Jesus in India

[Sasha_the_shiva]

i agree

 

[fallingblood]

Well considering that i dont fully believe in the bible, i will always see it as the 'jesus' who survived and had the incident with saul.

Then you have to show reason why your version is better than the accepted idea. Either way, you can't just make things up and say your version is better.

Sometimes i really doubt our 'best' religious sources. Jmmanuel is the most celebrated person in history and yet 'offically' almost nothing concrete is known as well as the church 'writing' for its own glorification and billions follow without question...that is really sad...and its also based on stories.

Actually many question it. That is why there is just a plethora of work on the subject. That is why there is such diverse scholarship on the subject. That is why there are so many different ideas concerning Jesus.

And there is a very good reason why there is little about him. We are talking about a character from the 1st century. We shouldn't expect anything else. That is what history tells us that we should have. And in fact, we have much more about Jesus than the vast majority of people during that time. Relatively, we have a ton about Jesus.

they cant show us (for now) coz the dalia lama is still in exile (who knows how long) and will not allow the archives opened until he returns.

And until that time, when we can see the manuscripts, the claims about them simply are not substantiated and can not be taken fully seriously.

first of all, the crazy man is the most spiritually enlightened person on the planet and there is a lot that we can learn from him. when people question his material or actions I then ask, then why has he been targeted for assassination 20+ times since the contacts began? why would he have destroyed the manuscript, knowing the priceless information inside? He did try to get it carbon dated but the preservative resin made it difficult to do so...i dont know the finer details. and Isa Rachid paid with his life translating the manuscript from arameic into german as he knew the authorities would find out and they did.
And when one actually looks into his work, you see a lot of gross consistensies, where as when you make things up, you are always bound to mess up somewhere because imagination has limits but concrete truth always prevails. and that is why his name (as dodgy as u makes it sound) is constantly coming up.

Do you have any actual proof that assassinations were attempted? I doubt it, because really, there are dozens of people claiming to have UFO contact and very similar things to this guy, and have never experienced any of that. And if the government or actual assassins were trying to kill him, they would have. They can assassinate political figures, there is no reason they can't assassinate this one man.

The fact that the documents were destroyed (or claimed to be destroyed), and he couldn't get a carbon dating, and all of these other problems suggests that really, there were no actual documents, or if there were, they were faked. If he found the documents, but they are supposedly destroyed, we have to assume he destroyed them. And why would he do that? Because it gives him an easy out.

There is no evidence that what he is saying is true. It looks and sounds like a hoax, and that is why no real scholar wants to mess with this stuff. Because they know better.

im not worried about his past; yes im sure he didnt spend his life on this. its his current work and research that is the point.

forgot to mention, if christian scholars were indeed studying the book of Henoch, there would be a different feeling within the religious ranks, coz the information is significantly different to what the church preaches. and of course many certain original teachings are available and can be read but like i said, try mentioning this in church.

I don't think you know what the vast majority of Christianity teaches. You keep saying these things about the teachings, yet, you show no familiarity with it.

The fact that even Catholic seminaries teach this stuff really shows that your idea that they are trying to hide these other books or what not simply is false.

And you still haven't named a credible professional who accepts any of this stuff. Scholars don't mess with it for one reason. It's a hoax, and it is quite obvious that it is.

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus could not have died on the Cross.He prophesied that he was to show a sing like that of Jonah to the adulterous Jews. And Jonah did not die in the belly of fish; he was only near-dead in it.

By saying that Jesus died on the Cross; make him a false prophet, in my opinion.
Jesus was a truthful person; hence Bible has quoted the events wrongly.

 

[fallingblood]

Jesus could not have died on the Cross.He prophesied that he was to show a sing like that of Jonah to the adulterous Jews. And Jonah did not die in the belly of fish; he was only near-dead in it.

Jesus also didn't spend three days in the belly of the Earth, so his prophecy wasn't meant to be literal, and simply fails either way.

By saying that Jesus died on the Cross; make him a false prophet, in my opinion.
Jesus was a truthful person; hence Bible has quoted the events wrongly.

Or Jesus was mistaken. Or the quote never belonged to him at all. Or you're misinterpreting the prophecy wrong.

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus also didn't spend three days in the belly of the Earth, so his prophecy wasn't meant to be literal, and simply fails either way.
Or Jesus was mistaken. Or the quote never belonged to him at all. Or you're misinterpreting the prophecy wrong.

This only proves that the accounts given by Bible about Jesus were only guesswork of the scribes.

 

[fallingblood]

This only proves that the accounts given by Bible about Jesus were only guesswork of the scribes.

Or that they were later additions. However, it really defeats you argument concerning the prophecy and how it meant Jesus couldn't have died.

 

[paarsurrey]

If Jesus was to show a sign and resurrect from the medically and physically dead then his friends need not to seek his body from the Roman official; why did Jesus have to hide in a tomb to resurrect? He would have resurrected in the open , rather in hands of the Jews to show the signs.

Jesus' body was the problem of the Jews not of his friends.

Jesus was only near-dead, not medically or physically dead.

 

[fallingblood]

If Jesus was to show a sign and resurrect from the medically and physically dead then his friends need not to seek his body from the Roman official; why did Jesus have to hide in a tomb to resurrect? He would have resurrected in the open , rather in hands of the Jews to show the signs.

Jesus' body was the problem of the Jews not of his friends.

Jesus was only near-dead, not medically or physically dead.

Who said Jesus hid in a tomb to resurrect? Actually, it is logical that Jesus was in a tomb when he resurrected. He was dead. So they put him in a tomb (they could have also thrown him in a shallow pit as well, doesn't really matter. What matters is that what was done to the body of Jesus is logical).

No one expected him to resurrect. The Gospels are quite clear on that. And ancient Judaism is even more clear on that.

So really, why would he resurrect in public? Or, in other words, why would the disciples parade the dead body of Jesus around town for a couple of days? And would they even have been allowed to? Of course not.

Really, you're argument here simply is not logical.

 

[paarsurrey]

Why should Jesus's friends demand body of Jesus from Pilate, in the first place?

They knew Jesus was not dead but was near-dead; and as such needed immediate treatment.

 

[fallingblood]

Why should Jesus's friends demand body of Jesus from Pilate, in the first place?

They knew Jesus was not dead but was near-dead; and as such needed immediate treatment.

When did they demand it? As the story is told, a powerful follower, or a devout Jew (depending on which version) asked for the body out of respect. It wasn't even Jesus's friends, but a secret follower, or just a devout Jew.

 

[paarsurrey]

When did they demand it? As the story is told, a powerful follower, or a devout Jew (depending on which version) asked for the body out of respect. It wasn't even Jesus's friends, but a secret follower, or just a devout Jew.

Jesus was a Jew so he could have Jews as his friends, there were no Christians there to help him; all the twelve were Jews; moreover, a "secret follower" is not a foe; he is a friend to help, in my opinion.

 

[fallingblood]

Jesus was a Jew so he could have Jews as his friends, there were no Christians there to help him; all the twelve were Jews; moreover, a "secret follower" is not a foe; he is a friend to help, in my opinion.

A follower does not mean they are a friend. More so, he wasn't one of the 12, or really even connected to Jesus in anyway. Basically what we get is that he sympathized with Jesus.

That's hardly what you implied. The friends of Jesus never demanded his body.

 

[cbachinger]

Then you have to show reason why your version is better than the accepted idea. Either way, you can't just make things up and say your version is better.
Actually many question it. That is why there is just a plethora of work on the subject. That is why there is such diverse scholarship on the subject. That is why there are so many different ideas concerning Jesus.

And there is a very good reason why there is little about him. We are talking about a character from the 1st century. We shouldn't expect anything else. That is what history tells us that we should have. And in fact, we have much more about Jesus than the vast majority of people during that time. Relatively, we have a ton about Jesus.
And until that time, when we can see the manuscripts, the claims about them simply are not substantiated and can not be taken fully seriously.
Do you have any actual proof that assassinations were attempted? I doubt it, because really, there are dozens of people claiming to have UFO contact and very similar things to this guy, and have never experienced any of that. And if the government or actual assassins were trying to kill him, they would have. They can assassinate political figures, there is no reason they can't assassinate this one man.

The fact that the documents were destroyed (or claimed to be destroyed), and he couldn't get a carbon dating, and all of these other problems suggests that really, there were no actual documents, or if there were, they were faked. If he found the documents, but they are supposedly destroyed, we have to assume he destroyed them. And why would he do that? Because it gives him an easy out.

There is no evidence that what he is saying is true. It looks and sounds like a hoax, and that is why no real scholar wants to mess with this stuff. Because they know better.
I don't think you know what the vast majority of Christianity teaches. You keep saying these things about the teachings, yet, you show no familiarity with it.

The fact that even Catholic seminaries teach this stuff really shows that your idea that they are trying to hide these other books or what not simply is false.

And you still haven't named a credible professional who accepts any of this stuff. Scholars don't mess with it for one reason. It's a hoax, and it is quite obvious that it is.

Sir, you make it sound as if i have pulled this whole topic out of my backside, insisting i have no proof, despite the most intimate details given.

What you say about Meier (through my own knowledge on him) proves that you dont know about the details his mission and how many times he either prevented assassination or his ET friends rescued him from serious illness. you are not dealing with an idiot born in switzerland. I have no answer to your last sentence but then i ask you , why havent they then yet if its so easy? given up maybe? perhaps its his fate in the face of spiritual justice constantly rebuking those in spiritual darkness. Cowards always back down eventually and people in power ARE cowards. many assassinations or attempts are from hidden bullets.

"The fact that the documents were destroyed (or claimed to be destroyed), and he couldn't get a carbon dating, and all of these other problems suggests that really, there were no actual documents, or if there were, they were faked. If he found the documents, but they are supposedly destroyed, we have to assume he destroyed them. And why would he do that? Because it gives him an easy out.

There is no evidence that what he is saying is true. It looks and sounds like a hoax, and that is why no real scholar wants to mess with this stuff. Because they know better...There is no evidence that what he is saying is true. It looks and sounds like a hoax"
you assume too much here (and u also show strong indication that you know little in this particular topic considering what i know myself) and if you still insist, you need to review...your comments about meier are so commonly used to try to debunk him. you even repeated a line in bold...you ask and answer under naive assumption. many of the alleged hoax points are clearly and logically explained in an online video.

i am being strong on points that i either know 100% or am confident in...i keep away from assumptions and 'i think'...and kindly please do not rebuke this point. i AM low in biblical knowledge but my knowledge in genuine UFOs is profound, that reaches into many areas of this topic.

 

[fallingblood]

Sir, you make it sound as if i have pulled this whole topic out of my backside, insisting i have no proof, despite the most intimate details given.

What you say about Meier (through my own knowledge on him) proves that you dont know about the details his mission and how many times he either prevented assassination or his ET friends rescued him from serious illness. you are not dealing with an idiot born in switzerland. I have no answer to your last sentence but then i ask you , why havent they then yet if its so easy? given up maybe? perhaps its his fate in the face of spiritual justice constantly rebuking those in spiritual darkness. Cowards always back down eventually and people in power ARE cowards. many assassinations or attempts are from hidden bullets.

If the government wanted him dead, he would be dead. Simple as that. And do you know how many alien contactees have claimed that they were in danger of assassination? There are dozens of them. And when actually researched, there is no evidence whatsoever.

There is just no evidence of anything you're saying besides a man saying that it happened. I can do the same thing, and have just as much evidence. For instance, I can state that I was contacted by aliens and was told that Meier was a conartist who was fleecing gullible people. I have just as much evidence for this as Meier has for his claim.

you assume too much here (and u also show strong indication that you know little in this particular topic considering what i know myself) and if you still insist, you need to review...your comments about meier are so commonly used to try to debunk him. you even repeated a line in bold...you ask and answer under naive assumption. many of the alleged hoax points are clearly and logically explained in an online video.

No, I'm simply using logic. The same logic I would use in regards to any other book or story.

It's a hoax. Pure and simple. I have seen many of them, and used to believe in various ones. But then I started to actually look at actual history, and found out that it was baloney.

And really, I bring up a good point. Where are the documents? Where are these documents he supposedly found? He claims they were destroyed, but by who? Since he had them, we have to assume he did it. And really, if there are no documents, then you have nothing.

i am being strong on points that i either know 100% or am confident in...i keep away from assumptions and 'i think'...and kindly please do not rebuke this point. i AM low in biblical knowledge but my knowledge in genuine UFOs is profound, that reaches into many areas of this topic.

There has never been any actual verified evidence that UFO's are anything but misperceptions. So you can have all the knowledge you want on the subject, but it really means nothing here.

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus prayed to the one true attributive creator God in the Garden of Gethsemane and right on the Cross most fervently that he should be saved from death on Cross and since he was a truthful person so the ONE- true-God, whom Jesus used to call father, saved him a death on the Cross.

My religion tells me very clearly in this connection:

[4:158] And their saying, ‘We did kill the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah;’ whereas they slew him not, nor crucified him, but he was made to appear to them like one crucified; and those who differ therein are certainly in a state of doubt about it; they have no definite knowledge thereof, but only follow a conjecture; and they did not convert this conjecture into a certainty;

The Holy Quran Arabic text with Translation in English text and Search Engine - Al Islam Online

 

[fallingblood]

Jesus prayed to the one true attributive creator God in the Garden of Gethsemane and right on the Cross most fervently that he should be saved from death on Cross and since he was a truthful person so the ONE- true-God, whom Jesus used to call father, saved him a death on the Cross.

My religion tells me very clearly in this connection:

[4:158] And their saying, ‘We did kill the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah;’ whereas they slew him not, nor crucified him, but he was made to appear to them like one crucified; and those who differ therein are certainly in a state of doubt about it; they have no definite knowledge thereof, but only follow a conjecture; and they did not convert this conjecture into a certainty;

The Holy Quran Arabic text with Translation in English text and Search Engine - Al Islam Online

Simply, the Quran is incorrect here. It was written hundreds of years after the events, and disagrees with our earliest and best sources.

More so, Jesus doesn't pray to be taken off the cross. He doesn't even really ask to be spared death. In the garden, he does ask that the cup be taken from him, but then states that God's will will be done. He accepts it. And on the cross, he only asks why God has forsaken him. That isn't a plea to come off the cross.

 

[paarsurrey]

Simply, the Quran is incorrect here. It was written hundreds of years after the events, and disagrees with our earliest and best sources.

More so, Jesus doesn't pray to be taken off the cross. He doesn't even really ask to be spared death. In the garden, he does ask that the cup be taken from him, but then states that God's will will be done. He accepts it. And on the cross, he only asks why God has forsaken him. That isn't a plea to come off the cross.

What is this cup which he says be taken from him? It is nothing but death, in my opinion.

 

[fallingblood]

What is this cup which he says be taken from him? It is nothing but death, in my opinion.

He's asking that God does not make him go through with the crucifixion. However, he follows it with your will be done. He accepts what must be done.

 

[paarsurrey]

The theme of writing four gospels is simply the purpose to manipulate events by the sinful scribes to prove Jesus was a god or a son of god as he became alive from the dead; and that never happened, in my opinion.

 

[outhouse]

The theme of writing four gospels is simply the purpose to manipulate events by the sinful scribes to prove Jesus was a god or a son of god as he became alive from the dead; and that never happened, in my opinion.

your out of line claiming that