When Jesus returns

[Phoenix Within]

It is true, QK, that we know very little about Jesus' life until he was about 31 years old, but why do you say he was in India? I have never heard this before.

I don't have a reference but I have heard of this before. I've also heard of Jesus studying Buddhism (from a friend of mine who was Buddhist), and there's supposedly reference to Jesus in Buddhist and Hindu texts, although I have heard that some of the texts don't quite jive with the historical timing (although what does, really). Supposedly in the Gnostic Gospels (a.k.a "The Nag Hamadi Library". These books were "omitted" by the church and declared heresy when they were forming their idea of what Christianity was going to be), there is scripture that could be interpreted as Jesus talking about a belief reincarnation, which would tie back to Hinduism. It also talks of his resurection as being a spiritual state rather than a physical one.

Much of what were taught about Jesus has been fed to us through the church. That information has been manipulated, mistranscribed, and mistranslated over the last 2000 years, and even a bit of "artistic Licence" has been added over the centuries. For example, the quote attributed to Jesus "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" isn't in earlier versions of the book! The book "Misquoting Jesus" has some interesting examples like this and other ones.

When you consider the politics behind the formation of the church, and the manipulation of the information provided to the masses, it had little to do with people's salvation than it did the control of the masses. The original message has been long forgotten and one that the people now know is the word of Man more than it is of God. In that regard, Christianity could be considered a false religion.

[Fancy]

I read that the original writings have been changed so much that its possible if Jesus does return, he wouldn't recognize the new versions.

[janalta]

Oh...he's back.
It's true....he was shopping for tofu and soy milk in a grocery store here in Kelowna the other day.
Felt kind of bad for him actually....you'd think someone would have told him that if he chose to come back in Canada in mid November that the long cotton robe and leather shoes weren't going to cut it like they did in the desert.
He looked pretty cold.

[steven lloyd]

Oh...he's back.

It's true ...

Simon Cowell praised as a 21st century Jesus by Christian group

The 51-year-old music mogul has been featured in the evangelical magazine Re, which praised his straight talking.
X Factor boss Simon Cowell has been praised as a 21st century Jesus by a group of Christians.

The 51-year-old music mogul has been featured in the evangelical magazine Re, which praised his straight talking.
An article, which had the headline The Cowell Factor, featuring Cowell, was published in the official journal for the Assemblies of God church.

It said: "Jesus, the one we think of as being meek and mild, gentle and loving and full of compassion, had the ability to talk tough. For some his words were upsetting and difficult to swallow - just like Cowell's - but he spoke truth and doesn't the truth hurt sometimes?

"Simon Cowell takes, learns from them and grows in the process, and there are numerous stories in the Bible of people who do the same."

http://celebedge.ca/bang/simon_cowell_p ... p/a8c84b22

[grammafreddy]

It is true, QK, that we know very little about Jesus' life until he was about 31 years old, but why do you say he was in India? I have never heard this before.

I don't have a reference but I have heard of this before. I've also heard of Jesus studying Buddhism (from a friend of mine who was Buddhist), and there's supposedly reference to Jesus in Buddhist and Hindu texts, although I have heard that some of the texts don't quite jive with the historical timing (although what does, really). Supposedly in the Gnostic Gospels (a.k.a "The Nag Hamadi Library". These books were "omitted" by the church and declared heresy when they were forming their idea of what Christianity was going to be), there is scripture that could be interpreted as Jesus talking about a belief reincarnation, which would tie back to Hinduism. It also talks of his resurection as being a spiritual state rather than a physical one.

Much of what were taught about Jesus has been fed to us through the church. That information has been manipulated, mistranscribed, and mistranslated over the last 2000 years, and even a bit of "artistic Licence" has been added over the centuries. For example, the quote attributed to Jesus "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" isn't in earlier versions of the book! The book "Misquoting Jesus" has some interesting examples like this and other ones.

When you consider the politics behind the formation of the church, and the manipulation of the information provided to the masses, it had little to do with people's salvation than it did the control of the masses. The original message has been long forgotten and one that the people now know is the word of Man more than it is of God. In that regard, Christianity could be considered a false religion.

There used to be a scholarly guy on the radio who searched out and studied ancient manuscripts - originals. He found a lot of them in England (where Mary and her mother, Saint Ann, are buried) but also was allowed access to the Vatican archives and many other world religious archives and museums. There were many documents, diaries and books written by Jesus' brothers, Matthew and other friends that chronicled the early years of the supposed Jesus, his work (not religious work - labour-type work) and his brothers and (sisters?). They told about his grandfather who was a shipping and mining (tin and lead) magnate who did trade with England.

I'll see if I can find more about who this scholar was. It was very interesting (even to an atheist like me).

[averagejoe]

GF, it was Jesus's Uncle Joseph of Arimathea who did a lot of travelling to England. He was a tin merchant. I'm was just reading a book on possible travels of Jesus. 18 years are missing in his life. This book has 3 possible locations that Jesus had travelled to during those lost years.
1) Parthia, an empire bigger and stronger than Rome. Parthia area was from the Euphrates River to the Hindu Cush Mnts. Parthia existed for almost 500 years and defeated Rome in every battle but 1. Where the 3 wise men had journeyed from when Christ was born.
2) England, because of trade and the possibility of Joesph of Arimathea and Jesus had lived in a place called Glastonbury England.
3)And possibly the New World. (North America) Apparently, Europe thru the Phoenician's who had been going for over a thousand years before Christ, mining Copper in the Lake Superior near Isle Royale where somewhere around 5,000 ancient mines exist.

Extra note: Ireland and Armenia (a province of Parthia) were the first 2 Christian nations in history.

[averagejoe]

Here are some interesting websites about the ancient mining in Isle Royale in Michigan.

ittp://www.michigansotherside.com/Artic ... Page2.html

http://www.philipcoppens.com/copper.html

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf090/sf090a01.htm

[Homeownertoo]

GF, it was Jesus's Uncle Joseph of Arimathea who did a lot of travelling to England. He was a tin merchant. I'm was just reading a book on possible travels of Jesus. 18 years are missing in his life. This book has 3 possible locations that Jesus had travelled to during those lost years.
1) Parthia, an empire bigger and stronger than Rome. Parthia area was from the Euphrates River to the Hindu Cush Mnts. Parthia existed for almost 500 years and defeated Rome in every battle but 1.

Whoa. Parthia's history during the Roman era was far more complex and fractious than this fanciful description. I can't imagine any reputable historian claiming it was either larger or stronger than Rome. It reached its greatest extent in the 1st cent. BC, just as Rome was becoming an empire and moving into lands formerly controlled by Parthia (Armenia, Syria). It endured less than half as long as the Roman empire and actually ceased to exist by mid-2nd cent. AD, when the Sassanids (Persians) overthrew its rulers and combined it with Khorasan.
"The decline of the Parthian Empire was due to the Romans invading and sacking the Parthian Empire. In the east, the rise of the Kushan dynasty came, and the west, the province of Persia in the Parthian Empire gained more power. The Emperor Vologases dealt with the new Roman campaigns against the Parthians and the usurpation of his brother who became the Emperor Artabanus V. The Empire was further weakened by the invasions of border people and the Romans." -- Wikipedia

2) England, because of trade and the possibility of Joesph of Arimathea and Jesus had lived in a place called Glastonbury England.

This would be odd, indeed, since even the scant refernces to Josoeph of Arimathea in Britain place him there after the death of Jesus.

3)And possibly the New World. (North America) Apparently, Europe thru the Phoenician's who had been going for over a thousand years before Christ, mining Copper in the Lake Superior near Isle Royale where somewhere around 5,000 ancient mines exist.

Fun to speculate on but there is no evidence for it.

[averagejoe]

Homeowner wrote: Fun to speculate on but there is no evidence for it.

Whats the speculation? That Jesus maybe came to North America or about the copper mines? Check my last posting where I gave some evidence. There is alot more evidence of European's being in North America at that time. You could checkout the Hopewell Civilization.

[averagejoe]

Here is some interesting info on Christ in England...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... gland.html

http://www.greatdreams.com/jesus2.htm

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Glastonbury

[averagejoe]

First of all Wikipedia as I always said is the worse sourcse of info one could you use.

Homeowner wrote:
I can't imagine any reputable historian claiming it was either larger or stronger than Rome.

How do you explain that the Roman Empire won only 1 battle in 500 years? Parthia also had an alliance with the Scythians in the Black Sea and Caspian Sea area's??

Homeowner wrote:
It reached its greatest extent in the 1st cent. BC, just as Rome was becoming an empire and moving into lands formerly controlled by Parthia (Armenia, Syria).

Armenia was invaded by Rome many times because it sat on the Western frontier of the Parthia Empire and were driven out many times by the Partian Empire.

Homeowner wrote:
It endured less than half as long as the Roman empire and actually ceased to exist by mid-2nd cent. AD, when the Sassanids (Persians) overthrew its rulers and combined it with Khorasan.

This a true statement. The Persian's rebelled against the Parthian Empire after the Parthian Army was depleated after the Battle of Nisibis in 215 AD. This battle was possibly the 3 biggest battle in world history after Kursk and Stalingrad."

Homeowner wrote:
The decline of the Parthian Empire was due to the Romans invading and sacking the Parthian Empire.

You contradict your self with this statement from Wikipedia...you had earlier said that the Parthian Empire was overthrown by the Persian's. Rome was to weak after the loss at the Battle of Nisibis.

[Homeownertoo]

First of all Wikipedia as I always said is the worse sourcse of info one could you use.

Homeowner wrote:
I can't imagine any reputable historian claiming it was either larger or stronger than Rome.

How do you explain that the Roman Empire won only 1 battle in 500 years? Parthia also had an alliance with the Scythians in the Black Sea and Caspian Sea area's??

Easy. You're simply wrong. See next section.

Homeowner wrote:
It reached its greatest extent in the 1st cent. BC, just as Rome was becoming an empire and moving into lands formerly controlled by Parthia (Armenia, Syria).

Armenia was invaded by Rome many times because it sat on the Western frontier of the Parthia Empire and were driven out many times by the Partian Empire.

In 20 BC, Augustus negotiated a truce with the Parthians, making Armenia a buffer zone between the two. The Parthians forced Armenia into submission in 37 AD, but in 47 the Romans retook control of the kingdom.

Under Nero, the Romans fought a campaign (55-63) against the Parthian Empire, which had invaded the Kingdom of Armenia, allied with the Romans. After gaining Armenia in 60, then losing it in 62, the Romans sent the legion XV Apollinaris from Pannonia to Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo, legatus of Syria. In 63, strengthened further by the legions III Gallica, V Macedonica, X Fretensis and XXII, General Corbulo entered into the territories of Vologases I of Parthia, who then returned the Armenian kingdom to Tiridates.

Another campaign was led by Emperor Lucius Verus in 162-165, after Vologases IV of Parthia had invaded Armenia and installed his chief general on its throne. To counter the Parthian threat, Verus set out for the east. His army won significant victories and retook the capital. Sohaemus, a Roman citizen of Armenian heritage, was installed as the new client king. But during an epidemic within the Roman forces, Parthians retook most of their lost territory in 166. Sohaemus retreated to Syria, аnd Parthia's power was restored power over Armenia.

After the fall of Parthia to the Sassanids, the succeeding Sassanian Dynasty aspired to reestablish Persian control, and occupied Armenia in 252. However, in 287, Tiridates III the Great was established King of Armenia by the Roman armies.

So much for your fantasy that Rome won only one battle against Parthia.

Homeowner wrote:
The decline of the Parthian Empire was due to the Romans invading and sacking the Parthian Empire.

You contradict your self with this statement from Wikipedia...you had earlier said that the Parthian Empire was overthrown by the Persian's. Rome was to weak after the loss at the Battle of Nisibis.

Sacking does not mean ending. They didn't stick around after the 'sacking'. But this was long before Nisibis, by which time 'Rome' was a shadow of its former self, and anyway Parthia had long since ended by then.

[Homeownertoo]

Homeowner wrote: Fun to speculate on but there is no evidence for it.

Whats the speculation? That Jesus maybe came to North America or about the copper mines? Check my last posting where I gave some evidence. There is alot more evidence of European's being in North America at that time. You could checkout the Hopewell Civilization.

That Jesus "maybe" came to Britain or North America. There is no evidence for either.

And no, there is not "a lot" of evidence of Europeans in North America at that time.

[averagejoe]

Homeowner wrote:
In 20 BC, Augustus negotiated a truce with the Parthians, making Armenia a buffer zone between the two. The Parthians forced Armenia into submission in 37 AD, but in 47 the Romans retook control of the kingdom.

Here is a map for you to see that the Parthian Empire was not retook control of by the Romans. Only a the province of Armenia was. Parts of Parthia were invaded. But not conquered.

http://www.utexas.edu/courses/ancientfi ... ?linenum=4

[1nick]

"I really hate the Romans"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE