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

Re: jesus or yeshu

Expand Messages
  • Christ Thomas
    ... Yes, Sarah, that is far fetched, isn t it.
    Message 1 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.
    • 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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.