isn't there a video on here of dr. ehrman saying that there's zero evidence for this? at one of the q&a sessions at a lecture or something.

historians are split in a number of ways concerning a factual account of jesus.
there are some that even postulate that jesus never existed at all while others provide evidence that he traveled to greece.
the most common is that he resided with the assienes.
the buddhist scenario is actually pretty popular.

but yeah..your right that there is not much in the way of "evidence".
i just thought this was interesting.i was not making a statement by posting just wanted to share.

Oh, I love watching these types of shows love the subject matter I general... and when these types of shows are on the discovery channel, they often have my music I them

as a christian from a fundamentalist background

resurrection is a difficult subject.
personally i believe that the gospels are distorted.
gospel of luke isn't exactly a unequivocal advocate of the ressurection.
really the resurrection is about the savior. The savior has to come back. do you understand?

watched the end of the vid. man i did not expect that. jesus goes off to tibet and lives to 80? wow.

i have to say, without the crucifiction, christianity falls apart. You wouldn't worship someone who had a bad weekend with roman soldiers and then slept it off.

so they're wrong. you don't have christianity without someone actually paying a price.

Personally I don't belivieve that christ rose from the dead, rather, i believe, that the soul of christ HAS to come back. anyhow. thanks for the brainfuck enoch. cheers

Jeebus, the most successful troll.

Moving this video to enoch's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

Oh please, everyone knows Jesus came to the USA to form Mormonism after the crucifixion!

*eyeroll

There is no evidence for this. This whole thing started because someone claimed to find documentation at an isolated monestary (i think in tibet) of Jesus' missing years. It was never confirmed, nor did anyone ever see the documents.

This is just yet another lie trying to cast doubt on the resurrection, so people won't believe that Christ was who He said He was. A lot of people can't make up their mind about Jesus..so they say He was a good man who was very wise. Well, if you read the scriptures you can't believe that. Jesus said outright He was God, and that He is the judge of the living and the dead..so either he is a liar or insane, or He was telling the truth and is our Lord and Savior. There isn't any middle ground there.

>> ^shinyblurry:

There is no evidence for this. This whole thing started because someone claimed to find documentation at an isolated monestary (i think in tibet) of Jesus' missing years. It was never confirmed, nor did anyone ever see the documents.
This is just yet another lie trying to cast doubt on the resurrection, so people won't believe that Christ was who He said He was. A lot of people can't make up their mind about Jesus..so they say He was a good man who was very wise. Well, if you read the scriptures you can't believe that. Jesus said outright He was God, and that He is the judge of the living and the dead..so either he is a liar or insane, or He was telling the truth and is our Lord and Savior. There isn't any middle ground there.


no shinyblurry.
there is no middle ground for you ,which has nothing to do with faith or belief in jesus but is entirely about YOUR belief in doctrine and dogma.
267 books of the bible..all by biblical authors yet only 66 IN the bible (KJV) or 73 (if you are catholic).
164 revisions.
over 22,000 mistranslations: CONFIRMED.
josephius flavius:debunked.
i can do this all day scooter.

as for jesus's life after resurrection i tend to agree that it is speculation based on rumor and tidbits of conjecture but the gospels themselves are based in many instances in the exact same way.
the bible is an incomplete text.
we now have:
the gospel of judas.
the gospel of mary.
the gospel of james.
the gospel of thomas.
and so much more but the church will never recognize anything apart from what has been canonized since 325 A.D.jesus didnt build the church..constantine,hippo and carthage did..nicean council 325 A.D.before that christianity would be unrecognizable to you or any other christian on the planet.

your comments have an evangelical flavor to them so i know my comment will be ignored because you are self-righteous in your own certitude based on a seriously flawed scriptural text.
any perceived deviation from canonized scripture is to be viewed as coming from satan and therefore a lie.
how very....dark ages of you.

only a fundamentalist or evangelical would view digging for the truth as a way to confuse and cast doubt.
is your faith based in jesus?
or a book?
because from what i have seen of your comments it is the latter.

well.you go have fun with that.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

@enoch great historical summary there.

Actually my belief is based primarily in personal revelation, but thanks for playing...and yes, you could make a fool out of yourself all day, that's true. The problem with your theory here about the translations is, historians have the original manuscripts the early church used. We know exactly what those bibles looked like and what they said. Perhaps you could try a little research before you correct someone who knows a lot more about bible history than you do. And I'm sorry but almost all of those so-called books you're talking about are gnostic texts. Here's a hint, gnostics aren't really Christians, they're Universalists. The ONLY one out of any of the arbitrary number you pulled out of thin air that maybe should have been in the bible is the gospel of Thomas.

I happen to research these things all the time, and I had already researched this particular case a long time ago. I came to the conclusion, as has practically every other reseacher and historian, that it was a hoax, flat out. I read a little more into it because I see the spiritual side of it, but it is still a hoax all the same. Just as you can say this to me using the nickname "enoch" without any irony, you apparently haven't spent more than 10 seconds verifying what you say has any relevence.

>> ^enoch:
>>

no shinyblurry.
there is no middle ground for you ,which has nothing to do with faith or belief in jesus but is entirely about YOUR belief in doctrine and dogma.
267 books of the bible..all by biblical authors yet only 66 IN the bible (KJV) or 73 (if you are catholic).
164 revisions.
over 22,000 mistranslations: CONFIRMED.
josephius flavius:debunked.
i can do this all day scooter.

as for jesus's life after resurrection i tend to agree that it is speculation based on rumor and tidbits of conjecture but the gospels themselves are based in many instances in the exact same way.
the bible is an incomplete text.
we now have:
the gospel of judas.
the gospel of mary.
the gospel of james.
the gospel of thomas.
and so much more but the church will never recognize anything apart from what has been canonized since 325 A.D.jesus didnt build the church..constantine,hippo and carthage did..nicean council 325 A.D.before that christianity would be unrecognizable to you or any other christian on the planet.

your comments have an evangelical flavor to them so i know my comment will be ignored because you are self-righteous in your own certitude based on a seriously flawed scriptural text.
any perceived deviation from canonized scripture is to be viewed as coming from satan and therefore a lie.
how very....dark ages of you.

only a fundamentalist or evangelical would view digging for the truth as a way to confuse and cast doubt.
is your faith based in jesus?
or a book?
because from what i have seen of your comments it is the latter.

well.you go have fun with that.

dag said: enoch..great historical summary there.

No, it actually was quite terrible.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Yes, quite terribly accurate. >> ^shinyblurry:

dag said: enoch..great historical summary there.
No, it actually was quite terrible.

>> ^shinyblurry:

dag said: enoch..great historical summary there.
No, it actually was quite terrible.


you just make my point with your comments.
i did not use the phrase "self-righteous" as a slight but rather as a statement.
one in which you have confirmed over and over and over.
your presumption and hubris are appalling.
you are a troll of the worst kind because you are already convinced of your righteousness and everybody you interact with are clueless to the truth you hold.
maybe they would listen more if you were not so condescending.

personal revelation?
great but how does that dismiss my evangelical statement?
gnostic gospels?
sure..but how does that take away from my premise that the more information we have the clearer the picture becomes?
jesus may possibly have studied with buddhist monks.
how does that take away from his teachings?
or his sacrifice?
it takes away NOTHING.

and instead of discussing something that is obviously important to you..
what do you decide to do instead?
make veiled insults towards me and ignore my argument entirely.

you are a child who is convinced of his own certitude and throws hissy fits when called on his own bullshit.
i do not know you.
i do not know if you have studied for years or got your information on the back of a cracker jack box.
i only know what you reveal here by your comments and you come across as a condescending know-it-all who takes any disagreement personally and attacks whomever has the audacity to direct any disagreement your way.

will you take this comment as it is intended and maybe perform some introspective thinking?
or will you behave.... as i have witnessed...like a spoiled child?
time will tell i guess but i feel i should be clear here...
i dont really care what you do.

>> ^enoch:
>> ^shinyblurry:
dag said: enoch..great historical summary there.
No, it actually was quite terrible.

you just make my point with your comments.
i did not use the phrase "self-righteous" as a slight but rather as a statement.
one in which you have confirmed over and over and over.
your presumption and hubris are appalling.
you are a troll of the worst kind because you are already convinced of your righteousness and everybody you interact with are clueless to the truth you hold.
maybe they would listen more if you were not so condescending.
personal revelation?
great but how does that dismiss my evangelical statement?
gnostic gospels?
sure..but how does that take away from my premise that the more information we have the clearer the picture becomes?
jesus may possibly have studied with buddhist monks.
how does that take away from his teachings?
or his sacrifice?
it takes away NOTHING.
and instead of discussing something that is obviously important to you..
what do you decide to do instead?
make veiled insults towards me and ignore my argument entirely.
you are a child who is convinced of his own certitude and throws hissy fits when called on his own bullshit.
i do not know you.
i do not know if you have studied for years or got your information on the back of a cracker jack box.
i only know what you reveal here by your comments and you come across as a condescending know-it-all who takes any disagreement personally and attacks whomever has the audacity to direct any disagreement your way.
will you take this comment as it is intended and maybe perform some introspective thinking?
or will you behave.... as i have witnessed...like a spoiled child?
time will tell i guess but i feel i should be clear here...
i dont really care what you do.


Wow, emote much? See what actually happened here is that you posted a bunch of information that wasn't true (while being rude and childish to boot), and I corrected you. Now, you send me a comment filled with personal attacks and call me immature. I'm guessing you're probably..15? Give me a break. Go do your homework and clean your room while you're at it.

uh..yeah.
thanks for clearing that up.

throwing hissy fits for the lord, just like jesus wanted you to

>> ^marinara:

i have to say, without the crucifiction, christianity falls apart. You wouldn't worship someone who had a bad weekend with roman soldiers and then slept it off.

Am I alone in thinking that's a huge misstep on the part of Christianity? All of Jesus' teachings and messages are suddenly meaningless because he didn't come back from the dead?

I feel like that's missing the forest for the trees.

To be believed or not, I find these sorts of stories to be a lot of fun.

If you agree, I suggest getting hold of a copy of Gabriel Knight 3, one of the last classic Sierra adventure games from 1999. It deals heavily with the themes of the Knights Templar, Bérenger Saunière, and Rennes-le-Château.

Oh, and vampires.

4 years later a <sarcasm>largely unknown</sarcasm> book would appear with a very similar plot: The Davinci Code.

Also, sorry enoch but this is a dupe. The original is right there at the bottom of the page in the related videos.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Did-Jesus-Die-BBC-4-Documentary

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by xxovercastxx. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

...you are just confusing the issue with all those facts!

Blasphemer!

>> ^enoch:

>> ^shinyblurry:
There is no evidence for this. This whole thing started because someone claimed to find documentation at an isolated monestary (i think in tibet) of Jesus' missing years. It was never confirmed, nor did anyone ever see the documents.
This is just yet another lie trying to cast doubt on the resurrection, so people won't believe that Christ was who He said He was. A lot of people can't make up their mind about Jesus..so they say He was a good man who was very wise. Well, if you read the scriptures you can't believe that. Jesus said outright He was God, and that He is the judge of the living and the dead..so either he is a liar or insane, or He was telling the truth and is our Lord and Savior. There isn't any middle ground there.

no shinyblurry.
there is no middle ground for you ,which has nothing to do with faith or belief in jesus but is entirely about YOUR belief in doctrine and dogma.
267 books of the bible..all by biblical authors yet only 66 IN the bible (KJV) or 73 (if you are catholic).
164 revisions.
over 22,000 mistranslations: CONFIRMED.
josephius flavius:debunked.
i can do this all day scooter.
as for jesus's life after resurrection i tend to agree that it is speculation based on rumor and tidbits of conjecture but the gospels themselves are based in many instances in the exact same way.
the bible is an incomplete text.
we now have:
the gospel of judas.
the gospel of mary.
the gospel of james.
the gospel of thomas.
and so much more but the church will never recognize anything apart from what has been canonized since 325 A.D.jesus didnt build the church..constantine,hippo and carthage did..nicean council 325 A.D.before that christianity would be unrecognizable to you or any other christian on the planet.
your comments have an evangelical flavor to them so i know my comment will be ignored because you are self-righteous in your own certitude based on a seriously flawed scriptural text.
any perceived deviation from canonized scripture is to be viewed as coming from satan and therefore a lie.
how very....dark ages of you.
only a fundamentalist or evangelical would view digging for the truth as a way to confuse and cast doubt.
is your faith based in jesus?
or a book?
because from what i have seen of your comments it is the latter.
well.you go have fun with that.

With all due respect, while there is indeed overlap, they are not the same.
>> ^xxovercastxx:

Also, sorry enoch but this is a dupe. The original is right there at the bottom of the page in the related videos.
dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Did-Jesus-Die-BBC-4-Documentary

The differences amount to...
1) The original has little transitions where they read passages from the Bible, the Torah, etc. They are missing in this edit.
2) When the man from Kashmir is explaining Issa, he's dubbed in this version. In the original, he's got subtitles.

Neither of these constitute added value. If anything, this is inferior to the original since it's missing 10 minutes of footage.

>> ^chicchorea:

With all due respect, while there is indeed overlap, they are not the same.
>> ^xxovercastxx:
Also, sorry enoch but this is a dupe. The original is right there at the bottom of the page in the related videos.
dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Did-Jesus-Die-BBC-4-Documentary

>> ^xxovercastxx:

Also, sorry enoch but this is a dupe. The original is right there at the bottom of the page in the related videos.
dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Did-Jesus-Die-BBC-4-Documentary


meh../shrugs.
if someone else sees it that way they are free to dupe.
i thought this was interesting and was unaware of the other video.
the other video is the complete show and the points you make in comparison are valid but technically this is not a duplicate but rather a clip.
my feelings will not be hurt if someone dupes this video nor will i harbor any ill will to anybody who does.
it is a video..a good one...but still a video and i have no emotional attachment to it.
it started a great conversation and it was again seen by many who may have also been unaware of the existence of the other video.
mission accomplished.

This was great. It really gets interesting at the 39:00 minute mark. I'd never heard any of that before.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Sunday, June 19th, 2011 9:19am PDT - promote requested by doogle.

3 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

Replaced video embed code with backup #7852 (supplied by member lucky760) - embed replaced by member lucky760.