Jesus.
- This topic has 259 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 2 days, 22 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
He was a student of Gamaliel, who was a Pharisee, and they believed in the resurrection; some Christians believed in reincarnation, like most religious people of that time.
Gamaliel (often spelled Gramael) was a famous first-century Jewish Pharisee, a leading teacher of the law, and a respected member of the Sanhedrin (the ancient Jewish council and court).
Role in the Sanhedrin: Defended the Apostles: In the Bible book of Acts (chapter 5), when the Jewish leaders wanted to kill the early followers of Jesus, Gamaliel spoke up in the Sanhedrin.Wisdom and Caution: He advised the council to leave the apostles alone, saying that if their movement was just a human plan, it would fail on its own. However, if it was from God, fighting it meant fighting God. His advice saved the apostles from execution.
Historical and Religious Impact: Teacher of Paul: According to the New Testament, Gamaliel was the teacher who trained the Apostle Paul (Saul of Tarsus) in strict Jewish law.High Status: In Jewish tradition, he is called Rabban Gamaliel the Elder and is remembered as one of the greatest teachers of the Mishna
I’ve been reading about the Mishnah in Robert Price: Deconstructing Jesus, and am awaiting his book on Paul: The Colossal Apostle.
There were no Pharisees, and no Synagogues, in Galilee in the supposed time of Jesus. There was also war between Jerusalem and Samaria, Galilee’s ally.
The Jews had no reason to want Christians killed. As Christianity developed, it shifted the blame for the crucifixion from the Romans to the Jews.
For some Christians Jesus escaped the cross and Simon of Cyrene was crucified in his place. Also, Barabbas means “Son of the Father” and some said he was Jesus and thus escaped.
The pre-Gospel epistles do not mention historicity and are solely concerned with a “spiritual” Christ, but by the time of Ignatius, that writer is frenziedly concerned with establishing an historical Jesus; desperately so!
The Gnostics did not exist. In a sense, all early Christians fit the bill as Gnostics, but there was no sect known, by themselves or by others, as Gnostics. Even Christian persecutors of one another had no knowledge of Gnostics. (Pun intended).
They can write and negate whatever they want, but the reality is that they can not deny that Jesus is an African myth, and all the writers of the Bible and the personalities of the Bible were African too, and none of them ever existed. Nobody can rewrite history.
Semite is not a race or an ethnic group; it is a group of languages, like Aryan, and mankind does not come from one man and his children. Palaeontology, medical histology and medical embryology have proven something different. The colour of our skin is produced by an internal gland activated by the sun or deactivated by the lack of sunlight ( did not synthesise melanin); we all come from the same origin. As Jose Ingeniero wrote: The lion is yellowish because it adapts itself to the colour of the grass
The book: Jesus 3000 years before Christ is evidence of the real origin of the myth of Jesus, and the Bible unearthed has proven with archaeological evidence that there is no evidence that the Israeli lived in Egypt, and the exodus never took place; therefore, the whole myth and legends fall apart
As Engels said at Marx’s funeral: Before man thought about politics and religion, he/she had to resolve their immediate needs; that is the real history of mankind based on reality instead of mythologies
Virgin births and resurrections are no doubt common everywhere and very old, but Jesus is not an African myth. He is a myth indeed, but one born amid the turmoil of the Jewish/Roman War.
However, Christianity very quickly gained a hold in North Africa, long before it won state protection. Now, Christianity, but from a modern colonial source, is so interwoven in Africa with ancient folk beliefs that believers may think it is African.
Read the books that I just mentioned. Everything is there. Catholicism is just the religion of the Europeans, invented by the Roman Empire using a distorted version of African mythology, which was used to colonise other peoples.
All the pictures and images were made by European artists. The original jews were African, and they had dark skin; they were blacks
The whole area of the Middle East was part of Africa; it was to be called northeast Africa.
Only a socialist society would be able to present the real history of mankind; there are too many negationists and conspiracists calling themselves historians.
At present, the USA government and its fake historians want to negate the whole history of the African peoples and the African slaves and insert their Christian white nationalists’ stupidities and the so-called replacement theory; the real replaced ones were the Asian natives.
The real historians, as Francis Jennings and Howard Zinn have proven and shown a different reality, and their books are not even mentioned. T
The religion of the natives was based on nature; nature and themselves were the same, showing that most religions were attached to a mode of production, as it was written in the book How Gods Were Created, a book written based on the materialist conception of history
” Catholicism is just the religion of the Europeans, invented by the Roman Empire using a distorted version of African mythology, which was used to colonise other peoples.”
There seems to be confusion here with two different epochs.
Catholicism, by which I suppose you mean Trinitarian Orthodoxy (Nicaean, Athanasian, Christianity), was not invented by the Roman Empire. It was adopted by it; then discarded in favour of Arianism for a brief spell, and was finally enforced as the state religion in the 390s by Theodosius. This was also not the time of Roman expansion, but was approaching the end of Roman power.” All the pictures and images were made by European artists.”
Not so. What about the Copts, Ethiopians and Armenians, who separated in the 5th century? They have a rich iconography.
” The whole area of the Middle East was part of Africa; it was to be called northeast Africa.”
When?
” At present, the USA government and its fake historians want to negate the whole history of the African peoples and the African slaves and insert their Christian white nationalists’ stupidities and the so-called replacement theory; the real replaced ones were the Asian natives.”
Agreed, but what has this to do with the ancient world? White racism was a product of the Atlantic slave trade, 1,500 years later in the Early Modern period.
” The religion of the natives was based on nature; nature and themselves were the same, showing that most religions were attached to a mode of production, as it was written in the book How Gods Were Created, a book written based on the materialist conception of history.”
Yes, but again, relevance to the ancient era?
“Jesús, 3000 años antes de Cristo: Un faraón llamado Jesús is a non-fiction book written by [Llogari Pujol Boix and Claude-Brigitte Carcenac Pujol], first published in April 1994. It explores historical and philological parallels between the life of Jesus of Nazareth and ancient Egyptian mythology, particularly the attributes of Osiris and the pharaohs.”
I do not deny that older myths were co-opted and renamed by the early Christians. They copied and distorted everything, and also faked everything.
You seem to be thinking, when you say “Catholicism”, of a much later period.
Western Europe in the Byzantine era (the time of the Church councils of Nicaea and Chalcedon) was largely discarded. Ecclesiastical history was taking place in the Middle East. The Popes of Rome were unimportant. They were hemmed in by Germanic tribes, who were Arian Christians, not Catholics. The Popes struggled to survive as an enclave of Orthodoxy out on a limb left to itself. They were also beset by the Huns from the east, and by Arabs, who sacked Rome in the 840s. The strongest influence within the Church of Rome was Greek.
Only in 1054 did the Pope, frustrated at being ignored by the East, make himself independent from the uninterested Orthodox Church, and commence an independent Roman Catholic Church. It would still be centuries before a nascent capitalism would launch the colonial era.The problem is that you want to negate everything, and you want other people to accept everything that you post. Everybody has different opinions, and this forum supports diversity of opinion
Ok. But there remains the question of historical evidence.
Did Christianity imbibe the myth of the dying and resurrected god from Egyptian mythology? Yes. But did Christianity arise in Africa? No.
Was the Roman Catholic Church the institution before 1054 that we know emerged much later? No.
Did Rome invent Christianity? No.
Was Cleopatra African or Greek? Greek.
Did white racism exist in Roman times? No.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.