Who is Jesus to you?

a reply to: kwakakev

to me Jesus was the' Son-of-Man (the direct son of King David who lived 500+ years before Jesus, born from Mary in AD 01)


and Jesus was ~32.5 years later 'quickened' into a multi-dimensional (spiritual-physical) entity

a reply to: schuyler

Or: an interesting case study how eventually a meme in the noosphere becomes alive.
Because I can't really imagine the person J.C. wouldn't have at least as 'myth giver' really existed. The Romans really were oppressing Jews and all kinds of different little streams existed in that historical context.
From there it got retold by refugees, discussions of what it all means, I'm confident Roman authorities were censoring and editing, we know they fought for 'unification' of Christians.
Successful.

And on a less objective note: I like the idea of people developing superpowers. So I wish that part's true and can be reproduced.

a reply to: ltrz2025

First, his entire teachings and even concepts as the "messiah" contradicts much of the "jewish" cosmovision.

Ha! On what planet in the multiverse do you live? Here 'Messiah' is a through and through Jewish concept.

Jesus was hardly the first or only one who'd have spoken about the issue of sacrifice, if anything he was the product of that social process.

And that with the writing is as with everything since it's not kings making a declaration in stone, it will rot. Or burn.
Since they had no king to make declarations in their name it's basically amazing the language survived at all.

a reply to: kwakakev

Anyway, this is my brief current take on the Jesus thing. So what is yours?

The adversary for his time and place. The guy in Network that's mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.

You gotta understand they were occupied. The Romans first invaded Judea in 63 BCE and surrounded Jerusalem, but Jews retained semi-autonomy from the Roman state for almost 60 years. When Rome officially annexed Judea along with Samaria in 6 BCE they lost they're semi-autonomy and by extension the freedom of religion.

Joshua was literally born into the Jews yet again being subjected to pagan polytheism and being beating into submission over it.

He was a lot like a modern Jihadist cleric that blows people up with empathy. He was an outspoken critic of Roman practice that refused to compromise his ethical position. And encouraged others to do the same.

That's why Rome arrested and executed him for sedition. He was a troublemaker sewing discontent against the rule of Rome using a counter morality to theirs.

After his execution. I break from the Christian narrative. He died with integrity and valor, but I think a telephone narrative formed and slightly changed context.

By the time the four main gospels of his account were written I feel the writer admiration and cult of personality turned the Genesis "Sons of God" into the Matthew "Son of god".

I hold Joshuas intent was more old testament like.

As an example. This Psalm is about David.

Psalm 89: 26-28

26 He shall cry to me, ‘You are my Father,
my God, and the Rock of my salvation!’
27 I will make him the firstborn,
the highest of the kings of the earth.
28 Forever I will keep my steadfast love for him,
and my covenant with him will stand firm.

In short he was a man who used Judaism to oppose Rome and became a god for it after he was tried by the state. He in turn inspired a new generation and morphology within Abrahamic scripture which by 300 years, became the majority.

The defacto Jewish position without being Jewish.

originally posted by: Peeple
Ha! On what planet in the multiverse do you live? Here 'Messiah' is a through and through Jewish concept.

Jesus was hardly the first or only one who'd have spoken about the issue of sacrifice, if anything he was the product of that social process.

And that with the writing is as with everything since it's not kings making a declaration in stone, it will rot. Or burn.
Since they had no king to make declarations in their name it's basically amazing the language survived at all.

You might be a very good looking horse, but that doesn't make the cut baby. :-D.

There is nothing "original" from the "jewish", everything you know as "jewish" was stolen myths from the Sumerian, Phoenician, Babylonian, Persian and Egyptian cultures. These nations were the true POWERS of the time and place. You have these nation's names, their lists of kings and cities, all carved in thousands of walls, tablets, steles, pottery, statues, etc. all around the Near East. But, there is no "Israel" or "Hebrew" carved anywhere you look, no "David", no "Solomon"... These brilliant "jews" you talk about so confidently were like a "ghost empire" of some sort...

Then, Messiah is a derivation of the Egyptian word "Messeh", which is what the Egyptians used to anoint their holiest priest kings. Look it up.

Regarding the "Jewish people". Again and last time, if you look at the archeological records, there is nowhere any people being named as "Jewish people" in any record. So you are literally talking about a fiction, that propaganda device called the Old Testament... For 200 years archeologists have been digging and digging in the "holy land", and never found such a thing. They keep digging though, just in case....

The Romans, at one time, called the place Judaea/Iudea (which is where this word "Jew" comes from), but that was a geographical term, not a term to define a type of people or culture. Judaea was, in fact, a region that encompassed several different regions, and completely different people with totally different beliefs. So apparently, these "Jews" you talk about, didn't even have a name for themselves!... Crazy. But well, soon later the Romans started calling these regions Syria-Palestine, because that was a more proper term with the majority of people the found in the area. That's why, when someone calls me "anti-semitic", I tell them that I tend to love Syrians and Palestinians, they are fantastic people, even thought they suffer so much due to the American and zionist bombings.

Regarding child sacrifice,I simply pointed out that that is one of the commandments of Yahweh in the Torah, and that Jesus' philosophy was clearly against that. So, he could not have been a hellenistic canaanite (what you call a "jew").

The rest of what you said makes no sense and misses the point entirely. Again, the "scholars" are openly lying to you by calling "paleo-hebrew" to the Phoenician alphabet, and they are doing it in your face. Facts are facts, whether you are brave to accept them or not. You have to know that there is a lot of zio-propaganda around these subjects... you know... some countries that should never have been "founded" need to keep a narrative to keep their B.S. in place....

Kisses.

a reply to: ltrz2025


From 70 triumph in Rome.

Movi ng about
4000 years ago.

I mean sure the kingdom of David might have been more a chiefdom, but to say it didn't exist is just absurd.
David per se might not recognise himself in the stories, but somebody like that for sure existed.
There is archeology even if it doesn't tell as much as we want it to.
So your point seems too extreme for me.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: ltrz2025

From 70 triumph in Rome.

Movi ng about
4000 years ago.

I mean sure the kingdom of David might have been more a chiefdom, but to say it didn't exist is just absurd.
David per se might not recognise himself in the stories, but somebody like that for sure existed.
There is archeology even if it doesn't tell as much as we want it to.
So your point seems too extreme for me.

1. Ok, so you show me a picture of a symbolic lamp, which was a very common symbol used in all the Near East. Actually, the menorah was a very ancient depiction of the Tree of Life, linked to Asherah, the Mesopotamian goddess. Again, that these "jews" (if they existed) would have stolen and appropriated for themselves... sorry, this doesn't work as evidence of any kind. On the contrary, it solidifies my position, that these "jews" you talk about were Hellenistic Canaanites, and that there was nothing different about them (again, if they actually existed).

2. Then you show me an opinion editorial of Haaretz, which is a well known zionist propaganda pamphlet, which WILL NEVER question the existence of this "mythological" kingdom called Israel... because otherwise, they need to pack their suitcase and get the hell out of there. Again, this opinion sheet from a propaganda pamphlet is no evidence of any kind.

3. There are no records of any kingdom or chiefdom of any David. More over, there is no record of any "Hebrew" or "Israel" anywhere before the middle-ages. But you claim so confidently that "to say that it didn't exist is just absurd".... what kind of logic is that? I wonder.... but well, feel free to "believe" what you want, even when it contradicts all evidence.


I think the debate is pretty settled by now. Glad to share what I know, but stick to the facts baby. Don't let your emotions mislead you.

a reply to: ltrz2025

Again I think the problem is you're looking for a modern entity in antiquity. There's also no other existing nation identified by its religion around, which maybe helps to see how absurde your expectations are.
Still there are throughout indications of semitic people speaking a semitic language that looks like it played a part in the developing of modern hebrew, using objects and symbols whose use is only in Jewish tradition still important enough to be a temple treasure.
Like I said they show up as identifyable people. And no they're not identical to those alive today, which is the only way how there could be a 100% overlap.
But they're there.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: ltrz2025

Again I think the problem is you're looking for a modern entity in antiquity. There's also no other existing nation identified by its religion around, which maybe helps to see how absurde your expectations are.
Still there are throughout indications of semitic people speaking a semitic language that looks like it played a part in the developing of modern hebrew, using objects and symbols whose use is only in Jewish tradition still important enough to be a temple treasure.
Like I said they show up as identifyable people. And no they're not identical to those alive today, which is the only way how there could be a 100% overlap.
But they're there.

1. Your first paragraph makes no sense, you are simply avoiding the evidence and trying to find a "justification" that contradicts all the evidence. That's not how the historical method works (if history is actually something you care about). It's quite an emotional response, not logical, from you. Are you a very emotional person in general?... Maybe that's what's troubling you.

2. There are indications of semitic people using a semitic language?... Yes, it's called Phoenician, and it's the VERY FIRST alphabet in history. Our alphabet right now is based in that Phoenician alphabet. That's why it's called Phonetic, not Hebraic, or "paleo-hebraic". It was probably the most RELEVANT invention in human history, and was done by PHOENICIANS, not by "Hebrews", people and language there are no records of until the middle ages...

3. You are literally lying when you say that the menorah was only used by "Jews" 2.000 years ago. You just need to look at the archeological record. Google for: Menorah Asherah. You are not intellectually honest Peeple. C'mon, if you are really interested in all this, you can do better. In fact, the weakness of your arguments are simply helping my position, but you can't see it. I wish it was different, a more challenging debate, honestly.

4. Again, no matter how much your emotions deny it, there are no records of "Jews", "Hebrews", "Israel", "David", "Solomon" anywhere in the archeological archives. It's all just Old Testament propaganda that you chose to believe as historical records, even when ALL the evidence points in the opposite direction. Again, archeologists have been digging all around Jerusalem and the Levant for centuries there. All they find is Greek and Mesopotamian (Canaanite) cultures.

This is all I have to say on the matter. Let you be with your beliefs, good day, lovely horsy.

a reply to: ltrz2025

Not really a ghost Empire.

I think what happened, and archaeology backs this up, at some point some of the former Canaanites started calling themselves Hebrew instead of Phoenician.

www.discovermagazine.com...

There's evidence of Egyptian Temples being constructed and maintained until around the time both Phoenicia (The remnants of The Canaanite) and the alleged Twelve Tribes of Israel came into existence.

It's like the people left over after Egypt withdrew split in half. That's why paleo-Hebrew and Phoenician are the same alphabet with different symbols. They were the same people before Egypt pushed across the Sinai Pennisula and annexed them.

There is also a definite tapering off polytheism that happened. By the time of Phoenicia they were Monoaltrous. It was all about Ba'al. The new "Hebrews" took that a step further with Yahweh.

They just didn't get to write it down until Cyrus The Great kicked Babylons ass, knocked down their tower (which foundation is still visible on Google Earth) and allowed "The Hebrews" to build another temple and write the majority of their cannon.

But to say they didnt have a first temple or weren't long telling their chosen narrative is false.

The artifacts excavated from the mount, detailed in a paper and presentations at a conference at Hebrew University, are said to include olive pits, animal bones and pottery fragments dating to the time of the First Temple, between the 8th and 6th Centuries BCE

There's also antiquated reference to The House of David as far back as the 9th century.

www.biblicalarchaeology.org...

They were telling their new Yahweh story for at least 400 years before the Moses was even written about or possibly even thought up. And of course they borrowed a lot. The monotheism premise was actually encouraged by the Zoroastrian Persians because The duality of the old testament was influenced by The Avesta, which was known of outside of Persia and predated The Torah by hundreds of years.

a reply to: Degradation33

It's all lies, misrepresentations and misreadings of the archeological evidence, "opinions" from pro-zionist and pro-bible sources, or from "hebrew universities"... You just need to read closely, and you'll see that they are all empty speculative claims, just wishful thinking and a lot of pro-zionist propaganda.

Again, there are no records of any "Hebrews", "Israel", "David", "Solomon", anywhere. All there is are silly speculations: "oh we found a stone here that apparently says something, but it's not clear, anyway, we will declare that David existed!". So stupid.

According to the bible (which is the source you base yourself on), this Israelite kingdom was waging war in the four directions, destroying everyone that crossed their path, even mighty armies and kings, by the power of Yahweh, etc. But somehow NO NATION OR CULTURE in the area recorded one of their feats, or even their very existence?... Hard to believe such a thing...

The Exodus has also been EXTENSIBLY refuted as a complete fabricated myth, even by Jewish scholars themselves. At the time the "Exodus" would have happened, Egypt controlled the entire Levant..., not just until the Red Sea, so literally these "Jews" would have escaped from Egypt to Egypt... ridiculous. Clearly the Exodus was a myth fabricated way after the time when it supposedly took place, because the people who wrote it had absolutely no idea of how the lands were divided during the Bronze Age....

Then, all you say about these alleged "Hebrews" is a personal fantasy of yours, completely disconnected ideas and evidence, that have no base in reality. And it's fine, you can believe and speculate any tale you want. But, I'm trying to discuss facts here.

Big hugs.

a reply to: ltrz2025

Calm down.
What I'm saying is as with every other group on the planet: they were very different in antiquity. Like the Romans and Greeks can still be found in the West, but are not the same people.
You expect to find Israel in antiquity, no sane person would do that.

a reply to: Peeple

LOL. So, to expect to find Israel in antiquity is insane?.. Then all these thousands of archeologist digging for evidence in the Middle East, spending millions of dollars, working under a cooking sun, are simply insane people with crazy expectations?...

Darn, I never expected such a thing, that must be a wild place right now! Loonie-toons land!... Thanks for the laughs Peeple, you're very funny. Totally calmed, big hugs and kisses (100% honest).

a reply to: ltrz2025

archeologist digging for evidence in the Middle East, spending millions of dollars, working under a cooking sun, are simply insane people with crazy expectations?...

No, because they know Israel is new and what they're digging up were their ancestral cultures evolving through time.
So it's still only you who has crazy expectations.

No kisses thanks, not from you.

If you’re going to ask a question like this shouldn’t you first prove that JC existed? So without sourcing the bible where is your evidence that JC ever existed or if existed was divine?

a reply to: ltrz2025

Well that's not historically valid. Maybe a segue for antisemitism, but they most certainly have a verified place in the archaeological and historical record.

While The Cyrus Cylinder never directly mentions the Jews, it mentions return of ALL displaced people. What's to say his decree didn't allow these people to return and build The Second Temple. It's also interesting it's the first thing he did after conquering Babylon. To write a decree allowing the reformation of displaced people.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Evidence of Jerusalem Temple:

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Here is some early 6th century Yahweh writings prior to the second temple:

en.m.wikipedia.org...

You can try to convince me it's lies all you want but when a narrative parallels history (what is known about how people were conquered and when) you tend to prefer that.

So forgive me for agreeing with Israel Finklestein, the most Jewish name ever.

Archaeological remains during that time does however, include Shoshenq I of the 22nd Dynasty of Egypt invading the Levant around 930-925 BCE, conquering many cities and settlements. Unlike the United Monarchy, archaeological evidence of the conquest have been found in various sites in the Levant. However, the 22nd Dynasty did not directly annex the Levant following the conquest and brought the Levant back into Egyptian domination for unknown reasons. It was theorized by Israel Finkelstein that Shoshenq I invaded the Levant in order to prevent the formation of a unified state under the Israelites, thus forming the basis of the biblical story of Jeroboam's Revolt.[5]

The Kingdom of Israel was destroyed around 720 BCE, when it was conquered by the Neo-Assyrian Empire.[6] While the Kingdom of Judah remained intact during this time, it became a client state of first the Neo-Assyrian Empire and then the Neo-Babylonian Empire. However, Jewish revolts against the Babylonians led to the destruction of Judah in 586 BCE, under the rule of Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II. According to the biblical account, the armies of Nebuchadnezzar II besieged Jerusalem between 589–586 BCE, which led to the destruction of Solomon's Temple and the exile of the Jews to Babylon; this event was also recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles.[7][8] The exilic period, which saw the development of the Israelite religion (Yahwism) towards the distinct monotheism of Judaism, ended with the fall of Babylon to the Achaemenid Persian Empire around 538 BCE. Subsequently, Persian king Cyrus the Great issued a proclamation known as the Edict of Cyrus, which authorized and encouraged exiled Jews to return to the Land of Israel.[9][10] Cyrus' proclamation began the exiles' return to Zion, inaugurating the formative period in which a more distinctive Jewish identity was developed in the Persian province of Yehud. During this time, the destroyed Solomon's Temple was replaced by the Second Temple, marking the beginning of the Second Temple period.

Seems Zion is pretty historical to me.

a reply to: Degradation33

Last post about this, because it's already clear.

1. Again, for last time, no matter what anyone says or thinks, there is ABSOLUTELY NO ARCHEOLOGICAL RECORD of any "Israel", "Hebrew", "Jewish", "David", "Solomon", in any museum in the planet, or anywhere at all. Again, after 200 years of excavations, looking for the "evidence", it was never found. You can theorize, speculate all you want, put the bible in a blender and drink it... but that doesn't change the facts.

2. The use of Wikipedia as a source is laughable, any trained monkey can edit it and do whatever they want. Then, you claim that the wikipedia article has some evidence or truth, but the wikipedia article itself indicates that all they have (including Finklestein) are speculations, that could be one way or the opposite, and they disagree with each other in practically everything. That's no historical evidence darling, no matter how much you try. Sorry.

3. I've never denied the belief in Yahweh. As I clearly explained in some posts, Yahweh was a Canaanite deity as many others, one of the children of EL-ohim. He was a Canaanite deity, married to Asherah, asking for child sacrifices, like all his "brothers" deities from Canaan. This is confirmed by archeological evidence. Hellenistic Canaanites existed, some believed in Yahweh, some believed in Baal, some in Moloch... they chose the pantheon deity that they liked the most.

3.5. Check closely the inscriptions. These wikipedia articles keep calling the inscriptions "Hebrew", when they are CLEARLY Phoenician (Canaanite) inscriptions. Can you see that they are lying to your face?...

4. The last thing that I'm trying to do is convincing you. On the contrary, I hope you find whatever belief makes you happy and stick to it all your life. No matter the "truth" really, your happiness is what's important. History is simply an intellectual activity. I love history, and because of that, I'm just trying to organize that which is FACT from that which is fantasy/myth/speculation/belief. Sorry if I'm bursting your bubble, that's not my intention. And again, you have the right to believe whatever you want.

5. Antisemitism in me?... Impossible, I have a very fond love for Palestinian and Syrian people. And also for anyone who call him/herself a "jew", even if they don't have an inch of semitic DNA in their veins. Many of my loved family members see themselves like that and I respect that decision 100%. I simply don't share their beliefs or historical fantasies (which almost everyone has in one subject or another) and wish them absolutely the best in life. But I do fight the government's brainwashing propaganda, which is aimed to turn humans against each other, to make them go to wars, using lies and manipulations. That I will always point my finger at, which is what I'm doing. Not to you, or any people with any belief.

Big kisses.

originally posted by: Peeple
No kisses thanks, not from you.

Ouch, that hurts!!

a reply to: ltrz2025

Go dig up some ancient Germans!
OMG!? They don't exist!
It's all 19th century invention!

a reply to: ltrz2025

This is no longer about Jesus but okay...

What is Palestine? Palestine is the word for the area that encompassed Israel and Judah, right?

Okay, non Wikipedia sources.

www.worldhistory.org...#:~:text=Palestine%20in%20the%20ancient%20world,a%20very%20small%20part%20of.

Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine' was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of.

The Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.

You can't qualify one neighboring and concurrent mutually recorded civilization as invalid and hold all the other ones as valid. Between 1400 - 900 BCE all were existing in some form in the area known as Palestine.

Allahu Akbar I suppose. Muslims came 1800 years after the area known as Palestine went through several occupations and civilizations already. Palestine today is a semantic game to call the Nation State of Israel invalid by Muslims. The ancient Palestinians were the Canaanite, Israelite, and Philistine.

This argument is one that is uniquely musliim. Common with Anti-Zionist Lebanese and Syrians. It calls Israel into question to prop up the Arab claim to the non-Mecca holyland as more valid.