[feedcomnet]

i have heard so many strong arguments for both sides. i am sure many of you have seen the film "zeitgeist". the beginning of it lays out a decent argument that jesus was only a personification of cycles of the sun. and then i read this:

over 40 authors and libraries worth of writings that have survived the times of jesus life and shortly after, and he is not mentioned once. even by st. paul. imagine that, in all of st. paul's letters, he never quotes jesus or talks about a story of jesus. not once. paul was supposed to have been there! if you witnessed the son of god do miracles and were the first to spread his church you would be quoting him left and right and speaking of his incredible deeds. i don't think a single person here would dispute with me how corrupted the religious institutions became in the history of this planet. so why wouldn't they twist and exploit such a powerful message? why wouldn't some evil genius create a story like this up in order to control the people? evil can be extremely creative when it comes to finding a means to their end.

but then i have read several books in which a person, through hpynotic regression, has remembered a lifetime with jesus. this trance state, as we all know from edgar cayce and the "law or one" books, can be extremely accurate. bypassing the limitations of our 3d consciousness, and accessing the collective/super (or whatever you want to call it) consciousness.

which brings me to another, larger question. could both exist at the same time? could he both have been a myth and a real man at the same time? i mean, what exists in mind exists in reality, right?

could there be infinite parallel "pasts" just like there is infinite possible futures?

i guess we all must trust our gut on this one and my gut tells me that he was a man and his story has been distorted and exploited. but i would love to here what all of your guts are telling you.

salute!
:d

[mrllxp]

i have heard so many strong arguments for both sides. i am sure many of you have seen the film "zeitgeist". the beginning of it lays out a decent argument that jesus was only a personification of cycles of the sun. and then i read this:

over 40 authors and libraries worth of writings that have survived the times of jesus life and shortly after, and he is not mentioned once. even by st. paul. imagine that, in all of st. paul's letters, he never quotes jesus or talks about a story of jesus. not once. paul was supposed to have been there! if you witnessed the son of god do miracles and were the first to spread his church you would be quoting him left and right and speaking of his incredible deeds. i don't think a single person here would dispute with me how corrupted the religious institutions became in the history of this planet. so why wouldn't they twist and exploit such a powerful message? why wouldn't some evil genius create a story like this up in order to control the people? evil can be extremely creative when it comes to finding a means to their end.

but then i have read several books in which a person, through hpynotic regression, has remembered a lifetime with jesus. this trance state, as we all know from edgar cayce and the "law of one" books, can be extremely accurate. bypassing the limitations of our 3d consciousness, and accessing the collective/super (or whatever you want to call it) consciousness.

which brings me to another, larger question. could both exist at the same time? could he both have been a myth and a real man at the same time? i mean, what exists in mind exists in reality, right?

could there be infinite parallel "pasts" just like there is infinite possible futures?

i guess we all must trust our gut on this one and my gut tells me that he was a man and his story has been distorted and exploited. but i would love to here what all of your guts are telling you.

love to all!
:d

[LarpBulaBus]

paul was not "there", if you mean it in the context i think you do. his conversion to christianity came after the death and resurrection of jesus. as for not mentioning jesus or stories of him, there are many possibilities to explain this. one simple explanation is that the name "jesus" is essentially a nickname given to him by the writers of the canonized scriptures, but was not his true name. there are many arguments about what his name actually was, but nobody knows for sure.

as for the question of whether or not he really existed...personally, i have no doubt that he did. totally aside from other reasons/sources, i read somewhere recently that there are records in monasteries located in tibet and india which mention him travelling there and doing the same sorts of things described in the bible. apparently, this took place during his youth and after the crucifixion.

like many others, i believe that his teachings were not preserved in their pristine form and were severely distorted for a variety of reasons. however, i am not inclined to dismiss him outright, and certainly not with the venom and aggression that so many others these days are willing to do. i think there is a lot of truth to be found there if one truly has an open mind.
i think that to discard anything outright is a mistake, since everything contains at least some elements of truth (even lies!)...likewise, to believe any one thing as totality is also a mistake, since such singularity of thought inevitably brings various forms of blindness.

in the end, we all must assess the truth for ourselves and we all see what we want to see, regardless of how "enlightened" we may like to think we are or who we may be talking to.

[VINPELA]

did jesus exist or not?? i have heard so many strong arguments for both sides. i am sure many of you have seen the film "zeitgeist".

imho, yes, he did indeed exist, but didn't do many of the things he's credited for. the christian religion was, for the most part, created by constantine, (except for paul's [rather large] part) and he just rolled different aspects of many religions into one, so that it would appeal to a wider audience.

yes i've seen zeitgeist, and it may not be perfect, but it raises many valid points. i still have some vague, past-life memories of fighting to the death, while trying to protect him, and it seemed pretty real to me.
over 40 authors and libraries worth of writings that have survived the times of jesus life and shortly after, and he is not mentioned once. even by st. paul. imagine that, in all of st. paul's letters, he never quotes jesus or talks about a story of jesus. not once. paul was supposed to have been there! if you witnessed the son of god do miracles and were the first to spread his church you would be quoting him left and right and speaking of his incredible deeds. i don't know where you read this, but some of the historical writers of the time did indeed mention jesus. and also paul was not there at the time, and he did not witness "the son of god do miracles" because he never met him. paul didn't enter the picture until years after the death of jesus, so maybe that's why he didn't mention him.

[Gadarett]

perhaps the zeitgeist presenters where not factoring in the fractal nature of our conscious universe. yes the astrological synchronism they uncover about the repetitiousness of the jesus story from the previous civilizations is undeniably accurate. however, there is a good chance that the universe sincronistically caused the actual happenings surrounding these stories to be in direct correlation to the astrological happenings. this is in contrast to their conclusion that jesus and his predecessors where some how concocted to hide the actual truth of the astrology present.

if they wanted to hide this truth, then why tell about it at all.

[adultcheee]

imho, yes, he did indeed exist, but didn't do many of the things he's credited for. the christian religion was, for the most part, created by constantine, (except for paul's [rather large] part) and he just rolled different aspects of many religions into one, so that it would appeal to a wider audience.

yes i've seen zeitgeist, and it may not be perfect, but it raises many valid points. i still have some vague, past-life memories of fighting to the death, while trying to protect him, and it seemed pretty real to me.
i don't know where you read this, but some of the historical writers of the time did indeed mention jesus. and also paul was not there at the time, and he did not witness "the son of god do miracles" because he never met him. paul didn't enter the picture until years after the death of jesus, so maybe that's why he didn't mention him.

alright, thanks for your response. this jesus thing has become so convoluted. i feel in my gut that he was a real man too. i have also heard that he had exceptionally psychic abilities, even as a small child. and much of his compassion and righteousness came from a particularly traumatic event that happened when he was a kid. i heard that when he was very young, he became angry with a friend and accidentally killed him, and then brought this kid back to life out of saddness and guilt. this is the humanity that they left out of the bible. he was a man with man-like emotions just like the rest of us.

of course none of us actually lived back then so there is no way to say %100 for sure what happened.

love to all,
foo

[BgpOoGI2]

i think jesus was a real man. i believe alot of the real scriptures were burnt. i love reading the parables, i dont know who wrote them, but there is obviously a peace, love, understanding teaching that seems to be with the stories of christ. i think the symbolism of what he did has a much deeper meaning then what people are willing to look at. teachings of how to weigh what is of love and what is of darkness. i love the parables of the seed and the vineyard and the wine press. i love the parables of the yeast in the dough. these teachings might of even been older then christ, and he was able to go to the other countries and use his intuition in him to pass on what ever teachings of peace and love still existed.


there are 2 gospels that i love to read, ive posted them before. gospels of the holy twelve and the gospels of peace. they ring music in my ears. i dont know if they are truly from christ, but the message is true.

matthew 6 verse 22 the light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy while body shall be full of light.

i do believe christ is as much a part of us as we are of him. i believe in the story of how christ (the first of the first fruits) opened a 'new womb'...i think we get confused when people call christ the savior or messiah....they dont want to think that without christ we cant have eternal life. we have came a long way in understanding why peace and love are the only way. 2000 yrs ago, it may of been just what the people needed to ponder on...peace and love and the true ideas of why one should strive to be true unto themselves and true unto their other selves. i believe the reason christ was so rejected was he taught us to look within...the masses of the people were afraid of this, for it would take away the power that the temples and religion held over the people. he came to change their ways and they didn't want that.

peace to all,
lynette

[JacksHH]

for the last several years, following the jesus life/myth/comination thereof has been sort of a hobby of mine. consequently, i've run across a number of books and online sources regarding this question. to begin by stating my current conclusion/opinion on the matter: yes, he existed as a historical person, but the early catholic church, under constantine's direction/influence, had a political agenda that created major distortions in his life and message(s) that make a current accurate assessment of them virtually impossible at this time without the possible documents the vatican may have buried in its archives somewhere. there's a guy i ran across a reference to once who i can't remember the name of who traced roman geneological records and claims that the new testament was originally a sort of historical novel, mostly, if not entirely, fiction, written by the roman general piso, also known as josephus, and his family (to increase their income probably, as it became popular).

i find it rather ironic that most people who profess themselves to be christians are more interested in following the myth (the virgin birth, the "miracles", the resurrection) than in following his teachings. despite the paucity of them in the canonical gospels and the lack of them in the epistles, what is left of them still allows an ethical basis on which to live one's life that is probably as good or better than any other that has come down the pike within the last few millennia (at least in the west).

a biblical/dead sea scroll scholar from australia spent twenty years decoding the new testament gospels and acts according to the pesher of habbakuk in the dead sea scrolls and came up with some very interesting data: jesus was not born in bethlehem (instead in a small building a few meters south of the qumran monastery/fortress), he was married twice and fathered four children, he was not crucified in jerusalem, but in qumran (she gives the exact spot within inches), and did not die on the cross, and most of the "miracles" can easily be explained by the use of idioms common at the time (for example, "walking on water" was an idiom for walking across the wharf to get to the boat), and, finally, jesus went to rome with peter and paul after the crucifixion.

imo, the nt was deliberately coded by those who wrote it (and only in the greek version, another hurdle for romans who didn't speak it, rabbis of that time being required to speak all 19 languages of the region as one of the requirements for becoming one, so "jesus" was no dummy, "jesus" himself possibly writing at least parts of the gospel of john while he was awaiting mary magdalene to give birth to the required son to carry on the lineage of king david) to mislead the romans as to their activities and inspire converts to their version of judaism, but it was only able to be decoded after the discovery of the dead sea scrolls, although the pesher code is basically quite simple (two others, at least, were employed, including the already commonly known one of gematria).

she put her findings (up to the point of publication; she may have had even more subsequently in another book: she has/had an online discussion group, but only open to serious scholars) in a probably still out of print book called [please pm for title] (i believe it was published in australia under the title [please pm]). that book seems to cover the actual life of jesus up to the time he went to rome (c. 61 ad), but his later life is revealed (to my satisfaction, anyway) in another book called [please pm]. apparently he may have gone to southern france either with mary magdalene (his first wife, euphemistically referred to as his companion in the gospel of philip, one the gospels found in the nag hammadi documents, and considered by gnostic christians to be of virtually equal importance to jesus himself [at least in principle; the gnostics considered both of them to be divine and symbolic only, not physical], which is why their activities were so actively suppressed [possibly to the point of "ethnic cleansing", i.e, mass murder] by both the patriarchal jews and the church) or to visit her and his son after his second marriage to a greek woman, eventually setting in srinegar, where he was buried at the age of 120, after giving sermons where he subsequently became known as avelokiteshvara, the compassionate buddha (!), although he was regarded as the prophet yuz asaf in the small jewish diaspora community at the time.

i found confirmation of this last assertion in another, recent "fluff" book [please pm] written by an australian tv journalist who visited india and was told virtually the same thing by an ak-47-toting muslim. there's a muslim guarding his mausoleum in downtown old town 24/7, and another at moses' gravesite, where there's a small egyptian-style stele marking it, a few miles up the road, since islam considers both of them to be prophets. there's also some rumors that he may have made it to japan (you can really get around, even on foot, in 120 years; as i recall, the book of mormon says he came to the us on a cloud, which might have been a lot faster means of transport in those days, depending on the wind speed and direction).

whatever you choose to believe, or fail to believe, about him, the "jesus" story has certainly had more influence on history in the last couple millenia than that of any other person, real or fictional, with the possible exception of siddharta gotama ("the" buddha [one of maybe over 700]).

peace, philip

[lidersontop]

as far as the astrological factor presented by the "zeitgeist" movie is concerned, there can be no doubt that what was said is true. however, do we not all have our astrological signs? do we not also have a specific astro-chart at the time of our birth?

consider david wilcock - his chart is the same as edgar cayce's. this was no coincidence, but it is rather the way of the universe. the chart of jesus, and horus, and whoever else was brought up in the aforementioned movie happens to be (arguably) the most significant astrological arrangement from our earthbound perspective. these people, more or less with christ consciousness, came time and time again to teach of the law of one.

"zeitgeist" simply made a far more interesting and dare i say more plausible case for the historical figure we know as jesus.

for those of you that would prefer to read books that would otherwise be included in the bible, look into the books of nag hammadi. these were found in the 1930's or so, and have not gone through the hands or authority of anybody in power. in other words, the writings are intact. you'll be surprised to see how different the lessons to be had in the books are from those in the bible, yet the central message of the law of one is there.

[LoloLibia]

i feel in my "spirit" that jesus was the christ and he came in the flesh so he could show us the love and mercy of his father who i believe to be "god" or "i am". i am not sure if everything in our bible today is true, but the true reason jesus came into our lives is very simple and we make it so difficult to see. it was a message of love, peace, mercy and forgiveness towards each other. i also believe as he stated so many times that his father does exist and our way to a higher place (heaven) is through christ himself. most of my stern beliefs come about by the energy or spark that i feel in my spirit, my deep place where things get sifted and sorted about until i come to a point of realization of what i believe to be true. i have studied for over 30 years being a christian and i have found nothing yet to move me any other way. christ came to show us that man could be held to a higher level and degree, in the way we treat and relate to each other. we are all connected to him and to each other and to our world as a whole. anyway, that's my two cents worth.
peace and love,
pamelak

[iceleliewBync]

i've never been a believer in anything spiritual until a couple of months ago and now i believe that jesus did exist. i believe he was a higher density being in a 3d body who came to point us in the right direction and then over the years the writings were changed to give the powers that be more control over the population.

i remember david saying that the film powder was nearly the life story of his contact in the black ops. powder seems like a 4d being in a 3d body, so if that's a possibility then i guess that jesus and his 'miracles' would seem to be along the same lines. jesus did say that one day we would be able to perform the same fetes as him and more.

[hereiamguy]

tigermoff,
in defence of what you said about st. paul, he spent his whole life teaching and preaching the gospel of jesus. no, he was not a witness at the time that christ was with the other disciples but jesus choose saul (paul) to be the teacher of the gentles and the world. paul was taught what he needed to know by people christ brought into his life and he had 3 years in the desert being taught by the holy spirit. remember also, peter had a large part to paul's understanding of the teachings of jesus. paul had to stand before the church in jerlusrem and give an account of his faith and how he came to be a christian after killing and prsicute so many of them. james (the brother of jesus) was the leader of the new way and he had a hard time accepting that paul had really changed. it was through peter's standing up for him and the teachings that paul was preaching, that he was given the blessing of "the way" and if you read any of his letters they are dripping with nothing but jesus and what he meant and stands for and how to have faith in his kingdom and know the love and the grace of christ and all love for all mankind and acceptance of each other in the name of love. i am not trying to preach to you or anyone else. i just felt i needed to clear up the fact that paul was a true deciple of jesus.
peace to you,
pamelak

[Grarypealumma]

well the law of one said he existed, he was a 4d wanderer and his name was different its something like jehosua, not jesus.

[Pateeffelty]

did i miss something. i dont see where tiger mentions st. paul?

[q9h9pPne]

for the last several years, following the jesus life/myth/comination thereof has been sort of a hobby of mine. consequently, i've run across a number of books and online sources regarding this question. to begin by stating my current conclusion/opinion on the matter: yes, he existed as a historical person, but the early catholic church, under constantine's direction/influence, had a political agenda that created major distortions in his life and message(s) that make a current accurate assessment of them virtually impossible at this time without the possible documents the vatican may have buried in its archives somewhere.

whatever you choose to believe, or fail to believe, about him, the "jesus" story has certainly had more influence on history in the last couple millenia than that of any other person, real or fictional, with the possible exception of siddharta gotama ("the" buddha [one of maybe over 700]).

peace, philip

wow, awesome phillip. thanks for the information. even more food for thought as if my plate wasn't already full of jesus material. i just heard another theory, and they really backed it up with some very detailed and complicated reasoning, that jesus was the son of julias caesar and cleopatra. and when the assassination of caesar happened is when jesus was sent away to live with friends and begin his spiritual journey. i won't even begin to try to list the whole story because it would take up a lot of space. but just let me know if you want a link to the video. it is very interesting.

thanks to everyone.

foo

[GypeFeeshyTes]

the way david pronounced it "yehosua" actually is joshua in hebrew. yesua is jesus.

[Zjohkrbi]

i was reading the previous posts and wanted to point out that the astrological signs we all know and love were developed in babylon 3000 yrs ago. the significance is that over time the constellations which they are based on will move out of alignment. this is because of the movement of our own solar system. being that 3000 years have passed the charts are no longer correct. so when most people think that the sun is aligned with capricorn for example, it's actually in sagittarius.

[Jambjanatan]

i believe that jesus did indeed live in the time and place that it is recorded that he did. the very fact that a whole sect of jews of that time suddenly started following the way and that the traditions became so widely spread around that within 100 years of jesus' supposed death and ressurection there were followers in the whole eastern part of the mediterranean area indicates strongly that a real person by the name of jesus existed.

the eastern european and middle eastern traditions are not the only historical records of jesus' existance. there is an ancient text in a buddhist monastery in himmis in tibet that records some of the life of jesus, know there as issa, and relates his travels and teachings in what is now india, pakistan and kasmir. here is a link that provides a translation of the life of st. issa. http://www.reluctant-messenger.com/issa.htm.

it is fascinating information.
blessing to all,
berry

[Fdhwzctl]

joshua

this is a very old and passé debate and i'm not going to initiate it here. the astrological sunsigns we still use are totally valid. the zodiak is a manmade-up mandala, and the size of the constellations vary very much; virgo f.i is much bigger than all the other constellations, but all signs only have 30 degress each.

liliane the transit

[mikaelluioy]

foosnik: i just heard another theory, and they really backed it up with some very detailed and complicated reasoning, that jesus was the son of julias caesar and cleopatra. and when the assassination of caesar happened is when jesus was sent away to live with friends and begin his spiritual journey. i won't even begin to try to list the whole story because it would take up a lot of space. but just let me know if you want a link to the video. it is very interesting.

well, yes, the link might be worth a gander. i was looking for something to read on going to bed or waking up a day or two ago and pulled the gospel of mary magdalene off the shelf. it's a document with several missing pages that was found in some archive around 1885 or so, and contains some interesting teaching material in the book, with a lot of commentary, most of which is caballistic speculation, but i was reminded of the fact that there is (or was, if madass hussein or the us raiders currently killing about 300 iraqis a day didn't wipe them out) a sect centered around northern iraq, but with a few stray believers in syria and the rest of the middle east that adheres to the idea that the nt was a cover story for john the baptist, and (my idea) jesus may have been the "wicked priest" in the dead sea scrolls that usurped his place in qumran, the cut off "head" being a symbol for that (like the mafia idea that if you cut off the head [like they may have killed jfk {as willing surrogate agents of the cia, which wanted him dead because he was passing on their reports to kruschchev through rfk}, expecting rfk would get off their case, but johnson kept him on, necessitating, in their view {and the cia's}, his assassination, which was a lot "cleaner" in diverting attention from their rôle]). if true, that could produce further obfuscation as to the place of jesus in "real" history. another problem in this whole scenario that i ran into recently was the authors of [please pm for title] (which i finally got around to starting to read this week) found documents missing in the vatican archives (which are supposedly open now to scrutiny) that relate to the early church history as seen through its founders. but it's an accepted fact by most scholars that christianity was a result of massive alteration of its original nature as a "brotherhood" when it was transformed into the state religion of the roman empire by constantine, who laid all sorts of pagan beliefs on the original supposed teachings, followed by a radical "cleansing" of all the gnostic beliefs through destruction of manuscripts and possibly wholesale "ethnic cleansing". jeshua's life would just be a major agatha christie mystery if it wasn't so central to much of what's happened globally since (a butterfly flaps its wings in brazil, and katrina happens? - i recently saw something that claimed it might have been a haarp project to divert attention from political happenings at the time or part of the ongoing plan to destroy the integrity of the us, but then, another source that said that haarp was a "good guys" project set up to hopefully prevent the poles from shifting - you pays your money and takes your choice, depending on your ct orientation). so much for a brief reply.

peace, philip