the Talmud’, pp. 37 seqq, 344 seqq, identifies this Ben Stada with Jesus of Nazareth. As to the meaning of the name, he connects it with ** ‘seditious’, and suggests (p. 345 n.1) that it originally denoted ‘that Egyptian’ (Acts XXI 38, Josephus, Ant. XX, 8, 6) who claimed to be a prophet and led his followers to the Mount of Olives, where he was routed by the Procurator Felix, and that in later times he might have been confused with Jeshua ha-Notzri. This hypothesis, however, involves the disregard of the Talmudic data, for Pappos b. Judah lived a century after Jesus (Cit. 90a), though the mother's name, Miriam (Mary), would raise no difficulty, as thab tksdn megaddla neshayia may be the result of a confusion with Mary Magdalene (v. also Box, The Virgin Birth of Jesus, pp. 201f, for other possible meanings of Ben Stada and Ben Pandira) Derenbourg (Essai note 9, pp. 465-471) rightly denies the identity of Ben Stada with Jesus, and regards him simply as a false prophet executed during the second century at Lydda.

I also chose the following for your enjoyment--

Sanhedrin 46a
MISHNAH. HOW IS HE HANGED?26 — THE POST IS SUNK INTO THE GROUND WITH A [CROSS-] PIECE BRANCHING OFF [AT THE TOP].27 AND HE28 BRINGS HIS HANDS TOGETHER29 ONE OVER THE OTHER AND HANGS HIM UP [THEREBY]. R. JOSE SAID: THE POST IS LEANED AGAINST THE WALL,30 AND HE HANGS HIM UP AFTER THE FASHION OF BUTCHERS. HE IS IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARDS LET DOWN. IF HE IS LEFT [HANGING] OVER NIGHT, A NEGATIVE COMMAND IS THEREBY TRANSGRESSED, FOR IT IS WRITTEN, HIS BODY SHALL NOT REMAIN ALL NIGHT UPON THE TREE, BUT THOU SHALT SURELY BURY HIM THE SAME DAY FOR HE IS HANGED [BECAUSE OF] A CURSE AGAINST GOD,31 — AS IF TO SAY WHY WAS HE HANGED? — BECAUSE HE CURSED THE NAME [OF GOD]; AND SO32 THE NAME OF HEAVEN [GOD] IS PROFANED.33
(27) This bears no resemblance at all to crucifixion. Cf. Rabbinowicz, Legislation criminelle du Talmud, p. 111: What a difference between this hanging after death, where the executed man had both his hands tied and did not remain one minute upon the gallows, and the Supplicium, which the Romans inflicted upon Jesus, who was nailed to the cross whilst alive, with his hands on the cross, and left hanging on the gallows all day.

I do hope that this shows my original post that there is evidence that Jesus (Yahusha) existed outside of the biblical texts. That was my original post. You may want to read other information pertaining to Jesus --
Chagigah 46b twice-- Sotah 47a four times -- 57a once -- Sanhedrin 43a once -- 46a once -- 56a three times --61b once --67a four times -- 106a three times -- 106b once -- 107b nine times -- Avodah Zarah 16b once -- 17a twice -- 27b once.
I can only say that most people live in a lie. Not that they are liars but that they have been lied to. The above literature are various talmudists with various dates. Now much of Talmud was compiled prior to Jesus, during Jesus time and after Jesus. That I leave to the scholars who dedicate a life to their work.

Why do some people freak out at the idea that Jesus was married? Is the notion of celibacy being superior to marriage and family a holdover from the Catholic philosophies?

a reply to: whitewave

I don't read Hebrew so I wouldn't be qualified to determine if the translation were correct or not. The point, totally unrelated to spin doctors, was that the person we call "Jesus" would not have been called that in his time. Joshua (or Yeshua) would not have the letter "J" in the spelling. For that matter, Jehovah wouldn't be a word either; more like a bad translation of YHWH. I'm not sure what "James" would be but, again, no letter "J".

I apologize for seeming so rude whitewave -- I have that bad habit of being obnoxious and discourteous on the keyboard.
You are correct. It is somewhat complicated in a sense. The new testament documents come to us in mostly Greek and then translated from Greek to what ever language of the reader and in the time frame of the translator. That is very important because language meanings do change in times of cultures.

You are right when you say that most English people spell Joseph with a J but there are also some who spell Joseph with a Y. Some spell His name Yoseph and not Joseph. Some spell the Greek to English Jesu or Jesus. Some spell the Hebrew to English as Yahusha or Yahushua or Yeshua.

The Soncino Talmud is a Hebrew to English rendition and they spell Jesus as Jesus even though they are Jewish and in Hebrew they call Jesus Yahusha (Ya-hoo-sha). But it is a matter of translation from the Hebrew into what you can understand in English. My bible is Eth Cepher and in Cepher they use Yahusha as Jesus and at times Yahuah as God. It all depends upon the translator to English.