So, here it is. The third and final part of my Jesus blog. After this I probably won't be on UG as often anymore. I work all day Monday through Wednesday, and the forums just seem lifeless these days. But I'll still be on from time to time.
Here it is. Historical reasonings.
Historic evidence proves that Jesus traveled eastward after the crucifixion. Since Jesus was sent to only preach to the Lost Tribes of Israel, he had to search and find them. Only two of these tribes actually remained in the area known as modern day Israel. The rest, as I stated, traveled eastward. 1) The Jewish Encyclopedia details a list of places where the Lost Tribes of Israel. Included in this list are locations such as Arabia, Afghanistan, and India. Like I said, he had to go to the tribes in order to preach to them. 2) The Bhavishya Maha Purana, an ancient Hindu text written in Sanskrit, speaks of Jesus explicitly. In one section, it discusses the arrival of Jesus: “The king asked the holy man who he was. The other replied: 'I am called a son of God, born of a virgin, minister of the non-believers, relentless in search of the truth.' The king then asked him: 'What is your religion?' The other replied, 'O great king, I come from a foreign country, where there is no longer truth and where evil knows no bounds” and in the following verse, he refers to himself as “Isa Masih”, meaning Jesus the Messiah (Source: Bhavishya Maha Purana). This evidence is obviously referring to Jesus, as there is no other person who would fit the description. Jesus was referred to as the son of God, he was said to have been born of a virgin, was a minister to the “non-believers”, and was, of course, in search of the truth. Even though this could possibly be considered a religious text, there is no way that anyone in India could have described Jesus without him actually coming to visit. 3) Isa, or Isa Masih, is Jesus. It is important to notice the fact that Jesus is not really the original name of Jesus, but rather a Romanization or English translation of the name. The original Hebrew/Aramaic name was Yeshua. The name Isa appears in texts of the East, such as the Hindi text above (which obviously referred to Jesus). It is understandable that Jesus (Yeshua) went under a different name as he traveled eastward as to avoid detection by his enemies. By the time he reached further east, the names he made stuck with him (Source: Where did Jesus Die? By JD Shams). 4) The tomb of Jesus is located in Kashmir. In the Sri Nagar Valley, there is a tomb called Roza Bal which is rumored to hold the body of Jesus. The name reads “Yuz Asaf”, which is Hebrew for “Jesus the Gatherer”, also rumored to mean “Son of Joseph” in the Kashmiri language. Joseph was the husband of Mary. The gatherer aspect comes from his mission to gather the lost tribes. Local tradition holds that Yuz Asaf came from the area of Israel. (Source: Where did Jesus Die? By JD Shams, tombofjesus.com) Now, in these areas, it is not uncommon for there to be carvings of the deceased person’s feet somewhere in the tomb. But what makes this one so peculiar is that there are crescent shaped markings carved into the feet, as if to indicate some sort of injury to the feet. Part of the crucifixion process is hammering one nail through both feet. This notion is matched by the image found in the Shroud of Turin, which one foot was in front of the other. (Source: http://www.tombofjesus.com/2007/core/historical_so urces/docs/feet_carvings.html ). There is a 3-D simulation which explains what I’m talking about there. 5) Now, skeptics will say that this doesn’t prove anything other than a man by the name of Yuz Asaf possibly survived crucifixion and was buried in Kashmir, but there is one more factor to consider. Yuz Asaf is Jesus. There is a large temple called Takhat Sulaiman (Throne of Solomon, but it is now called something different, I believe) in Kashmir which proves that Yuz Asaf is Jesus, and that he was there at a time after the crucifixion. An inscription in Persian reads “The mason of this pillar is the suppliant Bihishti Zargar, year fifty and four. Khawaja Rukun, son of Murjan, erected this pillar. At this time, Yuz Asaf proclaimed his prophethood, year fifty and four. He is Jesus, Prophet of the Children of Israel.” (Source: Tarikh-i-Kashmir by Khwaja Hassan Malik). In reference to the “year fifty and four” statement, Professor FidaHassnain explains:
“Note that since Islam did not exist during the reign of Gopadatta (79-109 AD), connecting the year 54 with the Muslim Hijra Era is absurd. During that period, the Laukika Era was exclusively used in Kashmir. As this era started in 3076 BC, the 54th year mentioned in the inscription would come to either 22 BC or 78 AD (since Laukika Year 1 is 3076 BC, [Laukika year] 3054 would be 22 BC, and [Laukika year] 3154 would be 78 AD.) As it was not possible for Jesus Christ to have traveled to Kashmir in 22 BC, I take the year 78 AD to be the correct date of his arrival” (Source: The Search for Historical Jesus by Fida Hassnain).
At this time, Jesus would have been much older and much time since the crucifixion would have passed. Yuz Asaf (Jesus) was in Kashmir at 78 AD, lived a long life, married, had children, died a natural death, and was buried in the Roza Bal tomb at around 120 AD, according to Ahmadi Muslim scholars such as Mirza Tahir Ahmad.
So while the debate rages on about the true story of Jesus, it is hard not to ask why some scientists don’t just open the tomb and prove everything through DNA testing. The problem is that there is far too much religious opposition. Integral parts of the Muslim and Christian faith rest on the fact that Jesus is alive and in heaven. Plus, a local Muslim priest was also buried in that same tomb hundreds of years ago, and locals do not want to have that tomb disturbed. Both sides will do anything to protect the sanctity of that tomb, for whatever reason. Muslim and Christian scholars both have tried to dismiss claims from historians, deviant scholars, scientists, and the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community (a minority sect of Islam which is an offshoot of the Sunni category) about the truth of Jesus.
Uncovering the truth about Jesus would definitely have a big impact on the world. A majority of people who used to be religious would be lost. Without any guidance, many people would lose their morals. Some would become depressed. Others may just not care at all. I used to think that it would have a big effect on the Christmas time economy, but the more I think about it, the more I realize that Christmas isn’t really about Jesus anymore anyway. Sure, there are some good-hearted Christians who still have their virtues, but a good number of Christians that I’ve spoken with seem to agree that Christmas has lost meaning over time.
But we have to keep something in mind when we hear what religious scholars have to say in defense of death on the cross and ascension. They have everything to lose. They’ll do whatever they can to win the argument. Both faiths which accept Jesus believe that he is still alive. However, Christians have the most to lose. Remember, the entire Christian faith is based upon the idea that Jesus died on the cross in order to atone for the sins of mankind. Christians believe that as long as you accept the idea that Jesus died on the cross for your sins; you will be saved from the torment of hell. Now this may sound insensitive, but that has always sounded a bit too easy for me to believe. What motivation do people have to be Jesus-like if it isn’t required to get into heaven? Perhaps it would be better for certain people if they realized that heaven is something you earn, not something that is given to you.
People like to hold on to what they’ve been raised with, no matter what it is. Every day, another child finds out that Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny isn’t real. They try and try to defend their ideas, but in the end, neither science nor history nor religion supports it. It’s funny how we can write off a giant prancing rabbit that hides eggs in bushes before we can let go of the idea that people can come back from the dead and rise up to a place which doesn’t even physically exist. To me, the Easter Bunny honestly sounds more probable.
Thanks to all of you who have kept up with these, and an added thanks to everyone who contributed to the discussions. I've had a good time. Peace.
1. His name was Yeishu, there's no "a" at the end. But that is a relatively unimportant detail.
2. Things did spread those days. It took a while, but they did. Why else would the Canaanite nations and the countries surrounding Israel (Ammon, Moav, Emor, Bashan) be afraid of them if they hadn't heard of what happened in Egypt? And we know they did know (according to the Bible) because it says they knew. So it is quite likely that the Hindu did hear about Jesus.
3. Couldn't Jesus have ascending in spirit? I mean, I think Christianity is a load of bullshit, but that isn't really a contradiction per se.
I'll miss our discussions, jetfuel.
Enjoy your summer!
Average life span back then was no where near 124 years. Jesus was born around 4 BC. Also, after Jesus' death and resurrection, but before his ascension, he promised to return again. It is very probable that the person in India was an imposter because following the Ascension there were many imposters claiming to be Christ in his second coming.
Its great that this interests you and that you've done research, but really if there was any major plausibility to this argument, it would be a lot more mainstream.
Average life expectancy does not tell us how long people tended to live. It does not even tell us the average age reached by most people. It includes babies and young mothers who die in child birth and children who die from disease. These skew the average downward. Once a man survived childhood, the numbers increased dramatically.
And about your last point, you've got it all backwards. It's because it's so plausible that it isn't mainstream. To you, at least. Because here, we have science and logic, while on the other hand, we have a story about men rising up from the dead and flying into space which can't be backed up or explained at all.
The Western world is dominated by Christians. Anything that contradicts them can be easily dismissed just by sheer strength in numbers. Just like on the news when they were showing Michael Jackson's brother giving a speech, he said to Michael "May Allah be with you" since Michael had converted to Islam a few years back. The same night, and every night since, I've seen the same clip played over and over again, except since then, they've edited out the last sentence. Because the news and media (made up of Christians and Jews) don't want one of America's biggest icons going down in history as a Muslim.
Likewise, when a logical theory is presented by anyone that contradicts the Christian faith, that theory is subject to the utmost scrutiny by the ruling majority, and will most likely be dismissed no matter what. Kinda like how when the first kid finds out Santa isn't real and tries to tell the rest of his class, but they don't believe him.
What evidence do you have that "Jesus was sent to only preach to the Lost Tribes of Israel." Also, if Jesus travelled after the crucifixion, that could happen even if he did die but then rose from the dead.
Echoplex wrote on Jul 7th, 2009 at 6:16pm : What evidence do you have that "Jesus was sent to only preach to the Lost Tribes of Israel." Also, if Jesus travelled after the crucifixion, that could happen even if he did die but then rose from the dead.
In Matt 15:24 and John 10:16, Jesus' mission is stated as to preach to the lost tribes of Israel, and Jesus also said not to preach to the Gentiles.
What you said next could have made sense if it weren't for the fact that the Bible states that Jesus ascended to heaven a few days after his crucifixion. This is all assuming that rising up from the dead is possible, of course.
First addressing the life span. Living for 124 years, is remarkable today, and practically physically impossible 200 years ago.
As for proof of imposter: What proof do you have to say that he was Jesus?
I will take the source of the Bible over the source you sited.
Even in our western civilization filled with Christians, if this were plausible, someone/thing would have picked it up and made a big deal, most notably, the History Channel. As for being able to preach, he walked the earth for 40 days after he rose from the dead. 40 days in bible speak means "a long period of time". So that could have been anywhere from a couple weeks, to several years.
One more thing i remembered. You said it would take days for victims of crucifixion to die. But, Jesus was nailed to the cross. It was the norm to tie the prisoner to the cross to ensure a long painful death. Blood loss, and physical beatings would be enough to kill him in 3 hours.
There's also a chart on the right showing lifespans of important people in the Bible. If Methusela lived to be 969, who's to say Jesus couldn't live to be 120?
Are you referring to the source that I cited as the Christian website I pulled up or the sources used in my paper? Because I can't believe in a book that says men can raise up from the dead and float up to heaven. Until you have scientific proof that this can happen, you got nothing on me.
About your 40 days comment, this is the part that interests me. Why will you interpret some parts of the Bible so loosely yet other parts so strictly? If you take the Bible at face value, you would say that Jesus died on the cross, came back from the dead, "walked the earth for 40 days", and then ascended to heaven. If you take the Bible metaphorically and interpret it as such, then you'd say that Jesus appeared to have died on the cross, but was nursed back to health. It would obviously appear that he had risen from the dead, yet we all know that isn't possible.
So why do you pick and choose which parts to take seriously and which parts you don't?
manic wrote on Jul 8th, 2009 at 5:54am :
As for proof of imposter: What proof do you have to say that he was Jesus?
I will take the source of the Bible over the source you sited.
Even though the Bible is known to be flawed?
The whole story of Jesus birth in Luke is completely at odds with known history. The Bible claims that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great and also during the census of Quirinius, yet Herod died in 4BC and the census of Quirinus didn't happen until Quirinius became governor of Syria in 6AD, ten years later.
Luke also claims that Mary and Joseph traveled to Bethlehem in order to take part in the census, yet the Roman law forbade travel during the census because they needed to know where people actualy 'lived' so they could tax them. Traveling traders were even told to stay at home and 'tend their gardens' which meant to grow crops to live on until after the census had passed and they could resume traveling and plying their trade again.
The very name 'Jesus of Nazereth' suggests that Jesus was actualy born in Nazreth.
jetfuel495 wrote on Jul 30th, 2009 at 5:31pm : Man, I've been waiting silently so long for another reply, but it looks like we've scared everyone off, Slacker
manic wrote on Jun 30th, 2009 at 9:08pm : Average life span back then was no where near 124 years. Jesus was born around 4 BC. Also, after Jesus' death and resurrection, but before his ascension, he promised to return again. It is very probable that the person in India was an imposter because following the Ascension there were many imposters claiming to be Christ in his second coming.
Its great that this interests you and that you've done research, but really if there was any major plausibility to this argument, it would be a lot more mainstream.
very nice, just finished reading the three of them. It's interesting, it looks solid in a lot of parts but the only thing bugging me is the trip to India with the Jews. That part seems a lot more loose than the rest, (but still more likely than the alternative) Just saying. Any old Christian will just say some random theory and then say it has as much evidence as yours. But again just sayin'.
A lot of effort went into this, obviously. It's very kool.
(I'm Athiest by the way) :P Kudo +2
