Jesus Died of a Deep Vein Thrombosis?

[moghrabi]

Hey guys, this is another denial that Jews killed the man for preaching a religion other than theirs.

Guffaw!?

Jesus belonged to the original Church of Jerusalem. Their brand of orthodox Judaism makes todays look like a sexfest. Back in the day, even eye contact with women was outlawed during menstration cycles, and anything other than adherence to the 613 laws would find you "removed" from the Church.

He was teaching their religion to them.

So they did not like the 613 laws, they killed him. Now, to get out of this, they are saying that he died of a stroke.

 

[mps]

Well, no. If you're taking the account in the Bible as fact, then sure, he was killed because the larger Jewish population didn't agree with him. But as it has already been demonstrated, the Biblical accounts are nothing more than an appeasment to various cults.

More likely is that Jesus was killed as a result of inner dissention within the Qumran tribe, chiefly due to his title usurpation. Both leaders, James the Just, and Jesus, were taken prisoner by the authorities as they attempted to quiet the situation.

Then, when the larger Jewish population was given the choice of having one man released, they chose Barrabas, meaning "Son of God", meaning the earthly-messiah, meaning James the Just.

Jesus, the kingly messiah, was subsequently crucified.

 

[moghrabi]

Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Jesus Died of a Deep

So was James (Barrabas) thought to be Jesus' brother in this version of the myth, mps?

 

[mps]

Yes, but all acounts of the Qumranian writings James the Just was the brother of Jesus. Together they were the two messiahs, or pillars, of the internal Nazorene prophecy.

Though why did you call it the "myth"? This isn't mythology anymore, so much as it is lost or suppressed history.

It's interesting how the Chuch today refuses to acknowledge this material, and has strongarmed the translations of the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea scrolls.

There is overwhelming evidence that the Jesus myth, as it stands now, is a verbatim account of the Mithra myth that predates it by a few decades. The church's response to this is (and I'm not making this up) that Satan went back in time and started the Mithra myth to discredit the legacy of Jesus.

If the church has to go to those lengths to discredit the evidence against it, you can only imagine what it is doing to the Qumran connections.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Though why did you call it the "myth"? This isn't mythology anymore, so much as it is lost or suppressed history.

They are still considered demi-gods therefore it is mythology.

I've been wondering about the story of James ever since the discovery of that bone box a few years ago. It's since been shown to be (most likely) a fake but the inscription was "James, brother of Jesus."

I knew that the writings of or about James were strictly verbotten in the Catholic Church so it seemed odd that would be the name that popped up.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Until I have found archaeological, and secular historical evidence to support your claims, I too consider the writings of the Qumarians and the Dead Sea Scrolls to be more of the same...myth-making at its finest...

It proves nothing...

 

[mps]

I wouldn't consider James and Jesus as demigod's. As was noted earlier, the term messiah did not have an unearthly connotations at the time. They were simply men who the tribe believed would attain great heights. It's the same now; Judaism is not waiting for man-god, they are waiting for a man to become the undisputed king of Israel.

And yes, the Ossuary of James has been declared a fake - at least by the ROM.

Also, archaeological evidence of cave-dwelling Orthodox Jews who denounced material possesions might be hard to comeby But as for secular historical evidence, the Qumran tribe or the original Church of Jerusalem is well known.