The Jesus Papers

  • Thread starter Thread starter DonLeon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DonLeon

Guest
I don’t know exactly where to post this thread so I thought this forum would be a good place. Also, I don’t know if this subject has been discussed before. If so, then I’m beating a dead horse with a wet noodle. If not then I would like to advance my comments on the subject,

I have just finished reading “The Jesus Papers” by Michael Baigent ( Harper-Collier ). It is a very interesting story the way it is presented and presents some real good arguments
that Jesus did not die on the cross, and that He was alive in 45 AD. He also presents arguments and “evidence” that Jesus’ hidden years were spent in Egypt studying the ways of the mystics, etc. and that jesus married Mary Magdalene.

The only thing that stops me from accepting all of this is that not only is it assumption and conjecture ( evident in the use of some of his phrases ), but he seems to be advancing Gnosticism. As we know, Gnosis ( knowledge ) is secret and only for the elect.
To me, this raises a RED flag. Besides, there are also many unanswered questions, such as “if the Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John, then why didn’t he
reveal that Jesus didn’t die on the cross?”. This and many other questions seem to be ignored.

Out of curiosity, I would like to know individual comments on this subject. Thank you.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
First of all there is no contemporary evidence for anything like this. It all came later, which should raise a red flag in itself.
Secondly, why would the writers of the Gospels have lied a bout it? Why form a vast conspiracy? They could have just told the truth. They certainly weren’t getting any benefits from making some sort of vast conspiracy to cover up Christ’s marriage and life after the crucifixion… many of them died horrible deaths. If they knew for a fact that this was untrue, why do that?
Thirdly, you say you are Catholic. Do you believe that the Church is really the Church? The Church founded by Jesus Christ? Then you should believe that the Scriptures are protected from error, and that what they say has to be true.
 
davidv said:
This is from the lead sentence in a wikipedia article on the author. Emphasis mine.

His speculations are contrary to the Teachings of the Church and can be rejected out-of-hand.
The following thread contains more thoughts on his “speculations”.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5464757&postcount=1
Click to expand...
Not to mention being historically unreasonable. Besides, doesn’t the term speculative say anything about his ideas? They are just that. Speculations without any evidence.
 
My advice, for what it is worth is learn about Jesus from Jesus himself. Did he make any of these claims? No.
 
By any chance did the OP buy this book at Borders? This sounds like more of that old DaVinci Code and Priory of Sion stuff rehashed. The so-called Priory of Sion of which Jean Genet was a member was founded in 1947 albeit they claim to be an ancient secret society with Da Vinci as one of their members. They rose to fame when the head of their group “found” an ancient manuscript in a Paris library showing their existance and linking them to various groups with masonic and illuminati links preaching all of Brown’s heresies. Their documents were proven to be a forgery by expert archeologists and art historians. The Marovingian clan of France who were Knights Templars also produced gnostic documents to forge their claim of royal blood through the house of King David (Jesus) and his supposed wife Mary Magdalene whom they claim was maligned by the church and who had a daughter who was the original matriarch of their line. The unfortunate problem with the Marovingians is that their line has all but vanished so a great future king or queen is kind of out of the picture. Too bad for them, good candidate for the anti-Christ and destroying traditional Christianity in the process.
Perhaps the OP should skip the pseudo-history backed up with tertiary or further off sources and read some real stuff. As they say in Cursillo “Don’t read good books read the best books.”👍
 
To the OP re: the gospel of John, my reply would be this.

The Catholic Church does not base its belief in or its understanding of the crucifixion on John’s gospel’s–or any of the synoptic gospels’, for that matter–description of it, or lack thereof.

The gospels were chosen for the canon because they supported the faith, not the other way around. Remember, even the writings of Paul preceded and influenced the gospels. The transformative power of the crucifixion, resurrection were seen in the writings of Paul long before Matthew, Mark or Luke wrote about these things. And the transformative power of the Eucharist was seen in the writings of Paul long before John gave his exposition in the Sixth chapter of his gospel.
 
scottywolf777 said:
By any chance did the OP buy this book at Borders? This sounds like more of that old DaVinci Code and Priory of Sion stuff rehashed. The so-called Priory of Sion of which Jean Genet was a member was founded in 1947 albeit they claim to be an ancient secret society with Da Vinci as one of their members. They rose to fame when the head of their group “found” an ancient manuscript in a Paris library showing their existance and linking them to various groups with masonic and illuminati links preaching all of Brown’s heresies. Their documents were proven to be a forgery by expert archeologists and art historians. The Marovingian clan of France who were Knights Templars also produced gnostic documents to forge their claim of royal blood through the house of King David (Jesus) and his supposed wife Mary Magdalene whom they claim was maligned by the church and who had a daughter who was the original matriarch of their line. The unfortunate problem with the Marovingians is that their line has all but vanished so a great future king or queen is kind of out of the picture. Too bad for them, good candidate for the anti-Christ and destroying traditional Christianity in the process.
Perhaps the OP should skip the pseudo-history backed up with tertiary or further off sources and read some real stuff. As they say in Cursillo “Don’t read good books read the best books.”👍
Click to expand...
In reference to the DaVinci Code and the Priory of Sion, my Dad was a student of DaVinci’s life and works. He researched DaVinci thoroughly and left no stone unturned in
his research. One thing that was evident was that DaVinci DID NOT belong to any secret societies, let alone the Priory of Sion. At the time, his benefactors, who supplied him with funds for his research and experiments, required him not to belong to any of these organi-
zations. To do so, if found out, would not only result in the termination of funds, but also was an insult to the benefactor, and as such, DaVinci would have been subject to torture as punishment, and even death, for breaking the trust. So, I would rather believe my Dad’s
resultant research than any thing published by Brown.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
Thank you all for your posts. We are all im agreement that these so called “proof” books are nothing but elaborate fiction.

My only fear is that those that are weak in the faith ( Catholic or other ) would tend to believe these stories and trend towards Gnosticism, which would eventually lead to the practice of magic, witchcraft and all that follows. If they do, then their souls are in peril.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
SonofMonica said:
To the OP re: the gospel of John, my reply would be this.

The Catholic Church does not base its belief in or its understanding of the crucifixion on John’s gospel’s–or any of the synoptic gospels’, for that matter–description of it, or lack thereof.

The gospels were chosen for the canon because they supported the faith, not the other way around. Remember, even the writings of Paul preceded and influenced the gospels. The transformative power of the crucifixion, resurrection were seen in the writings of Paul long before Matthew, Mark or Luke wrote about these things. And the transformative power of the Eucharist was seen in the writings of Paul long before John gave his exposition in the Sixth chapter of his gospel.
Click to expand...
The gospel of Mark is considered the most reliable text in your narrative. I would not use the argument you are using with Paul if I were you. That is a really good reason to be skeptical of the entire catholic church having an a priori disposition when assembling the texts. In fact, I have seen athiests propose this as a reason to discount the narrative. Paul is a very controversial figure, but I don’t expect you to feel that way about him. He just is.
 
DonLeon said:
Thank you all for your posts. We are all im agreement that these so called “proof” books are nothing but elaborate fiction.

My only fear is that those that are weak in the faith ( Catholic or other ) would tend to believe these stories and trend towards Gnosticism, which would eventually lead to the practice of magic, witchcraft and all that follows. If they do, then their souls are in peril.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
Click to expand...
I am unaware of the connection with Gnosticism and magic/witchcraft. Can you tell me more about that?
 
DonLeon said:
I don’t know exactly where to post this thread so I thought this forum would be a good place. Also, I don’t know if this subject has been discussed before. If so, then I’m beating a dead horse with a wet noodle. If not then I would like to advance my comments on the subject,

I have just finished reading “The Jesus Papers” by Michael Baigent ( Harper-Collier ). It is a very interesting story the way it is presented and presents some real good arguments
that Jesus did not die on the cross, and that He was alive in 45 AD.
Click to expand...
Can you tell me what his arguments are?
He also presents arguments and “evidence” that Jesus’ hidden years were spent in Egypt studying the ways of the mystics, etc. and that jesus married Mary Magdalene.
Click to expand...
What is his evidence for this?
The only thing that stops me from accepting all of this is that not only is it assumption and conjecture ( evident in the use of some of his phrases ), but he seems to be advancing Gnosticism. As we know, Gnosis ( knowledge ) is secret and only for the elect.
To me, this raises a RED flag. Besides, there are also many unanswered questions, such as “if the Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John, then why didn’t he
reveal that Jesus didn’t die on the cross?”. This and many other questions seem to be ignored.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t sound like a very honest book if it does not deal with the counter evidence. Sounds like this is a money grabbing scheme.

God bless,
Ut
 
StrawberryJam said:
I am unaware of the connection with Gnosticism and magic/witchcraft. Can you tell me more about that?
Click to expand...
Gnosticism (Gnosis: knowledge) is based primarily on ancient Egytian mysticism, which in its teachings delved into magic and what we call witchcraft. It had so called “secrets” in
which only the “perfect ones”, or the “elect”, knew. These “secrets” could not be revealed or discussed with anyone but another “perfect”. Doing otherwise could bring instant
death. Among these “secrets” is the Egyptian “Book of The Dead” which contains magic
spells.

Since Gnosticism ( a heresy ) is so based, it also has “secrets” which only a “perfect”
can know. There are myriads of forms of forms of gnosticism and many do delve into and
teach magical fomulae and spells and also delve into witchcraft. To become a “perfect”
or “chosen one” can take up to a life time of a so called study of gnosis.

PAX DOMINI :signof cross:
 
utunumsint said:
Can you tell me what his arguments are?

What is his evidence for this?

It doesn’t sound like a very honest book if it does not deal with the counter evidence. Sounds like this is a money grabbing scheme.

God bless,
Ut
Click to expand...
His main argument is that Jesus did not die on the cross, that He was alive and well in
45ad, and that He loved and married Mary Magdalen, had children and moved to France.
He goes in a round about way to present his argument and so-called “proofs” ( which
raises more questions ). The basis of his “proof” is the so called “Jesus Papers” ( which
he says are witten in Aramaic and had translated ), that he actually saw the papers but now they are no longer available for viewing ( very convenient ). The “papers” were dated
by two archaeologists, who are now dead. He wrote the book to warn the people of the
great wrong and cover-up by the Vatican. That the Vatican would lose its power over the people if the “truth” ever came out. I think that the book is a great story of fiction. The
only problem is that Christians of weak faith may and can believe what’s written to the
detriment of losing their souls. In my opinion, men like this are only interested in the
almighty dollar and as to how much they can roil the waters to make that dollar.

Paraphrasing Archbihop Sheen, " a lie is still a lie, even if everyone believes it, and the truth is still the truth, even if no one believes it!"

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
If Jesus had children, don’t you think he would have been sinning to leave them here without a father?

Let’s just rule that one out based on common sense.
 
Pons said:
Baigent is in fact one of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail which Dan Brown used for his novel. Here’s a good summary of what’s wrong with it. The Gnostics were anti-sex. Then how could Jesus be truly Gnostic and have children?
Click to expand...
I was talking with a friend who is a died in the wool, foaming at the mouth,card carrying atheist and he even thinks the whole Dan Brown, Holy Blood Holy Grail , Merovongian conspiracy to be pure bunk. I wouldn’t quote his exact words here because the profanity filter would go into melt down.:coolinoff:
 
scottywolf777 said:
I was talking with a friend who is a died in the wool, foaming at the mouth,card carrying atheist and he even thinks the whole Dan Brown, Holy Blood Holy Grail , Merovongian conspiracy to be pure bunk. I wouldn’t quote his exact words here because the profanity filter would go into melt down.:coolinoff:
Click to expand...
Because it is filled with historical misrepresentations. That is why your athiest friend can pick it apart.
You don’t need belief to see lies about history.:mad:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top