Priitaa

Haribol prabhus, Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. I just wanted to wish everyone a happy Radhastami! Srimati Radharani ki jai!

I hadn't realize exactly how long that post was. I knew it was long, but not THAT much. Sorry.

Oh my, well, I think you must be the same person who I keep getting mixed up with Shiva, and now with this Xtian fanatic. ha Sorry, but you did word that post similar to his. Anyway, if you have any questions about Prabhupada, you can ask but also need to understand the position of a pure devotee. Also, I have not read your questions about tilaka yet, tho I suspect I know what they are, and where they are. Maybe tomorrow. :-)

Thiest, Everything he quotes, he does not necessarily believe. Sometimes he quotes facts, what "they" believe, for example. Or what science believes, or what 'modern religion' teaches, etc. In that quote, I think he was pointing out that when freed from misunderstood Xtian fundamentalism, that helped to find the facts, not that he liked the idea. I know some of it initially sounds unusual or even nonChirt, but it is not nonChrist at all. It may be against modern day concocted Christianity, but not against Christ. I got to know the author online and he is a very VERY strong believer in Jesus. He explained that his entire purpose of his site is to prove that Jesus survived and moved to Inida! /images/graemlins/smile.gif Therefore, I made msyelf read thru it. While I dont agree with it all, I found if I gave it a chance or time (I admit it takes time which I often dont have much of), but then some of it made sense or I agreed with more. But not all. It didn't matter once I realized his purpose was pure. Hope this explains things.

Thank you for this! I suspect we tend to think an offenses is only when it is on the crude platform, which I too have been guilty of this misunderstanding. But it is also on the more 'polite,' when we criticize. Also a previous post mentiones like that: Good point. Even subtle levels (To speak of, or address, with impious irreverence) are dangerous.

http://bric.users.ftech.net/chapter03.html The Lights Of Truth Go Out TRUTH DIES WITH THE APOSTLES By the end of the first-century the conveyers of theocratic knowledge were all dead. The first 'presence' period of Jesus Christ had come to its end; the specially assisted revealing of knowledge was over. Manmade theories and doctrines were systematically stamping out any remaining influence left by these first-century disciples, true spiritual knowledge was dying from the earth with them. It would be impossible for humans alone to restore it; at least, not until the same 'helping spirit' was reactivated again. Bible evidence indicates that this would not take place until much later, almost 2,000 years later, when God's non-intervention time allocation to the nations came to an end, (see chapter 13). Then, active involvement influencing in the earth's affairs would start again; the communication link would be renewed, promoting accurate theocratic knowledge. Many will disagree, claiming that the Christian religion started by the apostles continued on and is still doing so. Well, according to the apostles themselves, this was certainly not what they expected to happen after they died. These apostles had written a lot of privileged information on how the situation was to develop. Let's examine just what they did anticipate. SPIRIT COMMUNICATOR Jesus made a promise to his apostles in the year AD 33 that he would maintain direct links with them until the then functioning Jewish age came to its end. He said: "Look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things (age)" (Matthew 28:20 NWT). Even though Jesus moved back to the spirit realm, he maintained a direct personal link with each individually he had purchased by means of a spirit powered communicator. The Jewish age or system ended in complete destruction under the hands of the Romans, just as Jesus had predicted it would (check Luke 21:5-6, 20). The historical records confirm that this occurred in the year AD 70 when the Roman armies under Titus completely destroyed the temple and the capital city of Jerusalem, removing all Jewish inhabitants from the land of Israel; (further information on this can be found in chapter 17). We can now calculate that Jesus' promise to maintain this special spiritual communication with his apostles continued for a further 37 1/2 years, from 33 to 70. The apostles fully understood that they were working within a limited time frame that would only last 37 1/2 years. This is why Paul in the year AD 56 speaking about how his contemporary Christian brothers should conduct themselves, said they should bear in mind that "the appointed time has grown short" (1 Corinthians 7:29, NRSV). So as the time left to them was reduced, only 14 years left remaining, they should arrange their affairs taking this into account. The direct communication bonding through the spirit power not only strengthened them, but taught them things that Jesus had previously said they were unable to grasp, but would be able to when they were tuned into this power source. To do this they required their own personal spirit 'communicator and receiver'. The apostles received this exclusive piece of equipment when it was presented to them at Pentecost in 33. The scriptures tell us that when they received this spiritual equipment, it was like a tongue (symbol of speech) of fire that sat on each one, Acts2:3. Immediately it went to work on their minds, giving them instantaneously the ability to speak in new languages. It also elevated them mentally, enabling them to receive knowledge and understand many important issues and developments that previously they had been unable to grasp (John 16:12-15). LIMITED PERIOD This spirit communicator and mental educating mechanism would only be given to selected individuals and for a limited time. When they died, the mechanism would die with them. Along with the information they received in connection with the Kingdom came warnings of the situation that was to develop following their deaths and the ending of this special arrangement. The apostle Paul explained that a full-blown apostasy would later take over. He warned about it, in fact, he said this very warning that he was giving them was then acting as a restraint, holding the main apostasy back until its permitted time to take over. Although Paul told them that it was partly in evidence then, it would not be fully out in the open until the restraining influence of the apostles, and the spirit working through them, were out of the way in death (check 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12). The apostle John, right at the end of his life around AD 98, confirmed what Paul had already said about this antichrist, but by then the antichrist was taking over fast, as the restraints were all but died off, proof that they were already then at the end of the Kingdom recruiting period (1 John 2:18-19, 4:1-3). The term 'apostasy' carries the original Greek meaning of separating, deserting or abandoning. The apostasy would desert or abandon the true knowledge in favour of its own false teachings. In this way the apostasy would be directly opposing what Christ had taught and revealed; it would be an antichrist organisation. CHRIST OPPOSING APOSTASY TAKES OVER Once the restraining apostles had been removed through death, the antichrist apostasy, took over completely, it was foretold to last for a set period of time. Paul said: "There will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for them-selves to have their ears tickled, and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories" (2 Timothy 4:3-4 NWT). The apostles anticipated the antichrist apostasy taking over after they died, to last for an appointed period of time, during which this apostasy condition and antichrist organisation would rule. According to 2 Thessalonians 2:8, follow-ing this allocated time period the apostasy would be exposed by Christ himself when he again turns his attentions to the earth and Kingdom affairs, some 1,900 years later at the time of the 'manifestation of his presence', (check 2 Thess 2:1-12). The apostles also warned of many of the false teachings or doctrines that the corporate apostasy would bring in, establishing them through their own approved and appointed teachers. THE GREAT APOSTASY. They would bring in destructive contradicting teachings, 2 Pet 2:1. They would exploit their followers with deceptions, 2 Pet 2:3. Follow teachings of demons, hypocrites speaking lies, 1 Tim 4:1. They would forbid some of their members to marry, 1 Tim 4:3. They would make decrees not to eat certain foods, 1 Tim 4:3. They would turn from the truth to false stories, 2 Tim 4:4. They would teach a denial that Christ was the only begotten son of God, referred to as the inspired expression of error, this was probably the most reprehensible of all, 1 John 4:1-9. APOSTASY RESTRAINING ENDS As soon as the final apostle died, this is precisely what happened! Once the resistance put up against it by the spirit empowered apostles was no longer there, the truth abandoning apostasy spread and gained ground. The second-century saw much confusion, contradiction and conflict. The prevalent opposition religions were vying for predominance which included the Greek and Roman pagan forms of worship. These religions had evolved numerous religious doctrines and ideas that were becoming mixed with the apostles' teachings. When major conflicting differences in doctrines occurred, gradually the weight of the pagan concepts won out. There were no power-assisted apostles left to resist it. This progressive mixing and polluting with pagan doctrines diluted out any strength of true Christian knowledge. The doctrines central to the Greek and Roman religions were multiple God deities, particularly triad deities. Greek philosophers such as Plato had developed beliefs in multiple gods and man's relationship with them. These concepts derived from more ancient civilisations such as Egypt. From these hand-me down ideas the Greeks and thereby the Romans cultivated their ancient religious beliefs, including the immortality of the human soul, an underworld concept of purgatory tormenting with fire, and family deities of Gods; they incorporated all of these into their pagan religions. Through the mixing of such potent pagan ideas the pure truth was dissolved out. One of the major foretold apostasy doctrines to appear was the one that would contradict Christ's position as being the only begotten son of God (1 John 4:3,5,6,9). By tracing the history of the apostasy and how it developed the denial doctrine of error on the origin of Jesus Christ, we shall see how the spirit induced truth of the apostles was indeed slowly rubbed out. With the restraints removed, a melting pot of religious ideologies, and doctrines developed. Various conflicting thoughts and pagan concepts from the Roman, Greek, Hebrew and Christian religions were stirred into a simmering broth. As time passed the friction and confusion often brought the pot to the boil, resulting in many heated clashes. Under various leaders, groups of dissenters were gathered, following their own particular teachings. By the year AD 325 about 225 years after the last apostle had died, this whole divisive situation was causing great concern to the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine. He was getting so much trouble in his empire from the unrest and conflict caused between these pseudo-Christian and pagan groups, so to settle things down he set up a council in the city of Nicaea to sort the mess out and agree a unified state religion that all could live with and he could back. APOSTASY DEVELOPED THROUGH CREED DOCTRINES The position of Christ as always was the focal issue: was he God, angel, or man? As far as Constantine was concerned he didn't much care which was agreed, so long as it was agreed by all, and the wrangling stopped. From the cauldron of this confusion evolved a primitive statement of belief: a simple creed statement, it was hoped all could agree too. Crystallised at this council, the creed slowly at first, as the conflicts could so easily be re-ignited, but bit by bit, and through various stages, became fashioned into a full statement of belief. This first creed as it was laid out stated: STAGE 1 "We believe in one God, the Father, almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father. Only-begotten that is only from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through him all things came into existence, the things in heaven and the things on earth. He became man like us and because of our salvation came down and became flesh, becoming a man, suffered and rose again on the third day, ascended to the heavens and will come to judge the living and the dead". This creed statement set the ball rolling by creating an ambiguous phrase 'begotten not made' implying that Christ was God from God, a type of subdivision of God, rather than created by God. The next stage came a generation later, in the year AD 381. A second council was called this time at Constantinople. This council took the original creed set down 56 years earlier and embellished it, bringing in an additional concept. This developed creed stated: STAGE 2 "We believe in one God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible; We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten from the father before all ages, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom things came into existence. Who because of us man and because of our salvation came down from heaven, and was made flesh by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried, and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures and ascended to heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father, and will come again in glory to judge the living and dead, and of whose kingdom there will be no end; We believe in the holy spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and son is together worshipped and together glorified, Who spoke through the prophets; in one Holy Catholic and apostolic Church. We confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins; we look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen". This development of the creed added the aspect of the holy spirit, referring to it as 'the Lord and life giver..who with the Father is together worshipped and glorified'. The creed statement of doctrine had now developed further, not only was Jesus a sub-divided part of God, a non-created being, but the Holy Spirit was now, not as according to the scriptures the power of God but a 'Lord and life giver' who is also a subdivision of God. This Holy Spirit is now to receive 'worship and glory' along with God and the Son as a third person: three entity subdivisions of God, or three Gods in one. This was much more acceptable to the leanings of those who already believed in multiple pagan deities. This revised creed became known as the Nicene Creed statement. Seventy years later in AD 451 there was yet another council at Chalcedon where the earlier Nicene creed was yet again massaged this time into what has become known as the Chalcedonian Creed. This creed laid down the following statement: STAGE 3 "Following the holy fathers we all together teach men to acknowledge as one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at the same time, complete in Godhead and complete as man, truly God and truly man, made up also of a reasonable soul and body, of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his being man, like us in all respects, apart from sin. Regarding his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but as regards his being man, begotten for us men and for our salvation, from Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer. One and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, recognised in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and substance, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ, even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the Fathers has handed down to us". It would challenge any reader to find where Jesus taught this in the scriptures. This statement of belief that God and Jesus Christ were one person became the cornerstone doctrine of this new creed religion, which had evolved over a period of some 350 years. It was a composite religion forged some 80% from base pagan religious doctrines and 20% from scriptural. It had evolved through the years of wrangling, compromises and just plain bludgeoning; becoming the official Roman state religion, the only approved religion operating hand in glove with the ruling authorities. It was a truly creed-based statement religion, with a basic foundation of pagan doctrines, incorporating a facade of so-called Christian ideas. Upon this foundation of pagan doctrines, the new creed religion cherry-picked the scriptures for bits it could use that fitted in with the evolved creed-based beliefs, while ignoring all references in the apostles' teachings that repudiated these creed doctrines. All the time the main point at issue was, who was Jesus Christ? Although each stage was fearsomely contested by opposing protesters to these creed statements, they lumbered on despite all opposition, eventually ending up in a form of received and accepted collection of fundamental doctrines. The apostles would not have recognised the creed religion and certainly would have had no part of it. The correct understanding had died off with them; that Jesus was equivalent in nature to pre-rebellion Adam, a perfectly created loyal Son of God, and could therefore re-balance the scales of justice. He could not be equal with the creator God as stated in the creeds, no mre than Adam was equal to God, (Romans 5:18). The creed doctrines invalidated the legal balancing arrangement of the ransom and therefore devalued the significance of the death of Jesus Christ. This trinity doctrine, as it became known, with the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit all subdivisions of a single spirit-being Godhead, was never believed or taught by the apostles. They had always taught that Jesus Christ was subordinate to his God and father, regarding him as a created being. This 'phoney' idea was embellished bit by bit into the full-blown trinity doctrine. The apostasy had through its creed development created an acceptance of the erroneous statement, that Jesus Christ was God in man's form. The inspired expression of error had emerged and established itself (1 John 4:6). BIBLE CENSORSHIP IMPOSED The scriptures were now more or less completely under the control of this evolved antichrist creed religion, acting in confederation with the Roman state administration. Now that the trinity doctrine stated and established by their creed was becoming inculcated into the masses it was hardly in its interest to publish too much of the information that the apostles had written down. The last thing they wanted was to stir up the old arguments, particularly as to who the scriptures evidenced the Son of God to be. Censorship of the writings of the first-century disciples was tight. Available copies were controlled, and only those teachers approved and appointed by the creed religion were allowed to expound the now fully developed apostasy doctrines (2 Pet 2:1-3, 1Tim 4:1-3). These creed statements were used for the indoctrination of the masses through oral inculcation. The creeds were taught and memorised parrot fashion, by repetitious use. The old adage 'repeat a lie often enough and it will be believed' formed a major part of the indoctrination process of these creeds. Apart from the trinity doctrine, other Platonized erroneous pagan doctrines, were similarly consolidated in this way through creed development. Hellfire and immortality of the soul were both adopted from the pagan religions. Again, these creed doctrines ran directly contrary to the scriptural information, that when a person dies that is the end. The hope generated by the scriptures was for a later resurrection; until then they 'sleep' in the grave. How can a being with an immortal soul also have a resurrection?? There can only be one or the other. The Bible advocates resurrection; the pagan advocates immortal soul. Resurrection is referred to over 40 times in the Greek scriptures, whereas, immortal soul not once, check a concordance. It is all too apparent that these creed-introduced doctrines are still held today as the most important central doctrines by nearly every Christian denomination that exists in the world. What a massive indoctrination has been achieved by these creed religions. Of the world's five billion population, approximately 25% over a billion call themselves Christian; of this approximately 99% belong to organisations that teach the trinity and other originally pagan ideas in one form or another. Of the remaining 1%, approximately half are not sure what they believe, leaving only a handful of religions in Christendom that reject this trinity teaching. THE DARK AGES Returning to the fourth-century. The spiritual lights were out; little if any spiritual knowledge about the Kingdom was available. Darkness had truly set in, the so-called Dark Ages had arrived. God's Kingdom plan was on hold, as the apostles had said it would be. The church state religions had managed to bury God's word. This is an all-too-often repeated failing of men, when in a position of controlling knowledge. Jesus had warned the religious clergy of his day of the same fault at Matthew 23:13: "You lock people out of the Kingdom of heaven. For you do not go in yourselves, and when others are going in, you stop them" (NRSV). Through these Dark Ages, much blood-letting was done in the name of religion, with very little truth from God's word allowed to shine. The first real threat to the censorship control of the Bible by the churches came with a mechanical invention. In 1439 Gutenberg first developed the printing press in Germany. By 1455 about 150 copies of the Bible had been printed; quickly, printing presses appeared everywhere. The mechanism was now available to allow lay people access to the Christian Greek scriptures, bypassing the control and censorship of the all-dominating Church. Lay people could now read and study these early printed translations. Although full of errors, received through multi-generation copy corruption’s in the manuscripts then available, they still allowed a partial comparison between scripture and Church doctrine. Once the Church had lost its binding censorship control, it moved to the next best position; it backed and authorised only the roughest and most doctrinally corrupted translations. This situation continued for over 1,000 years. So inculcated did the central Trinitarian doctrine become within the Church that when the Bible was first printed in the Textus Receptus form, the words were deliberately tampered with and changed to make it read and appear that the scriptures taught this spurious doctrine. To illustrate this point, the King James Bible of 1611 translates 1 John 5:7-8: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." The words in bold were added to the manuscript to support the trinity teaching. Later, more accurate translations corrected this deliberate act of fraud, leaving out the spuriously added words, although even today many Bibles are still sold with this commonly recognised error included. Nevertheless, back there a dirty translation was better than what was previously available: virtually nothing! As time passed, scholars often working against negative church pressure, researched the ancient manuscripts to rake out the errors that had crept in. The inevitable eventually happened: more and more individuals through Bible study began to protest at the obvious non-biblical doctrines and falsified errors that they had been taught by the Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation started only 50 odd years after the invention of the printing press and the release of the censorship stranglehold. The first man-motivated 'Age of Awakening', as some referred to it, had started. Before we review the progression back to some semblance of accurate scriptural knowledge through the turmoil and frustrations of the Protestant Reformation era, we need to turn our attention back in chapter 4 to the written information from God, or more correctly as it now was, the printed information from God.

http://bric.users.ftech.net/chapter03.html The Lights Of Truth Go Out TRUTH DIES WITH THE APOSTLES By the end of the first-century the conveyers of theocratic knowledge were all dead. The first 'presence' period of Jesus Christ had come to its end; the specially assisted revealing of knowledge was over. Manmade theories and doctrines were systematically stamping out any remaining influence left by these first-century disciples, true spiritual knowledge was dying from the earth with them. It would be impossible for humans alone to restore it; at least, not until the same 'helping spirit' was reactivated again. Bible evidence indicates that this would not take place until much later, almost 2,000 years later, when God's non-intervention time allocation to the nations came to an end, (see chapter 13). Then, active involvement influencing in the earth's affairs would start again; the communication link would be renewed, promoting accurate theocratic knowledge. Many will disagree, claiming that the Christian religion started by the apostles continued on and is still doing so. Well, according to the apostles themselves, this was certainly not what they expected to happen after they died. These apostles had written a lot of privileged information on how the situation was to develop. Let's examine just what they did anticipate. SPIRIT COMMUNICATOR Jesus made a promise to his apostles in the year AD 33 that he would maintain direct links with them until the then functioning Jewish age came to its end. He said: "Look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things (age)" (Matthew 28:20 NWT). Even though Jesus moved back to the spirit realm, he maintained a direct personal link with each individually he had purchased by means of a spirit powered communicator. The Jewish age or system ended in complete destruction under the hands of the Romans, just as Jesus had predicted it would (check Luke 21:5-6, 20). The historical records confirm that this occurred in the year AD 70 when the Roman armies under Titus completely destroyed the temple and the capital city of Jerusalem, removing all Jewish inhabitants from the land of Israel; (further information on this can be found in chapter 17). We can now calculate that Jesus' promise to maintain this special spiritual communication with his apostles continued for a further 37 1/2 years, from 33 to 70. The apostles fully understood that they were working within a limited time frame that would only last 37 1/2 years. This is why Paul in the year AD 56 speaking about how his contemporary Christian brothers should conduct themselves, said they should bear in mind that "the appointed time has grown short" (1 Corinthians 7:29, NRSV). So as the time left to them was reduced, only 14 years left remaining, they should arrange their affairs taking this into account. The direct communication bonding through the spirit power not only strengthened them, but taught them things that Jesus had previously said they were unable to grasp, but would be able to when they were tuned into this power source. To do this they required their own personal spirit 'communicator and receiver'. The apostles received this exclusive piece of equipment when it was presented to them at Pentecost in 33. The scriptures tell us that when they received this spiritual equipment, it was like a tongue (symbol of speech) of fire that sat on each one, Acts2:3. Immediately it went to work on their minds, giving them instantaneously the ability to speak in new languages. It also elevated them mentally, enabling them to receive knowledge and understand many important issues and developments that previously they had been unable to grasp (John 16:12-15). LIMITED PERIOD This spirit communicator and mental educating mechanism would only be given to selected individuals and for a limited time. When they died, the mechanism would die with them. Along with the information they received in connection with the Kingdom came warnings of the situation that was to develop following their deaths and the ending of this special arrangement. The apostle Paul explained that a full-blown apostasy would later take over. He warned about it, in fact, he said this very warning that he was giving them was then acting as a restraint, holding the main apostasy back until its permitted time to take over. Although Paul told them that it was partly in evidence then, it would not be fully out in the open until the restraining influence of the apostles, and the spirit working through them, were out of the way in death (check 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12). The apostle John, right at the end of his life around AD 98, confirmed what Paul had already said about this antichrist, but by then the antichrist was taking over fast, as the restraints were all but died off, proof that they were already then at the end of the Kingdom recruiting period (1 John 2:18-19, 4:1-3). The term 'apostasy' carries the original Greek meaning of separating, deserting or abandoning. The apostasy would desert or abandon the true knowledge in favour of its own false teachings. In this way the apostasy would be directly opposing what Christ had taught and revealed; it would be an antichrist organisation. CHRIST OPPOSING APOSTASY TAKES OVER Once the restraining apostles had been removed through death, the antichrist apostasy, took over completely, it was foretold to last for a set period of time. Paul said: "There will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for them-selves to have their ears tickled, and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories" (2 Timothy 4:3-4 NWT). The apostles anticipated the antichrist apostasy taking over after they died, to last for an appointed period of time, during which this apostasy condition and antichrist organisation would rule. According to 2 Thessalonians 2:8, follow-ing this allocated time period the apostasy would be exposed by Christ himself when he again turns his attentions to the earth and Kingdom affairs, some 1,900 years later at the time of the 'manifestation of his presence', (check 2 Thess 2:1-12). The apostles also warned of many of the false teachings or doctrines that the corporate apostasy would bring in, establishing them through their own approved and appointed teachers. THE GREAT APOSTASY. They would bring in destructive contradicting teachings, 2 Pet 2:1. They would exploit their followers with deceptions, 2 Pet 2:3. Follow teachings of demons, hypocrites speaking lies, 1 Tim 4:1. They would forbid some of their members to marry, 1 Tim 4:3. They would make decrees not to eat certain foods, 1 Tim 4:3. They would turn from the truth to false stories, 2 Tim 4:4. They would teach a denial that Christ was the only begotten son of God, referred to as the inspired expression of error, this was probably the most reprehensible of all, 1 John 4:1-9. APOSTASY RESTRAINING ENDS As soon as the final apostle died, this is precisely what happened! Once the resistance put up against it by the spirit empowered apostles was no longer there, the truth abandoning apostasy spread and gained ground. The second-century saw much confusion, contradiction and conflict. The prevalent opposition religions were vying for predominance which included the Greek and Roman pagan forms of worship. These religions had evolved numerous religious doctrines and ideas that were becoming mixed with the apostles' teachings. When major conflicting differences in doctrines occurred, gradually the weight of the pagan concepts won out. There were no power-assisted apostles left to resist it. This progressive mixing and polluting with pagan doctrines diluted out any strength of true Christian knowledge. The doctrines central to the Greek and Roman religions were multiple God deities, particularly triad deities. Greek philosophers such as Plato had developed beliefs in multiple gods and man's relationship with them. These concepts derived from more ancient civilisations such as Egypt. From these hand-me down ideas the Greeks and thereby the Romans cultivated their ancient religious beliefs, including the immortality of the human soul, an underworld concept of purgatory tormenting with fire, and family deities of Gods; they incorporated all of these into their pagan religions. Through the mixing of such potent pagan ideas the pure truth was dissolved out. One of the major foretold apostasy doctrines to appear was the one that would contradict Christ's position as being the only begotten son of God (1 John 4:3,5,6,9). By tracing the history of the apostasy and how it developed the denial doctrine of error on the origin of Jesus Christ, we shall see how the spirit induced truth of the apostles was indeed slowly rubbed out. With the restraints removed, a melting pot of religious ideologies, and doctrines developed. Various conflicting thoughts and pagan concepts from the Roman, Greek, Hebrew and Christian religions were stirred into a simmering broth. As time passed the friction and confusion often brought the pot to the boil, resulting in many heated clashes. Under various leaders, groups of dissenters were gathered, following their own particular teachings. By the year AD 325 about 225 years after the last apostle had died, this whole divisive situation was causing great concern to the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine. He was getting so much trouble in his empire from the unrest and conflict caused between these pseudo-Christian and pagan groups, so to settle things down he set up a council in the city of Nicaea to sort the mess out and agree a unified state religion that all could live with and he could back. APOSTASY DEVELOPED THROUGH CREED DOCTRINES The position of Christ as always was the focal issue: was he God, angel, or man? As far as Constantine was concerned he didn't much care which was agreed, so long as it was agreed by all, and the wrangling stopped. From the cauldron of this confusion evolved a primitive statement of belief: a simple creed statement, it was hoped all could agree too. Crystallised at this council, the creed slowly at first, as the conflicts could so easily be re-ignited, but bit by bit, and through various stages, became fashioned into a full statement of belief. This first creed as it was laid out stated: STAGE 1 "We believe in one God, the Father, almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father. Only-begotten that is only from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through him all things came into existence, the things in heaven and the things on earth. He became man like us and because of our salvation came down and became flesh, becoming a man, suffered and rose again on the third day, ascended to the heavens and will come to judge the living and the dead". This creed statement set the ball rolling by creating an ambiguous phrase 'begotten not made' implying that Christ was God from God, a type of subdivision of God, rather than created by God. The next stage came a generation later, in the year AD 381. A second council was called this time at Constantinople. This council took the original creed set down 56 years earlier and embellished it, bringing in an additional concept. This developed creed stated: STAGE 2 "We believe in one God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible; We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten from the father before all ages, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom things came into existence. Who because of us man and because of our salvation came down from heaven, and was made flesh by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried, and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures and ascended to heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father, and will come again in glory to judge the living and dead, and of whose kingdom there will be no end; We believe in the holy spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and son is together worshipped and together glorified, Who spoke through the prophets; in one Holy Catholic and apostolic Church. We confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins; we look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen". This development of the creed added the aspect of the holy spirit, referring to it as 'the Lord and life giver..who with the Father is together worshipped and glorified'. The creed statement of doctrine had now developed further, not only was Jesus a sub-divided part of God, a non-created being, but the Holy Spirit was now, not as according to the scriptures the power of God but a 'Lord and life giver' who is also a subdivision of God. This Holy Spirit is now to receive 'worship and glory' along with God and the Son as a third person: three entity subdivisions of God, or three Gods in one. This was much more acceptable to the leanings of those who already believed in multiple pagan deities. This revised creed became known as the Nicene Creed statement. Seventy years later in AD 451 there was yet another council at Chalcedon where the earlier Nicene creed was yet again massaged this time into what has become known as the Chalcedonian Creed. This creed laid down the following statement: STAGE 3 "Following the holy fathers we all together teach men to acknowledge as one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at the same time, complete in Godhead and complete as man, truly God and truly man, made up also of a reasonable soul and body, of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his being man, like us in all respects, apart from sin. Regarding his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but as regards his being man, begotten for us men and for our salvation, from Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer. One and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, recognised in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and substance, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ, even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the Fathers has handed down to us". It would challenge any reader to find where Jesus taught this in the scriptures. This statement of belief that God and Jesus Christ were one person became the cornerstone doctrine of this new creed religion, which had evolved over a period of some 350 years. It was a composite religion forged some 80% from base pagan religious doctrines and 20% from scriptural. It had evolved through the years of wrangling, compromises and just plain bludgeoning; becoming the official Roman state religion, the only approved religion operating hand in glove with the ruling authorities. It was a truly creed-based statement religion, with a basic foundation of pagan doctrines, incorporating a facade of so-called Christian ideas. Upon this foundation of pagan doctrines, the new creed religion cherry-picked the scriptures for bits it could use that fitted in with the evolved creed-based beliefs, while ignoring all references in the apostles' teachings that repudiated these creed doctrines. All the time the main point at issue was, who was Jesus Christ? Although each stage was fearsomely contested by opposing protesters to these creed statements, they lumbered on despite all opposition, eventually ending up in a form of received and accepted collection of fundamental doctrines. The apostles would not have recognised the creed religion and certainly would have had no part of it. The correct understanding had died off with them; that Jesus was equivalent in nature to pre-rebellion Adam, a perfectly created loyal Son of God, and could therefore re-balance the scales of justice. He could not be equal with the creator God as stated in the creeds, no mre than Adam was equal to God, (Romans 5:18). The creed doctrines invalidated the legal balancing arrangement of the ransom and therefore devalued the significance of the death of Jesus Christ. This trinity doctrine, as it became known, with the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit all subdivisions of a single spirit-being Godhead, was never believed or taught by the apostles. They had always taught that Jesus Christ was subordinate to his God and father, regarding him as a created being. This 'phoney' idea was embellished bit by bit into the full-blown trinity doctrine. The apostasy had through its creed development created an acceptance of the erroneous statement, that Jesus Christ was God in man's form. The inspired expression of error had emerged and established itself (1 John 4:6). BIBLE CENSORSHIP IMPOSED The scriptures were now more or less completely under the control of this evolved antichrist creed religion, acting in confederation with the Roman state administration. Now that the trinity doctrine stated and established by their creed was becoming inculcated into the masses it was hardly in its interest to publish too much of the information that the apostles had written down. The last thing they wanted was to stir up the old arguments, particularly as to who the scriptures evidenced the Son of God to be. Censorship of the writings of the first-century disciples was tight. Available copies were controlled, and only those teachers approved and appointed by the creed religion were allowed to expound the now fully developed apostasy doctrines (2 Pet 2:1-3, 1Tim 4:1-3). These creed statements were used for the indoctrination of the masses through oral inculcation. The creeds were taught and memorised parrot fashion, by repetitious use. The old adage 'repeat a lie often enough and it will be believed' formed a major part of the indoctrination process of these creeds. Apart from the trinity doctrine, other Platonized erroneous pagan doctrines, were similarly consolidated in this way through creed development. Hellfire and immortality of the soul were both adopted from the pagan religions. Again, these creed doctrines ran directly contrary to the scriptural information, that when a person dies that is the end. The hope generated by the scriptures was for a later resurrection; until then they 'sleep' in the grave. How can a being with an immortal soul also have a resurrection?? There can only be one or the other. The Bible advocates resurrection; the pagan advocates immortal soul. Resurrection is referred to over 40 times in the Greek scriptures, whereas, immortal soul not once, check a concordance. It is all too apparent that these creed-introduced doctrines are still held today as the most important central doctrines by nearly every Christian denomination that exists in the world. What a massive indoctrination has been achieved by these creed religions. Of the world's five billion population, approximately 25% over a billion call themselves Christian; of this approximately 99% belong to organisations that teach the trinity and other originally pagan ideas in one form or another. Of the remaining 1%, approximately half are not sure what they believe, leaving only a handful of religions in Christendom that reject this trinity teaching. THE DARK AGES Returning to the fourth-century. The spiritual lights were out; little if any spiritual knowledge about the Kingdom was available. Darkness had truly set in, the so-called Dark Ages had arrived. God's Kingdom plan was on hold, as the apostles had said it would be. The church state religions had managed to bury God's word. This is an all-too-often repeated failing of men, when in a position of controlling knowledge. Jesus had warned the religious clergy of his day of the same fault at Matthew 23:13: "You lock people out of the Kingdom of heaven. For you do not go in yourselves, and when others are going in, you stop them" (NRSV). Through these Dark Ages, much blood-letting was done in the name of religion, with very little truth from God's word allowed to shine. The first real threat to the censorship control of the Bible by the churches came with a mechanical invention. In 1439 Gutenberg first developed the printing press in Germany. By 1455 about 150 copies of the Bible had been printed; quickly, printing presses appeared everywhere. The mechanism was now available to allow lay people access to the Christian Greek scriptures, bypassing the control and censorship of the all-dominating Church. Lay people could now read and study these early printed translations. Although full of errors, received through multi-generation copy corruption’s in the manuscripts then available, they still allowed a partial comparison between scripture and Church doctrine. Once the Church had lost its binding censorship control, it moved to the next best position; it backed and authorised only the roughest and most doctrinally corrupted translations. This situation continued for over 1,000 years. So inculcated did the central Trinitarian doctrine become within the Church that when the Bible was first printed in the Textus Receptus form, the words were deliberately tampered with and changed to make it read and appear that the scriptures taught this spurious doctrine. To illustrate this point, the King James Bible of 1611 translates 1 John 5:7-8: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." The words in bold were added to the manuscript to support the trinity teaching. Later, more accurate translations corrected this deliberate act of fraud, leaving out the spuriously added words, although even today many Bibles are still sold with this commonly recognised error included. Nevertheless, back there a dirty translation was better than what was previously available: virtually nothing! As time passed, scholars often working against negative church pressure, researched the ancient manuscripts to rake out the errors that had crept in. The inevitable eventually happened: more and more individuals through Bible study began to protest at the obvious non-biblical doctrines and falsified errors that they had been taught by the Church. Thus the Protestant Reformation started only 50 odd years after the invention of the printing press and the release of the censorship stranglehold. The first man-motivated 'Age of Awakening', as some referred to it, had started. Before we review the progression back to some semblance of accurate scriptural knowledge through the turmoil and frustrations of the Protestant Reformation era, we need to turn our attention back in chapter 4 to the written information from God, or more correctly as it now was, the printed information from God.

There may be different definitions of the word "resurection," and so I am not going to get into that. I just wanted to present some info from the web that I found very convincing. ~~~~~~~~~ “I was sent by Titus Caesar with Ceralius and a thousand riders to a certain town by the name of Thecoa to find out whether a camp could be set up at this place. On my return I saw many prisoners who had been crucified, and recognized three of them as my former companions. I was inwardly very sad about this and went with tears in my eyes to Titus and told him about them. He at once gave the order that they should be taken down and given the best treatment so they could get better. However two of them died while being attended to by the doctor; the third recovered.” When the average person hears the word crucifixion, two things come to mind: (1) The crucifixion of Jesus Christ; (2) Death. In fact, for most of us crucifixion means death. That is simply because of the fact that there is only one individual that comes to mind when we see the word crucifixion: Jesus Christ. And as we “know,” Jesus Christ died on the cross, right? Well, according to the ancient and noted historian, Flavius Josephus, whom we quoted above, it was more than common for a crucifixion victim to be taken down from the cross alive and given “treatment so they could get better.” And, in the case of Flavius’s friends, one of them recovered from his crucifixion wounds. Dr. James Deardorff views Josephus’s testimony as the most powerful evidence that crucifixion victims could survive their ordeal. We originally wanted to include a number of case studies demonstrating the capacity of human beings to survive all forms of the most horrendous trauma—even for periods of months. Then, as we did the research, we came across so many unbelievable cases that it was simply overwhelming. We did not even know where to begin. Suffice it to say that if the reader studies the matter at a library, or goes to the Internet and searches on “trauma” or “torture,” you will discover some absolutely shocking cases of survival. Seeing these, there should truly be no reason to be surprised that a human being could survive a crucifixion. Countless human beings have recovered from much worse. Why do we assume that someone who was crucified automatically died on the cross? Well, there is an historical reality that cannot be forgotten. And that is that the Church at one time was the most powerful entity on earth. It was so powerful that it could pull down entire governments. Even though the Church is no longer viewed [by some] as this powerful, we can still get a hint of its might in past times just by recalling that a contemporary Pope, Pope John Paul II, is openly credited with being partially responsible for the downfall of the powerful Soviet Union, through the efforts of the Polish labor union Solidarity, the Catholic population in Poland and underground organizations. We must remember that the Church carried on one of the most ruthless campaigns in human history for the purpose of establishing its doctrine as the uncontested religious doctrine on earth. One such operation lasted for 603 years (1231 to 1834) and was called the Inquisition [though the most brutal period, it seems, was between 1478 and 1834]. The Inquisition was initiated by Pope Sixtus IV in 1478 under the Catholic monarchs Ferdinand II and Isabella of Spain, and was first called the Spanish Inquisition. In the beginning, the primary targets of the Spanish Inquisition were Muslims and Jews. But the enemy list quickly broadened to include witches, political enemies, scientists who dared propose theories contrary to the Church’s official theories and others. The Inquisition expanded widely into Europe and found some of its most savage expression during the Protestant Reformation. The methods of the Inquisition included torture, confiscation of property, the ripping of body parts while the victim was still alive through a rack-type device, and execution through burning. Everyone knew that the Church would not hesitate to torture and kill in order to establish its doctrine. Europe had witnessed the expulsion of all Jews from Spain in 1492 and the genocide of the Moriscos—converted Muslims living in Spain who had maintained some of their Islamic practices—under the direction of the Inquisition’s first Grand Inquisitor, Torquemada. The Inquisition was effective as a weapon against the Reformation. It has been estimated that the Church murdered an astounding 50 million human beings over the period of the Inquisition, which, shockingly, did not end until the 19th century. Censorship was the rule for the 600-year history of the Inquisition. Pope Paul IV is the Pontiff who created the Index of Forbidden Books, and anyone caught in possession of any of the books listed on that Index could be subject to ex-communication, horrendous torture and painful death. This Index of Forbidden Books was not abolished until the year 1966. So, it is quite clear why the only understanding that humanity had about the crucifixion was the one given to it by the Church. And it simply was not even possible, as you can see from the above history, that anyone, even though he or she may have fully known that crucifixion victims did not always die, would have even dared speculate about the possibility that Jesus Christ may have survived the crucifixion. [incidentally, the Church has re-named the Inquisition as the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. One can only hope that humanity will never again see 600 years of oppression from any religious institution—Christian or otherwise—claiming to be acting “in the name of God.” It is a great blessing we have, in this modern age, to be able to obtain any kind of information that we wish, no matter its level of controversy]. But what happened to Jesus Christ? We are fortunate to live in modern times, when science and the field of medicine lend us powerful tools of analysis, as well as a language of medical and scientific terminology. These things even allow us to determine what may have occurred physiologically to Jesus Christ during and, assuming he survived the crucifixion, even after his ordeal on the cross. [Later, we will quote Joe Zias of the Century One Foundation, in which he demonstrates that crucifixion was a torture that often lasted for days]. We are even more fortunate that Dr. Trevor Davies, former (and now retired) personal physician to the Queen of England, has offered his expert medical opinion regarding what might have occurred to Jesus physiologically during and after the crucifixion, concluding that Jesus could not have died on the cross, and that he survived the crucifixion. Dr. Davies and his wife, Margaret, herself a theological scholar, teamed up to write an article entitled, “Resurrection or resuscitation” for the globally prestigious, Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London. We will only present his hypothesis and conclusion, which he offered at the end of the article, though the entire document is well worth reading. In our view, one could not find a more perfect team—a prestigious medical doctor and a theological scholar—to evaluate the Biblical verses describing the passion of Jesus Christ. What is even more powerful is the fact that the Davies are Christians. Yet, as you will read in Dr. Davies’ conclusion, he believes that Christians should be willing to accept “proven knowledge,” no matter the theological ramifications. Dr. Davies’ article begins with an analysis of the crucifixion scene. It then covers various theories regarding how Jesus died. And then, finally, it offers his hypothesis, which we present below. Any emphasis is ours: “Hypothesis” “All condemned persons were flogged but they were not so weakened as to be unable to carry the patibulum. The strong presumption is that the abuse Jesus received at the Praetorium rendered him unable to carry out a task which other condemned persons were able to perform. This additional abuse, including the blow to the head, accounted for his early collapse on the Cross. At his crucifixion, Jesus was in shock and hypotensive, and lost consciousness because of diminished blood supply to the brain. His ashen skin and immobility were mistaken for death and there is no doubt that the bystanders believed he was dead. The cry (and there is little agreement about what may have been said) may not have been any more than a loud expiration preceding syncope. Oxygen supply to the brain remained minimal, but above a critical level, until the circulation was restored when he was taken down from the Cross and laid on the ground. Chill during the eclipse of the sun helped to maintain the blood pressure. As Jesus showed signs of life he was not placed in a tomb (which may have been the intention to avoid burial rites on the Sabbath) but taken away and tended...” “Conclusion” “The abuse meted out to Jesus in the Praetorium led to his collapse and early removal from the Cross, and to resuscitation. Individual and corporate suggestibility among the disciples and the women explains the reports of subsequent appearances. This hypothesis accepts the historical events surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus but explains what happened in the light of modern knowledge. “Faith does not require the abandonment of thought or the assent to the concepts not scientifically acceptable. The Church will be stronger if it accommodates proven knowledge with its creeds. If it does not, all that is left is blind belief, far beyond the credulity of most people.” Dr. Davies’ analysis is quite fascinating. But what puzzles me is the following. While he clearly states that, in his opinion, Jesus survived the crucifixion and was attended to, he then suggests, in later parts of the article which are not quoted above, that the appearances of Jesus to his disciples and followers after the event of the cross were attributable to “transmarginal inhibition, a state of activity of the brain in which hysterical suggestibility (or alternatively counter-suggestibility) frequently occurs.” While we certainly cannot deny the existence of such a phenomenon, we don’t understand why this necessarily means that Jesus did not appear to his followers physically. After all, since Dr. Davies clearly believes that Jesus survived the crucifixion, why then is it not possible that he met his followers physically? He introduces a psychological or even mystical element into what was otherwise a physiological analysis. If Jesus Christ physically survived the crucifixion, then most certainly it is possible that he physically met his followers after the event of the cross. Examination of Biblical passages in support of survival theory Jonas and Jesus “Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, ‘Master, we would see a sign from thee.’ But he answered and said unto them, ‘An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.’” Christians refer to the above passage of the Bible to demonstrate Jesus’ confidence that, in his capacity as the Son of God, he would rise from the dead after his crucifixion. In the view of Christianity, this prophecy is one of the various Biblical signs that establish the truth of Jesus Christ. Well, how could Jesus Christ have known that he would come out of the “heart of the earth” after being buried in the open and airy tomb of Joseph of Arimathea? Whether he was the Son of God, as Christians believe, or a prophet, as Muslims believe, or an enlightened Buddha, as Buddhists believe, if it is assumed that he was some kind of great, spiritually endowed person, then it is not surprising that he may have received some kind of premonition or even direct verbal revelation from God that he would be “resurrected.” The parallels that are always drawn between the Biblical account of Jonas’ three days in the belly of a whale and Jesus’ three days in the open and airy Garden Tomb are two: First, the fact that the time elapsed in both Biblical events was three days; second, the fact that both Jonas and Jesus escaped their confinement after three days. But there is another parallel: Jonas came out of the belly of the whale alive. Since Jesus Christ is reported, in the New Testament, to have drawn this parallel, must we also conclude that just as Jonas came out of the belly of the whale alive, so Jesus came out of “the heart of the earth” alive? Christian doctrine, of course, would state that Jesus was “alive,” but that he had a special body that was both human and Divine. Of course, most of humanity is not Christian. So, it is quite legitimate for non-Christians to examine the Biblical texts and draw their own conclusions. Even Christians may want to take a second look. Before continuing, we feel it necessary to say the following. Agnostics, atheists, and religious skeptics would view this use of the Bible to examine alternative possibilities surrounding the events of the crucifixion as meaningless, if not absolutely ridiculous. They would point out that since the Bible contains many questionable verses, and since the compilation of the Bible is to be held highly suspect, that it is a totally unreliable document. As such, the use of the Bible as a reference book would be deemed by them to be wasted exercise. We do not believe that. One of the things that can lend weight to any document is whether or not the information in it can be found duplicated elsewhere in other documents, or whether or not the information can somehow be corroborated. In fact, one of the charges made by atheists, agnostics, mythicists [people who believe that Jesus Christ never even existed], and skeptics is that since the events of Jesus’ life as recorded in the bible—particularly the Resurrection and the Ascension—cannot be corroborated by historical documents written at the time, then the Biblical account of Jesus Christ must be either false, embellished or pure myth. For instance, Acharya S, a mythicist and author of The Christ Conspiracy, says: “Despite this fact, however, there are basically no non-biblical references to a historical Jesus by any known historian of the time during and after Jesus’ purported advent.” [Acharya S, The Christ Conspiracy (Kempton: Adventures Unlimited Press, 1999), p. 49] But we contend that the reason one can examine the Bible for evidence of the historical Jesus is that, contrary to what mythicists claim, non-Biblical evidence does exist to support not only the existence of Jesus Christ, but his survival from the crucifixion and his subsequent travels to Kashmir. Of course, mythicists do not, for whatever reasons, seem to wish to study the books of the East, such as the Bhavishya Mahapurana (see later), written in 115 A.D. when Jesus is said to have been still alive, which clearly mentions the sojourn of Jesus Christ to Kashmir, and his meeting with King Shalivahana in the year 78 A.D. Obviously, since non-Christian documents do exist that record that Jesus Christ lived long after the crucifixion, then a reexamination of the Bible becomes necessary and is also a very legitimate exercise. In reexamining the Bible, you find that the Biblical evidence itself clearly supports the idea that Jesus Christ survived the crucifixion, just as it is stated in many books of the East. What is that Biblical evidence? We’ll first examine Biblical verses that lead to the conclusion that Jesus survived the crucifixion. Then we’ll cover the documents and evidence from the East. Pilate at Antonia And now when the even [evening] was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea, an honorable counselor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus. And Pilate marveled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead.” Perhaps the most intriguing idea put forth by some of the proponents of the Jesus-in-India theory is the notion that Pontius Pilate was intimately involved—at every step of the way—in assuring that Jesus Christ would not die on the cross. In this view, the involvement of Pilate actually goes back to the trial of Jesus, conducted before Pilate at the castle of Antonia. It was at this trial that Pilate might have revealed his sympathy toward Jesus Christ: “When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death...” “And Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, saying, ‘Art thou the King of the Jews?’ And Jesus said unto him, ‘Thou sayest.’ And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. Then said Pilate unto him, ‘Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee?’ And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marveled greatly. Now at that feast the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner, whom they would. And they had then a notable prisoner called Barabbas. Therefore, when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, ‘Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ?’” There are two things to note here. First, the Biblical account claims that a custom existed that allowed people to ask for the release of a prisoner of their choosing. If we are to believe the above account, something seems curious. The “chief priests and elders of the people” had taken Jesus Christ before Pilate, specifically, as is stated in Matthew 27:1, for petitioning Pilate to put Jesus to death. Even many non-Christians are very familiar with the Biblical accounts of the absolute hatred that the scribes and Pharisees had for Jesus Christ. One can well imagine the frenzy of a crowd of Jewish priests escorting Jesus to Pilate—they wanted him dead. So what was Pilate’s reaction? After questioning Jesus (not before), he decided to take advantage of a custom and allowed the priests to choose whether they wanted Jesus or Barabbas to be released. If this account is to be believed, it most certainly must have been clear to Pilate how badly they wanted Jesus dead. Yet, after questioning Jesus, he offered to release Barabbas instead, even though it was clear to Pilate that they were extremely anxious to see Jesus executed. Was he doing this just to honor a custom? Or was he doing it in hopes that they might choose freedom for Jesus? Or perhaps he was using his wits for the purpose of gauging the degree of hatred that the priests had for Jesus. Later events suggest that Pilate, after hearing Jesus speak, was impressed, and tried to use a prevailing custom in order to avoid succumbing to the demands of the priests. The following verse might reveal Pilate’s motivation: “For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.” Laying aside the question of how the recorders of the Bible knew that “he knew,” [perhaps through his personal aides and spies], the above verse is quite interesting. It seems to me that although he knew the true, underlying reason—jealousy—motivating the priests, Pilate’s offer of Barabbas was his way of measuring the level of discontent against Jesus. Supposedly, Barabbas was a very notorious criminal. Yet the priests preferred that Jesus be put the death. So, the request by the Jews to free Barabbas was unusual and was Pilate’s first confirmation that the priests were unjustified in their charges. Also, any intelligent leader of any era would know what happens when a new religious and spiritual teacher enters the scene: The orthodox authorities rally against him. It is a common occurrence in religious history, and Pilate knew precisely what was happening. “When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, ‘Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.’” Again, laying aside the question how the Biblical writers knew that Pilate’s wife had had this conversation with Pilate, We’ll examine the above Biblical account. To fully appreciate the above verse, one must understand the times. The Romans, though fierce conquerors and powerful rulers, were also very superstitious. So it is quite believable that Pilate was startled by his wife’s dream. He had stood before an extraordinary man. He knew perfectly well why the Jewish priests were scheming to execute Jesus. He had heard of Jesus and his profound teachings, as well as Jesus’ constant admonishment of the priest class; he had heard of the jealously and envy of the priests against Jesus. Finally, there stood The Man—Jesus. It must have been a powerful experience. So, is it difficult to believe that the superstitious Pilate would have done all in his power to help Jesus? This becomes clear later when we see that he washed his hands as a sign indicating not only that he was removing himself from the matter and giving Jesus over to the priests, but also of his belief in Jesus’ innocence. “But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask [for] Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. The governor answered and said unto them, ‘Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you?’ They said, ‘Barabbas.’ Pilate saith unto them, ‘What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?’ They all said unto him, ‘Let him be crucified! And the governor said, ‘Why? What evil hath he done?’ But they cried out the more, saying, ‘Let him be crucified!’” Did Pilate ask the question, “Why, what evil hath he done?” because he was ignorant of the charges against Jesus Christ? Obviously he did not. He knew full well what those charges were. So why did he ask the question? He asked for the obvious reason that he did not agree that Jesus Christ had done anything wrong. Many of us have been in situations where we’ve asked that same question about someone who was going to be punished—even if only a child for some minor infraction—for something that the person either did not do or which did not merit any punishment. One can almost hear the plaintive tone in Pilate’s voice. He did not believe the charges against Jesus, and he did not believe that Jesus had done anything wrong. So why didn’t he use his rank and dismiss the crowd? Because the Roman Empire followed a policy dictating that it would not interfere in the religious customs of the people it governed. “When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, ‘I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.’ Then answered all the people, and said, ‘His blood be on us, and on our children.’” Here Pilate openly stated, according to this Biblical account, that he did not want to be responsible for the execution of a “just person.” He reluctantly handed Jesus over to the people. It seems that this episode at Antonia set the stage for the next significant decision by Pilate—his setting of the time of the execution of Jesus Christ. Pilate sets the time of the Crucifixion “And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he is to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.” Did Pilate purposely set the execution time to interfere with Jewish religious law as outlined in Deuteronomy? In the eyes of the Jewish priests, it would have been a huge violation of Jewish religious law to allow Jesus to hang on the cross once the Sabbath had begun. Pilate set the time of execution close enough to the Sabbath so that Jesus would not hang on the cross long enough to die. At the approach of the Sabbath, Jesus would have to be removed from the cross. But why would he do this? You saw earlier that Pilate was very reluctant to hand Jesus over to the priests to be put the death. He also openly expressed his belief that Jesus was an innocent man. One does not have to assume that he was devoid of human sympathy simply because he was a bureaucrat of a powerful and feared empire. Also, the Biblical narrative states that Pilate was fully aware that the prime motive—jealousy—for the priests’ desire to execute Jesus was an unworthy one. And perhaps most important, his wife had had a frightening dream and had informed Pilate that he should not be involved in the matter at all. And, of course, Pilate washed his hands of the matter. It certainly is not beyond the realm of possibility that Pilate, using his authority, purposely set the time of the execution so that Jesus would have a chance to survive. Mark states that Jesus was crucified at the third hour (Mark 15: 25). Mark and Matthew state that Jesus died on the cross at the ninth hour (Mark 15: 33-37). So, according to them, Jesus remained on the cross for six hours. But Luke claims that Jesus died at the sixth hour (Luke 23: 44-46), which means that he would have been on the cross for only three hours. Dr. Fida Hassnain (A Search for the Historical Jesus) is of the opinion that Jesus may have been placed on the cross at the sixth hour. It appears that he is more convinced of the account offered in the book, Crucifixion by an Eye Witness, which claims that Jesus died on the ninth hour and had been on the cross for three hours. It seems that Dr. Hassnain’s attempt is to place the time of Jesus’ “death” closer to the approaching Sabbath. Perhaps in his view this would better demonstrate the sense of urgency in the need of the Jews to take the body of Jesus down from the cross before the Shabbat so that Jewish law would not be broken, as well as Pilate’s collusion in this matter. Hassnain states: “During ancient times, among the Jews, a day was counted from sunrise, so the third hour could be 9 am, the sixth hour 12 noon and the ninth hour 3 pm. Taking together the information given in the Gospels, I would be inclined to chalk out the events of the day as follows: “9 am (third hour): the case against Jesus presented before Pilate. Discussions until the sixth hour (12 noon) when final orders were given; “12 noon (sixth hour): Jesus was put on the cross at Golgotha; “3 pm (ninth hour): Jesus Christ was taken for dead and was allowed to be taken down from the cross. Thus it seems possible that Jesus remained on the cross for three hours only, because it was both the day before the Sabbath and also the day of preparation for the Passover.” In summary, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that Pontius Pilate purposely set the time of crucifixion in a way that would assure Jesus’ survival after his removal from the cross before the Sabbath. In fact, the Biblical verse we presented earlier, “And Pilate marveled that he were already dead,” shows that Pilate understood that Jesus should not have died so quickly, because he was very surprised when the Centurion told him that Jesus had died. And if, as some believe, Jesus had merely been unconscious, it is possible that he may still have been alive when he was taken down from the cross. Pilate and the Centurion? “The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that Sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then came the soldiers, and broke the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs.” There does not exist a single record, that we know of, documenting a collusion between Pilate and the Centurion. So although we realize that the suggestion of collusion might be labeled speculation, We’ll examine that possibility. Did Pilate issue advance orders to the Centurion instructing him not to break the bones of Jesus? The actions of this Centurion are puzzling. The Bible documents the actions of the Centurions who were on the scene as nothing least than beastly. Jesus Christ had been treated with deep contempt. He had been beaten, crowned with a crown of thorns, mocked and abused. So whether or not Jesus was “dead already,” why should it be believed that the Centurion suddenly adopted some sense of morality and decided to leave the poor corpse alone? Why wouldn’t he have broken the bones anyway out of sheer brutality and the bloodlust of the moment? Also, did the breaking of the bones really ensure that the victim would soon die as a result of suffocation, as popularly believed? [More on that later when we examine a college experiment performed in modern times]. How could the Centurion have believed that Jesus was dead, when the very next verse states that to “ensure” that he was dead, the Centurion “pierced” his side? Well if the reason he did not break his bones was because he was dead, then why pierce the side? If he pierced the side because he wanted to be certain that Jesus was dead, then why not break the bones also to be doubly sure? Supposedly, the breaking of the bones was meant to ensure that the victim would die, as this breaking removed the support the victim had had from his lower body, thus causing him to sink downwards, crushing his lungs with his ribcage. Who was the Centurion? Kersten on Longius I’d like to reproduce a lengthy passage from Holger Kersten’s book, The Jesus Conspiracy: The Turin Shroud and the Truth about the Resurrection. Kersten offers background on the soldier who spared Jesus’ legs. Referring to the identity of this soldier, Kersten states: “In the apocryphal Acta Pilata he is called Longinus and presented as the captain who supervised the Crucifixion. According to a tradition testified to by Gregory of Nyssa, Longinus was said to have later become a bishop in his Cappadocian homeland. This change of heart may mean that he had some connection with Jesus and his followers before the Crucifixion, or was even a secret follower of Jesus. This would make many of the problems about the events during the Crucifixion understandable. Joseph of Arimathea, Nicodemus and the centurion Longinus were among the secret followers of Jesus. Since they held influential positions, they were informed well enough in advance about what the revolutionary exposure of Jesus was leading to. “Joseph was highly respected as a member of the Sanhedrin. Since the second century BC this had been the high council of the supreme Jewish authorities for all affairs of state, judicature and religion. It consisted of seventy members under the chairmanship of the high priest. Nicodemus, who was initiated by Jesus under cover of night (John 3: 1-22), was also a Jewish Councilor. Thanks to their positions Joseph and Nicodemus had surely been kept well informed about the time and place of the execution and were thus able to plan the rescue of their master. We hear an echo of the advance information given to Nicodemus in a highly revered hagiographical legend of the Middle Ages. It tells how Nicodemus, in a letter sent to Mary Magdalene, warned Jesus about the attack by the Jews, when he was in Ephraim (John 11:53f) “Joseph and Nicodemus knew the Crucifixion itself could not be avoided. But if they could manage to take Jesus down from the cross early enough, and everything was well planned, it would be possible to keep him alive, and he would probably be able to continue his mission unobserved. It was crucially important to the whole operation that the apostles were not involved. They had gone into hiding for fear of persecution. Nothing would be done against the respected councilors Joseph and Nicodemus or the Roman centurion. So for a limited period there was a chance that the daring operation could be carried out.” Let’s examine the issue of the lance that was “thrust” into Jesus’ side and the question of the vinegar that was given to him, after which he “gave up the ghost.” Kersten (p. 249) points out that the original Greek word for the thrust by the soldier is nyssein. That word does not suggest a forceful thrust. The word means a light scratch, or a light puncture of the skin. This was considered a test designed to determine if the victim was actually dead. If the victim showed no reaction to this light stabbing, then it was assumed that the victim had died. The second issue has to do with the vinegar given to Jesus by the Centurion: “Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, ‘It is finished’: and he bowed his head and gave up the Ghost.” Did the vinegar contain some kind of opiate? Opium was well known to Jews at that time. Was the vinegar purposely brought to the crucifixion scene by the supporters of Jesus, particularly Joseph and Nicodemus, to serve two purposes: first, to act as a painkiller; second, to render Jesus unconscious? On Dying on the Cross Joe Zias, of the Century One Foundation, observes the following in his piece, “Crucifixion in Antiquity—The Evidence”: “A series of experiments carried out by an American medical examiner and pathologist on college students [F.T. Zugibe, 1984: “Death by Crucifixion”, Canadian Society of Forensic Science 17(1):1-13.6.] who volunteered to be tied to crosses, showed that if the students were suspended from crosses with their arms outstretched in the traditional manner depicted in Christian art, they experienced no problems breathing. Thus the often-quoted theory that death on the cross is the result of asphyxiation is no longer tenable if the arms are outstretched. According to the physiological response of the students, which was closely monitored by Zugibe, death in this manner is the result of the victim going into hypovolemic shock. Death in this manner can be in a manner of hours, or days depending on the manner in which the victim is affixed to the cross. If the victim is crucified with a small seat, a sedile, affixed to the upright for minimum support in the region of the buttocks, death can be prolonged for hours and days. In fact, Josephus reports that three friends of his were being crucified in Thecoa by the Romans who, upon intervention by Josephus to Titus were removed from the crosses and with medical care one survived.” Newsweek Magazine reported the following: “In most cases, the experts think, death on the cross came within a span of several hours to a day or more, either from loss of blood or from suffocation as the victim’s rib cage collapsed over his diaphragm.” So there is no question that it is possible to survive a crucifixion. Stroud claimed that in former times, in Central Africa, crucifixion victims would live as long as three days on the cross before finally expiring. And as is reported each and every year through UPI (United Press International) and API (Associated Press International), during Easter celebrations in the Philippines, actual crucifixions occur and are conducted by overly-devout Christians whose intentions are to atone for their sins. Most of the victims remain on the cross for only a few minutes, and throughout the ceremonies antibacterial agents are administered to prevent infection. But it is claimed that some of the crucifixion victims avoid these more public celebrations and opt for a deeper experience (in remoter areas), actually remaining on the cross for several days before authorities finally discover them, take them down, send them to a hospital for treatment and recovery, then charging them with something akin to disorderly conduct. The account in Stroud’s book claims that such victims can remain alive for days. While one might register a doubt as to whether or not someone would have himself nailed to a cross for several days, those of you unfamiliar with the Philippine crucifixions probably would have thought, before reading this link, that no one would have himself or herself crucified period, whether for four minutes or three days. So it is quite possible that the rumored Philippine crucifixions that are alleged to take place out of the sight of the authorities involve people who survive the crucifixion for days. In general, ancient crucifixions were not meant for quick death, but for prolonged torture. The cross was sometimes affixed with various wooden attachments that would allow the weight of the victim to be supported so that he would not die quickly, but slowly. One such device was known as the suppedaneum. The victim would actually stand on this wooden platform. Another was the sedile. This was a wooden attachment on which the victim could sit. As the philosopher Seneca, Nero’s personal secretary, stated: “The life of the person thus sentenced trickled away drop by drop.” Jewish Burial practices--A Short but powerful note “And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight. Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.” We contacted, via email, the Shema Israel Torah Network International Burial Society and asked them the following question: “Have Jewish burial customs changed much in 2000 years? The Bible claims that Jesus was covered with some kind of ointment [i think the Bible says 100 pounds weight of some kind of substance—seems to be quite a lot of weight]. Does that Biblical account actually fall in line with Jewish burial traditions? Because I thought I heard that it was forbidden to touch the body. Could you be so kind as to explain? Thank you.” We present below the email response We received from Mr. Fishel a member of that society. Any emphasis is Mr. Todd’s: “Jewish Burial Law, along with the rest of TRADITIONAL JEWISH LAW has not changed in 2000 years [but more] precisely, 3500 years. You’re right: the body is not to be touched except by giving it a ritual bath called a TAHARA, standing for purity and then the body is put in the ground in the quickest most simple fashion available with only traditional BURIAL SHROUDS.” For what reason did Nicodemus take a mixture of myrrh and aloes—a full one hundred pounds—to Joseph of Arimathea’s open and airy tomb, not in the manner which the Jews bury their dead, as the last phrase of the verse wrongly contends? Though he may have wound the body of Jesus in linen clothes with spices, it certainly was not to bury a dead man, because no such custom ever existed, according to Mr. Fishel Todd of the Shema Israel Torah Network International Burial Society. If the Biblical account is true, then it is obvious that Nicodemus carried those herbs to the scene for the purpose of applying them to Jesus’ wounds, so that he would be healed. Kersten states: “The theologian Paul Billerbeck makes the event appear as if an embalming was to take place with the aromatic substances added to oil. But the Rabbinical texts refer only to an oiling of the bodies of the departed. The addition of spices is nowhere mentioned, let alone in these quantities, and was never part of Jewish custom; nor was embalming. Moreover it would be pointless to perform the embalming in the way described. One would have had to remove the entrails to stop the decomposition gases from bursting the body; an incision which would be extremely repulsive to the Jews, and the substances applied would not have served this purpose on their own...” After the Crucifixion “Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulcher. And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments: And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, ‘Why seek ye the living among the dead?’” When the women came to the tomb, they encountered two individuals who asked a simple question: Why are you here looking for a living person at a burial site? Let’s examine another verse: “And he said unto them, ‘Why are ye troubled? And why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.’ And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, ‘Have ye here any meat?’ And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them” In order to convince the Disciples that he had survived the crucifixion, Jesus asked them to realize that spirits or ghosts or apparitions are not composed of human flesh and human bones. To make his point firmly, he asked them for a piece of meat. They gave him fish and a honeycomb, and he ate in front of them while they watched. The question becomes: What was the need for a supernatural divinity, a supernatural god, or God Himself, to eat food? Aside from his attempts to assure them that they were not seeing an apparition, it is most probable that Jesus was extremely hungry, having gone through pure hell in being beaten and nailed to a cross. Christians are bound by the doctrine that defines Jesus as both man and God. They view his post-crucifixion appearance as the appearance of this dual being. Non-Christians are not bound by religious faith to believe that Jesus was a special, supernatural being. When one reads the verses above without the condition of religious faith, then those verses become clear and simple, and they demonstrate one reality: Jesus Christ survived the crucifixion.

You are offensive! And again, you can't ctonrol your tongue and mind and are compelled to disrespect my spiriutal master and put him down! You know nothing of him, yet you judge. "No one is pure no one...Only the Son of God is pure..so he only I believe and his scriptures..." Only your spiriutal teacher is pure but not ours? What conceit you have. This must give you great pleasure tho. Or else your faith is so weak that you have to put down other paths in order to put yours up. We must be very powerful if you find it such a threat you must come here and criticize to get your personal empowerment. By the way, your repeated posts about how you believe only in scripture, specifically the Bible -- as I have told you elsewhere, it is not hard to prove the Bible has been tampered with, a lot. Not a little. You can remain stubborn in your faith and keep blinding yourself to the fact that Bible is no longer the word of Christ, but on these boards you will wind up with posts that show the nonsense within the Bible as the result of man. Therefore it is not wise you should even be instigating in such a way if you are the Xtian you claim to be. Unless you are trying to get us to post the evidence of the contamination of the Bible. "List his qualities, his background and compared to Jesus..." Just because you dont know he has qualities, does not mean he has no qualities. I know them, many here know them, you just dont want to know them. Nor is it not my job to do the research for you, a fault finder. Do it yourself or be quiet. You are lazy about this tho. You wouldn't believe in Prabhupada if he walked on water, healed the sick, and rose before your eyes. "He died...and where is he now? " Major offense! He never died. He is still with us and constantly helping the deovtees. Due to your material vision this is all you can see. While I recognize Jesus never died, you never give mutual respect. That's arrogance. My patience grow short with your insults and ignorance on what you speak on. "No one could ever tell if he return to the world and take the body of ....____..." I dont know what you expect me to fill in that blank with, as my mind doesn't go in the same places yours does, but I do know its offensive and you better knock it off. "He even not in the scriptures..But Jesus? He is the Son of God...No one else...Open your eyes men!" What scriputre would that be? ha You who do not even undrestand the Vedas, who keeps stubbornly insisting prajapati is Jesus when those who know Sanskrit better than you repeatedly explain how this is not so, are challenging scripture? First get an education. Then speak. And you wonder why so many Hindus doesn't see what you see, and convert? Because you did not undrestand the Vedas in the first place, which is obvious by all your posts on the topic. Maybe you are not seeing what they see. "Guest Who Has No Name (t.y. for this new name. great! sounds wonderful!) " Actually, it sounds cowardly. Too paranoid or fearful or whatever other reason, to actually let people know who you are.

You are offensive! And again, you can't ctonrol your tongue and mind and are compelled to disrespect my spiriutal master and put him down! You know nothing of him, yet you judge. "No one is pure no one...Only the Son of God is pure..so he only I believe and his scriptures..." Only your spiriutal teacher is pure but not ours? What conceit you have. This must give you great pleasure tho. Or else your faith is so weak that you have to put down other paths in order to put yours up. We must be very powerful if you find it such a threat you must come here and criticize to get your personal empowerment. By the way, your repeated posts about how you believe only in scripture, specifically the Bible -- as I have told you elsewhere, it is not hard to prove the Bible has been tampered with, a lot. Not a little. You can remain stubborn in your faith and keep blinding yourself to the fact that Bible is no longer the word of Christ, but on these boards you will wind up with posts that show the nonsense within the Bible as the result of man. Therefore it is not wise you should even be instigating in such a way if you are the Xtian you claim to be. Unless you are trying to get us to post the evidence of the contamination of the Bible. "List his qualities, his background and compared to Jesus..." Just because you dont know he has qualities, does not mean he has no qualities. I know them, many here know them, you just dont want to know them. Nor is it not my job to do the research for you, a fault finder. Do it yourself or be quiet. You are lazy about this tho. You wouldn't believe in Prabhupada if he walked on water, healed the sick, and rose before your eyes. "He died...and where is he now? " Major offense! He never died. He is still with us and constantly helping the deovtees. Due to your material vision this is all you can see. While I recognize Jesus never died, you never give mutual respect. That's arrogance. My patience grow short with your insults and ignorance on what you speak on. "No one could ever tell if he return to the world and take the body of ....____..." I dont know what you expect me to fill in that blank with, as my mind doesn't go in the same places yours does, but I do know its offensive and you better knock it off. "He even not in the scriptures..But Jesus? He is the Son of God...No one else...Open your eyes men!" What scriputre would that be? ha You who do not even undrestand the Vedas, who keeps stubbornly insisting prajapati is Jesus when those who know Sanskrit better than you repeatedly explain how this is not so, are challenging scripture? First get an education. Then speak. And you wonder why so many Hindus doesn't see what you see, and convert? Because you did not undrestand the Vedas in the first place, which is obvious by all your posts on the topic. Maybe you are not seeing what they see. "Guest Who Has No Name (t.y. for this new name. great! sounds wonderful!) " Actually, it sounds cowardly. Too paranoid or fearful or whatever other reason, to actually let people know who you are.

Be careful, as you are on the verge of making an offense, in which case this conversation will stop. However, at best maybe you actually do not understand, but the question reamins, do you really want to understand? Or do you dislike this concept to such a deep degree that you are doing everything within your power to 'not' understand. And no need to answer either of these, as we both all ready know the answer to that. I will add, however, that God is not some conventional, boorish Personality that can be whittled down to fit in our pockets of what 'we' are comfortable with Him being. If He wants to be blue, He can be blue. If He wants to appear in any way at all, God is not so limited that He cannot do that. It is because of our own weakness that we cannot handle God being that different from us human beings, we need to try to turn Him into a Human Being. This is one reason may Christians believe Jesus was God. Not all, but enough. Because they need to have some concept of God, and Jesus was unable to tell them because they could not handle hearing it. He clearly said he had much more to tell them, but they have not the ears to hear. Yet I feel I am wasting my time with this post to you, as you are rebellious and seem to think you should argue or everyone should follow you, and have not come to these forums to learn, but to fight. Not to misunderstand, I am not fighting. Simply, I dont want to waste my time, or yours, on these circular arguments that achieve nothing. And maybe you enjoy a good fight, I dont know, but the fact that you never quit even tho we have absolutely NO interest, sure looks like you are having fun! But God is not allowed to have any fun, or be the enjoyer, or there is envy? I disagree. God should be the Supreme Enjoyer, merely by the post "God," if for no other reason, and we should all feel happiness within when He enjoys. I wish you well.

Be careful, as you are on the verge of making an offense, in which case this conversation will stop. However, at best maybe you actually do not understand, but the question reamins, do you really want to understand? Or do you dislike this concept to such a deep degree that you are doing everything within your power to 'not' understand. And no need to answer either of these, as we both all ready know the answer to that. I will add, however, that God is not some conventional, boorish Personality that can be whittled down to fit in our pockets of what 'we' are comfortable with Him being. If He wants to be blue, He can be blue. If He wants to appear in any way at all, God is not so limited that He cannot do that. It is because of our own weakness that we cannot handle God being that different from us human beings, we need to try to turn Him into a Human Being. This is one reason may Christians believe Jesus was God. Not all, but enough. Because they need to have some concept of God, and Jesus was unable to tell them because they could not handle hearing it. He clearly said he had much more to tell them, but they have not the ears to hear. Yet I feel I am wasting my time with this post to you, as you are rebellious and seem to think you should argue or everyone should follow you, and have not come to these forums to learn, but to fight. Not to misunderstand, I am not fighting. Simply, I dont want to waste my time, or yours, on these circular arguments that achieve nothing. And maybe you enjoy a good fight, I dont know, but the fact that you never quit even tho we have absolutely NO interest, sure looks like you are having fun! But God is not allowed to have any fun, or be the enjoyer, or there is envy? I disagree. God should be the Supreme Enjoyer, merely by the post "God," if for no other reason, and we should all feel happiness within when He enjoys. I wish you well.

I suspect you are the same person who has been asking me what gives Srila Prabhupada the authority to speak about Jesus, has he seen yada yada, was he there at that time, etc. All I can say is that I am sorry your faith is so dependent on what you can feel, touch, taste, see, smell, etc., Am also sorry you don't seem to have anything better to do than try to covert those who will never convert. But I wish you well.

Here ya go /images/graemlins/smile.gif Revatinandana: I have a question. One of my prabhus told me that you once said that your Guru Maharaja said that Jesus Christ was a saktyavesavatara. Is that correct? Prabhupada: Yes. Because he said it, it must be correct. Muhammad also, saktyavesavatara." ~ SP, SB 6.127-34, Lecture, Suat, Dec., 17, 1970 ~~~**~~~ "So do not think that the Hindus, they have got disregard for Lord Buddha or for Lord Jesus Christ. No. They have all regard. Anyone who comes as representative of God, or as God, as powerful incarnation, they are all welcome. According to time, according to place, according to the audience, they may speak, speak something which is, which may be different from the Vedic conclusion, but they are accepted as powerful incarnations." ~ Srila Prabhupada lecture Sri Caitanya Caritamrta, Madhy lila 20.154-157, NY, Dec 7, 1977 ~~~**~~~ ".... Mohammed identified himself as a servant of the Supreme Lord. Thus whenever there is a discrepancy in our constitutional position, the Supreme Lord either comes Himself or sends His representative to inform us of the real position of the living entity. ~ Srila Prabhupada, On The Way To Krishna, Chapter 2

Here ya go /images/graemlins/smile.gif Revatinandana: I have a question. One of my prabhus told me that you once said that your Guru Maharaja said that Jesus Christ was a saktyavesavatara. Is that correct? Prabhupada: Yes. Because he said it, it must be correct. Muhammad also, saktyavesavatara." ~ SP, SB 6.127-34, Lecture, Suat, Dec., 17, 1970 ~~~**~~~ "So do not think that the Hindus, they have got disregard for Lord Buddha or for Lord Jesus Christ. No. They have all regard. Anyone who comes as representative of God, or as God, as powerful incarnation, they are all welcome. According to time, according to place, according to the audience, they may speak, speak something which is, which may be different from the Vedic conclusion, but they are accepted as powerful incarnations." ~ Srila Prabhupada lecture Sri Caitanya Caritamrta, Madhy lila 20.154-157, NY, Dec 7, 1977 ~~~**~~~ ".... Mohammed identified himself as a servant of the Supreme Lord. Thus whenever there is a discrepancy in our constitutional position, the Supreme Lord either comes Himself or sends His representative to inform us of the real position of the living entity. ~ Srila Prabhupada, On The Way To Krishna, Chapter 2

Ok, I will go find it, no problem. But I am going to get the short quote I have. There is much more. Matter of fact, once on these very message boards I read a whole thing someone copied and pasted by Prabhupada. It was all about how Muhammed (spelling?) was shaktyavesha avatara and came to elevate the people. A purport or a lecture, something like that. So I know this has been said by him from that perspective too. Anyway, brb /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Ok, I will go find it, no problem. But I am going to get the short quote I have. There is much more. Matter of fact, once on these very message boards I read a whole thing someone copied and pasted by Prabhupada. It was all about how Muhammed (spelling?) was shaktyavesha avatara and came to elevate the people. A purport or a lecture, something like that. So I know this has been said by him from that perspective too. Anyway, brb /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Thanks Shiva, am glad to hear that. Relieved actually. Maybe consider signing your name when you dont log in? I think that's where the confusion entered. I sometimes don't log in when I think I will only be here a moment (and it turns out to be longer ha) but then I sign my name. It really helps, and now I see another reason why it is important to do so. /images/graemlins/smile.gif I can find the quote from Prabhupada in a heartbeat, but it is exactly as Thiest has said. That is, Prabhupada is quoting his spiriutal master. Do you still want it? Before I open up web pages and search my files ha, please be honest. I dont mind, either way, just let me know. P.S. Not mad at you Shiva. :-)

Thanks Shiva, am glad to hear that. Relieved actually. Maybe consider signing your name when you dont log in? I think that's where the confusion entered. I sometimes don't log in when I think I will only be here a moment (and it turns out to be longer ha) but then I sign my name. It really helps, and now I see another reason why it is important to do so. /images/graemlins/smile.gif I can find the quote from Prabhupada in a heartbeat, but it is exactly as Thiest has said. That is, Prabhupada is quoting his spiriutal master. Do you still want it? Before I open up web pages and search my files ha, please be honest. I dont mind, either way, just let me know. P.S. Not mad at you Shiva. :-)

This does not surprise me, tho it does fascinate me. Could you explain how mystic Judiasm is related to mystic Hinduism? Thanks.

"Re: The Crows Have Landed Lemme outta this place!" What did I say to offend you?

Again, I am not sure if you ask your question, what was wrong with the way you asked, out of sincerity or to keep this going. Anyway, seems obvious to me, but ok, I will clarify it for you. "Mohammed lived a thousand of years prior to your Prabhupada. Where did he got his authority to speak of Mohammed? He only based his claims of the writings about Mohammed also. Or maybe Prabhupada is the reincarnation of Mohammed? Ha ha ha...just kidding...(half meant) Even half joke, especially following all else said, is not a joke. Again maybe it was a blunder or poor choice. Anyway....... Prabhupada has all authority to speak on anyone he darn well pleases, not because he had to have 'been there' or alive at that particular time, and not because like you or me, he can only speculate, or again like humans only get information from shastra, but instead as pure devotee he is not only thoroughly studied in all Vedic shastra but also has all knowledge (or can quickly get access to it through Krishna directly). This is a concept one can't get if they: 1) dont have a proper understanding of who Prabhupada is, 2) don't want to, or are not ready to surrender to the pure deovtee. Y.S. means Your servant.

Again, I am not sure if you ask your question, what was wrong with the way you asked, out of sincerity or to keep this going. Anyway, seems obvious to me, but ok, I will clarify it for you. "Mohammed lived a thousand of years prior to your Prabhupada. Where did he got his authority to speak of Mohammed? He only based his claims of the writings about Mohammed also. Or maybe Prabhupada is the reincarnation of Mohammed? Ha ha ha...just kidding...(half meant) Even half joke, especially following all else said, is not a joke. Again maybe it was a blunder or poor choice. Anyway....... Prabhupada has all authority to speak on anyone he darn well pleases, not because he had to have 'been there' or alive at that particular time, and not because like you or me, he can only speculate, or again like humans only get information from shastra, but instead as pure devotee he is not only thoroughly studied in all Vedic shastra but also has all knowledge (or can quickly get access to it through Krishna directly). This is a concept one can't get if they: 1) dont have a proper understanding of who Prabhupada is, 2) don't want to, or are not ready to surrender to the pure deovtee. Y.S. means Your servant.

"Re: I guess not. I just wanted to know. What's the fuss?" The fuss is that those with a Vaisnava education know the intense karmic reactions of even jokingly criticizing any pure deovtee. So it is not only for our beneift that we want the question to be asked free from sarcasm or doubts of Prabhupada's knowledge and purity, but your own. Maybe you are sincere and just made a blunder. I hope so, but I suspect if you can't find the ansewr in Rg Veda, for example, you will not only reject, but ctiticize that our dear Srila Prabhupada, who could speak to Krishna personally, has said like this. All I can do is humbly ask you to next time word your question with more thought. Thank you.

"Re: I guess not. I just wanted to know. What's the fuss?" The fuss is that those with a Vaisnava education know the intense karmic reactions of even jokingly criticizing any pure deovtee. So it is not only for our beneift that we want the question to be asked free from sarcasm or doubts of Prabhupada's knowledge and purity, but your own. Maybe you are sincere and just made a blunder. I hope so, but I suspect if you can't find the ansewr in Rg Veda, for example, you will not only reject, but ctiticize that our dear Srila Prabhupada, who could speak to Krishna personally, has said like this. All I can do is humbly ask you to next time word your question with more thought. Thank you.