Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

birch bark bible

Expand Messages
  • Ian Hutchesson
    To our nice Ahmadiyyist, Joey, ... Just a little more on this interesting religious text that shows: The book also seems to mention the prophet Mohammed as
    Message 1 of 20 , May 2, 1999
      To our nice Ahmadiyyist, Joey,

      >>Bhavishya Maha Purana, one of the sixteen Maha Puranas.

      Just a little more on this interesting religious text that shows:

      The book also seems to mention the prophet Mohammed as well as Queen Victoria!
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Just an illiterate man with the epithet Teacher, Muhammad by name, came
      along with his companions. Raja (Bhoja in a vision) to that Great Diva,
      that denizen of Arabia, purifying with the Ganges water and with the five
      things of cow offered sandal wood and pay worship to him. O denizen of
      Arabia and Lord of the holies, to thee is my adoration. O thou who hast
      found many ways and means to destroy the devils of the world. O pure one
      from among the illiterates, O sinless one, the spirit of the truth and
      absolute master, to thee is my adoration. Accept me at thy feet. (Bhavishya
      Purana Parv 3, Khand 3, Adhya 3, Shalok 5-8)
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      The text also contains various more modern references.

      I'm looking forward to your historical analysis of the birk bark bit.


      Ian
    • joseph baxter
      ... The word Sutta is apparently a Pali version of the Sanskrit word Sutra . believe you are referring to the word Sutra . I don t know if Pali would have
      Message 2 of 20 , May 2, 1999
        At 11:01 PM 5/2/99 +0200, you wrote:
        >At 12.17 02/05/99 -0700, joseph baxter wrote:
        >>At 11:33 AM 5/2/99 -0500, you wrote:
        >>>Birch Bark Scripture? Wuzzat?
        >>>
        >>
        >>The scripture, referring to Yeshu in Kashmir circa 78 CE is written in the
        >>Shardic alphabet of ancient Kashmir on birch bark papyrus. The passages
        >>in question, about 300 words are part of a much larger work which are
        >>reported to have been compiled by Sutta in 115 CE.
        >
        >You asked, Jack!
        >
        >Incidentally, "Sutta" means discourse at least in the context of Buddhist
        >discourses, the most famous seems to be the "Sutta Pitaka".

        The word "Sutta" is apparently a Pali version of the Sanskrit word "Sutra'.
        believe you are referring to the word "Sutra". I don't know if Pali would
        have been used in Kashmir during the period in question. In addition, this
        is not a Buddhist source. Hindu sources would more likely use sanskrit, and
        sutra is the sanskrit. In any case, Kashmiri scholars translate Sutta as
        the name of the compiler. Of course it could also be a pen name.

        Joe

        joe
      • joseph baxter
        ... Yes. This distinguishes it from the lesser (or interpretive) works known as the Uppapurana.(And I ... Well, I leave that subject to you, Ian. I don t read
        Message 3 of 20 , May 2, 1999
          At 11:01 PM 5/2/99 +0200, you wrote:
          >At 12.17 02/05/99 -0700, joseph baxter wrote:
          >>At 11:33 AM 5/2/99 -0500, Ian wrote:


          >
          >Maha I gather means "great" and is cognate with "maja" & "major".

          Yes. This distinguishes it from the lesser (or interpretive) works known as
          the Uppapurana.(And I
          >think Bhavishya means future.)
          >
          >The particular document is the source of some of Mdme Blavatsky's writings.

          Well, I leave that subject to you, Ian. I don't read Madame Blah-Blah-vatsky.


          >I can't wait for more of the same. You still push this "he didn't really
          >die stuff", merely because you need him alive to make it to Srinagar.

          Personally, I don't care if he makes it to Srinegar. The Kashmiri Jesus
          literature really doesn't provide anything useful about the teachings of
          Yeshu. GThomas is far more interesting. But if you want to discuss the
          known reported facts regarding Jesus in India, Asia, or Kashmir, I am
          comfortable discussing them. I don't say this or that is true. I find a
          lot of the reported facts hard to believe. If someone can disprove
          something, that's fine with me. But, simply ignoring reported facts, that I
          don't like.

          As for the Asian material, the Avalokitesvara information is probably the
          most thought provoking, since it is related to the central teaching of
          Yeshu, but the historical facts just aren't there for study. Thus, as for
          the Asian facts, I really don't care to prove anything. The center of the
          teaching material is clearly in the west. But if someone wants an
          explanation for what happened to him after he left the Roman empire, the
          explanation is there, and it as reasonable as any explanation, and it's as
          least as interesting as anything else you post about

          What is clear to me, nonetheless, is that Yeshu was around after the
          crucifixion. We know there was a forceful effect of the idea that Yeshu had
          been alive. I personally find it hard to believe that Yeshu would have had
          such a stunning effect on his disciples if he simply died.

          With kind regards,

          Joe



          joe
        • joseph baxter
          ... So tell me, dear friend, what library do you have access to? Clearly you must be inside the Vatican library, as Tom said, to get this stuff.
          Message 4 of 20 , May 2, 1999
            At 11:33 PM 5/2/99 +0200, Ian wrote:

            >>>Bhavishya Maha Purana, one of the sixteen Maha Puranas.
            >
            >Just a little more on this interesting religious text that shows:
            >
            >The book also seems to mention the prophet Mohammed as well as Queen Victoria!
            >------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            >Just an illiterate man with the epithet Teacher, Muhammad by name, came
            >along with his companions. Raja (Bhoja in a vision) to that Great Diva,
            >that denizen of Arabia, purifying with the Ganges water and with the five
            >things of cow offered sandal wood and pay worship to him. O denizen of
            >Arabia and Lord of the holies, to thee is my adoration. O thou who hast
            >found many ways and means to destroy the devils of the world. O pure one
            >from among the illiterates, O sinless one, the spirit of the truth and
            >absolute master, to thee is my adoration. Accept me at thy feet. (Bhavishya
            >Purana Parv 3, Khand 3, Adhya 3, Shalok 5-8)

            So tell me, dear friend, what library do you have access to? Clearly you
            must be inside the Vatican library, as Tom said, to get this stuff.
            Notwithstanding that, you are clearly reading a much later version. may
            you be blessed with cow offerings until you answer my question.

            joe


            joe
          • Ian Hutchesson
            ... Hey, Joe, where ya going with that gun in your hand? I think by now we ve seen that you ve got nothing up your sleave. You re the one who is supposed to
            Message 5 of 20 , May 2, 1999
              >So tell me, dear friend, what library do you have access to? Clearly you
              >must be inside the Vatican library, as Tom said, to get this stuff.
              >Notwithstanding that, you are clearly reading a much later version. may
              >you be blessed with cow offerings until you answer my question.

              Hey, Joe, where ya going with that gun in your hand?

              I think by now we've seen that you've got nothing up your sleave. You're
              the one who is supposed to have the textual support for your ravings.
              Haven't you *even* got a copy of the Bhavishya Purana? <grin>

              Come clean, Joey. Who's your source? Deardorf? Ahmadiyya literature? Menon?


              Ian
            • joseph baxter
              ... Who s got the Beretta, my friend? ... Sorry, my friend, but I didn t think you wanted cites. But I forgot that you are sitting at your terminal in the
              Message 6 of 20 , May 2, 1999
                At 12:44 AM 5/3/99 +0200, you wrote:
                >>So tell me, dear friend, what library do you have access to? Clearly you
                >>must be inside the Vatican library, as Tom said, to get this stuff.
                >>Notwithstanding that, you are clearly reading a much later version. may
                >>you be blessed with cow offerings until you answer my question.
                >
                >Hey, Joe, where ya going with that gun in your hand?

                Who's got the Beretta, my friend?
                >
                >I think by now we've seen that you've got nothing up your sleave. You're
                >the one who is supposed to have the textual support for your ravings.
                >Haven't you *even* got a copy of the Bhavishya Purana? <grin>
                >
                >Come clean, Joey. Who's your source? Deardorf? Ahmadiyya literature? Menon?

                Sorry, my friend, but I didn't think you wanted cites. But I forgot that
                you are sitting at your terminal in the Vatican library. The edition I am
                referring to is entitled "Bhavishya Maha Purana" and was published in 1910
                by the Oriental Research Library, University of Kashmir, Srinegar. It
                contains a copy of the original Sanskrit manuscript in the Shardic
                alphabet. See ch. 3, ,sec2, shloka 9-31. There is also a 1917 version
                published by the Venkateshvaria Press in Bombay. There is also a 1910
                edition published by the Oriental Research Institute in Poona, India.

                For a recent translation by a team of Kashmiri University professors, and
                recent photographs of the birch bark papyrus, see Professor Fida Hassnain's
                "A Search For The Historical Jesus", published by Gateway Books in Bath, in
                1994.

                As for Jeffrey Gibson's and your comments about "Sutta," the ancient
                author is referred to as "Pandit Sutta." That doesn't sound like a sutra.

                I hope this information is of some use. In the future, if you want citable
                reference works, please be more specific, and I will be happy to oblige.

                With kind regards,

                Joe

                joe
              • Legendmyth@aol.com
                If Jesus--And this is a real big if--went East, why does it follow that it was after the cross? The old theory is that the East (India) was where is spent the
                Message 7 of 20 , May 2, 1999
                  If Jesus--And this is a real big if--went East, why does it follow that it
                  was after the cross?

                  The old theory is that the East (India) was where is spent the "lost years."
                  The writings are first century. So are the Gospels. I would assume there
                  was more than one bloke running around with the name of Jesus or Yeshu--just
                  look at Mexico! The romantic in me (theological romantic, that is) would
                  love to believe that J. spent his lost years in India walking on water and
                  further amazing the local spiritual adepts. The realist in me says no way!

                  Sarah
                • Ian Hutchesson
                  ... Now that you ve admitted your major source, you should take the time to look at theworks cited by Fida Hassnain (who is a Sufi teacher and retired
                  Message 8 of 20 , May 2, 1999
                    At 18.28 02/05/99 -0700, joseph baxter wrote:
                    >At 12:44 AM 5/3/99 +0200, you wrote:
                    >>>So tell me, dear friend, what library do you have access to? Clearly you
                    >>>must be inside the Vatican library, as Tom said, to get this stuff.
                    >>>Notwithstanding that, you are clearly reading a much later version. may
                    >>>you be blessed with cow offerings until you answer my question.
                    >>
                    >>Hey, Joe, where ya going with that gun in your hand?
                    >
                    >Who's got the Beretta, my friend?
                    >>
                    >>I think by now we've seen that you've got nothing up your sleave. You're
                    >>the one who is supposed to have the textual support for your ravings.
                    >>Haven't you *even* got a copy of the Bhavishya Purana? <grin>
                    >>
                    >>Come clean, Joey. Who's your source? Deardorf? Ahmadiyya literature? Menon?
                    >
                    >Sorry, my friend, but I didn't think you wanted cites. But I forgot that
                    >you are sitting at your terminal in the Vatican library. The edition I am
                    >referring to is entitled "Bhavishya Maha Purana" and was published in 1910
                    >by the Oriental Research Library, University of Kashmir, Srinegar. It
                    >contains a copy of the original Sanskrit manuscript in the Shardic
                    >alphabet. See ch. 3, ,sec2, shloka 9-31. There is also a 1917 version
                    >published by the Venkateshvaria Press in Bombay. There is also a 1910
                    >edition published by the Oriental Research Institute in Poona, India.
                    >
                    >For a recent translation by a team of Kashmiri University professors, and
                    >recent photographs of the birch bark papyrus, see Professor Fida Hassnain's
                    >"A Search For The Historical Jesus", published by Gateway Books in Bath, in
                    >1994.

                    Now that you've admitted your major source, you should take the time to
                    look at theworks cited by Fida Hassnain (who is a Sufi teacher and retired
                    professor). Such wonderfully trustworthy works as: "Jesus Lived in India"
                    by Holger Kersten, "The Gospel of Bartholomew" (big favourite for you
                    Ahmadiyyan fans), "The Crucifixion by an Eyewitness" (a Freemason
                    circulated work which has conveniently disappeared -- oops we can scratch
                    that one), and pseudo-Essene fantasies of Szekely (the sort of thing you
                    find in quaint theosophy bookstores -- need I say more?).

                    >I hope this information is of some use.

                    Yes, very revealing.

                    >In the future, if you want citable
                    >reference works, please be more specific, and I will be happy to oblige.

                    Joey, the citable stuff is with regard to dating and sourcing of original
                    materials. You haven't done so. You have only hinted at a tertiary source's
                    comments on secondary sources' comments. I want to know how you can
                    actually date your one slim excerpt from the Bhavishya Purana which uses an
                    Arabic form of the name of Jesus, suggesting some time after the Islamic
                    conquest of northern India. What techniques were used in the dating of the
                    birch bark text? Who has validated the dating techniques? I am asking for a
                    scholarly approach to the dating of the bbb. Without it you are in the dark
                    (one of your favourite hangouts). Do I need to get more specific than that?
                    The text itself shows clear reworking over several centuries. I wonder if
                    Bill Clinton'll make it in as well...

                    I see nothing substantive for you to hold onto your seemingly ridiculous
                    position regarding Jesus' "survival after the crucifixion".


                    Ian
                  • Ian Hutchesson
                    ... In fact, Sarah, some writers have also proposed this idea. However, both flights make one ask, as we are taking flights, why on earth would he want to go
                    Message 9 of 20 , May 2, 1999
                      At 23.44 02/05/99 EDT, Legendmyth@... wrote:
                      >If Jesus--And this is a real big if--went East, why does it follow that it
                      >was after the cross?

                      In fact, Sarah, some writers have also proposed this idea. However, both
                      flights make one ask, as we are taking flights, why on earth would he want
                      to go to India?

                      >The old theory is that the East (India) was where is spent the "lost
                      years."
                      >The writings are first century. So are the Gospels. I would assume there
                      >was more than one bloke running around with the name of Jesus or Yeshu--just
                      >look at Mexico! The romantic in me (theological romantic, that is) would
                      >love to believe that J. spent his lost years in India walking on water and
                      >further amazing the local spiritual adepts. The realist in me says no way!

                      The romantic D.H.Lawrence wrote a novella called "The Man Who Died" or "The
                      Escaped Cock", about a resuscitated Jesus getting off with a priestess of
                      Isis and finding out about life. The situation is quite pregnant for the
                      romantic mind.


                      Ian
                    • Christ Thomas
                      ... Yes, Sarah, that is far fetched, isn t it.
                      Message 10 of 20 , May 3, 1999
                        Legendmyth@... wrote:
                        >
                        > If Jesus--And this is a real big if--went East, why does it follow that it
                        > was after the cross?
                        >
                        > The old theory is that the East (India) was where is spent the "lost years."
                        > The writings are first century. So are the Gospels. I would assume there
                        > was more than one bloke running around with the name of Jesus or Yeshu--just
                        > look at Mexico! The romantic in me (theological romantic, that is) would
                        > love to believe that J. spent his lost years in India walking on water and
                        > further amazing the local spiritual adepts. The realist in me says no way!
                        >
                        > Sarah

                        Yes, Sarah, that is far fetched, isn't it.
                      • Shahina Amin
                        Dear Ian, If Joe is an Ahmadi in disguise I would certainly like to know that. Why does it make you suspicious that just because he believes in an aspect about
                        Message 11 of 20 , May 3, 1999
                          Dear Ian,

                          If Joe is an Ahmadi in disguise I would certainly like to know that. Why
                          does it make you suspicious that just because he believes in an aspect
                          about Jesus' life/death that the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam holds that he
                          must be a secret Ahmadi?

                          Haven't we already discussed this issue of Jesus' survival from the cross
                          and ending up in Kashmir, India enough times already? I certainly don't
                          mind this discussion to go on forever but when one is not convinced the
                          first time maybe he won't be later either.

                          Peace
                          Shahina
                        • Tom Simms
                          ... And, pray tell, Ian, do you only consult non-sectarian sources? If so, you can t know much. Even most pagan material is polemical. Two Tomb Simms (I
                          Message 12 of 20 , May 3, 1999
                            On Mon, 03 May 1999 00:44:34 +0200, mc2499@... writes:
                            >
                            >>So tell me, dear friend, what library do you have access to? Clearly you
                            >>must be inside the Vatican library, as Tom said, to get this stuff.
                            >>Notwithstanding that, you are clearly reading a much later version. may
                            >>you be blessed with cow offerings until you answer my question.
                            >
                            >Hey, Joe, where ya going with that gun in your hand?
                            >
                            >I think by now we've seen that you've got nothing up your sleave. You're
                            >the one who is supposed to have the textual support for your ravings.
                            >Haven't you *even* got a copy of the Bhavishya Purana? <grin>
                            >
                            >Come clean, Joey. Who's your source? Deardorf? Ahmadiyya literature? Menon?
                            > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

                            And, pray tell, Ian, do you only consult non-sectarian sources? If
                            so, you can't know much. Even most pagan material is polemical.

                            Two Tomb Simms (I don't have to go dig, I tell 'em where to.)

                            >
                            >Ian
                            >
                            >
                          • Christ Thomas
                            ... Ezek. 10:10 And as for their appearances, they four had one likeness, as if a wheel had been in the midst of a wheel. Ezek. 10:14 And every one had
                            Message 13 of 20 , May 3, 1999
                              Christ Thomas wrote:
                              >
                              > Legendmyth@... wrote:
                              > >
                              > > If Jesus--And this is a real big if--went East, why does it follow that it
                              > > was after the cross?
                              > >
                              > > The old theory is that the East (India) was where is spent the "lost years."
                              > > The writings are first century. So are the Gospels. The realist in me says no way!
                              > >
                              > > Sarah
                              >
                              > Yes, Sarah, that is far fetched, isn't it.

                              Ezek. 10:10 And as for their appearances, they four had one likeness,
                              as if a wheel had been in the midst of a wheel.

                              Ezek. 10:14 And every one had four faces: the first face was the face
                              of a cherub, and the second face was the face of a man, and the third
                              the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.

                              By far, one of the most interesting aspects of a sighting of Jesus in
                              India, after the resurrection, in that the rumor has persisted for over
                              two thousand years. That within it’s self is something for one to
                              ponder. There is an excellent reason, found within the scriptures, to
                              discount a sighting and another reason why such a rumor would still
                              persist. The children of God have one likeness. They all look alike.
                              Ezekiel told you that. Quite simply, they saw the Twin Brother of Jesus.

                              Ezek. 1:5 Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four
                              living creatures. And this was their appearance; they had the likeness
                              of a man.
                              Ezek. 1:16 The appearance of the wheels and their work was like unto
                              the colour of a beryl: and they four had one likeness: and their
                              appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a
                              wheel.
                              Ezek. 1:28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the
                              day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This
                              was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I
                              saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.

                              Ezek. 2:1 And he said unto me, Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I
                              will speak unto thee.

                              Ezek. 2:2 And the spirit entered into me when he spake unto me, and
                              set me upon my feet, that I heard him that spake unto me.

                              The Twin Brother of Jesus, that went to India after the death of Jesus,
                              you all know, except for the doubters, was Judas Didymus Thomas.

                              Matt. 13:55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called
                              Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and JUDAS?
                              John 11:16 Then said THOMAS, which is called DIDYMUS, unto his
                              fellowdisciples, Let us also go, that we may die with him.
                              Acts 20:4 And there accompanied him into Asia and Timotheus; and of
                              Asia,

                              The name THOMAS is the acts and other new testaments is spelled
                              TIMOTHEUS. The misspelling was one of those adulterated acts that
                              allowed the RC church to deceive the earth. That was one of the ways she
                              could exalt Peter and make him the head of her church. She just hid the
                              name Thomas with an ancient spelling.

                              Why would the sighting of Jesus in India be less plausible? Because
                              after the resurrection he did not have the same likeness. He rose in
                              another form.

                              Mark 16:11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had
                              been seen of her, believed not.

                              Mark 16:12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as
                              they walked, and went into the country.

                              The children of God all have one likeness. If Jesus was observed in
                              India he would have been in the latter form which no one would have
                              recognized.

                              Thomas lived in India until his own murder and built Seven Churches
                              there. They are still there. Quite simply the Twin Brother of Jesus was
                              mistaken for Jesus.

                              Thomas
                            • joseph baxter
                              Tone down the polemics, Ian, I think you have forgotten the context of our discussion, which had to do with hypotheses, such as the hypothesis re the name of
                              Message 14 of 20 , May 3, 1999
                                Tone down the polemics, Ian, I think you have forgotten the context of our
                                discussion, which had to do with hypotheses, such as the hypothesis re the
                                name of the man, and hypotheses to explain certain reported Asian facts
                                such as the Seat of Solomon temple inscriptions, and other *reported*
                                facts, including the one you are currently frothing at the mouth about. (If
                                you have a hypothesis which explains the large body of reported Asian
                                facts, or any of these reported facts, that is fair game for discussion.)
                                I will respond to your message as time permits.

                                With kind regards,

                                Joe


                                At 06:38 AM 5/3/99 +0200, you wrote:
                                >At 18.28 02/05/99 -0700, joseph baxter wrote:
                                >>At 12:44 AM 5/3/99 +0200, you wrote:
                                >>>>So tell me, dear friend, what library do you have access to? Clearly you
                                >>>>must be inside the Vatican library, as Tom said, to get this stuff.
                                >>>>Notwithstanding that, you are clearly reading a much later version. may
                                >>>>you be blessed with cow offerings until you answer my question.
                                >>>
                                >>>Hey, Joe, where ya going with that gun in your hand?
                                >>
                                >>Who's got the Beretta, my friend?
                                >>>
                                >>>I think by now we've seen that you've got nothing up your sleave. You're
                                >>>the one who is supposed to have the textual support for your ravings.
                                >>>Haven't you *even* got a copy of the Bhavishya Purana? <grin>
                                >>>
                                >>>Come clean, Joey. Who's your source? Deardorf? Ahmadiyya literature? Menon?
                                >>
                                >>Sorry, my friend, but I didn't think you wanted cites. But I forgot that
                                >>you are sitting at your terminal in the Vatican library. The edition I am
                                >>referring to is entitled "Bhavishya Maha Purana" and was published in 1910
                                >>by the Oriental Research Library, University of Kashmir, Srinegar. It
                                >>contains a copy of the original Sanskrit manuscript in the Shardic
                                >>alphabet. See ch. 3, ,sec2, shloka 9-31. There is also a 1917 version
                                >>published by the Venkateshvaria Press in Bombay. There is also a 1910
                                >>edition published by the Oriental Research Institute in Poona, India.
                                >>
                                >>For a recent translation by a team of Kashmiri University professors, and
                                >>recent photographs of the birch bark papyrus, see Professor Fida Hassnain's
                                >>"A Search For The Historical Jesus", published by Gateway Books in Bath, in
                                >>1994.
                                >
                                >Now that you've admitted your major source, you should take the time to
                                >look at theworks cited by Fida Hassnain (who is a Sufi teacher and retired
                                >professor). Such wonderfully trustworthy works as: "Jesus Lived in India"
                                >by Holger Kersten, "The Gospel of Bartholomew" (big favourite for you
                                >Ahmadiyyan fans), "The Crucifixion by an Eyewitness" (a Freemason
                                >circulated work which has conveniently disappeared -- oops we can scratch
                                >that one), and pseudo-Essene fantasies of Szekely (the sort of thing you
                                >find in quaint theosophy bookstores -- need I say more?).
                                >
                                >>I hope this information is of some use.
                                >
                                >Yes, very revealing.
                                >
                                >>In the future, if you want citable
                                >>reference works, please be more specific, and I will be happy to oblige.
                                >
                                >Joey, the citable stuff is with regard to dating and sourcing of original
                                >materials. You haven't done so. You have only hinted at a tertiary source's
                                >comments on secondary sources' comments. I want to know how you can
                                >actually date your one slim excerpt from the Bhavishya Purana which uses an
                                >Arabic form of the name of Jesus, suggesting some time after the Islamic
                                >conquest of northern India. What techniques were used in the dating of the
                                >birch bark text? Who has validated the dating techniques? I am asking for a
                                >scholarly approach to the dating of the bbb. Without it you are in the dark
                                >(one of your favourite hangouts). Do I need to get more specific than that?
                                >The text itself shows clear reworking over several centuries. I wonder if
                                >Bill Clinton'll make it in as well...
                                >
                                >I see nothing substantive for you to hold onto your seemingly ridiculous
                                >position regarding Jesus' "survival after the crucifixion".
                                >
                                >
                                >Ian

                                joe
                              • Christ Thomas
                                ... Ezek. 10:10 And as for their appearances, they four had one likeness, as if a wheel had been in the midst of a wheel. Ezek. 10:14 And every one had
                                Message 15 of 20 , May 3, 1999
                                  Christ Thomas wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Legendmyth@... wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > If Jesus--And this is a real big if--went East, why does it follow that it
                                  > > was after the cross?
                                  > >
                                  > > The old theory is that the East (India) was where is spent the "lost years."
                                  > > The writings are first century. So are the Gospels. The realist in me says no way!
                                  > >
                                  > > Sarah
                                  >
                                  > Yes, Sarah, that is far fetched, isn't it.

                                  Ezek. 10:10 And as for their appearances, they four had one likeness,
                                  as if a wheel had been in the midst of a wheel.

                                  Ezek. 10:14 And every one had four faces: the first face was the face
                                  of a cherub, and the second face was the face of a man, and the third
                                  the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.

                                  By far, one of the most interesting aspects of a sighting of Jesus in
                                  India, after the resurrection, in that the rumor has persisted for over
                                  two thousand years. That within it’s self is something for one to
                                  ponder. There is an excellent reason, found within the scriptures, to
                                  discount a sighting and another reason why such a rumor would still
                                  persist. The children of God have one likeness. They all look alike.
                                  Ezekiel told you that. Quite simply, they saw the Twin Brother of Jesus.

                                  Ezek. 1:5 Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four
                                  living creatures. And this was their appearance; they had the likeness
                                  of a man.
                                  Ezek. 1:16 The appearance of the wheels and their work was like unto
                                  the colour of a beryl: and they four had one likeness: and their
                                  appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a
                                  wheel.
                                  Ezek. 1:28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the
                                  day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This
                                  was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I
                                  saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.

                                  Ezek. 2:1 And he said unto me, Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I
                                  will speak unto thee.

                                  Ezek. 2:2 And the spirit entered into me when he spake unto me, and
                                  set me upon my feet, that I heard him that spake unto me.

                                  The Twin Brother of Jesus, that went to India after the death of Jesus,
                                  you all know, except for the doubters, was Judas Didymus Thomas.

                                  Matt. 13:55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called
                                  Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and JUDAS?
                                  John 11:16 Then said THOMAS, which is called DIDYMUS, unto his
                                  fellowdisciples, Let us also go, that we may die with him.
                                  Acts 20:4 And there accompanied him into Asia and Timotheus; and of
                                  Asia,

                                  The name THOMAS is the acts and other new testaments is spelled
                                  TIMOTHEUS. The misspelling was one of those adulterated acts that
                                  allowed the RC church to deceive the earth. That was one of the ways she
                                  could exalt Peter and make him the head of her church. She just hid the
                                  name Thomas with an ancient spelling.

                                  Why would the sighting of Jesus in India be less plausible? Because
                                  after the resurrection he did not have the same likeness. He rose in
                                  another form.

                                  Mark 16:11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had
                                  been seen of her, believed not.

                                  Mark 16:12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as
                                  they walked, and went into the country.

                                  The children of God all have one likeness. If Jesus was observed in
                                  India he would have been in the latter form which no one would have
                                  recognized.

                                  Thomas lived in India until his own murder and built Seven Churches
                                  there. They are still there. Quite simply the Twin Brother of Jesus was
                                  mistaken for Jesus.

                                  Thomas
                                • Ian Hutchesson
                                  ... Polemics, Joe? Naaa, I don t have an agenda -- other than coherent balanced analysis along scientific lines , if you want to call that an agenda. ...
                                  Message 16 of 20 , May 4, 1999
                                    At 09.22 03/05/99 -0700, joseph baxter wrote:
                                    >Tone down the polemics, Ian,

                                    Polemics, Joe? Naaa, I don't have an agenda -- other than "coherent
                                    balanced analysis along scientific lines", if you want to call that an agenda.

                                    >I think you have forgotten the context of our
                                    >discussion,

                                    Definitely not. My first comment was to Jack for asking "Birch Bark
                                    Scripture? Wuzzat?" It was you who introduced this "Birch Bark Scripture"
                                    stuff and I merely commented on the evidence -- or better the lack of it.

                                    >which had to do with hypotheses, such as the hypothesis re the
                                    >name of the man,

                                    As to such a hypothesis, I have already stated my position: the texts are
                                    in Greek and probably none was written anywhere near Judea; no-one has
                                    established a historical person at the core of the Jesus literature, so one
                                    can't make presuppositions as to a non-historical person's place of
                                    residence; all we therefore have is a Greek name of a literary personality.

                                    >and hypotheses to explain certain reported Asian facts
                                    >such as the Seat of Solomon temple inscriptions, and other *reported*
                                    >facts, including the one you are currently frothing at the mouth about.

                                    It's hard for you to overcome the necessity to believe. It overshadows your
                                    ability to test your surrogate hypotheses. All fall down with the
                                    incredible notion of a Jesus surviving his crucifixion, the first hurdle
                                    you have failed to deal with. (The second is lack of credible dating for
                                    your "Asian facts".)

                                    >(If
                                    >you have a hypothesis which explains the large body of reported Asian
                                    >facts, or any of these reported facts, that is fair game for discussion.)

                                    Naturally, as indications of a Jesus in India started cropping up with
                                    Mirza and the "discovery" of the tomb of Jesus, I can see no reason for
                                    looking further afield.

                                    >I will respond to your message as time permits.

                                    It might be better, if you can't add anything substantive (as you haven't
                                    so far), that you get the substance first.


                                    Cheers,


                                    Ian
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.