What happened to Jesus the second time around?

Good stuff. My FIL goes to meetings up the North East to view the cosmos with reduced light pollution benefits. He's got a tracker type scope. Constantly adjusting. Brilliant stuff. Have you managed to track the space station?

Unfortunately my mount as yet does not have software capable of tracking the ISS.
I am awaiting new firmware, but it is not high on the list of the programmer.

I have had it in sight, , but as you found with Saturn it's difficult to manually track it, It's quite fast.
 
Sponsored Links
What happened to Jesus the second time around? Born 25th Dec, died some years later on a Friday, came alive again two days later and given that he's not around today in the same sense as he was when the bible was written, what happened to Jesus and why is this part of the story not told? Perhaps it is, I just didn't listen. I mean, did he make a few more dining tables and wardrobes for the neighbours then die of an infection from a spinter or what?

The bible was initially written by the disciples some time after Jesus's death, and they're are prefaced with the word "according to", so it's actually a recollection at a later date about what probably happened. I think it was written in Greek and Hebrew, even though Jesus very likely spoke Amaraic and Hebrew, with Latin being spoken by the Romans in charge, so may well have been a case of "did you say what I think you said etc etc".

It's been changed through several languages, and the dates got adjusted to help integrate the Pagans who worshipped the seasons into the Christian Church, so although it's reckoned that Jesus was born somewhere about March, the Pagan festival around Christmas, was deemed a better point to use.

Jesus didn't start teaching till he was about 30, and was crucified when he was about 33, and there are stories of him in appearing Glastonbury and India, so he travelled far and learnt a lot prior to preaching, but the real question becomes, was it before, or after he "died". There is a strong school of thought that he went off to India with Mary Magdalene after he rose from the dead, but that would have shown he was human more than enlightened, and wouldn't have worked in the churches favour.
 
Wow, that's a nice chunk oh history right there :D So he might have died, as a man, in India but there was no-body there who could/would write about or suitably translate the event?

Nozzle
 
Sponsored Links
If the authorities had tried to murder you, I suspect you wouldn't start advertising who you were, and the enormity of what happened in Jerusalem, wouldn't have travelled ahead of him. As the Christian religion didn't really get going till well after his "supposed" death, there wouldn't have been importance given to stranger that spoke another language. All quite straight forward really.
 
If the authorities had tried to murder you, I suspect you wouldn't start advertising who you were, and the enormity of what happened in Jerusalem, wouldn't have travelled ahead of him. As the Christian religion didn't really get going till well after his "supposed" death, there wouldn't have been importance given to stranger that spoke another language. All quite straight forward really.

I sense a paradox here. I understood that the Roman's murdered him becuase they didn't like his claim that he was related to God. This suggests they had an idea about this God fella and thus must have meant the Romans were established Christians to have even given a toss about this blasphemy.. or perhaps they were Jewish? Roman Catholicism must have come much later in the Roman times. I see what you're saying about not recognising the importance until after the fact.

Nozzle
 
If the authorities had tried to murder you, I suspect you wouldn't start advertising who you were, and the enormity of what happened in Jerusalem, wouldn't have travelled ahead of him. As the Christian religion didn't really get going till well after his "supposed" death, there wouldn't have been importance given to stranger that spoke another language. All quite straight forward really.

Did you not read the disclaimer on the first page of the Bible......

Any resemblance between the characters in this book, to any persons living or dead, would really be a miracle.
 
The Jews were proclaiming Jesus to be the Messiah, and they were hoping that he would help them rise up and overthrow the Roman empire. The problem was the Jewish church elders didn't like Jesus because he was threatening their supremacy, so got the Romans to put him on trial. I'm not sure if Pontius Pilate saw the truth behind the stich up, and tried to save Jesus, but it's more than likely that the crowd in the square were orthodox Jews, and didn't like Jesus challenging them. I can't comment on where the Roman in Roman catholics came from, but in theory, Catholicism should be a lot closer to the supposed original teachings of Jesus, as Christianity as we know it, came after the reformation during Henry the 8th breaking away from the Church of Rome - which might well be where the expression Roman Catholics come from.
 
I sense a paradox here. I understood that the Roman's murdered him becuase they didn't like his claim that he was related to God. This suggests they had an idea about this God fella and thus must have meant the Romans were established Christians to have even given a toss about this blasphemy.. or perhaps they were Jewish? Roman Catholicism must have come much later in the Roman times. I see what you're saying about not recognising the importance until after the fact.

Nozzle

NO, ceasar found no wrong in Jesus at all, it wasent the romans that wanted him dead, it was the jewish pharasees that wanted him dead,
Jesus told ceasar he had no power over him,unless it was given from above. Jesus gave himself do die on the cross.
when the guards went to find Jesus, they said we are looking for Jesus, and Jesus said I AM HE, and the guards all fell backwards to the ground, becuase of his autoirity in his words. but Jesus surrendered himself to the guards, becuase he planed to suffer on the cross and die and be raised again.
in the garden he sweated blood, yes, sweated blood becuase he knew what he was about to experience , he that had no sin, was about to become sin for us. he was about to take the full wrath of God, for every sin we commited,


you people need to read and study the bible
 
Food for thought.

http://www.thenazareneway.com/jesus_bloodline.htm Not the best source but a useful starting point to explore the theory that Jesus led a normal life for about 30 years before "going public" with his teachings.

The first time I heard that there might be a blood line from Jesus was in the 1950 from a priest who was convinced that there was or had been a blood line that was suppressed or maybe eliminated by the top people in the Catholic Church. His belief in the blood line got him kicked out of the priesthood
 
Why? It has no more authority than an Enid Blyton book.

Plus its filled with hate and horrible teachings. Such as how to beat your slave.

the old and new testament is enough for us, no more scriptures are needed, no new books have been added since the last one, which was over 1800 plus years ago.
if they wrote everything that Jesus did, there would not be enough room in the world to contain them.

john 21;25

25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

mark3;13

Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top