Lost Years of Jesus

[sojourner]

Mary, fearing that Herod would find Jesus, sent her son to live with his aunt in Bel Air, California. Thus Jesus spent his "lost years" learning what it meant to truly be a "fresh prince".

I was going to posit that he spent his teenage and college years strung out in an opium dive in the mountains above Kathmandu...
I understand that there's an ashram there of totally progressive monks. He was sequestered in a white room with black curtains...

 

[oldbadger]

He might have been married. I don't see why not. I wonder how many wives died in child-birth..... Most men were probably married by 17-18?

And I reckon that he was not called Jesus......never. He might have been called Yeshu, without the 'a' on the end (Galilean dialect).

Maybe he was already an experienced and very capable healer, exorcist and social guide, well known among the Galilean fishing community and linseed product industries?

 

[outhouse]

He might have been married. I don't see why not.

Possible, but really unknown.

I wonder how many wives died in child-birth.....

Posted this once for you. I think it was 20-25%

Most men were probably married by 17-18?

Earlier.

Problem was this statistic changed depending on geographic location and wealth or poverty status of said culture.

Add to that the many different sects who all had different traditions.

Staying away from pleasure and fornication were very popular during these times. Its not unusual for teachers to be celibate.

And I reckon that he was not called Jesus......never. He might have been called Yeshu, without the 'a' on the end (Galilean dialect).

or Yehoshua


Never Jesus

Maybe he was already an experienced and very capable healer, exorcist

Probably

and social guide,

You would need to expand on that to get into any possible details.

well known among the Galilean fishing community and linseed product industries

Doubt it. he would have looked like another beggar with his few disciples. Teachers and healers were plentiful. Not one of many historians wrote about him while alive because he was just another oppressed Galilean.

Everything we know about his life in Galilee is just about unknown, as it was backfilled in later by people far removed, VERY FAR removed from the actual man.

 

[nash8]

There is no evidence for this, just a load of wishful thinking, lies, and pseudoscience.

How is any part of history "pseudoscience"? And where did these ideas come from. I've read the admittance of whatever that guys name was that discovered St. Essa, but the whole story sounds super sketchy to me, and from the opposite perspective as you. Where would you even come up with an idea like that?

Namaste,

Jesus never travelled to India. I understand that some Hindus say that he did, and I don't really know the reason why they say that he travelled to India, but it isn't right. It hurts Hindu sentiments as well as Christian sentiments. Was India lacking something at that time that She needed a holy man from outside, far away places? I vehemently doubt it. But, he could have gone to a next door town (or village) in Judea for all we know.

From my opinion it was the other way around, Jesus came to learn from the massive amounts of knowledge contained within India.

I believe the "lost years" were all covered in the Gospel of Biff.

Interestingly enough, they aren't covered in any of the apocraphya (I think that's how you spell it), as far as I can tell either, which I find quite odd.

He might have been married. I don't see why not. I wonder how many wives died in child-birth..... Most men were probably married by 17-18?

And I reckon that he was not called Jesus......never. He might have been called Yeshu, without the 'a' on the end (Galilean dialect).

Maybe he was already an experienced and very capable healer, exorcist and social guide, well known among the Galilean fishing community and linseed product industries?

He most certainly was not called Jesus at that time. That is a Greek transliteration, and an awful one of that. Jesus' name most closely translated into English today would be Joshua, and I've read that Yeshu was actually a reference to a person teaching things from outside the state of Israel, and did not actually refer to a real person, but I don't know how reliablie that source is. I think his name would be YHSVH in Hebrew, but I could be wrong. I simply refer to Jesus so everyone knows who I'm talking about, but I will gladly refer to him as Joshua.

 

[nash8]

And in reference to him being a carpenter, why the difference in the gospels?

"Is this not the son of the carpenter"
"Is this not the carpenter"

It seems to me that if he was a carpenter, he would not be reffered to as the son of the carpenter, but simply the carpenter, no?

 

[nash8]

Doubt it. he would have looked like another beggar with his few disciples. Teachers and healers were plentiful. Not one of many historians wrote about him while alive because he was just another oppressed Galilean.

Maybe.

Everything we know about his life in Galilee is just about unknown, as it was backfilled in later by people far removed, VERY FAR removed from the actual man.

There is no record of his life in Galilee, other then his childhood, and this poses another question. If he was talking with the scribes about law as a young child, wouldn't somebody have taken notice of him?

 

[outhouse]

And in reference to him being a carpenter, why the difference in the gospels?

"Is this not the son of the carpenter"
"Is this not the carpenter"

It seems to me that if he was a carpenter, he would not be reffered to as the son of the carpenter, but simply the carpenter, no?

All backwards bud

the word is not carpenter, it is tekton.

There was little to no wood in Nazareth, a stone worker would make more sense based on many parables in the NT that relate with a stone worker.

As Johnathon Reed points out, Tekton in this time and place translates to a handworker from displaced people who were renters.


what you notice in the NT is Gmark first making the statement, the later authors embarrassed over the known poverty of tektons and then downplay if not ignore the given term tekton.

 

[nash8]

Does it matter what the words means? Whether he was a stone worker or a wood worker?

Tekt
It seems to me that there are many interpretations of the word tekton, no?

 

[ChristineES]

Does it matter what the words means? Whether he was a stone worker or a wood worker?

Tekt
It seems to me that there are many interpretations of the word tekton, no?

It doesn't matter. I was told that a carpenter back then would have worked with both stone and wood.

 

[danieldemol]

How is any part of history "pseudoscience"?

Since when did something become "history" just because you missuse the term?

And where did these ideas come from. I've read the admittance of whatever that guys name was that discovered St. Essa, but the whole story sounds super sketchy to me, and from the opposite perspective as you. Where would you even come up with an idea like that?

If by sketchy you mean Nicolas Notovitch's work is fabricated or dubious then we are in agreement, which makes it pseudo-history, not "history"

Interestingly enough, they aren't covered in any of the apocraphya (I think that's how you spell it), as far as I can tell either, which I find quite odd

It is not odd if nothing noteworthy happened from a faith perspective.

 

[ZooGirl02]

I believe that shortly after Jesus was born the Holy Family which was Jesus, Saint Joseph, and the Blessed Mother of God, Mary, fled to Egypt and so Jesus spent a good portion of his childhood in Egypt. At some point after that they moved back to Israel and he spent another good portion of his life in Nazareth. That's what I believe.

 

[outhouse]

Does it matter what the words means? Whether he was a stone worker or a wood worker?

Tekt
It seems to me that there are many interpretations of the word tekton, no?

There are many translations. And they change with cultural changes, and time.

Had it been known that he was a wood worker, he would have been a tekton of wood. stone, a tekton of stone. Gmarks best account due to what limited information he had, was that Jesus was a poor handworker, and later gospels tried to sort of hide this.

Again Johnathon Reed is the best cultural anthropologist in Galilee, and he states for Nazareth, Jesus would have been a handworker living a life below that of a common peasant.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Based on the lost years of most Aussie males that age, he backpacked across Europe and pulled beers in London to fund the trip.

 

[outhouse]

Based on the lost years of most Aussie males that age, he backpacked across Europe and pulled beers in London to fund the trip.

Funny, that's not far off.

Its my opinion, he ate better traveling around with 3-4 disciples healing and teaching for dinner scraps in these poor hovels, then working 6 days a week.

 

[George-ananda]

Sources I respect say he went to the east; the Himalayan area and became renown there as a saint.

 

[outhouse]

Sources I respect say he went to the east; the Himalayan area and became renown there as a saint.

Which are all unsubstantiated.

 

[nash8]

Since when did something become "history" just because you missuse the term?

Pseudohistory perhaps, pseudoscience not so much.

If by sketchy you mean Nicolas Notovitch's work is fabricated or dubious then we are in agreement, which makes it pseudo-history, not "history"

Actually the opposite. I definitely don't doubt that Notovitch's work was definitely not a treatsie in "objective" history, but I also find it hard to believe that he created the story out of thin air. No matter what the story, fiction or non-fiction, there always exists at least a shred of truth.

I also find it interesting Notovitch's choice of monastery considering the foundations of it.

Tibetan Buddhism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hemis Monastery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I also find it interesting that the "nobility" of the monks was not questioned when it provided a means to "debunk" the story, but that the monks questionable nobility provides the counter-argument to subsequent inquiries into the story at least according to one view.

Tibet

It is not odd if nothing noteworthy happened from a faith perspective.

But what happened to Jesus in his teenage years does not neccesarily require a faith perspective. The entire Bible is not based entirely on faith my friend, peoples interpretations of it, most definitely, but the actual writing not so much.

But at the same time, yes i do find it odd that nothing noteworthy happened from a faith perspective due to the intense documentation of the rest of Jesus' life from a faith perspective. Even the Apocraphia don't even try to touch on the missing years from Jesus' life, and those works are notorious for exagerating the miracles performed by Jesus. Considering the documentation, faith based or not, of his childhood years as well as the documentation of his later years, I find it very odd. At the least I suspect someone between the Jesus' death and 1887 to promote some idea of what happened, yet noone did. You can't seriously tell me that's not odd.

You can't tell me that 100 years after his death, noone had any ideas about what happened to him, even if it was that he stayed in Galilee and became a carpenter.

I believe that shortly after Jesus was born the Holy Family which was Jesus, Saint Joseph, and the Blessed Mother of God, Mary, fled to Egypt and so Jesus spent a good portion of his childhood in Egypt. At some point after that they moved back to Israel and he spent another good portion of his life in Nazareth. That's what I believe.

That's an interesting point as well. There is a 33 year gap between Herod's reign. I will not try to argue that historicity of the murder of the boys in Galilee, but I will say that there is a chance that Jesus could have grown to the age of a young boy in Egypt.

 

[nash8]

There are many translations. And they change with cultural changes, and time.

Had it been known that he was a wood worker, he would have been a tekton of wood. stone, a tekton of stone. Gmarks best account due to what limited information he had, was that Jesus was a poor handworker, and later gospels tried to sort of hide this.

Again Johnathon Reed is the best cultural anthropologist in Galilee, and he states for Nazareth, Jesus would have been a handworker living a life below that of a common peasant.

But your missing my point, one gospel says he was a tekton, and another says he was the son of a tekton. So according to one gospel, yes, your analysis would be right. But the other gospel leaves some ambiguity, no? Would it be any less embarrasing to be the son of a tekton?

And you also miss the later greek translation of tekton which means a learned man, which according to your view, most of the Gospels were written with a hellenistic twist. This would also correlate with Lukes account that Jesus "advanced in wisdom in stature, and in favor with God and men." This correlates with the later translation, and not the former.

Based on the lost years of most Aussie males that age, he backpacked across Europe and pulled beers in London to fund the trip.

Interestingly enough, you kind of support my point. If you were a young teenager and you had a choice between living the life "lower than a peasant", or traveling the world which would you choose? What if Jesus said, screw it i'm gonna be poor anyway, why not be poor and travel the world and maybe have a chance to better my life. Especially if he had healing/teaching talents, or at the least was intelligent enough to trick people into thinking he did.

Sources I respect say he went to the east; the Himalayan area and became renown there as a saint.

Can you cite those sources?

 

[nash8]

Funny, that's not far off.

Its my opinion, he ate better traveling around with 3-4 disciples healing and teaching for dinner scraps in these poor hovels, then working 6 days a week.

Exactly, so what makes you think that he wouldn't have realized this at age 13 as opposed to age 30?

 

[oldbadger]

Possible, but really unknown.

Hi Outhouse! Ha ha, we're off again...... but don't tell J!!

Posted this once for you. I think it was 20-25%

Death in childbirth.... thankyou again, then... that one dropped off the radar. (I blame dementia)....:sad:

Staying away from pleasure and fornication were very popular during these times. Its not unusual for teachers to be celibate.

I didn't say Yeshu was a teacher (before his ministry). And it might be better to say,'It was not unusual for teachers to appear to be celibate'. We'll never know how many were genuine, but since most would have been upper class then I would discount any strong Jewish integrity amongst them.

or Yehoshua

His proper name might have been Joshua, or Yehoshua, but that's not what he was likely to have been called. We haven't changed that much, imo, and so his friends would have shortened that down pretty quickly. So I would give more credence to 'Yesh' than any other name (amongst his friends).

Never Jesus

Quite. Absolutely.

Doubt it. he would have looked like another beggar with his few disciples. Teachers and healers were plentiful. Not one of many historians wrote about him while alive because he was just another oppressed Galilean.

I don't think that he did look like a beggar. And he probably did not have disciples before his ministry. We know lots more about his life in Galilee than you suggest, but would have to guesstimate on his life before his ministry started. I propose that he had been a handyman, making anything from Flax-working tools, to spars, oars, wet-boxes etc for the fishing industry. Net needles go back that far, and so he might have had a pouch full of bone net-needles ....... better than coins for everyday purchases..... And he didn't beg, he simply became so adept at healing, exorcism, herbal meds etc that he slowly transferred careers. I reckon that he did travel from village to village, was always well received and cared for, and held general gp duty in his lodging before moving on.
I don't think he picked up the 'ministry' until after John had been arrested, which is what his temptation was all about. He had had such an easy life, so why give it up to take up such a huge challenge....? temptation.

Everything we know about his life in Galilee is just about unknown, as it was backfilled in later by people far removed, VERY FAR removed from the actual man.

Previous life, maybe, Yes, but the more we 'look' at it all, so the more we might be able to make individual personal appraisals about what the truth might have been, and extract which parts are evangelical addition. Obviously this leaves academic knowledge behind, but so do the academics, and since most of them are in lah-lah land, no problem....