@TruthSurge If then that's true and there is no prophecy regarding Jesus in the OT and it doesn't speak of Him nor His promise, then I should just throw the Holy Bible in the trash since it's worthless. The Prophets labored in vain and the Law should be discarded. They did not pave the way for the Anointed. We are all destined to hell. The OT is the backbone of the NT.
@TruthSurge Jesus could not just appear in the earth, just like that. Remember He had to fulfill the prophecies [the Prophets]. Genesis 3:15 says He will be born of a woman. God testing Abraham and telling him to sacrifice his only son, foreshadows that God will one day give His only Son to the world. Psalm 22 comes to fulfillment. To every detail and iota.
@David325ful "Jesus could not just appear in the earth, just like that. "
Sure he could. Because there are no prophecies about Jesus in the Old Testament. It's all midrash and pesherim. Go look up those terms and get back to me.
@TruthSurge Ecclesiastes 12:10 "The Preacher sought to find acceptable words; and what was written was upright- words of truth." What if I told the Egyptians copied Solomon and his great wisdom? Remeber his fame spread and everybody came to hear his wisdom and great understanding. (1 Kings 10:7) Mainly African regions.
@TruthSurge I believe even an athiest can take something good out of the Holy Bible.The Writings of Solomon are very well centered on daily life. It gives advice and wisdom on how you can find favor with man and God. And no I don't believe God came down and had sex with Mary in order to concieve Himself. The Holy Spirit planted the holy Seed in her and the rest is history. Plus her labor was painless that was one benefit.
@David325ful "The Holy Spirit planted the holy Seed in her "
But this holy spirit had to physically come to earth in order to do it because the text (which you seem to eschew) says that this spirit OVERSHADOWED her. In other words, it was ON TOP OF HER. Odd, I would have thought god could just poof himself onto earth in ANY form BUT the birth stories of Matthew and Luke were added LATER in order to explain just how Jesus was the son of god AND to provide anther link to...
@David325ful ....another link to Greek myth (virgin born gods).
You are ignorant of all of this and that ignorance helps keep you in the fold, so to speak.
Lots of the Bible was borrowed from pre-existing literature. You prob didn't know that either. Lots of the proverbs come from Egyptian texts predating the Bible. etc etc etc. I think you would do well to read a book like "Misquoting Jesus". Get away from the insidious brainwashing of the church.
@jcgadfly I do think. I'm a freethinker. But I hate when some people can take a quick look at the Holy Bible and judge it. You have to do a thorough analysis and dig in deeper to find if its a Divine book indeed. Like the Spirit says in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Test all things; " The Holy Bible is a book full of mysteries, paradoxes, riddles, prophecies, and wisdom. One can never fully grasp the Holy Bible and say "I've learned everything I need to know."
@David325ful I think when you believe that a god had sex with a young girl in the Middle-East in order to give birth to himself, you've stopped learning.
@pythor2 it was good at the time for a CERTAIN audience. then it got crammed down the world's throat via Constantine's help and the rest.... is BLOODY history.
@AMpufnstuf The Holy Bible is the most accurate in science not to mention that it has a span of 4,000 B.C to 96 C.E. Job 26:7 mentions the earth "hanging" on a vacuum. It was believed that the earth rested on a solid platform. Genesis 1:2 mentions entropy 2nd law of thermodynamics. Leviticus 17:11 mentions that blood is the life of the flesh. All the 59 elements of the human body can be found in dirt(Genesis2:7) These are only a fraction of the pie on how advanced it is in science.
I am partially through this I think and I keep asking myself the same question and the only one who can answer is you. I want to know if you enjoy reading the stories of Jesus from a reader's standpoint, not a religious or non religious, but more like a scholar. Me I believe the bible is in some ways historical. I think that the stories in it are nothing more than myth but even greek mythology is historical. gives us insight in different writings and culture of the time it was written. Agree?
@Nightw0lf414 yes, of course. Any writing from the past is a tiny puzzle piece that fits into a bigger picture. Get enough of those writings over a short time and you can have a clearer picture of what was going on with the people and their beliefs. It's kind of just pure anthropology/history/psychology/religion all wrapped up together. There IS history in the Bible. That of its authors and that which is corroborated by outside sources, since much is fiction.
@David325ful As TruthSurge said, Hinduism is older than Christianity and also has millions of adherents ( ~900 million, almost 10 times the number of jews ). It's the oldest religion in existence and hindu sacred books were preserved 'till today. Odysseus was not founder of a religion and his literary works weren't sacred books. It's like saying that the Grimm brothers lost your game because no one follows them. Oh, and there are still today some followers of ancient greek religion.
@David325ful Be realistic with your cult numbers, christ doesn't have 2.2 billion followers. There are 2.2 billion people who marked down on a poll that they're a cult member and they'll make damn sure their kids end up one too.
There are actually about 18 people per town who go to church, so apparently nobody takes the book very seriously anymore. Because we're above it, and we know it to be historically, scientifically, and even morally wrong. In summary: bullshit.
@TruthSurge haha I was being satirical. :) But I was going to use his movie history as an example for something. Simplified version: starting in the 60s, his movies were all about justice and he was the one that delivered it by killing the bad guys. Then a few years ago he comes out with a movie that has the same framework, same setup, same "literary" structure, which makes the viewer recall how he handled all previous similar situations; it was called Gran Torino.
@TruthSurge So what I'm saying is, what's wrong with the author of Mark using a known story (Odyssey/old Clint movie) to construct a narrative about a true event to show how this true event/story is superior to all other thoughts/narratives about "heroes" or "gods"? Authors use terms and narrative frameworks that the audience knows. I know what you are saying (thus far) makes sense as an option, but you must also acknowledge that I'm saying is also plausible.
@perichoresis7 "what's wrong with the author of Mark using a known story (Odyssey/old Clint movie) to construct a narrative about a true event to show how this true event/story is superior to all other thoughts/narratives about "heroes" or "gods"? "
I THINK this is your best question yet. The short answer is "nothing". :)
@TruthSurge Thanks! :) I just wish I could offer a question that wasn't so theoretical. Substance is what many people are looking for, and I'm afraid there just isn't much to offer.
@perichoresis7 notice how I left you dangling there. HEHEHEHHE
There is nothing inherently wrong with that but assuming Mark DID do that, we now have to see if we can determine HOW MUCH of the prior stories did he use? What we find in the case of Jesus is - almost everything. :( Keep asking! You're keeping me on my toes!
@TruthSurge hahaha Glad to hear it! Because I haven't left my toes. Give me some tights and I'll be a ballerino! haha Okay, that was lame, but I am definitely expanding my knowledge and learning a lot through our discussions. Glad to hear you're getting something out of it as well. :)
@TeesByTruthSurge I probably got some of the details wrong in my last comment about Augustus, but you get the point, I'm sure. I don't have my own copy of "Gospel Fictions". I read it a long time ago. I recall reading about the discovery of an inscription that declared Augustus "Savior" sometime before the (presumed) birth of Jesus. A commemorative battle inscription of some kind.
@TeesByTruthSurge Yeah! I liked that one too! "Gospel Fictions" highlights the fact that Caesar Augustus was proclaimed God, Savior and harbinger of Peace several years before the (presumed) birth of Jesus. It seems the political rebels in the eastern half of the empire couldn't stand an adopted orphan being declared "God", so they started a counter-movement and substituted their own version..... from Galilee.
Such fraudulence, ya just couldn't write this stuff. . . oh wait, they DID! :D
@TeesByTruthSurge You're probably correct that this book will someday be a source for NT studies. Another interesting book is one by Randel Helms called "Who Wrote The Gospels?". Heard of it? The really cool thing is that nothing in Helms's book contradicts the ideas of MacDonald (from what I've seen so far). It's very cool when that happens. These authors are on to something. I always thought there was something odd about Mark's gospel and his obsession with the "secret messiah" thing.
@TeesByTruthSurge tee-hee-hee... Yeah, Oct 21 is Harold Camping's 2nd chance clause (exactly 6 months after his failed May 21 prediction. Look it up, it's good for giggles.
I was gonna go, but they cancelled by boarding pass for Air Jesus! :-(
Back on topic: I'll read MacDonald's book. It's plausible that a cult promoter like the author of Mark would try to one-up a best seller like the Odyssey to give his cult more credibility.
Muhammad used epic biblical fiction to pad out his book. :-)
This "hidden identity motif" reminds me of my attitude towards my sock puppet YouTube alter-ego-channel. See, he's way more colorful and controversial than the real me, and when people PM me saying they've identified me, I always admonish them "to tell nobody".
The Odysseus parallels are quite interesting, and playing the game of looking for parallels now myself I've come to the hypothesis that Jesus is an anti-Odysseus. Jesus represents a rejection of the human for the divine, and Odysseus represents a rejection of the divine for the human (compare Satan tempting Jesus in the wilderness with earthly power in Matthew with Calypso tempting Odysseus with divinity. (continued)
@markdzima (cont'd) Whereas Jesus is repeatedly attributed with speaking truth, Odysseus is famous for his clever lies and deceptions (Odysseus was credited with the Trojan Horse deception, and consider also his deceptions with regard to the cyclops, etc.). Jesus's teachings can be seen as a rejection of the sins arising from individualism, Odysseus was an archetype of individualism (and it is perhaps significant that his father's name, Autolychus, might translate as "lone wolf").
@markdzima Dad was Laertes, not Autolychus. Autolychus was the father in law to Laertes. Was the father of Laertes' wife.
But you bring up an interesting thing because you are right that the Odyssey was about the idea that man COULD overcome even the capricious and destructive wiles of the gods and succeed whereas the gospel story paints the opposite picture. It is not wrong to call Mark's story an anti-epic. It is an epic but with some inverted ideas.
So, in your opinion, have you gotten many believers to watch this or do you think it's mostly the "choir"?
Either way, you really ARE putting on quite a display of your ability to research a topic, put together a theme, put your thoughts on paper then produce a very buffed and polished final product. I can only imagine the hours you put into this labor of love. I appreciate your efforts.
Let me explain a question you had at 13:10 about why the chief priests needed help in identifying Jesus which really has nothing to do with Odysseus cloaking himself
In fact, they didn't need help identifying Jesus at all, they only needed to arrest Jesus when the crouds weren't around such as night. So they only needed the help to locate where Jesus was at night
Thus fulfilling King David's prophecy in Psalm 41:9-13
But you wouldn't dare compare the Gospel of Mark to prophecy would you
@lungay009 Let me explain how CHristians don't even read their own Bibles then ironically claim atheists are wrong. Here, let me let Mark explain it to you.
And he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he; take him, and lead [him] away safely.
Gee, seems like the chief priests couldn't tell who Jesus was without Judas' help EVEN THOUGH as Jesus himself says verses later he was always seen in public and in synagogues debating them!
@TruthSurge Now back-up a little in the scripture and read again Mark 14:43
Mark 14:43 Just as he was speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, appeared. With him was a crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests, the teachers of the law, and the elders.
As you can see the chief priests weren't with the ones they've sent to arrest Jesus. So the crowd sent to arrest Jesus by the chief priests did need a sign, a kiss, finger pointing, something to know who to arrest.
@lungay009 Wouldn't it be the guy in the long white robe who looked strangely European. :)
You do bring up a fair point and not one I did not consider but do you really think no one in the crowd knew what Jesus looked like? That the chief priests would send total strangers? And Jesus addresses the group as "you" when he mentions teaching publicly giving the impression that maybe these people would have known his looks by virtue of that. vs 48, 49. What do you think of that?
@lungay009 Then, there's a final little piece that might come into play regarding this. "And one of them that stood by drew a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest" The servant of the high priest. A guy who would have been in the temple along with the high priest all the while Jesus was reading from the OT and debating them and such. And still this guy needed help in identifying Jesus. It still looks like a plot flaw in that regard. Thanks for bringing that up tho.
@TruthSurge All in all the prophecy stated that the Son of Man would be betrayed. The servant of the high priest wouldn't have fit the character roll of betrayer well.
@lungay009 But another thing is that there didn't need to be any betrayal at all. The servant or someone who knew what he looked like could have gone with the crowd and picked him from a group of 11 other men, wouldn't you say? THe judas part is pure fiction built on several literary inputs.
@lungay009 Even if we assume Psalm 41:9-13 is being referenced by the Gospels, it is a hindsight determination that makes it a prophecy instead of any quality intrinsic to the verse itself.
And even if we do assume that it is a prophecy it is significantly vague, enough such as to render it useless in a prophetic context. It has the same prophetic value as "I will get married" or "A cop will get shot".
@onijester56 Well if it wasn't prophecy Jesus was aware how he was to fulfill his destiny. And said several times in Mark he would be betrayed by one with him.
@lungay009 "Jesus was aware how he was to fulfill his destiny" And hence making it a self-fulfilling prophecy as Jesus set out to fulfill it. Again, no more prophetic value than "I will get married".
"said several times...he would be betrayed" Let us assume that Mark did not place the claims after-the-fact. He would be aware of his increasing political power and the desire others would have had to 'deal with' him. Betrayal would be the easiest method to do so. Again, "A cop will get shot".
@lungay009 Again, assuming that Jesus even said that...
Person A gains some political power -> Person A gains lots of political power -> Person A becomes threat to people in power -> Person A knows he is a threat -> Person A can expect to be betrayed at some point -> The most likely candidate is one who is close to Person A --> Person A 'prophecizes' betrayal -> It happens, he is claimed a prophet; it doesn't, either no one remembers or it is retroactively 'remembered' that it did somehow.
I mean betrayal as a means of political silencing had been recognized as an effective/easy means at least 70 years before Jesus came to prominence, when Julius Caesar was betrayed by Brutus. If Jesus had been taught even mild history, that most likely would have come up and Jesus could then expect it.
And even if he never heard of the history, it would be easy to see that people you were close to were acting shifty/strange/slyly and judge that something was up with them.
@onijester56 How was Jesus a political threat to Judas or his disciples? When in history did a student ever consider his teacher a threat to the point of killing him?
@lungay009 Do you even read before you respond? I never said Jesus was a threat to JUDAS but to THE PEOPLE IN POWER (assign that label to the Jews, the Romans, aliens from Planet Z, or whoever you think).
THEY used Judas. As to why Judas would accept, it could have been for the money, to protect the nation Jesus was failing, because Satan possessed him, because God planned it to be so, because he was exchanging prisoners (which Jesus would have agreed to), or one of many other options.
@onijester56 What nation was Jesus failing when he was never in any political power?
So if Jesus wasn't a threat to Judas why did Judas SEEK OUT the chief priests FIRST for? Seems Judas was using the chief priests to do away with Jesus. But why? What did Jesus do to Judas?
And the only reason they used Judas was because Judas went to THEM first. They only took advantage of the opportunity of Judas going to THEM telling THEM "I know where he is if you want him".
1) Most likely in Judas' eyes the same nation he was getting the bulk of his followers from, the same nation he put the ultimatum for people to leave their families to follow him or not be saved, the same nation which he promised change to but did not provide. Mark 14:3-9, Matthew 26:6-13, and John 12:1-8. If we apply Luke 7:36-50, that is two different incidents.
2) Lots of people following and obeying you is intrinsically political power.
@onijester56 Alright, let me see if I got this right. A few dozen people following Jesus makes a nation, is this right?
And if so what change did Jesus promise this tiny nation of a few dozen that Judas had to take Jesus out for not making good on his political promise?
And did Judas give Jesus enough time to make good on his political promise of change being Jesus was leader of this tiny nation of a few dozen for only three years?
@lungay009 "A few dozen people following Jesus makes a nation" You can't seriously have forgotten that Jesus went through Jewish-Roman territories, separating Jewish-Roman families and by extension promoting societal collapse of the Jewish-Roman area in the name of freedom and love. That Judas, biblically, was one such Jewish-Roman people supports the idea that he could have 'betrayed Jesus' after being disillusioned (such as by the "Mary of Betthany" event).
"what change did Jesus promise this tiny nation" Jesus continually speaks of freedom and equality in his teachings.
"did Judas give Jesus enough time to make good on his political promise" You have never read the Bethany event, have you? Jesus essentially said 'Fuck the poor, I'm getting treated specially.' Instead of changing anything, Jesus (so Judas saw) was failing the task he set up.
And also this is only ONE OF MANY POSSIBILITIES. God, Satan, greed, etc. are possible as well.
On equality/freedom, to begin: the Good Samaritan, the Golden Rule, the teachings on Salvation [through either work or faith, an equal footing is established for all], and the message of loving others.
The Bethany event takes place at Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8. Of course there is a comparative event at Luke 10:38-42 but it is not the specific event. Jesus takes praise by annointment and calls it 'better' than helping the poor instead.
"Why do you bother the woman? For she has done a good deed to Me. / For you always have the poor with you; but you do not always have Me." NASB
"Why do ye give trouble to the woman? for a good work she wrought for me / for the poor always ye have with you, and me ye have not always" YLT
On and on. He puts himself above the poor in each translation of each corresponding verse. Those looking for change/freedom (which would be a good chunk) would disagree with Jesus' words.
3) Again, Judas could have needed (or even just wanted) money. Maybe he planned to make a safe-haven for the oppressed. Maybe start up an army or his own kingdom. Either God or Satan controlled him. It could have been a prisoner-exchange agreement that the Bible Authors did not remember clearly after 50 years. It could have been a request by Jesus.
And all this ASSUMES ON NO historical EVIDENCE (and in fact against pretty direct Biblical evidence) that the event is historically-based.
@TeesByTruthSurge M,ark was a gentile christian lmao he was jew christinaity did not exit then you buffoon. He was fololower of jesus. No but I do not take robert price asrsriously. He is not a proper scholar so do not lecture me what is proper scholarshiop. NT Wright he would diaagree with he is a proper scholar
@TeesByTruthSurge He was jew he knew plaestine well. You can asssert he wasnt ajew but it seems unlikely because he is familair with the old testment and jewish ideas and culture.
@TeesByTruthSurge No amrk was writtten firs tin synoptic gospels but paul was before that. Bart ehrman is good at he scripture says not at what history says. Ehrman is wrong about lots of thiungs
@TeesByTruthSurge Mark was a netile really myou obvious do not know anyhthing. Mark was a jew. How do i know a he traveled iwith other jews b wwhich scholars say mark was agentile i have read of most of them say look at the internet what wikipedia newflash wikipeida is not scholarly.
cont and was punishable by deaht. Also they thought he was just a tridckster, hoaxster they did not realise that he was claoming to be the on of god. This is why when they do find this out thy dclaim he uis usuing the power of the devil. Of course mark was copoying greek religous be;iefs. facepalm. Again what happened when they did know who he was they accuse him opf blapshemy and heresy. Yes doing that when they were influential would have help jesus you fail
@bossman103 No, I think you fail. Because you are clearly so afraid to find out what I have in store in my next 2 or 3 vids that you are allowing your mind to do the old "let's stop this now before I get too deep" routine. It's a common reaction to finding out something that will totally change your beliefs.
If you don't want to postpone your judgment until I'm DONE presenting ALL of my Homer/Mark evidence, please, can you at least lose the attitude? I could say fuck you and block you.
@TruthSurge Ok I apologise. I should be more forgiving. I am asorry I conssider myself very open minded. I will watch the next couple of weeks and see what you present. I should not prejudge. However I am sorry you incorrect in anumber of things. Read jonathan z smith honestly he is a good read and gives good insights. Hopefully when n you do finish i will have a new computer and we can discuss in video form
@bossman103 Okay, fine. Now, I KNOW you do not agree with me. Okay, why must we belabor that? I KNOW what Christian theology teaches pretty much in ALL the denominations. So to repeat that to me is kind of tedious for me. Now, you DO bring up at least a valid point that Jesus could not be expected to run around advertising his "sonship" to the Jews. fair enough. but that does NOT mean Mark did not copy the hidden identity idea and APPLY that to his story.
@TruthSurge So, just give me a little more time, and when I'm finally done with THIS part of my res series, if you still don't buy it, I'm cool with that but I'd say you cannot buy it no matter HOW convincing it might be because it would mean that Mark is fiction and the entire orthodox view is built upon that fiction (Mark to Matthew to Luke to Acts, all predicated upon Mark's original tale). so.... there ya go.
@TruthSurge I will not be convinced because of one thing. mark was a jew and as a jew the notion of him taking any sort of paganism seems impossible and improbable. It would like you as an atheist endorsing church and state it would unlikely due to your worldview
There is a enormous amount of fail here. First;ly the ressurection is based upon jewish ideas not greeks ones. The only influence this had on christinaity is the recent edition of jesus going to hell to defeat satan. That is thanks to dante and michaelangelo. Secondly the frasier hypothesis has been disproven so you are wronfg and outofdate with compemotry comparative religion. Next the whole thing about him disaguise himself have you thought that cliaming to be the son of god was blasphemy cont
I got to cut the demon warning a little slack. Considering the audience believed the world was called into being with but a word. Words had power. Names had power... wait, names was Lord of the Rings wasn't it.
I'm more interested in why Demons are saying "son of God" and not "you are God". I would think a Demon would cut through the BS of the trinity and call God out for who he is.
If that wasn't clear it's because talking about the Trinity is like talking about time travel... sigh...
What a great choice of music throughout. Sets a mood without being distracting. I'm really diggin' this series. If asked to vote on it, I'd say this belongs on public television.
@ZephZhang I wrote all of the music myself. :) I just couldn't be bothered trying to find music anymore. So since I had this synth plugin on my PC and I know a BIT about audio, I just decided to roll my own. It's kind of fun too. hehe But sometimes hard to get a good match. thank ya
I'm actually pretty sure, that given the little we know about Jesus or most of the people surrounding him, it would even be possible to construct a case for "the hoax jesus". Constructed by the romans to convert the jews because they wouldn't accept the greco/roman pantheon :P
@nuckable That seems to be a popular theory as I see it cropping up in priv msgs and such. I really can't get behind that one tho. Just think for one second. You're Rome. You want the Jews to worship a NEW god (Jesus) because they won't worship your old ones? ? And then to do so, you write Mark's gospel showing this same Jesus bitch slapping the Jewish leaders calling them hypocrites for rejecting him already? nah. Can't get behind it.
@TruthSurge Well, assume that the first letters (by Paul) were written to plant the seed, then Mark's gospel and the rest is all based on these fictional letters.
Honestly though, I didn't think it all through, I was just speculating that it could be postulated and I'm pretty sure, would even make more sense than the resurrection myth :P
@nuckable I can't buy that at all. The facade someone would have to maintain across 7 letters like that during those days (2000 years ago roughly) is not really possible. There is no hint of a hoax in Paul's 7 authentic letters, IMO. It's too consistent and lengthy, IMO.
I think Paul was simply affected by the pressures of the Greco-Roman influence and Philo and his own distaste for the Jewish laws and once the idea got around that god had a son, it was just a matter of searching OT.
@nuckable I can't buy that at all. The facade someone would have to maintain across 7 letters like that during those days (2000 years ago roughly) is not really possible. There is no hint of a hoax in Paul's 7 authentic letters, IMO. It's too consistent and lengthy, IMO.
I think Paul was simply affected by the pressures of the Greco-Roman influence and Philo and his own distaste for the Jewish laws and once the idea got around that god had a son, it was just a matter of searching OT.
@nuckable so, not bashing you but just saying I can't accept the "hoax" theory for Paul's letters or really any of the epistles. I think you'd come closer to selling that with Acts of the Apostles. That's all fiction.
@TruthSurge Heh, I didn't feel like you were bashing my idea.
The reason behind it was less because of my knowledge of Paul's letters or the epistles, it was actually based on the fact (at least afaik) that virtually nobody from Jesus' following is known to history. None of his apostles, nor his family and neither him really.
But in the end these are all words in the wind. I was just saying an idea out loud, hoping to catch your attention and to get your feedback, which I got ;)
@nuckable Ref "apostles", in the epistles (generally earlier than the gospels and acts) there ARE no disciples. The word is never used. Disciple is someone who was taught by someone. Jesus never taught the apostles because they were apostles (messengers) who got their info about Jesus from the OT. There is an amazing rift between the epistles (early) and gospels/acts (later). Disciples/apostles is one indicator that we have 2 diff strands of Christianity going.
@nuckable which explains why none of the disciples save the big 3 (james, john and peter) were known. The rest were total fiction. They aren't mentioned by Paul or anyone in the epistles because.... they didn't exist. Neither did Jesus but that's another story.
@TeesByTruthSurge Well... then I think I'll have to wait for it. In the mean time I'll read the Odyssey for the hundredth time, just to troll you with inconsistencies. Regards my friend!
Stupefying your mind in religious sleep. Caustic trumpery from your pitiful god. Centuries of lies to bolster belief. Empty words and useless faith. Resting beside your infirm prayers. Mindless and empty, false and absurd. Your sleep is sheltered with willing ignorance. It is time to celebrate the serpent's choice. So enthralling is Satan's wisdom. Death to dullards with the powers of Old Nick. Open your eyes to the shadowy truth. The search for enlightenment lies with the devil.
this is a great series. it was obvious to me as a child that the gospels were fiction, there is far too much of the all knowing narrator to be anything else, and it's interesting to hear you formalising my hunches.
@jolulipa ....And Laertes was not as bad to him as Jesus' father was in the bible story. And what is the role of Telemachus in this whole thing? je, je, je,... I'm enjoying this series. I always thought that the Odyssey was far better than the Iliad... this will give me a lot of new talking points.
@TruthSurge Crap! you just took the fun out of my lungs! Damn atheists! Now a days, "no one knows how its like, ...to be a troll, ....to a friend... like I do" I love your work man! :>)
@jolulipa Inversion. The inversion allows for Mark to "improve" the hero. You see, by flipping the deaths (odysseus lives and his pallies die, but Jesus dies and his pallies live) Mark makes Jesus GREATER because the disciples alive are able to ALSO reject Jesus along with the Jewish leaders and it is JESUS who dies and in a greater trick than odysseus did, came back from death itself. Inversion is not uncommon when rewriting a prev story.
I think this is interesting, but I'm not convinced yet. I'll watch the next couple of videos and see what you have up your sleeve. I'm rooting for you.
@rriverstone1 Bingo. Now, that isn't in MARK, so I did not include that in this vid but it IS in Matthew and again, one has to wonder if "Matthew" was also embellishing Mark by including references to Homer that Mark "overlooked". :) Good catch.
@destronia123 Well, not that good. But he copied someone good. And 2000 years later... well, he's got one of his stories in the best selling anthology of all time. not bad for a hack writer. :)
@ozmoroid I may split the next chunk into a smaller chunk just so I can rewrite, revoice and get it done w/o cramming the whole week. Give me time to polish it a bit more. It's going to be VERY interesting. The final parallel I will show in detail is going to be an OMG moment for prob everyone.
@bonnie43uk yep. And Homer was the bomb back in the 1st century in Italy and Greece. And thanks to Al the Great's conquering... well, hehehe. so, I now shove my nose into my monitor again and try to crank out the next batch of evidence for this Homer/Greek connection.
@0gods Thanks.. Yes, it does! Because, with a heavenly Jesus at the core of Christianity up TO the writing of Mark, we can clearly see how Mark was left to invent his story basically whole cloth because there WASN'T a Jesus on the landscape at all. When all the pieces fit, my brain does wonderful things. It's like being on drugs without the drugs. :)
@pakleglia Yep, it's because Mark was making Jesus' son of god identity a secret because he was copying Odysseus' secret identity. And again, this clues us in that it's fiction because as you say, it just wouldn't have been like that in real life. It's a fictional, literary construct - no more.
@pakleglia HAHA yes, I did revert to the old TLD method at the start. But it's very hard to keep a vid series that will equal 3 major motion pictures in length to look LIKE a movie all the way thru. I'm just lucky to get it done on time as is. This particular one didn't turn out as convincing as I had hoped. There are LOTS of things ref hidden identity I didn't cover. But hopefully the pt was made and you can do your own searching for "who is dat main?".
It's funny, I had never heard of the connection between the Gospels and The Odyssey until your last video, and then a few days after watching it, I was watching a show on The History Channel and they made the same connection. Good work :D
@jippzmcghee thanks. Yes, I'm not sure but I think Dennis MacDonald noticed this first and he also wrote one about the Acts of Andrew. Luke (Acts) also draws directly from Homer in the 20th chap of Acts. It's a direct ripoff of the Elpenor scene. I should do a vid on that someday.
@FelidaTheG33k Yes, I'm just doing a bit of foreplay now to change metaphors. hehe Man, the next few vids will leave no doubt. I may even redo the writing some and voice over. Just try to make it better.
hmm I do remember a bit about Odysseus(I think) where he's leaving the under world with his wife, but at the very last moment looking back, and because of a deal he made to not look at his wife while making this journey back out of the underworld, she was taken back.
Kinda has that don't look back bit or you'll turn into a pillar of salt, Like you said they've taken parts of an old story and changed it up a bit.
Similar but not exactly the same, but definitely influenced by the older works.
@mrx0066600 Actually, Mark has taken a LOT from Homer and Greek mythology. I just only gave a couple of them in this 15 min vid. I plan to go over many more and it should become apparent that Mark was basically sculpting his own story FROM the Odyssey and a mashup of his Jesus knowledge and OT prophecies.
Yeah, it does smack of the Lot and wife story, doesn't it?
That isn't the story of Odysseus you're remembering, it's the story of Orpheus and his wife Eurydice. It was Orpheus who looked back and thereby failed in his rescue of Eurydice.
Woah. This is a pretty compelling comparison, Truth. I forget which gospel it is in, but Jesus also tells his disciples "it is meant for you to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but everyone else must be told in parables." Also, have you ever thought that maybe the Jesus figure is maybe a representative allegory for the nation of Israel?
This is an excellent series...
EmpiricalTruth 1 week ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
@TruthSurge If then that's true and there is no prophecy regarding Jesus in the OT and it doesn't speak of Him nor His promise, then I should just throw the Holy Bible in the trash since it's worthless. The Prophets labored in vain and the Law should be discarded. They did not pave the way for the Anointed. We are all destined to hell. The OT is the backbone of the NT.
David325ful 1 week ago
@TruthSurge Jesus could not just appear in the earth, just like that. Remember He had to fulfill the prophecies [the Prophets]. Genesis 3:15 says He will be born of a woman. God testing Abraham and telling him to sacrifice his only son, foreshadows that God will one day give His only Son to the world. Psalm 22 comes to fulfillment. To every detail and iota.
David325ful 1 week ago
@David325ful "Jesus could not just appear in the earth, just like that. "
Sure he could. Because there are no prophecies about Jesus in the Old Testament. It's all midrash and pesherim. Go look up those terms and get back to me.
TruthSurge 1 week ago 4
@TruthSurge Ecclesiastes 12:10 "The Preacher sought to find acceptable words; and what was written was upright- words of truth." What if I told the Egyptians copied Solomon and his great wisdom? Remeber his fame spread and everybody came to hear his wisdom and great understanding. (1 Kings 10:7) Mainly African regions.
David325ful 1 week ago
@David325ful "What if I told the Egyptians copied Solomon and his great wisdom?"
If you "told" that, I'd ask "where is your evidence?"
Ah, just what I thought. Pure wish thinking on your part.
TruthSurge 1 week ago
@TruthSurge I believe even an athiest can take something good out of the Holy Bible.The Writings of Solomon are very well centered on daily life. It gives advice and wisdom on how you can find favor with man and God. And no I don't believe God came down and had sex with Mary in order to concieve Himself. The Holy Spirit planted the holy Seed in her and the rest is history. Plus her labor was painless that was one benefit.
David325ful 1 week ago
@David325ful "The Holy Spirit planted the holy Seed in her "
But this holy spirit had to physically come to earth in order to do it because the text (which you seem to eschew) says that this spirit OVERSHADOWED her. In other words, it was ON TOP OF HER. Odd, I would have thought god could just poof himself onto earth in ANY form BUT the birth stories of Matthew and Luke were added LATER in order to explain just how Jesus was the son of god AND to provide anther link to...
TruthSurge 1 week ago
@David325ful ....another link to Greek myth (virgin born gods).
You are ignorant of all of this and that ignorance helps keep you in the fold, so to speak.
Lots of the Bible was borrowed from pre-existing literature. You prob didn't know that either. Lots of the proverbs come from Egyptian texts predating the Bible. etc etc etc. I think you would do well to read a book like "Misquoting Jesus". Get away from the insidious brainwashing of the church.
TruthSurge 1 week ago 3
@jcgadfly I do think. I'm a freethinker. But I hate when some people can take a quick look at the Holy Bible and judge it. You have to do a thorough analysis and dig in deeper to find if its a Divine book indeed. Like the Spirit says in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Test all things; " The Holy Bible is a book full of mysteries, paradoxes, riddles, prophecies, and wisdom. One can never fully grasp the Holy Bible and say "I've learned everything I need to know."
David325ful 1 week ago
@TruthSurge We never stop learning.
David325ful 1 week ago
@David325ful I think when you believe that a god had sex with a young girl in the Middle-East in order to give birth to himself, you've stopped learning.
TruthSurge 1 week ago
The Bible now seemed like a very good story taken WAYYY too far.
pythor2 2 weeks ago
@pythor2 it was good at the time for a CERTAIN audience. then it got crammed down the world's throat via Constantine's help and the rest.... is BLOODY history.
TruthSurge 1 week ago
@AMpufnstuf The Holy Bible is the most accurate in science not to mention that it has a span of 4,000 B.C to 96 C.E. Job 26:7 mentions the earth "hanging" on a vacuum. It was believed that the earth rested on a solid platform. Genesis 1:2 mentions entropy 2nd law of thermodynamics. Leviticus 17:11 mentions that blood is the life of the flesh. All the 59 elements of the human body can be found in dirt(Genesis2:7) These are only a fraction of the pie on how advanced it is in science.
David325ful 2 weeks ago
@David325ful it's clear you know nothing about the Bible or science.
TruthSurge 2 weeks ago
@David325ful I understand. Like so many Christians you've neither read your Bible or a science book. Stop taking the word of apologists and think.
jcgadfly 1 week ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
I am partially through this I think and I keep asking myself the same question and the only one who can answer is you. I want to know if you enjoy reading the stories of Jesus from a reader's standpoint, not a religious or non religious, but more like a scholar. Me I believe the bible is in some ways historical. I think that the stories in it are nothing more than myth but even greek mythology is historical. gives us insight in different writings and culture of the time it was written. Agree?
Nightw0lf414 2 weeks ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
@Nightw0lf414 yes, of course. Any writing from the past is a tiny puzzle piece that fits into a bigger picture. Get enough of those writings over a short time and you can have a clearer picture of what was going on with the people and their beliefs. It's kind of just pure anthropology/history/psychology/religion all wrapped up together. There IS history in the Bible. That of its authors and that which is corroborated by outside sources, since much is fiction.
TruthSurge 2 weeks ago
@TruthSurge Isaiah 42:2 "He will not cry out, nor raise His voice, nor cause His voice to be heard in the street."
Isaiah 52:13 "Behold, My Servant shall deal prudently; He shall be exalted and extolled and be very high."
Present year 2012 : Jesus is amongst 2.2 billion followers.
Odysseus followers: 0 I rest my case.
David325ful 3 weeks ago
@David325ful Christianity formed 2000 years ago. Hinduism formed 4000 years ago. Hinduism is older than Christianity and has millions of adherents.
Hinduism - 1 Christianity - 0.
TruthSurge 3 weeks ago
@David325ful As TruthSurge said, Hinduism is older than Christianity and also has millions of adherents ( ~900 million, almost 10 times the number of jews ). It's the oldest religion in existence and hindu sacred books were preserved 'till today. Odysseus was not founder of a religion and his literary works weren't sacred books. It's like saying that the Grimm brothers lost your game because no one follows them. Oh, and there are still today some followers of ancient greek religion.
pedroamaralcouto 3 weeks ago
@David325ful Be realistic with your cult numbers, christ doesn't have 2.2 billion followers. There are 2.2 billion people who marked down on a poll that they're a cult member and they'll make damn sure their kids end up one too.
There are actually about 18 people per town who go to church, so apparently nobody takes the book very seriously anymore. Because we're above it, and we know it to be historically, scientifically, and even morally wrong. In summary: bullshit.
AMpufnstuf 2 weeks ago in playlist Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt)
Okay. Good. But I have a question that will really stump you. Are you a Clint Eastwood fan and have you seen many of his movies?
perichoresis7 4 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 nope. Not a western fan so I only know bits and pieces I've seen like "make my day" etc.
TruthSurge 4 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 so anything about that WILL stump me.
TruthSurge 4 weeks ago
@TruthSurge haha I was being satirical. :) But I was going to use his movie history as an example for something. Simplified version: starting in the 60s, his movies were all about justice and he was the one that delivered it by killing the bad guys. Then a few years ago he comes out with a movie that has the same framework, same setup, same "literary" structure, which makes the viewer recall how he handled all previous similar situations; it was called Gran Torino.
perichoresis7 4 weeks ago
@TruthSurge So what I'm saying is, what's wrong with the author of Mark using a known story (Odyssey/old Clint movie) to construct a narrative about a true event to show how this true event/story is superior to all other thoughts/narratives about "heroes" or "gods"? Authors use terms and narrative frameworks that the audience knows. I know what you are saying (thus far) makes sense as an option, but you must also acknowledge that I'm saying is also plausible.
perichoresis7 4 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 "what's wrong with the author of Mark using a known story (Odyssey/old Clint movie) to construct a narrative about a true event to show how this true event/story is superior to all other thoughts/narratives about "heroes" or "gods"? "
I THINK this is your best question yet. The short answer is "nothing". :)
TruthSurge 4 weeks ago
@TruthSurge Thanks! :) I just wish I could offer a question that wasn't so theoretical. Substance is what many people are looking for, and I'm afraid there just isn't much to offer.
perichoresis7 4 weeks ago
@perichoresis7 notice how I left you dangling there. HEHEHEHHE
There is nothing inherently wrong with that but assuming Mark DID do that, we now have to see if we can determine HOW MUCH of the prior stories did he use? What we find in the case of Jesus is - almost everything. :( Keep asking! You're keeping me on my toes!
TruthSurge 4 weeks ago
@TruthSurge hahaha Glad to hear it! Because I haven't left my toes. Give me some tights and I'll be a ballerino! haha Okay, that was lame, but I am definitely expanding my knowledge and learning a lot through our discussions. Glad to hear you're getting something out of it as well. :)
perichoresis7 4 weeks ago
Wow!! Really Great Video!!!
karlbuttler 1 month ago
@karlbuttler thanks
TruthSurge 1 month ago
Vulva
2eelShmeal 2 months ago
@2eelShmeal now, you're talkin'.
TruthSurge 2 months ago
@TruthSurge lol
2eelShmeal 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this series... should be a psa
TheMorriganLeFay 3 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge I probably got some of the details wrong in my last comment about Augustus, but you get the point, I'm sure. I don't have my own copy of "Gospel Fictions". I read it a long time ago. I recall reading about the discovery of an inscription that declared Augustus "Savior" sometime before the (presumed) birth of Jesus. A commemorative battle inscription of some kind.
anyhoo, take care, man.
jdh501 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge Yeah! I liked that one too! "Gospel Fictions" highlights the fact that Caesar Augustus was proclaimed God, Savior and harbinger of Peace several years before the (presumed) birth of Jesus. It seems the political rebels in the eastern half of the empire couldn't stand an adopted orphan being declared "God", so they started a counter-movement and substituted their own version..... from Galilee.
Such fraudulence, ya just couldn't write this stuff. . . oh wait, they DID! :D
jdh501 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge You're probably correct that this book will someday be a source for NT studies. Another interesting book is one by Randel Helms called "Who Wrote The Gospels?". Heard of it? The really cool thing is that nothing in Helms's book contradicts the ideas of MacDonald (from what I've seen so far). It's very cool when that happens. These authors are on to something. I always thought there was something odd about Mark's gospel and his obsession with the "secret messiah" thing.
jdh501 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge tee-hee-hee... Yeah, Oct 21 is Harold Camping's 2nd chance clause (exactly 6 months after his failed May 21 prediction. Look it up, it's good for giggles.
I was gonna go, but they cancelled by boarding pass for Air Jesus! :-(
Back on topic: I'll read MacDonald's book. It's plausible that a cult promoter like the author of Mark would try to one-up a best seller like the Odyssey to give his cult more credibility.
Muhammad used epic biblical fiction to pad out his book. :-)
jdh501 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge if the truth about my obnoxious alter-ego got out. . .
oh, the horror. . .
btw, get ready for Spaceship Jesus this Friday. Ya goin"? I'm not! :D
jdh501 4 months ago
GREAT video series!
This "hidden identity motif" reminds me of my attitude towards my sock puppet YouTube alter-ego-channel. See, he's way more colorful and controversial than the real me, and when people PM me saying they've identified me, I always admonish them "to tell nobody".
heheheh. . . ;P
jdh501 4 months ago
Interesting... ★★★★★
Katalyzt 4 months ago
The Odysseus parallels are quite interesting, and playing the game of looking for parallels now myself I've come to the hypothesis that Jesus is an anti-Odysseus. Jesus represents a rejection of the human for the divine, and Odysseus represents a rejection of the divine for the human (compare Satan tempting Jesus in the wilderness with earthly power in Matthew with Calypso tempting Odysseus with divinity. (continued)
markdzima 4 months ago
@markdzima (cont'd) Whereas Jesus is repeatedly attributed with speaking truth, Odysseus is famous for his clever lies and deceptions (Odysseus was credited with the Trojan Horse deception, and consider also his deceptions with regard to the cyclops, etc.). Jesus's teachings can be seen as a rejection of the sins arising from individualism, Odysseus was an archetype of individualism (and it is perhaps significant that his father's name, Autolychus, might translate as "lone wolf").
markdzima 4 months ago
@markdzima Dad was Laertes, not Autolychus. Autolychus was the father in law to Laertes. Was the father of Laertes' wife.
But you bring up an interesting thing because you are right that the Odyssey was about the idea that man COULD overcome even the capricious and destructive wiles of the gods and succeed whereas the gospel story paints the opposite picture. It is not wrong to call Mark's story an anti-epic. It is an epic but with some inverted ideas.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge Thanks for the correction. Autolychus was the grandfather of Odysseus then. Might still make the name significant, perhaps.
markdzima 4 months ago
@markdzima well, I wonder if there is a parallel to a machine lesbians would like? oh no he di unt!
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Comment removed
lungay009 4 months ago
Comment removed
lungay009 4 months ago
So, in your opinion, have you gotten many believers to watch this or do you think it's mostly the "choir"?
Either way, you really ARE putting on quite a display of your ability to research a topic, put together a theme, put your thoughts on paper then produce a very buffed and polished final product. I can only imagine the hours you put into this labor of love. I appreciate your efforts.
2eelShmeal 4 months ago in playlist Empty Tomb
Ok, got my popcorn, I'm ready
2eelShmeal 4 months ago in playlist Empty Tomb
Let me explain a question you had at 13:10 about why the chief priests needed help in identifying Jesus which really has nothing to do with Odysseus cloaking himself
In fact, they didn't need help identifying Jesus at all, they only needed to arrest Jesus when the crouds weren't around such as night. So they only needed the help to locate where Jesus was at night
Thus fulfilling King David's prophecy in Psalm 41:9-13
But you wouldn't dare compare the Gospel of Mark to prophecy would you
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 Let me explain how CHristians don't even read their own Bibles then ironically claim atheists are wrong. Here, let me let Mark explain it to you.
Mark 14:44
And he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he; take him, and lead [him] away safely.
Gee, seems like the chief priests couldn't tell who Jesus was without Judas' help EVEN THOUGH as Jesus himself says verses later he was always seen in public and in synagogues debating them!
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@lungay009 ooops.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge Now back-up a little in the scripture and read again Mark 14:43
Mark 14:43 Just as he was speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, appeared. With him was a crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests, the teachers of the law, and the elders.
As you can see the chief priests weren't with the ones they've sent to arrest Jesus. So the crowd sent to arrest Jesus by the chief priests did need a sign, a kiss, finger pointing, something to know who to arrest.
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 Wouldn't it be the guy in the long white robe who looked strangely European. :)
You do bring up a fair point and not one I did not consider but do you really think no one in the crowd knew what Jesus looked like? That the chief priests would send total strangers? And Jesus addresses the group as "you" when he mentions teaching publicly giving the impression that maybe these people would have known his looks by virtue of that. vs 48, 49. What do you think of that?
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge There's also the issue of mentally sorting people by place.
But like I said as Jesus said it happened so that prophecy would be fulfilled, and so it was.
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 Then, there's a final little piece that might come into play regarding this. "And one of them that stood by drew a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest" The servant of the high priest. A guy who would have been in the temple along with the high priest all the while Jesus was reading from the OT and debating them and such. And still this guy needed help in identifying Jesus. It still looks like a plot flaw in that regard. Thanks for bringing that up tho.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge All in all the prophecy stated that the Son of Man would be betrayed. The servant of the high priest wouldn't have fit the character roll of betrayer well.
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 But another thing is that there didn't need to be any betrayal at all. The servant or someone who knew what he looked like could have gone with the crowd and picked him from a group of 11 other men, wouldn't you say? THe judas part is pure fiction built on several literary inputs.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge Indeed, there didn't need to be a betrayal at all. That's what Jesus meant when he said:
Mark 14:49 I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be fulfilled.
The Judas part is pure prophecy fulfilled.
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 Even if we assume Psalm 41:9-13 is being referenced by the Gospels, it is a hindsight determination that makes it a prophecy instead of any quality intrinsic to the verse itself.
And even if we do assume that it is a prophecy it is significantly vague, enough such as to render it useless in a prophetic context. It has the same prophetic value as "I will get married" or "A cop will get shot".
onijester56 4 months ago
@onijester56 Well if it wasn't prophecy Jesus was aware how he was to fulfill his destiny. And said several times in Mark he would be betrayed by one with him.
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 "Jesus was aware how he was to fulfill his destiny" And hence making it a self-fulfilling prophecy as Jesus set out to fulfill it. Again, no more prophetic value than "I will get married".
"said several times...he would be betrayed" Let us assume that Mark did not place the claims after-the-fact. He would be aware of his increasing political power and the desire others would have had to 'deal with' him. Betrayal would be the easiest method to do so. Again, "A cop will get shot".
onijester56 4 months ago
@onijester56 How did Jesus know one of his friends would betray him?
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 Again, assuming that Jesus even said that...
Person A gains some political power -> Person A gains lots of political power -> Person A becomes threat to people in power -> Person A knows he is a threat -> Person A can expect to be betrayed at some point -> The most likely candidate is one who is close to Person A --> Person A 'prophecizes' betrayal -> It happens, he is claimed a prophet; it doesn't, either no one remembers or it is retroactively 'remembered' that it did somehow.
onijester56 4 months ago
(cont)
I mean betrayal as a means of political silencing had been recognized as an effective/easy means at least 70 years before Jesus came to prominence, when Julius Caesar was betrayed by Brutus. If Jesus had been taught even mild history, that most likely would have come up and Jesus could then expect it.
And even if he never heard of the history, it would be easy to see that people you were close to were acting shifty/strange/slyly and judge that something was up with them.
onijester56 4 months ago
Comment removed
lungay009 4 months ago
Comment removed
lungay009 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@onijester56 How was Jesus a political threat to Judas or his disciples? When in history did a student ever consider his teacher a threat to the point of killing him?
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 Do you even read before you respond? I never said Jesus was a threat to JUDAS but to THE PEOPLE IN POWER (assign that label to the Jews, the Romans, aliens from Planet Z, or whoever you think).
THEY used Judas. As to why Judas would accept, it could have been for the money, to protect the nation Jesus was failing, because Satan possessed him, because God planned it to be so, because he was exchanging prisoners (which Jesus would have agreed to), or one of many other options.
onijester56 4 months ago
@onijester56 What nation was Jesus failing when he was never in any political power?
So if Jesus wasn't a threat to Judas why did Judas SEEK OUT the chief priests FIRST for? Seems Judas was using the chief priests to do away with Jesus. But why? What did Jesus do to Judas?
And the only reason they used Judas was because Judas went to THEM first. They only took advantage of the opportunity of Judas going to THEM telling THEM "I know where he is if you want him".
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009
1) Most likely in Judas' eyes the same nation he was getting the bulk of his followers from, the same nation he put the ultimatum for people to leave their families to follow him or not be saved, the same nation which he promised change to but did not provide. Mark 14:3-9, Matthew 26:6-13, and John 12:1-8. If we apply Luke 7:36-50, that is two different incidents.
2) Lots of people following and obeying you is intrinsically political power.
And this is only one reason.
(cont)
onijester56 4 months ago
@onijester56 Alright, let me see if I got this right. A few dozen people following Jesus makes a nation, is this right?
And if so what change did Jesus promise this tiny nation of a few dozen that Judas had to take Jesus out for not making good on his political promise?
And did Judas give Jesus enough time to make good on his political promise of change being Jesus was leader of this tiny nation of a few dozen for only three years?
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009 "A few dozen people following Jesus makes a nation" You can't seriously have forgotten that Jesus went through Jewish-Roman territories, separating Jewish-Roman families and by extension promoting societal collapse of the Jewish-Roman area in the name of freedom and love. That Judas, biblically, was one such Jewish-Roman people supports the idea that he could have 'betrayed Jesus' after being disillusioned (such as by the "Mary of Betthany" event).
(cont)
onijester56 4 months ago
(cont)
"what change did Jesus promise this tiny nation" Jesus continually speaks of freedom and equality in his teachings.
"did Judas give Jesus enough time to make good on his political promise" You have never read the Bethany event, have you? Jesus essentially said 'Fuck the poor, I'm getting treated specially.' Instead of changing anything, Jesus (so Judas saw) was failing the task he set up.
And also this is only ONE OF MANY POSSIBILITIES. God, Satan, greed, etc. are possible as well.
onijester56 4 months ago
@onijester56 Please show me the scripture where Jesus promises freedom and equality?
And please tell me where I can read about this Bethany event that Jesus withdraws his campaign promise?
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009
On equality/freedom, to begin: the Good Samaritan, the Golden Rule, the teachings on Salvation [through either work or faith, an equal footing is established for all], and the message of loving others.
The Bethany event takes place at Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8. Of course there is a comparative event at Luke 10:38-42 but it is not the specific event. Jesus takes praise by annointment and calls it 'better' than helping the poor instead.
onijester56 4 months ago
@onijester56 No, he DIDN'T call it "better" than helping the poor, go back and read it again.
lungay009 4 months ago
@lungay009
Matt 26
"Why do you bother the woman? For she has done a good deed to Me. / For you always have the poor with you; but you do not always have Me." NASB
"Why do ye give trouble to the woman? for a good work she wrought for me / for the poor always ye have with you, and me ye have not always" YLT
On and on. He puts himself above the poor in each translation of each corresponding verse. Those looking for change/freedom (which would be a good chunk) would disagree with Jesus' words.
onijester56 4 months ago
Comment removed
lungay009 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@onijester56 There was no mention of them disagreeing with Jesus's words, only with the perfume being used on him.
Was Jesus himself rich? Didn't he do enough good to deserve a proper burial as any other?
And what change/freedom were they waiting from Jesus? Where did Jesus ever say "vote for me and I'll set you free"?
Did a poor person ever approach Jesus and was turned away empty handed?
lungay009 4 months ago
Comment removed
lungay009 4 months ago
(cont)
3) Again, Judas could have needed (or even just wanted) money. Maybe he planned to make a safe-haven for the oppressed. Maybe start up an army or his own kingdom. Either God or Satan controlled him. It could have been a prisoner-exchange agreement that the Bible Authors did not remember clearly after 50 years. It could have been a request by Jesus.
And all this ASSUMES ON NO historical EVIDENCE (and in fact against pretty direct Biblical evidence) that the event is historically-based.
onijester56 4 months ago
Great work on part five TS! Keep 'em coming :)
cosmicskydaddy1 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge mark was a jew i am arguing with you. Bart ehrman would not take any of this srriously. He think jesus mythiciism is stupid as well
bossman103 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge M,ark was a gentile christian lmao he was jew christinaity did not exit then you buffoon. He was fololower of jesus. No but I do not take robert price asrsriously. He is not a proper scholar so do not lecture me what is proper scholarshiop. NT Wright he would diaagree with he is a proper scholar
bossman103 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge He was jew he knew plaestine well. You can asssert he wasnt ajew but it seems unlikely because he is familair with the old testment and jewish ideas and culture.
bossman103 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge No amrk was writtten firs tin synoptic gospels but paul was before that. Bart ehrman is good at he scripture says not at what history says. Ehrman is wrong about lots of thiungs
bossman103 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge Mark was a netile really myou obvious do not know anyhthing. Mark was a jew. How do i know a he traveled iwith other jews b wwhich scholars say mark was agentile i have read of most of them say look at the internet what wikipedia newflash wikipeida is not scholarly.
bossman103 4 months ago
Great work !!!Y You're really good.
Great narrative style and audio video presentation
Sign me up for the whole series!
Iseeyoursoul 4 months ago
@Iseeyoursoul Okay. Free lifetime passes! thank ya
TruthSurge 4 months ago
cont and was punishable by deaht. Also they thought he was just a tridckster, hoaxster they did not realise that he was claoming to be the on of god. This is why when they do find this out thy dclaim he uis usuing the power of the devil. Of course mark was copoying greek religous be;iefs. facepalm. Again what happened when they did know who he was they accuse him opf blapshemy and heresy. Yes doing that when they were influential would have help jesus you fail
bossman103 4 months ago
@bossman103 No, I think you fail. Because you are clearly so afraid to find out what I have in store in my next 2 or 3 vids that you are allowing your mind to do the old "let's stop this now before I get too deep" routine. It's a common reaction to finding out something that will totally change your beliefs.
If you don't want to postpone your judgment until I'm DONE presenting ALL of my Homer/Mark evidence, please, can you at least lose the attitude? I could say fuck you and block you.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge Ok I apologise. I should be more forgiving. I am asorry I conssider myself very open minded. I will watch the next couple of weeks and see what you present. I should not prejudge. However I am sorry you incorrect in anumber of things. Read jonathan z smith honestly he is a good read and gives good insights. Hopefully when n you do finish i will have a new computer and we can discuss in video form
bossman103 4 months ago
@bossman103 Okay, fine. Now, I KNOW you do not agree with me. Okay, why must we belabor that? I KNOW what Christian theology teaches pretty much in ALL the denominations. So to repeat that to me is kind of tedious for me. Now, you DO bring up at least a valid point that Jesus could not be expected to run around advertising his "sonship" to the Jews. fair enough. but that does NOT mean Mark did not copy the hidden identity idea and APPLY that to his story.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge So, just give me a little more time, and when I'm finally done with THIS part of my res series, if you still don't buy it, I'm cool with that but I'd say you cannot buy it no matter HOW convincing it might be because it would mean that Mark is fiction and the entire orthodox view is built upon that fiction (Mark to Matthew to Luke to Acts, all predicated upon Mark's original tale). so.... there ya go.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge I will not be convinced because of one thing. mark was a jew and as a jew the notion of him taking any sort of paganism seems impossible and improbable. It would like you as an atheist endorsing church and state it would unlikely due to your worldview
bossman103 4 months ago
@TruthSurge Maybe its unlikely though. Mark would not take from pagan stories he just would not. As you go on I will point out why
bossman103 4 months ago
There is a enormous amount of fail here. First;ly the ressurection is based upon jewish ideas not greeks ones. The only influence this had on christinaity is the recent edition of jesus going to hell to defeat satan. That is thanks to dante and michaelangelo. Secondly the frasier hypothesis has been disproven so you are wronfg and outofdate with compemotry comparative religion. Next the whole thing about him disaguise himself have you thought that cliaming to be the son of god was blasphemy cont
bossman103 4 months ago
I got to cut the demon warning a little slack. Considering the audience believed the world was called into being with but a word. Words had power. Names had power... wait, names was Lord of the Rings wasn't it.
I'm more interested in why Demons are saying "son of God" and not "you are God". I would think a Demon would cut through the BS of the trinity and call God out for who he is.
If that wasn't clear it's because talking about the Trinity is like talking about time travel... sigh...
xdassinx 4 months ago
What a great choice of music throughout. Sets a mood without being distracting. I'm really diggin' this series. If asked to vote on it, I'd say this belongs on public television.
ZephZhang 4 months ago
@ZephZhang I wrote all of the music myself. :) I just couldn't be bothered trying to find music anymore. So since I had this synth plugin on my PC and I know a BIT about audio, I just decided to roll my own. It's kind of fun too. hehe But sometimes hard to get a good match. thank ya
TruthSurge 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Very interesting video, and it makes sense along with Mark's use of irony during the passion narrative.
andybreeden 4 months ago
Nice debate material there,truthsurge!
eat666shit 4 months ago
I'm actually pretty sure, that given the little we know about Jesus or most of the people surrounding him, it would even be possible to construct a case for "the hoax jesus". Constructed by the romans to convert the jews because they wouldn't accept the greco/roman pantheon :P
Assuming that Paul was in on it, of course :D
nuckable 4 months ago
@nuckable That seems to be a popular theory as I see it cropping up in priv msgs and such. I really can't get behind that one tho. Just think for one second. You're Rome. You want the Jews to worship a NEW god (Jesus) because they won't worship your old ones? ? And then to do so, you write Mark's gospel showing this same Jesus bitch slapping the Jewish leaders calling them hypocrites for rejecting him already? nah. Can't get behind it.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge Well, assume that the first letters (by Paul) were written to plant the seed, then Mark's gospel and the rest is all based on these fictional letters.
Honestly though, I didn't think it all through, I was just speculating that it could be postulated and I'm pretty sure, would even make more sense than the resurrection myth :P
nuckable 4 months ago
@nuckable I can't buy that at all. The facade someone would have to maintain across 7 letters like that during those days (2000 years ago roughly) is not really possible. There is no hint of a hoax in Paul's 7 authentic letters, IMO. It's too consistent and lengthy, IMO.
I think Paul was simply affected by the pressures of the Greco-Roman influence and Philo and his own distaste for the Jewish laws and once the idea got around that god had a son, it was just a matter of searching OT.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@nuckable I can't buy that at all. The facade someone would have to maintain across 7 letters like that during those days (2000 years ago roughly) is not really possible. There is no hint of a hoax in Paul's 7 authentic letters, IMO. It's too consistent and lengthy, IMO.
I think Paul was simply affected by the pressures of the Greco-Roman influence and Philo and his own distaste for the Jewish laws and once the idea got around that god had a son, it was just a matter of searching OT.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@nuckable so, not bashing you but just saying I can't accept the "hoax" theory for Paul's letters or really any of the epistles. I think you'd come closer to selling that with Acts of the Apostles. That's all fiction.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge Heh, I didn't feel like you were bashing my idea.
The reason behind it was less because of my knowledge of Paul's letters or the epistles, it was actually based on the fact (at least afaik) that virtually nobody from Jesus' following is known to history. None of his apostles, nor his family and neither him really.
But in the end these are all words in the wind. I was just saying an idea out loud, hoping to catch your attention and to get your feedback, which I got ;)
Thanks
nuckable 4 months ago
@nuckable Ref "apostles", in the epistles (generally earlier than the gospels and acts) there ARE no disciples. The word is never used. Disciple is someone who was taught by someone. Jesus never taught the apostles because they were apostles (messengers) who got their info about Jesus from the OT. There is an amazing rift between the epistles (early) and gospels/acts (later). Disciples/apostles is one indicator that we have 2 diff strands of Christianity going.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@nuckable which explains why none of the disciples save the big 3 (james, john and peter) were known. The rest were total fiction. They aren't mentioned by Paul or anyone in the epistles because.... they didn't exist. Neither did Jesus but that's another story.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Excelent stuff, well looks like I have to take a look at Homers Odyssey.
Unfortunately, I have one or two other books that I have to read first.
DeletedDelusion 4 months ago
@DeletedDelusion thank ye.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Imagine Mark had been reading Superman instead of Homer: Jesus puts on a pair of glasses, and neither man nor demon can recognize him;-)
detersgumig 4 months ago
@detersgumig I know! crazy, ain't it. But satan might have found out about the kryptonite. :) then oh boy!
TruthSurge 4 months ago
This is excellent. Your secret is safe with me - I won't tell anything who made this video.
SuperSoylent2 4 months ago
Awesome. This is great debate ammo.
moonlightavenger 4 months ago
wwowowwow. im coming hungry
MrPacnman 4 months ago
Excellent series. Can't wait for the next vid!
KT45 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge
Don't forget that back in time most of them were more illiterate than a chimp with glasses.
realbojay 4 months ago
@TeesByTruthSurge Well... then I think I'll have to wait for it. In the mean time I'll read the Odyssey for the hundredth time, just to troll you with inconsistencies. Regards my friend!
jolulipa 4 months ago
awesome job. the beginning sounded like the story of Perseus. Parallels there as well - son of God, demons, snakes,sea monsters
ModernDeism 4 months ago
Ahh yes, another spectacular episode indeed.
rich2rock 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TheDarkLordLucifer 4 months ago
this is a great series. it was obvious to me as a child that the gospels were fiction, there is far too much of the all knowing narrator to be anything else, and it's interesting to hear you formalising my hunches.
spoddie 4 months ago
I see a problem here (I am a devout reader of the Odyssey), At the end, Odysseus was left without friends, yet Jesus still had eleven... What gives?
jolulipa 4 months ago
@jolulipa ....And Laertes was not as bad to him as Jesus' father was in the bible story. And what is the role of Telemachus in this whole thing? je, je, je,... I'm enjoying this series. I always thought that the Odyssey was far better than the Iliad... this will give me a lot of new talking points.
jolulipa 4 months ago
@jolulipa I wouldn't say that every Odyssey character has a counterpoint in Mark. There is no necessity for Mark to copy ALL of the Odyssey. ?
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@TruthSurge Crap! you just took the fun out of my lungs! Damn atheists! Now a days, "no one knows how its like, ...to be a troll, ....to a friend... like I do" I love your work man! :>)
jolulipa 4 months ago
@jolulipa Inversion. The inversion allows for Mark to "improve" the hero. You see, by flipping the deaths (odysseus lives and his pallies die, but Jesus dies and his pallies live) Mark makes Jesus GREATER because the disciples alive are able to ALSO reject Jesus along with the Jewish leaders and it is JESUS who dies and in a greater trick than odysseus did, came back from death itself. Inversion is not uncommon when rewriting a prev story.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
I think this is interesting, but I'm not convinced yet. I'll watch the next couple of videos and see what you have up your sleeve. I'm rooting for you.
tacojohn9 4 months ago
@tacojohn9 Thanks. It will be worth it.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Also some of hercules stories from the greek iilad have echoes in the gospels.
meleder 4 months ago
@meleder yeah, Homer's Iliad (the last part) seems to show up in Mark's gospel.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Calypso is Satan, seducing Jesus as he wandered in the desert!
rriverstone1 4 months ago
@rriverstone1 Bingo. Now, that isn't in MARK, so I did not include that in this vid but it IS in Matthew and again, one has to wonder if "Matthew" was also embellishing Mark by including references to Homer that Mark "overlooked". :) Good catch.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Sounds like "Mark" wasn't a very good writer... ;)
destronia123 4 months ago
@destronia123 Well, not that good. But he copied someone good. And 2000 years later... well, he's got one of his stories in the best selling anthology of all time. not bad for a hack writer. :)
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Surge ahead! I'm thoroughly enjoying this series.
ozmoroid 4 months ago
@ozmoroid I may split the next chunk into a smaller chunk just so I can rewrite, revoice and get it done w/o cramming the whole week. Give me time to polish it a bit more. It's going to be VERY interesting. The final parallel I will show in detail is going to be an OMG moment for prob everyone.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Excellent stuff, .. finally, a conspiracy theory that (seems) to hold water.
If you ask the average person in the street in what language the New Testament was written, it's more than likely they'll say, Latin, or Aramaic.
No, .. it was originally written in Greek. And what was Homers Odyssey written in? .. Greek. I cannot wait for the next episode!!
bonnie43uk 4 months ago
@bonnie43uk yep. And Homer was the bomb back in the 1st century in Italy and Greece. And thanks to Al the Great's conquering... well, hehehe. so, I now shove my nose into my monitor again and try to crank out the next batch of evidence for this Homer/Greek connection.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Another powerful episode! I can't wait for the next video. This series works well with your mythical Jesus series.
0gods 4 months ago
@0gods Thanks.. Yes, it does! Because, with a heavenly Jesus at the core of Christianity up TO the writing of Mark, we can clearly see how Mark was left to invent his story basically whole cloth because there WASN'T a Jesus on the landscape at all. When all the pieces fit, my brain does wonderful things. It's like being on drugs without the drugs. :)
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@pakleglia Yep, it's because Mark was making Jesus' son of god identity a secret because he was copying Odysseus' secret identity. And again, this clues us in that it's fiction because as you say, it just wouldn't have been like that in real life. It's a fictional, literary construct - no more.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@pakleglia HAHA yes, I did revert to the old TLD method at the start. But it's very hard to keep a vid series that will equal 3 major motion pictures in length to look LIKE a movie all the way thru. I'm just lucky to get it done on time as is. This particular one didn't turn out as convincing as I had hoped. There are LOTS of things ref hidden identity I didn't cover. But hopefully the pt was made and you can do your own searching for "who is dat main?".
TruthSurge 4 months ago
It's funny, I had never heard of the connection between the Gospels and The Odyssey until your last video, and then a few days after watching it, I was watching a show on The History Channel and they made the same connection. Good work :D
jippzmcghee 4 months ago
@jippzmcghee thanks. Yes, I'm not sure but I think Dennis MacDonald noticed this first and he also wrote one about the Acts of Andrew. Luke (Acts) also draws directly from Homer in the 20th chap of Acts. It's a direct ripoff of the Elpenor scene. I should do a vid on that someday.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Hungry and waiting for the main course. :-)
FelidaTheG33k 4 months ago
@FelidaTheG33k Yes, I'm just doing a bit of foreplay now to change metaphors. hehe Man, the next few vids will leave no doubt. I may even redo the writing some and voice over. Just try to make it better.
TruthSurge 4 months ago
hmm I do remember a bit about Odysseus(I think) where he's leaving the under world with his wife, but at the very last moment looking back, and because of a deal he made to not look at his wife while making this journey back out of the underworld, she was taken back.
Kinda has that don't look back bit or you'll turn into a pillar of salt, Like you said they've taken parts of an old story and changed it up a bit.
Similar but not exactly the same, but definitely influenced by the older works.
mrx0066600 4 months ago
@mrx0066600 Actually, Mark has taken a LOT from Homer and Greek mythology. I just only gave a couple of them in this 15 min vid. I plan to go over many more and it should become apparent that Mark was basically sculpting his own story FROM the Odyssey and a mashup of his Jesus knowledge and OT prophecies.
Yeah, it does smack of the Lot and wife story, doesn't it?
TruthSurge 4 months ago
@mrx0066600
That isn't the story of Odysseus you're remembering, it's the story of Orpheus and his wife Eurydice. It was Orpheus who looked back and thereby failed in his rescue of Eurydice.
markdzima 4 months ago
@markdzima
Ah, thanks for correcting me there.
mrx0066600 4 months ago
What is the difference between Super man and Jesus ???
parsonman05 4 months ago
@parsonman05 Jesus needs money to do his super deeds?
TruthSurge 4 months ago
Woah. This is a pretty compelling comparison, Truth. I forget which gospel it is in, but Jesus also tells his disciples "it is meant for you to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but everyone else must be told in parables." Also, have you ever thought that maybe the Jesus figure is maybe a representative allegory for the nation of Israel?
TempleOfInanna2 4 months ago