Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Thing is Jesus was a Jewish rabbi, and a controversial one as such. The two main sects or political blocks back then were the Sadducees and the Pharisee and then you had the scribes and the priests, all of which followed elaborate extensions and pervasions of the Law (Torah) of Moses, much of what today is known as the Talmud. Jesus managed to hiss them all off to the extent where he becomes the victim of a conspiracy and they nearly bloody kill him and make sure there is no trace of his to be found in official rabbinical or historical+ literature produced by these his enemies.

Jesu's adherers and fans were found among the artisans, the women, fishermen, punks and hippies, hookers, the outed and mad and the soldiers, a working class hero, not afraid to wield the blade of his tongue left and right and dress the walls of the City with his opponents. I don't find it odd one bit that TPTB made sure there be no mentioning him in the annals until they finally couldn't ignore it any longer. And that's when the disifo campaigns started, much of which is still preserved today in the shape of the NT, except for a couple of books and a few stories, it's all bollocks. Like Kim in N-Korea and Chuck Norris. Noone! I say Noone can beat Superman!

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Thing is Jesus was a Jewish rabbi, and a controversial one as such. The two main sects or political blocks back then were the Sadducees and the Pharisee and then you had the scribes and the priests, all of which followed elaborate extensions and pervasions of the Law (Torah) of Moses, much of what today is known as the Talmud. Jesus managed to hiss them all off to the extent where he becomes the victim of a conspiracy and they nearly bloody kill him and make sure there is no trace of his to found in official rabbinical or historical+ literature produced by these his enemies.

Jesus was a pariah long before the Sadducees and the Pharisee ever heard of him. His illegitimate birth relegated him to the role of "Mamzer" in his village, something I think seriously rankled the youthful Jesus. It meant he could never be an elder or hold any official position. That, I believe is what led him to find comfort with other 'outcast' radicals, like John the Baptist. They basically said "Screw the Temple, we're going to start our own form of worship, with blackjack, and hookers..." Well, maybe not that last part but he figured very early on you don't need all those official, legitimate neckbeards to tell you how to worship God. You don't even need the Temple, you can worship God right there in your home, break bread right there at your own table, God is within you. That was a radical departure from the Great Temple and the dominion of the Sadducees and the Pharisee, which sought to control and profit from the worship of God.

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Thing is Jesus was a Jewish rabbi, and a controversial one as such. The two main sects or political blocks back then were the Sadducees and the Pharisee and then you had the scribes and the priests, all of which followed elaborate extensions and pervasions of the Law (Torah) of Moses, much of what today is known as the Talmud. Jesus managed to hiss them all off to the extent where he becomes the victim of a conspiracy and they nearly bloody kill him and make sure there is no trace of his to found in official rabbinical or historical+ literature produced by these his enemies.

Jesus was a pariah long before the Sadducees and the Pharisee ever heard of him. His illegitimate birth relegated him to the role of "Mamzer" in his village, something I think seriously rankled the youthful Jesus. It meant he could never be an elder or hold any official position. That, I believe is what led him to find comfort with other 'outcast' radicals, like John the Baptist. They basically said "Screw the Temple, we're going to start our own form of worship, with blackjack, and hookers..." Well, maybe not that last part but he figured very early on you don't need all those official, legitimate neckbeards to tell you how to worship God. You don't even need the Temple, you can worship God right there in your home, break bread right there at your own table, God is within you. That was a radical departure from the Great Temple and the dominion of the Sadducees and the Pharisee, which sought to control and profit from the worship of God.

Yes, and no need for expensive grape wine or fancy Passover steaks. Water is the better wine and the simplest bread the holiest meal! Jesus was called a drunkard, a possessed madman and a Samaritan. And there's a hint to what you say, that he was a mamzer. The establishment considered him born out of wedlock and that he was a man without inheritance. Had Jesus lived today, perhaps he would have said "Frig the banks and the archaic political structures! To hell with the church and all who worship there! Here, have some bitcoins and a copy of EVE Online, let's pretend to blast them all to bits on a daily basis and pray for Assange and the others who are putting the lamps in their proper stands for all to gaze."

LOL Those are some very interesting analogies. I like the way you and blackmarketeer have viewed the story. I don't necessarily agree with some of your interpretations, but I do agree that he was a radically different thinker compared to the other religious figures of the day. We can see that by his interactions with lepers (forbidden) women (forbidden), and many of the other (forbidden) things he did and said.

At bare minimum, he was a fascinating man who had radically different ideas than those in the region at the time. He had to have been saying something special, or his story would not have survived this long, and people wouldn't still be telling it today, almost 2000 years later.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Thing is. in order for a story to become the best story ever told and last for thousands of years... well, this is an understantement, but you have to touch it up a bit. For you see, reality isn't that exciting really. Jesus was a carpenter, and he made a boat, let's say he walked on the water instead. And he made a house with doors and windows. Let's say he could walk through walls instead. Get it? It's not lying, for walking on a boat is walking on the water. And when you walk through a door you do walk through a wall.

www.youtube.com...


is all i could think of

a reply to: ltheghost

Its not really new. Years ago researching the historicity of Jesus I came acroos the Roman Aristocratic family Piso.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

lol @ the Pisos. (In spite of your cool King Crimson username…)

Long since debunked. Only total idiots believe that nonsense.

a reply to: adjensen

lol @ the Pisos. (In spite of your cool King Crimson username…) Long since debunked. Only total idiots believe that nonsense.

This coming from a Zealot who starts a thread

"How to Spot the Reptilians Running the U.S. Government"
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'll let others make up their mind about you without calling you an idiot, but hey you can beleive in a benelovent Jehovah who quitely left the scene a while back.

No doubt you steered clear away from the inteligent discourse in threads such as these:

Yahweh = Satan. They have you worshiping evil.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

or

Jehovah is an Evil God
www.abovetopsecret.com...

A gentile falling for the oldest con game in history, namely that you think you're a spiritual Jew...a bit like that Saul of Tarsus who had his "psychotic" break and went on to pervert the real message of James the apostle and the one called Jesus who surrounded himeself with armed men. (Peter at the Garden of Gethsemene)

Why do I even bother wasting my time in these threads

Jesus was a Gnostic. If he existed at all.... I wish more Christians knew who the Gnostics were or what the apocrypha is.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Dude, I always tell people that Yahweh is satan & the Jews worship the devil. It doesn't go over very well usually.


My mom is Jewish & I tell people I'm "Jew-ish".

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

This coming from a Zealot who starts a thread

"How to Spot the Reptilians Running the U.S. Government"

Um… you do realize that was a joke, right? Apparently not. No, I do not believe that there are Reptilians, never mind them running the US government.

No doubt you steered clear away from the inteligent discourse in threads such as these

I don't generally waste my time on threads like those because people who hold the belief that the God of the Israelites is different than the God of Christianity miss the very obvious point that Jesus was a Jew, and if he believed that his Father wasn't the God of the Israelites, he'd have made that perfectly clear. Instead, he quotes Hebrew scripture, teaches obedience to God and was an observant Jew.

A critical thinker would realize that the argument that the God of the Israelites was evil is pretty much dead on delivery.

a reply to: Eunuchorn

Jesus was a Gnostic. If he existed at all.... I wish more Christians knew who the Gnostics were or what the apocrypha is.

I have studied the Gnostic Christians for many years. Sorry to say that Jesus was not a Gnostic, which was the religious outgrowth of Greek Platonism. As noted above, Jesus was an observant Jew, and that meant a rejection of dualism, which is what Gnosticism is predicated on.

Add to that the fact that we know where Gnostic Christianity came from (Gnosticism itself pre-dates Christianity by several centuries,) and that is from the teachings of Valentinius, around the middle of the Second Century. Valentinus had been a candidate for the Bishop of Rome (aka: Pope,) had been passed over and his response was, effectively, "to heck with you, I'll go start my own church." Which is what he did, blending the Gnostic mythos with Christianity, turning Christ from the Messiah to being the "Bringer of Gnosis", a claim that did not exist until Valentinus.

In other words, he made it all up.

ETA: Oh, I think that you are confused as to the word "apocrypha", which refers to a number of books that are in the Catholic Bible, but not the post-1611 Protestant Bibles (they were in the first edition of the King James Bible, but later removed.) These are books that are in the Old Testament, and the reason that the Protestants removed them is because they didn't like them very much, and could use the excuse that they were in Greek versions of the Hebrew Bible (the Septuagint,) but not in Hebrew versions. Since Jesus used the Septuagint, he would have known these books, but the Protestants don't care, because they disagree with them.

I think what you meant was the texts found in the Nag Hammadi library, which, contrary to popular belief, were never considered for inclusion in the Bible, for the simple reason that they are the texts of another religion… one might as well wonder why there are no Hindu or Islamic books in the Christian Bible.

The title of this thread should be called: "The Enemy creates ancient confession hoax." As he will do anything to discredit Christ. I've actually heard of this before, and there seem to be no end to the stories of people 'finding' things that discredit the Christ. Yet nothing that really sticks, or discredits other religions. I never really could wrap my head around that. Odd, how Muslims don't seem to have to worry about that, nor Krishnas, or Buddhists... Odd how the one folks always try to discredit, is the one that claims to be the real one. Almost as if there were an Enemy that didn't want you to know about God, or the Christ...

a reply to: adjensen

Christianity miss the very obvious point that Jesus was a Jew, and if he believed that his Father wasn't the God of the Israelites, he'd have made that perfectly clear. Instead, he quotes Hebrew scripture, teaches obedience to God and was an observant Jew.

So it would be anathema for him to preach a new religion called christianity, or that he would arise from the dead, or that he would encourage eating of his flesh and blood.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Why?

He didn't "preach a new religion" -- Christianity is a sect of Judaism, and the resurrection of the dead is a Jewish belief, it didn't originate with Christ.

Jesus Christ = rich jest us
its maybe the only full anagram
please see my siggy thread

originally posted by: adjensen
a reply to: Eunuchorn

Jesus was a Gnostic. If he existed at all.... I wish more Christians knew who the Gnostics were or what the apocrypha is.

I have studied the Gnostic Christians for many years. Sorry to say that Jesus was not a Gnostic, which was the religious outgrowth of Greek Platonism. As noted above, Jesus was an observant Jew, and that meant a rejection of dualism, which is what Gnosticism is predicated on.

That's what I thought too. I believed dualism was at the very core of Gnosticism.

I think that you are confused as to the word "apocrypha", which refers to a number of books that are in the Catholic Bible [...] I think what you meant was the texts found in the Nag Hammadi library

I think what he refer to is the collection of books put together by Montague Rhodes James often shortened to M.R. James, called "The Apocryphal New Testament", first published in 1924 more than 20 years ahead of the Nag Hammadi find of 1945 and the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls a few years after that again. M.R. James is perhaps best remembered for his dealings with ghost stories, but also for his work on cataloguing the libraries at Cambridge, producing among other the mentioned book.

"Apocrypha" was first used in English in the 14th century to discribe certain Christian books. It is one of the breadcrumbs we find in the trail of the rising protestant movement leading up to Martin Luther and the Reformation. From Gr. apo- "away" + kryptein "to hide", put together to form the verb ἀποκρύπτειν (apokryptein), "to hide away". It was used in Latin and Greek long before it was introduced into English, in much the same sense, but not referring to a specific library or corpus, but rather as a word often translated "Secret" or similar:

en.wikipedia.org...

The word "apocryphal" (ἀπόκρυφος) was first applied[who?] to writings which were kept secret because they were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated. For example, it is used in this sense to describe A Sacred and Secret Book of Moses, called Eighth the Holy (Μωυσέως ἱερὰ βίβλος ἀπόκρυφος ἐπικαλούμενη ὀγδόη ἢ ἁγία). This is a text taken from a Leiden papyrus of the third or fourth century A.D. The text may be as old as the first century, but other proof of age has not been found. In a similar vein, the disciples of the Gnostic Prodicus boasted that they possessed the secret (ἀπόκρυφα) books of Zoroaster. The term in general enjoyed high consideration among the Gnostics (see Acts of Thomas, pp. 10, 27, 44).

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Thanks for the clarification, I guess that the Protestant in me just recalls the word associated with the books that are in the Catholic Bible but not in the Protestant versions.

You're probably aware of it already, but this is a great compilation of old non-canonical Christian texts: Early Christian Writings. Lots of fascinating works in there.

originally posted by: adjensen

You're probably aware of it already, but this is a great compilation of old non-canonical Christian texts: Early Christian Writings. Lots of fascinating works in there.

There's quite a few of those sites, I still have a few links from the time I first discovered non-canonical literature and had a few rounds with the Gnostics, the Essenes, Arianism and the the lot. Since then I have scavenged for most of what's available in hard copy of these scriptures, and among these books is the M.R. James' book I mentioned earlier.

Also worth mentioning is the 2 volume "standard" works of Robert Henry Charles often bundled together with the aforementioned book, "The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament", containing OT era books like Jubilees, the Book of Enoch and so on. I am always on the lookout for books containing scriptures related to Judaism and Christianity. Latest major addition was a 2006 resetting (Tolle Press) of the 1599 Geneva Bible complete with notes and references that I found in my favourite secondhand bookstore a few months ago and got for 15 quid. There are so many books…