Was Jesus, a victim of self aggrandizing suicide.

why don't you guys get a room huh?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I might return it if you were a RegularOldgirl.
I love women only.
I do like some men a lot though based on their minds and not their hairy bodies.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Regards
DL

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Why?
You like threesomes and want to romp do you?
If that is your real picture then we will keep the room dark.

Just kidding, you are not that bad.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Regards
DL

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It was purely platonic. I'm not...

NOT that there's anything wrong with that... (Seinfeld).

 

I agree and found this one day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in9SiDtJLaU&feature=player_embedded

Regards
DL

 

you are. your self-glorification makes me sick.

 

depends how many times you clock it up

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Why India? Possibly he had been there before?

 

There is a big possibility for that; there are more than 18 years that were absolutely erased from the canon.
One theory is that when Jesus reached adolescence, out of curiosity, attraction or respect, Jesus went to return the visit to the three magi from the East, the 3 Kings from India that went to pay tribute to him at his birth place. There was a well-known trade route from Jerusalem to India in Jesus days.

The first lost years of the gospel, is when the wholly family went to Egypt to get away from the prosecution of Herod. They probably took refuge were the marginal Egyptian Jews lived (now known as the -Therapeutae- they were mystic healers, accounted by the Greeks). But then they returned to Jerusalem when Jesus was about 12 years old. These years are also missing in the canon…
After that episode of Jesus arguing with the priests in the temple when he was 12, there is no more mention of Jesus life in the canon until he was 30.

There are scriptures in Tibet (Hemis Monastery in Ladakh, India, high in the Himalaya) and Kashmir about his life in India, in his adolescence and as a young adult he received initiation as Issa (his Initiate name). There is an early church of Thomas in Kashmir he went with Jesus to India after the crucifixion; and there is also a text from a King in India called “Salivahana”, from the first century, the scripture is called Bhavishya Maha Purana (written in Sanskrit) where the King meets “Isa-Masiha” (Jesus the Messiah) years after the crucifixion.

I read an amazing book called: ”Jesus journey to the country of the Magi” (interestingly have not yet been translated into English language, I read it in Spanish, the book was published in 2009 and it is called “Viaje de Jesus al País de los Magos”) that accounted the visions from 1820 to 1821 of Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824) (in 2004 canonized as saint for her documented clear visions, miracles and stigmata). Mel Gibson even based the movie “Passion of the Christ” from other visions attributed to her.
The interesting thing about this book, is that the visions of Anna were documented in detail about Jesus journey to India as a young adult; Anna Catherine Emmerich was not a scholar, and did not have access to the information we have right now about Jesus scriptures and early churches in India; but still, her visions about Jesus journey were in extreme clear detail, she said that she felt that she was there when she was having the visions, and she herself did not understand and was puzzled by the fact that she was in two places in time simultaneously. She was cataloged as an heretic in her time, because what she preached was not in any scripture of the bible, she claimed she was a witness of the whole thing.

 

My whole theory is that these lost years of Jesus were systematically removed because they would show how Jesus was an ordinary human being (a “hippie type” one); and he had to experience and learn many things before he became (by his own effort) an enlightened Being. Showing that everyone can achieve what he did, and that there is no point in blindly worshiping him.

 

That was genius. Sometimes I feel like I am missing out on so much great stuff just because I'm so local. What do they call that parochial?

 

I saw some TV show on this. It seems a little far fetched. Most blokes in this era never got more than 5 miles away from where they were born. (just guessing -- figuring it was like New York City with no taxis).

I'm guessing he just made a buttload of benches and tables and stuff (following his dad's lead) and his life was extremely boring. So boring that he wanted to bust out. And since he was a major narcissist, he eventually made up a few whoppers and went out looking for sycophants.

But I'm just spittballing here.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Mmm I think you are projecting your own points of view into Jesus’ actions. The reason or motive for what Jesus did could, and most probably, be something we cannot imagine.
I say that because I believe his actions were caused by a quite different motive than what you are stating, but nonetheless if I say it I would also be projecting my own ideas into Jesus.

The thing is, as he himself said “The tree is known by its fruits”, and studying Jesus words (fruits); the “tree” that Jesus mind was, seems to me as one of the most precious ones in history, not to mention highly artistic.

 

Too bad the fruits don't all know the tree, But I guess that is why Perennial philosophy exists.

 

Have you read Bertrand Russell's essay "Why I am not a Christian"? He quotes a lot of Jesus and takes the moral high ground since Jesus' words make him out to be kind of a dick.

 

I did, and Bertrand Russell makes some interesting points; he was not much against the teachings of Christ as he was against the hypocrisy of mainstream Christians, as to that I agree with him wholeheartedly. Then he starts discrediting some teachings of Christ as if he knew what Christ meant; I agree with Russell on the things he opposed Christ teachings, but I do not think he understood them as they were originally designed. For example he discredits Jesus statements on the supremacy of Israel, or the belief in hell; but I don’t think Jesus himself believed these things either; you can just interpret his words that way if you wish to. The description of Hell is taken from the Apocalypses, but that book has a deep esoteric meaning not meant to be understood in that time (occult simbology used to protect the teachings). Statements taken out of context can be interpreted in many ways; you need to consider the context in order to understand what he meant. As an example: the Hebrew term “Yisrael” (later Greek “Israel”) means, quite literally, "He has striven with God," or "He has been saved by God"; Jesus was not referring to a worldly country, as if that makes sense; it makes no sense at all as Russell stated, but he didn’t consider other meanings.
Russell was against churches and the manipulation of the masses via fear, Jesus was against those things as well; I think the whole essay of Russell is directed to Christianity, not Christ.

Also, Russell uses the word “Christ” indifferently to “Jesus”; when you understand the teachings you would know that these words are not to be used in the same meaning. He says that “Christ” was the man, well, he was mistaken about that, “Jesus” was the man, and “Christ” is the quality of his consciousness that lies hidden within each and every one of us. Jesus was the son of man, Christ is the son of god (notice the past and present verbs used); cause Jesus was the mortal man, Christ lives as the universal spirit. Off course these sentences have metaphorical meaning, not quite literal.

 

Good thought provoking summary. You remember a lot more if it than I do. I read it in 1973.

 

Not the way I use that word.
Humor transcends boundaries.

Redards
DL

 

Not quite literal for sure.
Yet you read literally, to some extent, a book that begins with a talking snake and ends with a seven headed monsters.
Jesus appears between those two and so does his genocidal father of the O T.

How much of a literal Jesus do you believe in?
Virgin birth?
Was he his own father somehow?
Did he father himself with his own mother?

Regards
DL

 

Greatest I am,

Those questions can be answered the day you make a gold fish or even a little guppy.