Brother AACOOLDRE : The Bible's biggest contradiction

Discussion in 'AACOOLDRE' started by AACOOLDRE, Jul 19, 2002.

  1. AACOOLDRE

    AACOOLDRE Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    364
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Teacher
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +400
    THE BIGGEST CONTRADICTION OF THE BIBLE
    “One source of counteracting a prejudicial attack is the use of arguments that might refute an unpleasant suspicion. For example: One should look to see if the opposite arguments are true of the opposite subject ,thus refuting the argument if it is not, confirming it if it is”- Aristotle

    In the Bible there are too many contradiction for me to handle. I have documented many of them in my pamphlet, Christianity On Trial. I accidentally came upon this contradiction the other day. It’s ironic that I came across this information as it was nearing Christmas. I titled this essay as a Big Contradiction because it cast serious doubts to the jugular vein, or the main tenets of Christianity. This essay exposes flaws in the belief that Jesus died on the cross in a manner and fashion of God wanting him to. You will discover contradictory information concerning the alleged ‘execution’ of Jesus. If these contradictions about Jesus’ death hold true, the information below will prove that God didn’t want Jesus to die. Christianity is ninety-nine percent based on the belief that Jesus died for mankind’s sins. If you don’t believe this principle, you can’t go to heaven. But if I prove this to be untrue, I will have attacked Christianity at its heart and proved it is all a fraud. Besides the essay Not a Jewish Exodus, this is one of the most important essays I’ve ever written. And I thank you for reading this.
    It appears that Jesus is contradicting himself in the Bible; Or that somebody has tampered with the Bible, because Jesus is a man of God and He wouldn’t contradicted His Gospel of “truth” according to God’s will. Note, my Christian friend, to keep in mind three key words: (Pleased & Left or forsaken), because they are synonymous with each other as it relates to this essay and others.
    The Contradiction begins in two stages. The first stage is a pop quiz. When Jesus so called said: “My god, my god why hast thou forsaken me? Was this in (a) Hebrew Eli, Eli Matthew 27:46 or in Aramaic Eloi, Eloi Mark 15:34 ? The second stage of the contradiction comes out gradually with documents piling on top of eachother. Lets begin with a quote. “And he that sent me is with me; the father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him” (John 8:29). Now compare this quote with another. “ And he (Jesus) made his grave with the wicked and with the rich in his death... yet it pleased the lord to bruise him... when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin” (Isaiah 53:5﷓10). These two verses contradict Jesus’ statement when he was hanging on the cross alledgedly saying: “My God my God, why hast thou forsaken, me? (Matthew 27:46). If Jesus were one with God he wouldn’t have needed to ask God why he left him. Jesus couldn’t of asked this question because it makes the other two Bible verses untrue.
    We have someone putting words into Jesus’ mouth. The book of Revelation (22:19) states this would happen, so don’t say it isn’t so. If it pleased God that Jesus was dying for mankind’s sins, how could God leave him when Jesus said he left him not alone because he always pleases him? Some might say that God left Jesus because he was on the cross bearing the burdens of evil. But Isaiah said that Jesus being on the cross pleased God, and Jesus linked the two words please and left as describing God as not leaving Jesus ever alone. This is conclusive proof that the Bible has been tampered with and that lies were told about the supposed killing of Jesus. This short essay will go on to be a pain in the neck for Christians for eternity. For I have successfully challenged the very reasons why they claim Jesus started their religion. But if this isn’t enough I have more. Read Samuel 15:22. “And Samuel saith, hath the lord {is in great delight} in burnt offerings and sacrifices. As in obeying the voice of the lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice”. And last but not least Ezekiel 18:20 states: “The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father”, {vice versa}. But there is a contradiction in Exodus that states the father’s sins shall be visited upon the 3rd and fourth generation of descendants. But never the less, I provided you with ample evidence to cancel out the so-called sacrifice of Jesus.

    The Christians say the sacrifice of Jesus was one of the most important events of all time for humankind. This event was supposed to win every person who believed in it a one-way ticket to heaven with the pleasure of being with God. Why would God not be present at this most important, amazing event of all time, [with the exception of Judgment day], in the world that pleased him so much? This was the event of events, the Grand finale, plus the cream on the pie, the ultimate climax, the turning of the tide and the very reason why the New Testament letters were supposed to be written. If Jesus death was to save mankind God would have been there. Why would God excuse himself, be absent from and avoid his own presence from an event that pleased him so much?

    In summary allow me to juxtapose the Old Testament quote with the New Testament verses concerning the alleged assassination of Jesus on the Cross.
    The most important aspects of the New Testament Cross killing of Jesus accounts are implausible. The book of Isaiah was written between 740 BC –700 BC roughly; “But chapters 40-through 66 of the book of Isaiah appear to be by someone living about two centuries later p.29” according to Richard Friedman in his book “Who wrote the Bible?” It would be almost eight hundred years later the New Testament would be transformed from an originally oral tradition of Jesus mouth to a written statement by people who were not there, that it was at best a second hand, third hand account with no eye witnesses or tangible evidence of direct support. It’s unreliable and unsupportive.

    Equally, significant I find no credible evidence to support any aspect of the alleged Cross crucifixion. The possibility that the document actually came from the 700bc time frame era is ever more remote. Since Isaiah didn’t foresee, or recall a truthful aspect of the so-called cross killing and not knowing God would forsaken Jesus constitutes perjury and or witness tampering. His statements cannot be taken as legitimate evidence pertaining to the alleged Jesus assassination.
    Because of the many uncorroborated stories between Isaiah and the New Testament Gospels I cannot consider their best story they have to offer for their religion has any truth ; but indeed a recent fabrication, in the New Testament, based on ancient history in the Old Testament . I have to stop to ask a question at this juncture: Was Isaiah lying then in 700 BC or is the Gospels of Saint Paul lying now; or are the both of you telling a lie?
    The real, only, reason why Jesus had to be so called killed and rose back to life because its religion was competing with the Egyptian worldwide popular God Horus who was killed by his brother Seth, and brought back to life by his sister Isis. The educated and learned Christians knew of this secret.
    But the case of the Biggest Contradictions is still open. The contradiction of what Jesus was supposed to say about why God left him on the cross can only be rehabilitated by unorthodox means. “The lost Gospel of Peter” states that Jesus said: “My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me”. Jesus never said God left him because it would have been a lie and a contradiction. What Jesus possibly meant was that his ability and power (strength) to stay awake not alive, was being affected by the sedative of gall mixed with vinegar (Matt 27:34 states that he basically sipped on it but didn’t drink it all down. Matthew Hennery made a commentary which said “he would not drink it, because he would not have the best of it: would have nothing like an opiate to lessen his sense of pain”. But the lost gospel of Peter gives us all indications that he did drink it all. Peter states “And one of them said, give him to drink gall with vinegar. And they mixed and gave him to drink and fulfilled all things”. And it was only after drinking this substance does Jesus say his strength or “power” was leaving him. The gospel of John gives all indications that Jesus drunk this sedative. John states: “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”. John :19:29-30. This sedative gave the appearance helped give the appearance that he was dead but only asleep. Myrrh was used as a medicine “was valued primarily as a powerful antiseptic and painkiller” see p.149 in The Star of Bethlehem by Michael R. Molnar According to Hippocrates (460bc-350bc, the so called “Father of Medicine” actually an Egyptian was stated in his writings on how to cure pain: “The strongest vinegar of a white color, honey, Egyptian alum, the finest natron; having toasted these things gently pour in a little gall”. Pliny the elder wrote something very interesting in his book Natural History Pliny stated that “pennyroyal and mint are allies in their ability to revive people who have fainted; both are put in glass bottles full of vinegar”. And I had a conversation with a woman who owned a bookstore. She informed it to me that Jesus would of most likely said father not God that would have been consistent with his other statements. But be reminded there is nothing in the Gospel of Peter that contradicted the other four main gospels. As a matter of fact the Nazarenes used to cite from Peter. {And Josephus, Christianity’s largest extra-Bible source of written information, according to William Whiston translation of his works states in dissertation 1 & 7 that Josephus was a Nazarene} The only way the Christians can be cured from their biggest contradiction is to accept the lost book of Peter and admit that everything written in the Bible isn’t entirely accurate. But this they shall never do because there is total discrepancy between their actual lines of their own theology and arguments they wish to adapt to the actual facts of the case of Christianity on Trial. But its impossible for the Christians to save themselves from this fatal contradictions. Just last night I came across another fatal blow. The Christians can’t use the lost book of Peter because Psalm 22:1 commits them to the contradiction. Psalm 22:1 says: “My god, my god ,why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from helping me and from the words of my groaning”. The Bible writers put words in Jesus mouth in order to fit erroneous Old Testament prophecies. Eventhough Peter was right the Christians are forever trapped in this internal dilemma. I also checked the Greek/English translations for the above quotes out of Matthew. And my findings were the same .They translated the same words so they can’t say there was a mistranslation of words. The full context of Psalm 22:1 which was wrongfuly transferred over to the NT meant God left Jesus whereas the lost gospel of Peter indicated it was his strength or “power” that left him. Whoever wrote that Jesus said God left him didn’t know Jesus. I offer one last chance of restoration to my Christian friends and that’s to scrap the gospel of John in its entirety. Many scholars claim the gospel of John is strangely diffirent from the other three anyway. I’m told that only in Egypt there remains the largest collection of fragments from the book of John.
    The Gospels spoken of by the Koran is not the New Testament. It is not the four gospels now received as canonical. It is the single gospel which Islam teaches, was revealed to Jesus, and which he taught. Fragments of it survive in the received canonical gospels and in some others, like the gospel of Peter, of which traces survive. The final form of the New Testament canon was set in the fourth century A.D at about 367 A.D. A long, long time after Jesus died a natural death.
    Jesus words weren’t the only thing that got bumbled up. I will touch on it briefly here but deal with it in greater detail in the following essay. The Koran maintained “That they say in boast ‘We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the apostle of God’; but they killed him not nor crucified him but so it was made to appear to them and those who differ therein are full of doubts with no certain knowledge but only conjecture to follow for of a surety they killed him not”. Now I already proved they got Jesus words wrong so why wouldn’t they perhaps get his death wrong too. While the gospel texts and oral traditions were being tampered with the New Testament left some clues to support the above Koranic quote. Read between the lines of Matthew as he paraphrase Governor Pilate’s orders: “Command therefore that the sepulcher be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people ,he is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.”-Matthew 27:64. Pilate was saying in so many words that the wrong/error man was killed. What else could have been the error? Ann Wroe wrote a book called Pontius Pilate and offered this information: “On the page that survives, [from a Coptic manuscript], the Jews and Pilate quarreled after the burial of Jesus. The governor has gone to the tomb; it is not ‘proper’ or ‘desirable, the Jews tell him, that a high Roman official should do that. Besides, the body laid in the tomb is not even Christ. Disquietingly, it belongs to someone else”. Pilate didn’t want the error of his mistake to be known until after the third day so that the Christians couldn’t steal the body, produce a phantom Jesus and say it rose from the dead. A little bit of reading in between the lines, detective work and incorporating all relevant documents tends to produce the best evidence. Pilate could of made the mistake because the name of Jesus was a very common name. Josephus works contains 19 diffirent persons that bare the name Jesus. A. Powell Davies wrote Dead sea Scrolls and stated: The word Christ is not the name of a person but the title of an office. A Messiah or ‘Anointed one’ could be any of a number of persons, in the past or present or the future…in the first centuries B.C and A.D. Jesus was by no means the only person who could be meant by Christ”. Could Pilate have killed an impostor on purpose ? There is a Ethiopian tradition that Pilate became a follower of Jesus. If this is true his hidden sentiments of admiring Jesus had to develop before Pilate so called killed him. He could of easily switch persons or made it “appear” Jesus was killed.
    I talked to my exgirlfriend, [who now lives in Alabama]; over the Internet telephone about this Pilate/Jesus matter. She said that Pilate felt he was in error because he felt he really killed a prophet. But the evidence proves otherwise. If Pilate really thought Jesus was to rise again then he would of must of known that placing guards at his cemetery wouldn’t prevent god from raising his dead body and removing the stone so he could get out. The total context of Pilate statements can only conclude that he felt he got the wrong man. If Pilate thought he killed the real Jesus he wouldn’t of placed guards at his tomb. Jesus would of rose on the third day and would have had the power to move the stone or walk through it like he was supposed to walk through doors without the door opening (John 20:19). If Pilate had a change of opinion about Jesus he must of known Jesus healed the sick with just a touch, turned water into wine and had power to raise the dead. Pilate felt that the dead man in the tomb wasn’t Jesus and didn’t want to be turned into a fool by the reappearing of the real Jesus who never was killed. We can argue this one way or the other. Could Pilate thought Jesus was someone else and found out latter? Herod thought that John the Baptist was Jesus see Matthew 14:2 & Mark 6:16. But all of this was for the sake of arguing their own positions. The fact of the matter is that there was no Pilate, Herod from the get go. There was a Christ who was killed earlier by a wicked priest according to the Talmud. This story was incorporated into Jesus with transplanting Herod and Pilate into the story. Allow me to quote my favorite philosopher Bertrand Russell: “One of the doctrines of a certain sect of Gnostics was adopted by Mahomet. They taught that Jesus was a mere man, and that the son of god descended upon him at the baptism, and abandoned him at the time of the passion. In support of this view they appealed to the text: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me”-a text which it must be confessed, Christians have always found difficult. The Gnostics considered it unworthy of the son of god to be born ,to be an infant, and above all, to die on the cross; they said that these things had befallen the man Jesus, but not the divine son of god. Mahomet, who recognized Jesus as a prophet, though not as divine, had a strong class feeling that prophets ought not come to a bad end. He therefore adopted the view of the Docetics (a Gnostic sect), according to which it was a mere phantom that hung upon the cross”-A History of Western Philosophy. I see a slight paralle with Helen who’s phantom was in Troy while actually in Egypt. Jesus fled to Egypt and his phantom died in Israel.If Jesus was real he had to have stayed in Egypt along time because a lot of his speeches were very similar to the Egyptian religion.
    When you can provide two or more strings of evidence to refute that Jesus didn’t make two or more statements while he was supposed to be on the cross. Is it not reasonable to suggest that there is more than a chance that he didn’t die. For example Philo, a Jew, of Alexandria, Egypt quoted Plato “There is forgiveness for those whose sin is due to ignorance, because they have no experience to tell them what they should do” Luke in 23:34 inserted the quote was probably influence by Plato or Philo. But since philo was in Egypt and he probably stole this concept from the Egyptian Book of the dead which states “There is no fault in my body, not have I spoken lies [sins] with knowledge” p. 18 Another example of Paul stealing from Philo was saying that the art of the covenant had a golden jar containing manna Hebrews 9:4. This isn’t mentioned in the OT. Who told Paul about the golden jar. It had to of been Philo. Also the Papyrus of Ani inside the Egyptian book of the dead has a like statement. On p.73 of Budge translation says: “Not is there sin in my body, not have I spoken lies with knowledge”. I go further into detail of this in my essay Christianity on trial . My main problem with the forgiveness thing is that it implies that his killing was a sin. Would you say god needs forgiveness for the flood or the fire to come?
    Sir Arthur Weigall came up with an ingenious theory about the so called killing of Jesus. “When Jesus was crucified he did not die, but only swooned (to faint, or be unconscious);and afterwards he was revived by his friends and spirited away. The Matthew narrator tells us that the chief priests and Pharisees requested Pilate to station a guard of Roman soldiers at the tomb of Jesus. It is stated in the bible account that the guard was not placed at the tomb until the second night after the burial of Jesus. Weigall suggest that Jesus was taken out of the tomb of the first night; so that the soldiers stood watch over an empty sepulcher”.
    Egyptian myths and legends must be taken seriously when assessing contradictory and ambiguous New Testament accounts. For example: If you are going to say that Judas was responsible indirectly for killing Jesus and there are contradictory information. The contradictions are amazing and sheds more light of Egyptians stories being incorporated. If I prove that Judas sucide was made up then that fact will render Jesus dying as false because Judas was supposed to had killed himself because he was mad the death of Jesus didn’t bring about an immediate Judgement day he thought would come. The contradictions begin. Did Judas kiss Jesus as a sign to the police so they would know to arrest him? John 18:3-12 says no cause he wasn’t close enough to him but Matthew 26:48-50 says yes. Who bought the field where Judas was buried. Matthew 27:5 says it was the priest Acts 1:18 says Judas bought it himself. Why did they call the field a field of blood? Matthew 27: 8 said it was due to the fact it was bought with blood money but Acts 1:19 said it was due to the bloody death of Judas. Now let us get to the climax of the Judas story. How did Judas die? Paul, who had contact with Philo of Alexandra Egypt, and a contemporary of Jesus, said Judas fell head first busted his head open and his body parts were cut open. See Acts 1: 18. Now Matthew 27:5 simply said that Judas hung himself from a tree. Paul may of cute and pasted an old Egyptian legend concerning the death of Judas. Lets go back to Acts 1:18 “now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out”. If you read The Egyptian book of the dead, written before Moses was a sperm drop, a similar story of a serpent dying an almost exact death. Let us turn to a hymn of praise to Ra when he riseth in the eastern part of heaven. “ Thine enemy the serpent hath been given to the fire. The serpent-fiend Sebau hath fallen headlong…let me slit asunder the serpent-fiend Sebau”. Even if the Christians could restore the contradiction by saying Judas hung himself on top of a tree, the branch broke and his body fell off a cliff doesn’t matter because his death parallels the Egyptian one even more with that type of explanation. Another error is reported concerning the death of Judas. Webb Garrison wrote: Strange Facts about the bible says “Matt 27:9-10, part of the downfall of Judas Iscariot, contains a monumental boner. In all known manuscripts it reads: “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver... Jeremiah never said anything about thirty pieces of silver…Quotation from memory was a common practice by New Testament writers”.
    We can’t leave out the book of Isaiah which Christians claim foretold the coming of Jesus. This isn’t the case as Goddfrey Higgins has stated “The book of Isaiah has given much trouble, as already mentioned, to our divines, they have wanted it for a prophecy of Christ, while it literally expresses that it alludes to Cyrus” see Anacalypsis Volume 1 p.171. The first Messiah in the Bible was Cyrus, the King of Persia who released the Jews from exile in Babylon. Now the Christians knew from Herodotus, Book 1:108 that “The Magi had interpreted the dream to mean that his Daughters son would usurp his throne. To guard against this, Astyages, when Cyrus was born,…(to prevent his death was swithed with another infant). This was the inspiration of the Christians that Jesus was hunted down for death as an infant but escaped it. Even Matthew Henry (b.1662) famous 250 year old commentary on the Bible noted from the book of Isaiah that “Cyrus, a type of Christ”

    I end this essay with a quote from Socrates. “All good counsel begins in the same way ;a man should know what he is advising about ,or his counsel will all come to nothing. People should know the nature of things ,when they don’t know about them, and not having come to an understanding at first because they think they know, they end, as might be expected ,in contradicting one another and themselves”
    In all fairness I should state that the story of Jesus execution was an old story in Egypt that was updated with Pontus Pilate and Herod playing key roles. The Essenes and their scrolls are the best proof yet that Jesus/Osiris lived several centuries earlier”.-See Historical Deception By Moustafa Gadalla p.222 . Also I must note that “Some people maintained that the Jews had deliberately falsified the Hebrew manuscript, out of malice towards the Christians”-History of Weste
     
  2. j'hiah

    j'hiah Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2001
    Messages:
    3,431
    Likes Received:
    67
    Location:
    lend me some sugar.. l am your neighbor
    Ratings:
    +70
    Dre,
    i don't feel offended or attacked in the least bit being a believer in Christ.

    but i'll study and get back with you.

    nfinite
     
  3. dnommo

    dnommo Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2001
    Messages:
    2,053
    Likes Received:
    13
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Teacher of English, Literature & Poetry
    Location:
    Baltimore, Md.
    Ratings:
    +15
    Dre,

    You have given a lot fo information here...One point kinda stuck out to me. It read:

    While i did read after this your arguement on it, i want to give a little light on this matter. Pilate's decision was based on political issues not because he felt he killed a prophet. Remeber, he left the decision up to the people. He did not want to execute Jesus because Jesus had not done anyhting wrong in Pilates eyes. This was someone brought to him by the Jews who felt that He was a heretic (for lack of a better word). The Pharisees felt that Jesus was breaking one of the basic tenets of their belief; thou shall have no other God before me. Christ never claimed to be such a person but it was the people who called him such.

    The reason for the guards that the tomb is because of graverobbers. There was a fear that someone would come and tkae his body from its resting place.

    Basically, Pilate didn't want to get involved in such a political matter that could destroy his career. It wasn't about what he beleived but about how to enforce the law. Christ had not broken any laws against Rome so Pilate left it up to the people to decide the fate of Christ.

    I shall read further into this and response back...
     
  4. AACOOLDRE

    AACOOLDRE Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    364
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Teacher
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +400
    For further evidence of the bible biggest contradiction you might want to read another thread i wrote. It debunks the book of acts claims that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus. Its kind of long but worth your time.

    Oedipus is Osiris:
    And The Strange connection of…
    1. The book of Isaiah
    2. Cyrus, the King
    3. Jesus
    4. And Playwright Sophocles
    By Andre Austin

    The poet and playwright Sophocles (495-406BC) wrote three plays devoted to a mythical king named Oedipus.

    Immanuel Velikovsky wrote a book Oedipus and Akhenaten in 1960. theory that the playwright Sophocles wrote allusions to a real Egyptian King Akhenaten . Because Oedipus was blind and had trouble walking due to bad legs and other parralles gives Veikovsky enough inference to say it was Akhenaten. What do we do with scholars comparing Moses and Akhenaten side by side. But if we go back to 1500 BC, before the time of Akhenaten, Moses and Oedipus we can read from the Egyptian Book of the dead which informs us that Osiris had bad feet and was blinded. For example:

    “I’am he who is without his power of walking” p220 and again

    “I, the avenger of right and truth, have avenged his eye. I have swathed the eye of Osiris”p294

    It might be possible that many of the Black College fraternities dance ceremonies with a cane/stick is related some how to the ancient Egyptians.

    Martin Bernal author of Black Athena stated in Volume 2 of his work, “In Volume 4 I shall be looking at the equally intricate mythological parallels between…Oedipus and the Egyptian k3 Mwt.f (bull of his mother)” see p120-121.


    Notes:

    Velikovsky theory of Akhenaten being a Moses isn’t out of the box. The myth of Osiris was transferred often times for recycle with fictional and historical figures. This complex issue is compounded when ancient Egyptian historian Mantheo (300BC) states Moses changed his name from Osarseph after the god Osiris. Back in Egypt Kings often incorporated the myths of their religious beliefs into their customs and lives.

    Oedipus had foster parents as well as Moses too.

    Paul Roche who translated some of Sophocles works into English makes these comments. “A look at the name Oedipus is revealing, for it is stuffed with latent meanings, all of them emblematic of the themes of Oedipus The King. Oida means I know (with the present sense of eido, I see): which encapsulated Oedipus compuslsion to ferret out his past and see who he really is, which, when he does, impels him to punish his knowing, his seeing, by putting out his eyes.” When I reread Plutarch’s “Isis and Osiris I became more amazed at the Oedipus, Osiris link. According to Plutarch for the Egyptians “Their King and Lord Osiris they portray by means of an eye…there are even some who explain the meaning of the name as “many eyed”.
    The historian Xenophon recorded Socrates stating that Sophocles was his favorite tragic poet. It’s a coincidence that Herodotus and Sopholes were contemporaries. Sophocles in his work “Oedipus at Colonus” made an interesting statement:

    “Oedipus; Oh, what miserable and perfect copies
    Have they grown to be of Egyptian ways!
    For there the men sit at home and weave
    While their wives go out to win the daily bread” –337 ff

    I felt lucky that my memory has served me well to turn to Book 2:35 of Herodotus and read:” The Egyptians themselves in their manners and customs seem to have reversed the ordinary practices of mankind. For instance, women attend market and are employed in trade, while men stay at home and do the weaving”. To me this is amazing because it proves Sophocles mixed history with mythology. Some scholars like Martin Bernal have stated: “Greek poetry and music have fundamental origins in Egypt and that two central stories in Greek legend, those of Pandora and Oedipus, can be derived from actual events in the Egyptian Eighteenth Dynasty”-Black Athena writes back p.337.


    A little bit of similarity between Oedipus The King and the 41st book of Isaiah. I believe some of the style and use of words are too similar to avoid mentioning it.

    Oedipus: You mean, you know and will not say?
    You’d rather sacrifice us all and let the city rot?
    Tiresias: I’d rather keep you and me from harm.
    Don’t press me uselessly. My lips are sealed. Isaiah 41:1 starts out saying “Silent”
    Oedipus: what, nothing? You miserable old man!
    You’d drive a stone to fury. Do you still refuse?
    Your flinty heart set in hopeless stubbornness?
    Tiresias; My flinty heart! Oh, if you could only see
    What lurks in yours you would not chide me so.
    Oedipus: hear that? What man alive, I ask,
    Could stand such insults to our sovereignty and State?…

    Tresias: the rotting canker in the state is you.
    Oedipus: Insolence!
    And dare you think you’re safe?

    Tiresias: Yes, safe for truth has made me strong
    Oedipus: What Truth? Hardly learned from your profession
    Tiresias: No. Learned from you, who force it out of me?
    Oedipus Force what? Say it again. I must have it straight.
    Tiresias: Was it not straight? You’d bait and goad me on?
    Oedipus: It made no sense. So speak it out again.
    Tiresias: I say, the murder of the man
    Whose murder you pursue is you
    Oedipus: What! A second time? This you will regret.

    Tiresias: shall I add to it and make you angrier still?
    Oedipus: to your heart’s content. Mouth away!
    Tiresias: I say that you and your most dearly loved
    Are wrapped together in a hideous sin, blind to the horror of it
    Oedipus: you think you can go on blabbering unscathed
    Tiresias: Unscathed, indeed, if truth is strength

    (Isaiah 41: 1-2 also connects Righteousness with Judgment of truth. Later in verse 3 Isaiah says he will be unscathed. Too much similar talk for it not to be the same.)

    Tiresia: Poor fool! These very gibes you mouth at me
    Will soon be hurled by every mouth at you.



    Oedipus: You can’t hurt me, you night-hatched thing!
    Me or any man who lives in light.
    Tiresias: You’re right. I’m not the one that fate cast
    For your fall

    Apollo [the sun God patron of arts] is enough. It’s in his able hands
    Oedipus: Creon? Of course!
    Was it you or he that thought up that?
    Tiresias: hardly Creon. You are your own worst enemy.
    Oedipus: Oh wealth and sovereignty! Statecraft
    Surpassing art!

    Oh life so pinnacled on fame
    What ambushed envy dogs your trail?
    And for a kingship that the state put in my hands… (Cyrus says he got the world)
    ( In his hands)
    Tell me when did you ever play the prophet Straight? (See Isaiah 45:13 where he says “I will raise Cyrus in my righteousness: I will make all his ways straight”)

    In this part of the play resembles Isaiah 41:25

    “I have stirred up one from the north, and
    He comes-
    One from the rising sun who calls on my (Repeated Isaiah 45:6-7)
    Name ( similar clay cylinders of Cyrus say this too)
    He treads on rulers as if they were mortar, ( About light)
    As if he were a potter treading the clay (repeated in Isaiah 45:9 just four verses away from mentioning Cyrus name. And is this an allusion to the clay tablets of Cyrus that matches Isaiah? Cyrus talks about light and conquering other rulers. If it is its stunning!)

    (No one can deny Sophocles and Isaiah used similar analogy with treading on rulers with art crafts. Verse 7 of Isaiah uses the very word “Craftsman” but this isn’t all)

    26 Who told of this from the beginning, so we could know,
    or beforehand, so we could say, 'He was right'?
    No one told of this,
    no one foretold it;
    no one heard any words from you.
    27 I was the first to tell Zion, 'Look, here they are!'
    I gave to Jerusalem a messenger of good tidings.
    28 I look but there is no one-
    no one among them to give counsel,
    no one to give answer when I ask them. (Are they implying the question is a riddle?)
    29 See, they are all false!
    Their deeds amount to nothing;
    their images are but wind and confusion.

    Now isn’t this something the play of Sophocles deals with foretelling events and answering riddles. The downfall of the house of Oedipus was foretold by the gods before Oedipus was born, but it was foretold because it was going to happen; it was not going to happen because it was foretold, and it was going to happen because Oedipus being what he was, made it happen. The riddle had to do with “What being has only one voice, has sometime two feet sometimes three, sometimes four, and is weakest when it has the most. Oedipus answer referred to the life of man, but the riddle belongs to a cluster found all over the world, many of which refer to the weakness of the sun in the morning and evening and its strength at midday. I think that in the light of the Egyptian Sphinx dedication to the sun in the mourning and evening the parallels is quite remarkable”-Martin Bernal in his “Black Athena” p.69.

    I do not know who wrote the last parts of Isaiah. The critics politely call him Deutero-Isaiah, which means “Second Isaiah”. Shall we call him the forger of half of Isaiah (thirty or forty chapters of it? The two writers of Isaiah are at least two centuries apart. I wonder if the second Isaiah copied parts of Sophocles. Sophocles was born in 495 BC, about 30 years prior to Cyrus the great death in 529 BC. Many bible scholars believe Isaiah wrote about Cyrus as the Jews first Messiah in the Bible. If it can be proven that Isaiah II took notes from Sophocles it advances scholars claim the book of Isaiah was written by at least two individual two hundred years apart. According to William Neil’s Pocket Bible Commentary “The general theme of chs. 40-48 is the impending liberation of the exiles by Cyrus conquest of Babylon” see p.252. However Neil says “No words of old testament scripture played so large a part in early Christian theology as Isaiah 53:1-12 (Luke 24:13-34; Acts 8:26-39)” p255. Put I shall prove it all was Cyrus later on.

    The more I study this strange connection between Isaiah, Cyrus, Jesus the more I’m convinced there was out right mythology interjected into our holy books. Allow me to slowly explain some more of the theft of Sophocles play. First I will quote a book written in 1962 by Aubrey De Selincourt called The World of Herodotus “Oedipus the King is the only play of Sophocles, or of any other Greek playwright, in which, apart from the poetry, the actual plot is a gripping one; or perhaps I should say the way the development of the plot is handled; for the final issue of the story, like that of all Greek plays, is of course Foreknown. The legend, of which the play is concerned with a crucial incident, is as follows. Laius, king of Thebes, was told by an oracle of Apollo that he would have a son whose life would be accursed: it was his destiny to kill his father and marry his mother. The child was born, was there any way to avert his appalling doom? Laius and his wife Jocasta thought there was-the baby should be destroyed. Accordingly they gave it to a shepherd with orders that it should be exposed, with an iron pin through its ankles, in a lonely glen on Mt. Cithaeron, and left to die. But the shepherd heart failed him, and gave the child to another shepherd…Oedipus grew to manhood…In the course of his wanderings he came to Thebes-a city of which he knew nothing. There he found everything in confusion. Laius, the king, had just been killed by an unknown wayfarer; The Sphinx (possibly Isis) was devouring all who failed to answer her riddle. Oedipus answered it and destroyed the monster power, and the Thebans in gratitude made him their king…In Oedipus mind felt he was guilty: he it was who killed King Laius at that chance encounter on the road. Oedipus mad with horror blinds himself with pins from a woman’s dress”.

    I see many similarities with Cyrus, and Oedipus.

    1. They tried to kill Cyrus and Oedipus on a mountain. Herodotus states that “The Magi had interpreted a dream that his daughters son would usurp his throne…the kings orders are that you must expose this infant in the wildest spot you know amongst the hill” Book 1:110. Jesus would be put to death on the hill of Golgoths, or place of the skull. And all were tried to kill them in infancy like Werner Keller noted: “The chosen child… (They wanted killed) was attached to a number of prominent figures in antiquity, to Sargon of Akkad, Moses, Cyrus even to the Emperor Augustus as well as to such mythical characters as Oedipus”-see The Bible As History p.372-373. I guess he forgot Horus.
    2. Isaiah says, “I will go before you (Cyrus) and will level the mountains I will break down the gates of bronze and cut through bars of iron”. Is this an allusion to Odepipus whose ankles were tied up with iron pins.
    3. A shepherd takes Odepipus as his son in the play. And Herodotus reports “And it so happened that Cyrus- the supposed son of the (Cyno) the herdsman” Book 1:114.
    4. In Isaiah 42:18-19 Hear, you deaf; look, you blind, and see! Who is blind but my servant and deaf like the messenger I send. Who is blind like the one committed to me? Blind like the servant of the lord”. If Isaiah was referring to Cyrus, which I think he was, this would fit well with Sophocles play where Oedipus went blind.
    5. The Magi gives information to Herod the King and he fears Jesus rise will bring about his death. King Laius felt the same way too in Sophocles play. Also king Astyages wanted Cyrus dead. All the kings wanted them killed in their infancy.
    6. Cyrus raised by Foster parents and so was Oedipus as well as Moses.
    7. Both Moses & Cyrus cause water in river to dry up so their troops could cross.
    8. Both Oedipus & Moses dealt with a Plague.
    9. Niccolo Machiavelli in his Art of War quoted a contemporary historian of Socrates named Xenophon. Xenophon wrote a history book of Cyrus called Cyropaedia. I believe Xenophon is reliable because Diogenes Laertius stated, “He gained the friendship of Cyrus” (the younger). Also William Whiston in his notes on The Works of Josephus says: “Isaiah 13:12; which character makes Xenophon’s most excellent history of him very credile”. Now, Machiavelli states in Book 6: “Many (Soldiers) have gained an advantage by pretending to run away in great fear and by leaving their camp full of wine and provisions; the enemy has gorged himself on these and others have returned and fallen upon the enemy while he was drunk or asleep. In this manner Cyrus was served by Tomyris ( a Scythian who had him crucified in 530BC and buried in a stone Mausoleum in Iran). This brings alive Isaiah 20:13 who said “Let us eat drink; for tomorrow we shall die”. This may also be the origin of the legend of Jesus last supper of eating and drinking wine. It also may explain why Peter in his lost Gospel says Jesus/Cyrus stated that his power rather than God had forsaken him. It fits well that a military General/King would say he lost his power. Anyway in my other essay,“The Bible biggest contradiction”), I prove without a fraction of doubt that Jesus couldn’t of said “My God why has thou forsaken me”. I also touch on Isaiah 53:10 where God said he was pleased to “Bruise him”. I believe this was Cyrus too because just a few lines up in Isaiah 53: 2 it stated “He shall grow up before him as a tender plant”. Herodotus 1:108 reported that Cyrus father dreamed that his daughter was pregnant and a vine (plant) grew from her private parts.
    Xenophon writings on Cyrus states that “Thus they (Cyrus) talked together, and thus they journeyed on until they
    Reached the frontier, and there a good omen met them: an eagle swept
    Into view on the right, and went before them as though to lead the
    10. Way” Isaiah 40:31 “They shall mount up with wings as Eagles; they shall run, and not be weary”. Cyrus was held in high esteem being anointed by God see Is 45:1. Also Isaiah 46:11 says I call from the east a bird of prey”. The Catholic bible notes says this is Cyrus. I noticed that Sophocles mentions that Odeipus didn’t “take cues from birds”.
    11. In the same poem of Isaiah where Cyrus is mention common themes of their religion are talked about. Cyrus a member of Zoroastrianism stats that the world is constantly fighting between light/good and dark/evil. Isaiah 45:7 says I form the light and create darkness I bring prosperity and create disaster”.
    12. Two clay cylinders of Cyrus statements found by archaeologist match Isaiah 53: 4,5 and 10. “The dwellers in Babylon (Jews included as exiles)…I freed from the yoke that ill became them. I repaired their houses, I healed their afflictions”. On another cylinder he says: “Sin, the light of heaven and earth, with his favorable omens gave into my hands …I brought the gods back into their sanctuaries”. You can’t deny that Isaiah said: “Surely he hath borne our grief’s, and carried our sorrows…he was wounded for our transgressions…and with his stripes we are healed”. Verse ten goes on “yet it pleased the lord to bruise him…the pleasure of the lord shall prosper in his Hand .You can find Cyrus quotes of his own cylinder seals in The Bible As History p327-328. The author even admits, “The Bible Chronicler had known the text of the clay cylinder” (in 2 Chron.36). Because he quoted from a portion of the cylinder I omitted. I feel confident in saying that the Christian writers had no business stating a claim in the book of Isaiah referred to Jesus when Cyrus was the man was intended. The same language Cyrus used Isaiah used. Building construction claims of Cyrus cylinder is confirmed by Isaiah 44:28. Isaiah 45:1 talks about using Cyrus right hand and so I think Isaiah 53:10 referred to the same individual too. Isaiah 13: talks about “lift ye up a banner upon the high mountain (Persia has many mountains) exalt the voice unto them, shake the hand”. Matthew Henry’s commentary states: “It is said of Cyrus that in this expedition God held his right hand xlv.1. Henry believed that God was calling Cyrus from the mountain in Isaiah 13 and in other places as well.
    13. Diodorus says Cyrus died by crucifixion at the hands of the Scythians. Matthew reports Jesus died by crucifixion from the Romans. Herodotus 1:214 states that there were many accounts of Cyrus death. So his death is a mystery. Oedipus would die mysteriously in either at Colonus or at Athens. Now at this something John in the book of Revelation states Jesus died spiritually in Egypt and Babylon.
    14. Herodotus 1:177 reports “Cyrus was engaged with the north and east, bringing into subjection every nation without exception”. This may of given Isaiah inspiration to say “I have stirred up one from the north, and he comes- one from the rising sun (East) who calls on my name” Isaiah 41:25. The Catholic notes claim Cyrus is the one summoned. I believe this too because it matches Herodotus notes. So when we move down to the other verses it matches Oedipus history of his life being foretold and no one being to answer a question which I believe is the riddle of the Sphinx. I also believe that when Isaiah talked about leveling mountains was done in retaliation for people wanting to kill Cyrus on top of a hill. Bible scholars already admit chapter 41 of Isaiah was talking about Cyrus so don’t they admit Isaiah chapter 40 too? I shall offer evidence that along with chapter 41 chapter 40 talked about Cyrus too. Just because some writer in the New Testament had Jesus repeating its words doesn’t necessarily mean that Chapter 40 was referring to Jesus instead of Cyrus. With that said, first let me quote from its famous passage.
    ISAIAH SOPHOCLES
    “A voice of one calling: Then where shall your yelp of
    In the desert prepare horror not resound…echoing
    The way for the lord from Mount Cithaeron…
    Make straight in the wilderness what flood of sorrows-ah! you
    A highway for our God. Do not dream- will pull you
    Every valley shall be raised up down and level off your pride
    Every mountain and hill made low -From Oedipus The King
    The rough ground shall become level also compare verse 6 and 9
    The rugged places a plain-Isaiah 40: 3-4 were there’s more crying
    Yelp another word for cry
    (Basically the whole chapter 40 is included but after I quote from king and Herodotus I will interject other verses at convenient times. The same talk about crying and mountains are repeated in Isaiah 44:23. Be careful to note Cyrus name is brought up in verse 28 just 5 down)

    Before I go on presenting my evidence I must digress and say that one of my Heroes Martin L. King paraphrased from Isaiah in his famous “I have a dream speech” in 1963, which was a call for justice, fairness and equality for Black people. I can’t resist reciting his inspired poetry:

    “I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places shall be made plain, and crooked places shall be made straight and the glory of the lord will be revealed and all flesh shall see it together”. King probably didn’t realize that his paraphrasing of Isaiah was an Egyptian concept. “The Egyptians applied the ‘Justice’ of scales to social and legal life at least as early as the Middle Kingdom” Black Athena writes back p.272

    Now back to the evidence of Cyrus being the inspiration for Isaiah 40. My well-trained eyes have seen connections of Herodotus reports of Cyrus and Isaiah chapter 40. Herodotus said in Book 1:125-126:

    “The letter set Cyrus thinking of the means by which he could most effectively persuade the Persians to revolt, and his deliberations led him to adopt the following plan, which he found best suited to his purpose. He wrote on a roll of paper that Astyages had appointed him to command the Persian army; then he summoned an assembly of the Persians, opened the roll in their presence and read what he had written. ‘And now, he added, I have an order for you: Every man is to appear on parade with a sickle’

    The order was obeyed. All the men assembled with their sickles, and Cyrus next command was before the day was out they should clear (level see Isaiah 40: 4) a certain piece of rough land full of thorn bushes, about eighteen or twenty furlongs square. This too was done, whereupon Cyrus issued the further order that they should present themselves again on the following day, after having taken a bath. Meanwhile Cyrus collected and slaughtered all his fathers’ goats, sheep, and oxen (Isaiah 40:11) in preparation for entertaining the whole Persian army at a banquet, together with the best wine and bread he could procure. The next day the guest assembled, and were told to sit down on the grass (see Isaiah 40: 6; 7; 22) and enjoy themselves. After the meal Cyrus asked them which they preferred-yesterday’s work or today’s amusement; and they replied that it was indeed a far cry from the previous day misery to their present pleasures. This was the answer, which Cyrus wanted; he seized upon it at once and proceeded to lay bare what he had in mind. ‘Men of Persia’ he said, listen to me: obey my orders, and you will be able to enjoy a thousand pleasures as good as this without ever turning your hands to servile labor…Take my advice and win your freedom”. (Freedom was define as justice of balance scales in Isaiah 40:12) Its also interesting to note, “Cyrus success owed much to the material resources of his kingdom. It was rich in minerals, above all in iron, and the high pastures (grass) of the valleys lay a great reserve of horses and cavalrymen…Greek were told already by Herodotus that the Persians loved flowers”- The Penguin History of the World By J.M Roberts p.155-156 Now what do you think gave Isaiah 40:6 to say “All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field”? Pliny the Elder in Natural History reports “King Cyrus could name all the soldiers in his army”. That’s amazing because in Isaiah 40:26 it states: To whom then will ye liken me, or shall be equal?…that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names”. Was Isaiah referring to Cyrus?

    Why did Cyrus and Isaiah link the same type of analogies with freedom if they were not talking about the same thing? Like I said bible scholars already admit chapter 41 and 42, 44 spoke of Cyrus. I already proved a quote from Herodotus for chapter 41 was applied to him so why exclude chapter 40?

    There are other verses in Isaiah that appears to fit the character of Cyrus military career.

    “I will make rivers flow on barren heights,
    And springs within valleys.
    I will turn the desert into pools of water
    And parched ground into springs- Isaiah 41:18

    It appears Isaiah is talking about diverting water. The military strategy of Cyrus used the river Euphrates for his advantage. The river Euphrates ran through the center of Babylon. Cyrus dug channels and canals, to divert enough of the water so that his army could enter unopposed along the riverbed. Now if verse 18 fits Cyrus why not verse 15 of chapter 41 that talks about leveling the hills? This would be the same type of things said in Isaiah 40:4? I’m just providing additional arguments for my case.

    I know that Herodotus probably didn’t read the Jewish scripture. I base this assumption on my addiction to some of the Gibbonian fine writing. In one of Edward Gibbon’s footnotes he reports: “Josephus has persuaded many of the Christian fathers that Plato derived a part of his knowledge from the Jews; but this vain opinion cannot be reconciled with the obscure state and unsocial manners of the Jewish people, whose scriptures were not accessible to Greek curiosity till more than one hundred years after the death of Plato (that would be 248 cause Plato died in 348 Bc) Please refer to chapter 21 of Gibbon’s “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. So Herodotus who died in 420BC would not have copied anything from Isaiah. Both wrote independently and compliment each other. The second Isaiah “He (Isaiah) is the first who reports the lord as saying ‘there is no god but I’. He believes in the resurrection of the body, perhaps as a result of Persian influence. His prophecies of the messiah were, later, the chief Old Testament texts used to show that the prophets foresaw the coming Christ”, (which is incredible) see A Western History of Western Philosophy By Bertrand Russell p.312-313 Herodotus 1:131 reports “Persian customs which I can describe from personal knowledge. The erection of statues, temples, and altars is not an accepted practice…they also worship the sun, moon earth, fire, water and winds, which are their only original deities”. And the Egyptians did the same.

    I believe that there were myths and history that was mixed with religion. Apparently some of these myths had common themes that got recycled into various stories of different peoples for thousands of years.

    For further information being related to Jesus not matching Isaiah please read my other essay “The biggest contradiction of the Bible”. I hope I provided enough information for your satisfaction.

    I shall end on a soft note. Because the Jews were so fond of Cyrus the Great they gave a warm-hearted eulogy of him near the end of Isaiah. But first let me remind you that Cyrus was buried on the southern slopes of a long range of hills there still stands among the rough grass of the highlands a small stone building (mausoleum) dating from the time of Cyrus. Guess what Isaiah Eulogy was? “The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: merciful men are taken away. Among the smooth stones of the stream is thy portion…Upon a lofty and high mountain hast thou set thy bed…behind the doors also and the post hast thou set up thy rembrance…he that putteth his trust in me shall possess the land, and shall inherit my holy mountain” Isaiah 57: 1-8 and verse 13. Well Cyrus is laid on top of a hill with stone and did write an inscription for peoples memory. I have additional information that the unnamed person in Isaiah 57:7 is in reference to Cyrus. Isaiah states, “Upon a high and lofty mountain you made your bed and there you went up to offer sacrifice”. According to Xenophon Cyrus: “But one night, as he lay asleep (in his bed) in the royal palace, he dreamt a
    Dream. It seemed to him that some one met him, greater than a man, and
    said to him, "Set your house in order, Cyrus: the time has come, and
    you are going to the gods."

    With that Cyrus awoke out of sleep, and he all but seemed to know that
    the end of his life was at hand. [3] Straightway he took victims and
    Offered sacrifice to Zeus, the god of his fathers, and to the Sun, and
    all the other gods, on the high places where the Persians sacrifice,
    and then he made this prayer”

    About a page down Xenophon quotes Cyrus: "My sons, and friends of mine, the end of my life is at hand: I
    know it by many signs”. And Isaiah 57: 8 also talks about his “indent symbols”. A sign/symbol means the same thing.

    More compelling evidence points to Cyrus in Isaiah 57:9 the word Molech is used in which children were sacrificed to a pit of fire. But Molech was an ancient Phoenician god called Ammon and Cyrus was a member of Zoroastrianism. Names of the religions are in name different but customs were the same. Fire was the central them of Zoroastrianism. They saw god as the sun in the day and fire at night. Apparently so did the Christians when Paul wrote: “For our god is a consuming fire” Hebrews 12:29. Fire was a multi-dimensional full of ideas that were a benefit for human kind. I see no difference between the Phoenician Ammon and the Egyptian Amon. Plus Amon was explicitly identified with the rams and thunder of Zeus by Herodotus and others in antiquity. Osiris was called the son of fire/Ra; and before your soul could be judged you had to go through a pit of fire. Likewise Jesus said he baptized with fire. A Persian religious founder Manicheans (215-276 ad) combined Christian, Gnostic and Zoroastrian into his teaching. It flourished until the government became Christian. In the beginning of Plutarch’s Isis and Osiris he states: “It is a fact, Clea, that having a beard and wearing a coarse cloak does not make philosophers, nor does dressing in linen and shaving the hair make votaries (or consecrate) of Isis”. These things were done but they were symbolic to represent something else. Plutarch, in, Isis And Osiris does tell a story of Isis burning a Childs body as a indirect means to recover the dead body of Osiris to give him his life back. He also talks about Zoroaster the blood of wolves being sacrificed as votive and thank offerings. Plutarch also states Zeus adopted Osiris. Jesus being called a Nazarene (not a city but sect) would of cut his hair and thrown it in fire as a sacrifice. Josephus reports “Those that are called Nazirites suffer their hair to grow long…when they consecrate their hair, and offer sacrifice, they are to allot that hair for priests [to be thrown in the fire] –Antiquities of the Jews Book 4, chapter 4. Now Josephus also stated the Essence “offer their sacrifices themselves”. This is why I believe they used their own hair. Isis used magic spells with people’s hair too either for harm or help. The New Testament writers were aware of this practice and wrote: “All men will hate you because of me. But not a hair of your head will perish” Luke 21:17. The prophet Jeremiah 7:31 accuses his own fellow Jews of burning their sons and daughters in fire. And in verse 29 he tells them to repent by cutting their hair. I digress to report the Kennedy assassination. At the former President’s grave a perpetual pillar of fire is set on top of his coffin. Gus Russo reports in his book Live by the sword that: “She [Jackie] then removed a lock of his hair. In his brother’s coffin, Bobby placed his PT 109 tie clip, an engraved rosary, and a lock of his own hair” p334. This was an Egyptian practice. Read the Egyptian Book of the dead: “Thoth raiseth up the hair [cloud/water]. And bringeth the eye [Sun/fire] alive, and whole”. If you recall the Egyptian Book of the dead was written before Moses was born. I would say that Jesus crucifixion/sacrifice was to fire or the sun of the heat rays being exposed on a naked body that was supposed to exhaust and kill a person. For further reading on other hair stories turn to my notes in the essay Jesus, Osiris and Pythagoras

    The only objection I see from Isaiah 53 is one verse that said he had done no violence. This couldn’t refer to Jesus because he said he came not to bring peace but a sword (Matthew 10:34). I take it literally because he told his bodyguards to go buy a sword (Luke 22: 36). And the book of Revelations is filled with violence and Jesus judges those you are thrown into the “lake of fire”. This man is far from nonviolent. Overall Isaiah fits Cyrus and we must come to grips that poems and myths often contain historical data. Poetry is inevitably written at many levels full of ambiguity. Isaiah 53 was set up as a model for another Cyrus using historical information from his life. Isaiah desired another Cyrus but without warfare I guess. Jesus being a member of the Essence as scholars point out carried weapons. According to Josephus: “For which reason they carry nothing with them when they travel into remote parts, though still they take their weapons with them” The War of The Jews Book 2 Chapter 8.4 The Essence also implemented the death penalty for anyone who spoke against Moses.


    So whats the point in studying all of this ancient history. This I’ve asked myself and come up with two answers. Well its satisfies my conviction that the crucifixion of Jesus was just an allegory, a symbolic event written to carry a hidden meaning. It did not happen to Jesus cause Isaiah reference was to Cyrus. Paul states that there is no basis for Christianity if there is no physical resurrection. The Jews didn’t believe in resurrection until Cyrus freed them. Paul states “And if Christ be not risen, then our preaching is vain, and your faith is also vain”. Corinthians 15:13-16. Obviously I agree with this assumption and train of logic. My second reason I get from this essay is on the historical side. I’m seeing the need in the world for another Cyrus, the Great. With the world under religious turmoil in the Middle East we could use a tolerant of all religious faith from persecution. Just like Cyrus allowed exiled Jews to return to Palestine and so we see a need for another Cyrus to allow Arabs to return to their original homes in Palestine. Most of their homes were bulldozed so we need a Cyrus like individual to repair homes too. Who will be our candidate to walk in the footsteps Cyrus? Could it be Bush? I have little faith in it but he could do the job if he had it in his heart to do it. Our Republic should demand that our future leaders be well grounded in the history and development of all religions. So that the mistakes and success of the past can serve as a semi-guide so we can act smart with distributing justice, fairness and truth for humanities sake. And please don’t look at this as living in the past. Its just food for thought.


    Case closed. I’m adjourned.

    Peace,

    Andre Austin

    APPENDIX

    1. I’ve read bits and pieces of Hesiod’s Work and Days. Hesiod wrote before Homer and both were deeply influenced by Egypt. For example Hesiod writes, “Do not urinate standing turned towards the sun…the godly man of sound sense does it squatting” 699-733. Herodotus travels to Egypt around 450BC found made this remark: “Not only is the Egyptian climate peculiar to that country…but the Egyptians themselves in their manners and customs seem to have reversed the ordinary practices of mankind…women urinate standing up, men sitting (squatting) down” Book 2:35 After I read this I figured that Hesiod in only a paragraph away from his quote about urination advised us “And do not, when you come upon a burning sacrifice, balefully find fault with it: the god resents that too”. I wonder if this was in reference to Herodotus 2:62 references to the “festival of lamps”. All over Egypt at set times everyone burns a lamp. Revelation 1:12 talks about lamp stands. Because I proved Revelation 1:14 as an original concept I see no reason to rule out verse 12.

    Other scholars like Martin Bernal agree that Hesiod “Work and days is clearly in the instructional tradition earliest and most richly attested in Egypt” –Black Athena Writes Back p335

    2. When Apuleius was initiated into the mysteries of Osiris and Isis he stated: “Everything was thus fully prepared; and now once more I abstained for ten days from eating flesh. Then, admitted with a shaven head” The Golden *** Book 11

    3. According to the Stoicism “Held that only Zeus, the Supreme Fire” –A History of Western Philosophy By Bertrand Russell p.257
     
  5. story

    story Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Messages:
    200
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    Student of Life
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +1
    I will definitly read up on this tonight and respond tomorrow...because I am stuck on the Bible being inerrant...and the errors are in our interpretation....there are only two ways to read the bible...but there is a huge difference in what one will come away with
     
  6. story

    story Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Messages:
    200
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    Student of Life
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +1
    wow...i'm sitting at work...and picked up "Newsweek"

    cover story, "Visions of Heaven" How Views of Paradise Inspire and Inflame Christian, Muslims and Jews
     
  7. poeticdelight

    poeticdelight Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Messages:
    2,077
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2
    People like you cause much confusion

    Romans 2:14

    "...Some people naturally obey the Law's commands, even
    though they don't have the Law. This proves that the
    conscious is like a law written in the human heart. And it will
    show whether we are forgiven or condemned, when God has
    Jesus Christ judge everyone's secret thoughts, just as my message says."

    Even if our faith in the scriptures is disproven on judgement
    day it won't matter none the less because God gave man a
    conscious his people know right from wrong


    pd
     
  8. wildflower7

    wildflower7 Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2001
    Messages:
    1,303
    Likes Received:
    4
    Occupation:
    motherhood
    Location:
    maryland
    Ratings:
    +4
    Thank you for help me cement my faith in Jesus Christ, and making me go to the Bible. There is an understanding that you can't possibly have if you don't believe. I don't have to write an essay or a sermon about it, just know that you have helped put another slab of cement on my faith in God whether you wanted to or not. -7:spinstar:
     
  9. wildflower7

    wildflower7 Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2001
    Messages:
    1,303
    Likes Received:
    4
    Occupation:
    motherhood
    Location:
    maryland
    Ratings:
    +4
    Okay, I will say this. Sin is true separation from God. It was the plan for Jesus to take on all the sins of His people which meant, yes, He would have to be separate from God. If there had been no separation, then the plan of salvation could not have worked because Jesus wouldn't have truly taken on all the sins. So, Jesus took on all the sins (in which for that time had to be separated from God), died, rested on the Sabbath, rose that Sunday, then ascended back to heaven to be with God. Throughout Jesus' ministry, God never left Him but when he became the sacrifice, they had to be separated for that time. And that's not a contradiction.

    Having said that, I will not delve further in a debate about the Bible or contradictions. I believe what I believe and will not be shaken from it. You believe what you believe and I'm not here to convert you to anything. -7
     
  10. j'hiah

    j'hiah Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2001
    Messages:
    3,431
    Likes Received:
    67
    Location:
    lend me some sugar.. l am your neighbor
    Ratings:
    +70
    DRE,

    Can you find among the four gospels where Jesus is said to not have lived, died, and ressurect??

    of course not.

    l've read maybe a 3rd of your argumentative analysis and have where you have found contradictions l have found connections.
    (l've briefly scanned through the rest.)

    lf i must expound (connections) as you did, if you'd like, i will.

    Do you find it a bit awkward that throughout this long, refuting writing that you did not find a blemish on the fact that Jesus rose again??
     
Loading...