Image via Wikipedia
I’ve come across a couple of stories today that are doubtless going to generate a lot of controversy:
‘Jesus Discovery:’ Jerusalem Archeology Reveals Birth Of Christianity (HuffPost)
Supposedly this discovery was made on June 29, 2010 and yet we are just learning about it today? That in itself seem a bit odd. Also, both articles lead off with a photo of a carved image that they identify as a “fish” — well, perhaps, but look closely. Does that REALLY look like a fish to you? I’ll grant that it could be (you never know what was in the mind of some ancient artist from a completely different culture) but keep in mind that, as the first linked article mentions,
“… iconographic images on ossuaries are extremely rare, given the prohibition within Judaism of making images of people or animals.”
So if it’s NOT a fish, what could it be? I expect we’ll be seeing this photo on an upcoming segment of “Ancient Aliens“.
Now, despite everything I have written about my distaste for organized religion, and my belief that the god of the old testament was an evil imposter (probably an alien or an other-dimensional being, but one that didn’t show a great deal of love or compassion toward humanity, not even his supposedly “chosen people”), I still have no problem with the idea that Jesus actually existed. I do tend to believe that he actually did exist, but like many early figures, much of the lore that has been written about him was complete fiction, while other parts of his story suffered deliberate editing by the early church to remove the parts that they didn’t want people to know. I think that it’s much more likely that the reason Jesus came was something completely different from what the churches teach. The real purpose has been pretty much lost to us, although you can still catch glimpses of it in the four gospels (the parts that survived editing and revision, not to mention deliberate and unintentional translation errors) and especially in the some of the writings found in the Nag Hammadi library.
Some of the people who believe that we’ve been visited by aliens in the past believe that Jesus may have been an alien-human hybrid. Mary, of course, was his mother, but she was artificially inseminated with the sperm of Jesus’ father. And when he spoke of his “heavenly father” (and keep in mind that when you see the word “heaven” or “heavens” in the bible, that’s often more properly translated as “universe” or “skies”), he was really speaking of his “father in the sky”, or perhaps more precisely, his father in the alien spacecraft, that had access to some advanced technology (including a way to send “voices from the sky” if the occasion called for it). Again, that’s just a theory, and I’m not saying I believe it or disbelieve it (although in my mind, it’s more credible than some of the B.S. that the churches throw out there). While his “heavenly father” could have been the god of the old testament (in which case, he must have mellowed out a lot in his old age — maybe they got him the alien equivalent of psychiatric help for his little issue with destroying humans right and left), I tend to think it was probably some other alien. The Jews just assumed that his “heavenly father” was their god, and he wasn’t about to go out of his way to correct them, lest he be stoned to death before his ministry ever got off the ground.
Note that Jesus could never do any miracles in his home town. Ever wonder why that was? One guess is that he was using advanced technology (again, likely supplied by his “heavenly father” from the spacecraft in earth’s orbit — the same one the wise men had seen at Jesus’ birth, that led them right to the infant Jesus) and that in his younger days he’s already revealed some of his “bag of tricks” to those in his home town. So there were too many people there who knew what to look for. It’s the same reason a magician might not want to perform at a magician’s convention — if everyone there already knows the secrets, they aren’t going to be very impressed. Another theory is that it wasn’t entirely Jesus performing the miracles per se, it was the combined faith of those around him — Jesus was just sort of a catalyst or a focus point for their faith. In his home town, so many people had known him from childhood that they had no faith that he was anything other than an ordinary person. Therefore, there was no faith to amplify — the crowds or individuals around him were giving him nothing (or perhaps even negativity and disbelief). Again, my position is that “I don’t know”, but I do believe that had all of Jesus’ original teachings survived, many if not most of us could do the very same miracles that he did, and more. Whether those teachings were “how to make advanced technology” or “how to amplify your faith” or whatever they may have been, the fact that the early church went out of their way to destroy the parts that would not cause people to become dependent on a “priestly class” was a great tragedy.
This in no way is intended to denigrate Jesus’ ministry, or the fact that he came to teach us things that the church later decided it doesn’t want us to know (such as the reality of reincarnation). In fact, I believe it is the churches that are denigrating him every time they teach lies about him, or his reason for coming here (or give much more respect to the fake apostle Paul and his writings than they do to the teachings of Jesus). But keep in mind that Jesus’ ministry was to the Jewish people of his time, and never to the Gentiles. So the church uses Paul to try to place him as the “bridge” between Jesus and the Gentiles. Which is fine in one respect — I’m not saying that, despite all of Paul’s flaws, he didn’t have a genuine ministry to a specific group of Gentiles back in his day. But Paul’s writings, intended for specific churches in a specific culture at a specific time in history, should never have been considered as universal truths for the entire world at a time centuries in the future, while at the same time the clear teachings of Jesus have been all but ignored by many churches.
Ultimately, the problem with the discovery of this tomb is that it will be kind of like a UFO sighting — while it will be considered an interesting discovery and will provide additional “evidence” for the true believers, it will contribute very little to our actual knowledge. Just as a UFO sighting tells us virtually nothing about what they are, where they come from, or who’s inside them, the finding of Jesus’ tomb will probably not add a whole lot to our knowledge of his life or his teachings. I’d be much more excited if they’d found a first-century library that contained actual writings authored by Jesus himself, or even by one of the original disciples, written by their own hand. Not that I honestly believe we’d ever be allowed to see such a thing if it were found, particularly if it directly contradicted what the churches are teaching!
Related articles
- ‘JESUS DISCOVERY’: Has the Tomb of Jesus Been Found? (VIDEO) (blippitt.com)
- Jesus Discovery: Tomb Exploration Reveals First archaeological Evidence of Christianity from the Time of Jesus (inquisitr.com)
- ‘The Jesus Discovery:’ Simcha Jacobovici and James Tabor Claim to Have Found the Tomb of Jesus (ibtimes.com)
- Old and New Claims Being Made Over the ‘Jesus Discovery’ (thewesternexperience.com)
- ‘Jesus Discovery:’ Jerusalem Archeology Reveals Birth Of Christianity (fourbluehills.com)
- ‘Jesus Discovery:’ Jerusalem Archeology Reveals Birth Of Christianity (mybigearth.com)
- Earliest Christian Iconography Found In “Jesus Tomb” Area (neatorama.com)
- Tomb exploration reveals first archaeological evidence of Christianity from the time of Jesus (eurekalert.org)
- Tabor Tries Again to Sell the ‘Jesus Family Tomb’ Tale… (zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com)
