I've been thinking on the "literal readings" of the bible and I came up with this theory, and I'm hoping it may hold some "truth".

Yoshua was the leader of a radical group compared to the main stream religions of the time. The Jewish leaders wanted to decapitate him, as the old saying goes "remove the head and the body will die." We use this same tactic today in our military.

When Yoshua told his apostles that one of them would betray him, he wasn't making a prophecy or prediction, but an order. He knew that if he wanted his people to stop being prosecuted, at least a little bit and for a short time, he'd need to be removed from the picture. More over he'd become a martyr. He picked Judas for two reasons, one he looked similar to himself, and two knew that Judas would follow through with his plan. His other desciples wouldn't want him to give himself up.

However I think that Yoshua was even smarter, though it was the priests who wanted his prosecution, it was the Romans who carried it out. The Romans didn't know what he looked like, or only had a fair idea, only enough that a comparison between he and his brother Judas would have made him indestinguishable.

Judas, may in fact, have been the one to die on the cross, taking the place of Yoshua, so that Yoshua could "come back to life".

The story of Judas's suicide was most likely made up to cover up the truth of the swap off. And the gospels that tell of the ascension to heaven, could just be the covering up of Yoshua's fleeing from Jerusalum.

Later his remaining family continued his teachings whilist he taught else where. When he actually finally died, he would have been brought back, in secret, by his followers to bury him with his family.

What do you think?

kame: I disagree for several reasons:

Yeshua was an itinerant preacher who was baptized by his cousin, John The Baptist (who wasn't popular with Rome or its leaders. He in fact publicly accused him of sleeping with his brother's wife. Salome did her famous Dance of the Seven Veils that ended with her being handed the Baptist's head on a platter. She had requested it as payment for her dance). The Sanhedrin, particularly the Pharisees, were always asking questions of Jesus, trying to trap him. But Jesus was too sharp for them and always had a quick answer. They got annoyed that he was in effect stealing their congregation away by performing miracles, raising the dead, healing the deaf, dumb, blind, lame, lepers and performing such other miracles that it really made them look bad. He was certainly more popular than the High Priests. Just look at the reception he received from the populace on Palm Sunday when he entered Jerusalem on the back of a donkey. His adversaries accused him of trying to become king. That's why he kept telling them "My kingdom is not of this world..." The tactic was not beheading for the Sanhedrin. They wanted to remove the leader so his followers would disperse. The traditional method of the times was crucifixion. John would probably have been crucified had Salome not asked for his head.
Jesus knew, just as we all know, when someone is plotting behind our backs. Their behavior speaks volumes. You have but to read the gospels to note that on many occasions it is Judas Iscariot (there were two Judas among the disciples) who "corrects" Jesus - he undermines the Messiah, to make him look bad in front of his followers. How many times have we all been publicly undermined by a jealous "friend?" Jesus knew what his personal mission was. He tells his disciples that "unless I die I cannot send you the Paraclete (Holy Spirit)...I go to prepare a place for you in my Father's house...Father if it's possible, let this cup pass from me...he wasn't about to run away from the inevitable. "Thy will be done, Father, not my will." It was his to reconcile the Children of God to their Father - not to concern himself with their physical safety. He told them what they'd face if they followed him - persecution, death...he knew that. If they believed in Him, they would believe that neither He nor they would die. He promised them eternal life. "Destroy this temple (his body) and after 3 days I will raise it up again." is what He told his enemies. The idea was not to be "removed from the picture" for the sake of his disciples bodies but to rise again in fulfillment of the Scriptures for the sake of their immortal souls.
His disciples didn't want him to give himself up. In fact Peter slashed the ear of one of the soldiers who came to arrest him in the Garden. It was Jesus who healed that same soldier and reprimanded Peter. He predicted that Peter would deny him 3 times before the cock crowed - and he did. Surely there was no need for all that had there been some clandestine plan to escape the cross. Martyrdom was not Jesus' goal - it was the expiation of the sins of his brothers and sisters. He reconciled us with God. He died for our sins - while we were yet sinners. He didn't choose martyrdom, nor did he make a choice for himself, he suffered for US, he died for US, and he rose for US that he might set an example of eternal life and be victorious over physical death.
The priests didn't want his followers to blame them for his death, so they left it in the hands of the Romans (who the Jews hated). Pliate literally washed his hands of Jesus' death. He said to them that he "found no guilt in him."
It wasn't Judas on the cross. If the Romans didn't know what Jesus looked like, everyone present at the crucifixion did. They were all screaming for Pilate to release Barabbas and crucify Jesus. Do you think the mob didn't know who Jesus was? Would they have settled for anyone else? Ever see a lynch mob? By the way, Judas hanged himself from a tree apparently because he couldn't stand the guilt of what he'd done - sold Jesus for a few pieces of silver.
You need to study the nature of Presence. Just to put it in layman's terms. Presence has nothing to do with being physically present and everything to do with being spiritually present. Do you know how you can feel totally alone in a crowded room and yet feel totally Present in an empty room? Have you never "connected" to someone who wasn't around physically - a loved one or friend perhaps? I have had that experience and let me tell you from personal experience: Jesus Christ is not dead; He is very much alive right here and right now. Just because you can't see Him physically, there are a lot of people who can feel His presence and His comfort and miracles very miraculously even now. That's what keeps His followers preaching the Good News far and wide. "We are one, as the Father and I are one..." When you feel that sense of "oneness" - the Jews call it "shalom" - that is to be at peace with self, God and your world - then you can understand what it means to be a Child of the Most High God and able to transcend earth to enjoy heaven in the Gift of God's Time - the Present.
You know I think it would be better if people were searching for the tomb of Judas. Then they could tell if his remains showed signs of strangulation. But it's easier to seek the tomb of Jesus - because they have "positive identification" because the name is inscribed on an ossuary. That makes a lot of sense - NOT!
How is it some people can fantasize an alleged fraud perpetrated by Jesus but not one perpetrated by his enemies?
Don't let me be the first to inform all of you but Mary, the Mother of Jesus, whose ossuary is inscribed with her name, was assumed into heaven. Is this discovery also questionning that tenet of Catholic christianity? Anything else they're going to try to debunk? They haven't bothered with the Pope's infallibility in a while...I suppose that's next - after they finish crucifying Christ in this century.

Christ has died,
Christ is risen,
Christ will come again.
not Judas - CHRIST. Maybe they should be looking for Judas' tomb instead of Jesus so they can positively identify the cause of death - suicide by strangulation.
Mary, the Mother of Jesus, isn't in those ossuaries either. She was assumed into heaven.

All faith and belief studs aside, I still say its a possibility and even more so plausible.

In all honesty all the knowlege we have of the time period is skewed by religious rhetoric and any facts are few and far between.

Kame...may I ask what factual evidence presented in last night's soap opera cause you to believe in it? I'm curious as to what I might have missed regarding the whole matter in the light of my educational background, my love for archaeology, my knowledge of the Biblical Archaeological Review, my years as a catechetical director, my involvement in rewriting the catechism post-Vatican II, my studies as one of the first women Eucharistic Ministers in this country, and whatever valuable documentable information my professors from the Seminary imparted (one of whom wrote for the Jerome Biblical Commentary). There were glaring, and I do mean GLARING errors, in that gnostic account of the life of my Lord and Savior. For the love of God, and Jesus, I feel it my duty to ask you to please REFLECT upon what you saw and heard and then go to the Source for the truth before you let the blind lead you astray.

WHY WOULD JESUS FAMILY AND DESCIPLES MARK HIS TOMB WITH HIS NAME,WHEN THEY LIVED AND WERE TORTURED UPON THE BELIEF THAT JESUS DIED AND HIS BODY ROSE UP IN THREE DAYS??? THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
ALSO AS EVERYONE KNOWS: JESUS BELIVERS HAVE OFTEN NAMED THERE CHILDREN AFTER JESUS AND THE DESCIPLES, EVEN TO THIS DAY
I WAS NOT IMPRESSED WITH THIS DRAMATIZATION. HOW ABOUT YOU?

leroing: Not only was I not impressed, I was distressed at their lack of scientific evidence. It was quite obvious that they were trying to use gnostic gospels to make a case for Mary and Jesus to have been married and have a child. Even that story has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. In the Gospels, Joseph of Arimethea provides his tomb for the burial of Jesus. Since it is on the sabbath, the women cannot annoint the body. When Mary does go to annoint it, she finds the tomb empty. Why? Even according to their accounts the body would not have been removed for a year until after it had decomposed. So what reason was provided for the empty tomb after 2 days? None. so much for yet another gnostic deception exposed.

How curious, ok one: it wasn't the documentry on discovery that lead me to my conclusions. It was my litteral following of the bible rhetoric, the predesposed knowledge of Roman Socialism and Jewish theolegic idealism.

[quote] There were glaring, and I do mean GLARING errors, in that gnostic account of the life of my Lord and Savior. For the love of God, and Jesus, I feel it my duty to ask you to please REFLECT upon what you saw and heard and then go to the Source for the truth before you let the blind lead you astray.[/quote]

Ha, I'd argue the Bible has the glaring errors, not the gnostic gospels. The Bible, unlike the Gnostic Gospels, has been changed, edited, rewritten, translated, rewritten again, etc etc.
The Gnostic Gospels haven't been touched since their hiding, over 1600 years ago.

[quote]WHY WOULD JESUS FAMILY AND DESCIPLES MARK HIS TOMB WITH HIS NAME,WHEN THEY LIVED AND WERE TORTURED UPON THE BELIEF THAT JESUS DIED AND HIS BODY ROSE UP IN THREE DAYS??? THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
ALSO AS EVERYONE KNOWS: JESUS BELIVERS HAVE OFTEN NAMED THERE CHILDREN AFTER JESUS AND THE DESCIPLES, EVEN TO THIS DAY[/quote]

Ok one, there was no need for yelling, please follow appropriate forum etiquette. Two, people really didn't name people after Yeshua until after his death. Though his name was common then, I must agree with the show's point that the outstanding and compounded names found in that tomb, to which align with so many sources including the Bible on names, makes it unlikely that it isn't Yeshua's tomb.

The family at that time may have not even been the ones to write those names however, it could have been later family, decendents, which would explain the less formal writing of the Greek and Hebrew.

[quote]leroing: Not only was I not impressed, I was distressed at their lack of scientific evidence. It was quite obvious that they were trying to use gnostic gospels to make a case for Mary and Jesus to have been married and have a child. Even that story has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. In the Gospels, Joseph of Arimethea provides his tomb for the burial of Jesus. Since it is on the sabbath, the women cannot annoint the body. When Mary does go to annoint it, she finds the tomb empty. Why? Even according to their accounts the body would not have been removed for a year until after it had decomposed. So what reason was provided for the empty tomb after 2 days? None. so much for yet another gnostic deception exposed.[/quote]

You make me laugh, think for once and you'll understand why there wasn't a body. It was removed, to hide the fact that it wasn't Yeshua who died. Done so on a day when those who'd be able to identify for sure, say a mother or family member, couldn't go to the tomb.

The Gnostic Gospels as I've argued are less changed and most likely far more accurate to what happened than the bible. So, so much for a believed deception. You want deception look at the metaphorical "miracles" that Yeshua supposedly performed, that so many christians are brainwashed into believing, instead of reading the bible for what it really is. A story book; designed to teach a lesson and govern a people who didn't understand many of the things around them.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: kameskuroma,

Here is something that in the back of my mind bugs me;why why why;if Jesus did have bones to be found would they dare place them in the most obvious place:a family tomb!! Knowing the persicution and danger involved; would not grave robbers and officials do there best find these bones and throw them in face of believers??...as was said above, it does not make any sense; there is something very wrong here; things just dont add up that easily.

i watch the program and the film maker hisself answered questions after the program asked by peter jennings and time and time again what he said in his docummentry was proven sensaionalism
for television and basicly hype to sell more books. when it comes to a matter of belief or faith that is exactly all there is to it either you believe or you don't. as for me i believe in jesus and what i was taught in the bible so in those beliefs they could not be jesus's bones because he arrouse from the dead and asended to the kingdom of his father (god).

I have a good question, why didnt they do DNA samples on Joseph's or Mary's bones to see if any of them are related? This Tomb could have been a total fraud placed by the Roman government because they knew what Christianity would do to their empire.

For one, if robbers had known, or governments known that this was in fact Yeshua (which, if you did watch the show, it was pointed out that most people ignored these names because of how common each of the individual names were), then I'm sure that it would have happened sooner.

If my theory is correct then Yeshua would have died much later than what the bible says, and no one after the christians would have known that his bones were placed there.

Joseph and Mary's bones, well as they did explain in the follow up program, they did the most viable test in the time frame available to them. Hopefully they will find a viable sample to do Joseph and Mary, or Joseph and Yeshua and Marisemne.

Here's the problem I see, instead of being flexible and accepting the fact that its Possible that this is the Yeshua of their belief, they're denying it all together. They fail to see the fact that their religion, is a belief, a faith, that is over 2000 years old, has been changed, edited, and skewed a dozen times over, and in fact maybe incorrect.

I know of several christian friends who watch the show and said that it was interesting, and they'd await more information before judging. Not jumping down the throats of the people who did the documentry and dismissing things purely on the belief that their faith is more accurate than actual facts that are there. Even if those facts were skewed by the show's docudrama emphasis.

Kameskuroma, if you read the Gospel of Judas (which the manuscript was released last year) you will see that your very theory was put forth in that Gospel. Also, they think the Gospel of Judas was written even earlier than the oldest NT scriptures.

Kame: "they?" "their beleifs?" Are "we" the opposition or perhaps more informed than those who would make of common names uncommon people. You are free to believe the paltry evidence presented; you are equally as free to believe that the religion that has endured such attacks in the past still endures and will endure forever regardless of any "evidence" to the contrary. Our "kingdom is not of this world" hence whatever earth-shaking, mind-boggling, religion-shattering discoveries are made it isn't going to make a difference. Not a one of you can take anything with you when you go. You're all going to die. we, like our Lord before us, will share Eternal Life. Our faith has made us whole. What's your "faith" in? Empty ossuaries and equally as empty promises from false idols. Good luck! They may rock the building but the cornerstone is never shaken. We've got a good solid foundation. "Weep not for us...rather weep for yourselves..."

kame: i have no wish to bash you or anyone else. your theory is interesting. almost as good as davinci code stuff. flesh out the story and make your movie. its full of inconsistent info, but it doesn't matter.
while many people believe that the bible "has been translated and re-written so many times that its totally useless" the truth is that you can take a modern version (aside from the king james version) and compare it to the texts that are the closest to the original copies. aside from minor errors they are incredibly accurate. you can bypass all the "re-interpreted" versions. the NIV was translated from the oldest copies by a group of researchers from many different denominations, so that no one group could influence the information.
as for the show; it was interesting as well. the problem that i think many people have is not that it actually negatively effected christianity, but that that was the intended effect.

What you fail to see, is the fact that there is opposition to the "standard" beliefs. Which should be making those who follow those "standard beliefs" think about them.

Misinformed and inconsistant information, hardly. My theory is based purely on the bible, and was only compounded by the Gospel of Judas (which became publically available only four months ago, in an incompletely translation.)

You want to talk about misinformed, look at your own posts. I don't want to bash anyone either, but those who don't want to take into account all information and facts, and throw away that which they don't wish to believe, are no better than those who condemned science and called in herecy.

kames, I have been hit by the censor button so I will try again.

You, like all the other gnostics living in the here and now under protection of Jesus' redemptive mission to humanity, which included his body and soul resurrection can always demand from Jesus He take back this redemptive blesssing from all gnostics, thereby ensuring your ending up in a limbo-like world where you will be in the dark place where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Jesus made mention of this to all those nmot baptized in the spirit.

If you were baptized as a child, why haven't you and the rest of gnostics demand from Jesus to take this spiritual blessing away as well. You can't have it both ways and perpetually violate the 1st Commandment attacking of the persona of Jesus and simultaneously hoard these 2 Spiritual blessings you got from Jesus, that is the vilest hypocritical blasphemy gnostics perpetrate.

lilgal, as you have seen in all of my posts to the gnostics I use the same methodology Jesus utilized to get His message across. He used short parables based on an analogy but the meaning of the message always honed in on a specific target. My target has been this pernicious vile hypocrisy gnostics spew out and yet they never once denounce these spiritual blessings they got due to Jesus' death and resurrection. I take offense to gnostics who violate the 1st Commandment with what they take for granted is immunity from prosecution. I can't be bothered with their obsessive-compulsive shtick to play Tuesday morning quarterback with history. That is why I say to the gnostics to pluck out their marbles from the sandbox, go home, call it a day...forever. Now I have updated the sanbox analogy a bit. I have disturbed them playing with marbles, and they are witnessing their marbles disappearing in the sands of time...these poor bay-bees, they lost their marbles. What a crying shame.

Unfortunately your message is a bag of garbage.

One there is no such thing as Limbo, according to the bible. If you're as you say you are, a true christian, you'd know this. Two: you have only offered opinion, not one ounce of physical proof as to what you're claiming. Where as, I have, in the existance of gospels and sources outside of the bible, and faith.

Three: Though I tend to ignore such things, in your case I'll make the point that your grammar and mechanics could use some real work. Which tells me that you aren't as intelligent as you think yourself to be. Do me a favour and leave your opinions out of this. You want to argue against what we're talking about here, and what I put forth, give some real evidence.