File: 1746018899662.png (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB PNG

>>18432782
Not at all! He was investigated at the time , by the people best in a position to know whether he was legitimate or not, and both came away believing that he had genuine divine power. By two world leaders, in fact.

One was the Roman Emperor Tiberius. Based on reports - including from his own governor Pilate - he concluded that Jesus had worked genuine miracles. Tiberius wrote in one of his letters that "We had already heard several persons relate these facts; Pilate has officially informed us of the miracles of Jesus."

Even more striking is the case of King Abgar of Osroene. Not only did he believe the reports, but he personally wrote to Jesus asking to be healed - and after the resurrection, one of the Apostles went and healed him. These letters were preserved in the official Edessan archives and later published by early historians.

Eusebius records the correspondence and its miraculous result: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250101.htm

And the royal Armenian historian Movses Khorenatsi confirms it in his own account as well: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0859.htm

So based on contemporary investigations by state intelligence apparati: not a LARPer, 100% legit

File: 1758835240382514.jpg (79.4 KB)

79.4 KB JPG

>>18432791

>>18432791
Is Movses Khorenatsi really confirming it if he was just copying Eusebius? He would've been writing a century later give or take, and from several sources it seems like Movses explicitly used Eusebius as one of his sources (the newadvent website seems to have a greatly abridged version of his history that excludes this), and there's reason to suspect he used Eusebius a lot more heavily than he admits.
https://www.kroraina.com/armen/thomson_4a.html
>But one's confidence in Moses' "archives" is even more shaken by the patently false claim in II 10 that Eusebius in his Church History (book 113) bears withness to the existence in Edessa of archives dealing with Armenia, for Eusebius merely says that...
>...It is true that Moses claims to be basing his narrative here on Africanus the chronographer and merely quotes Eusebius for corroboration...
>Moses then proceeds to quote several of the Greek chroniclers but without informing his readers that he has read them at second hand in Eusebius' Chronicle
>...But after mentioning the former, Moses then quotes extensively from Eusebius' Chronicle...

>>18432782
He didn't exist.

>>18432825
>Is Movses Khorenatsi really confirming it if he was just copying Eusebius?
He's confirming it. He too went to the same archive. He says "Abgar, having written this letter, placed a copy of it, with copies of the other letters, in his archives" (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0859.htm). And in Book 2 chapter 10 (https://historians.armeniancathedral.org/book/t06Khor2_10.htm) he tells us that he had been to that very archive, saying one of his sourced had "transcribed everything from the charters of the archive of Edessa...Let no one doubt this, for we have seen that archive with our own eyes".

As you can see in the original link, he also transcribes many more of Abgar's letters, including those between him and Tiberius that the scholarly article at https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.31826/hug-2011-090104/html argues are authentic so far as their historical core goes.

>the newadvent website seems to have a greatly abridged version of his history that excludes this
Yeah reading Khorenatsi can be a bit irksome since there's no great, free, full English translation available right now. https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Armenians_(Movses_Khorenatsi) is the best and displays all of Book 1, but it's still a work in progress for the whole thing

>and there's reason to suspect he used Eusebius a lot more heavily than he admits
Bear in mind your link is quoting Robert Thompson, who's acknowledged as a bizarrely rabid hater of Khorenatsi. Like the introduction at https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Armenians_(Movses_Khorenatsi) says:

"the existing standard translation by Robert Thomson is out-of-print, available nowhere online, and has been harshly criticized in the strongest terms as 'biased and anti-scientific', with even a suggestion of Thomson 'intentionally aiming to mislead the reader' in his translation being raised[11]; and part of his translation described as 'tantamount to corrupting the text'."

>>18432834
Between a Harvard professor and people accusing him of being a bizarrely rabid hater of a random ancient historian, where they might be motivated to say so to defend evidence in favor of their religion, I think it makes sense to guess that the Harvard professor is closer to the mark. As Jesus allegedly commends Abgar, I believe although I have not seen (in the possibility of a thorough debunking of this letter's authenticity).

>>18432851
Basically every scholar of Armenian studies who I have read looks at Thompson's work like o_õ

The Wikipedia article on Khorenatsi has an entire section dedicated almost entirely to exactly that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movses_Khorenatsi#Modern_studies

I suspect it has to do with Thompson being educated in Turkey and got his rabid hatred for Khorenatsi's history there (you know how Turks are with Armenians) because he _HATES_ Khorenatsi. You can see hints of the political motivation in how Thompson consistently mistranslates "Atropatene" in Khorenatsi's work as "Azerbaijan".

The Amazon review of his translation (hard to find now, only one for over $1000) at https://www.amazon.com/-/es/History-Armenians-Moses-Khorenatsi/dp/0674395719 is very accurate:

"the translator and his footnotes are unbearable. For hundreds of pages in the footnotes he goes on and on trying to make Movses sound like an unreliable hack, or giving absolutely pointless references to obscure works. If anything takes a moment's thought, then according to the footnotes it is an error"

Basically everyone who reads Thompson's work says "what is up with this guy". I would compare it to a world where the New Testament was an obscure document, and the main scholar on it for many years was Richard Carrier. Sometimes you simply get people with weird bones to pick and that's why they specialize in something.

Now let's look at what he actually says:

"the patently false claim in II 10 that Eusebius in his Church History (book 113) bears withness to the existence in Edessa of archives dealing with Armenia"

Which makes no sense. Eusebius outright says there that the archives "contain accounts of ancient times" and also "the deeds of Abgar", an Armenian king. I suppose technically Eusebius doesn't explicitly directly spell out that the archives talk about ancient Armenian kings but that's obvious, is Thompson trying to say it talks about "ancient times" somewhere else or what?

>>18432791
You're a moron. So much more reliable historians never mentioned that, but some obscure Armenian guy wrote it and you believe it without any evidence? There's precisely zero evidence that Tiberius mentioned Jesus anywhere.

Just how fucking stupid you people are? Ancient historians made shit up all the time. Why would Pilate sentence Jesus to death if he believed he has super powers? He never gave a shit about Jews, he was literally called back to Rome because of his brutality.

>>18432979
>I would compare it to a world where the New Testament was an obscure document, and the main scholar on it for many years was Richard Carrier.
So a world where the likely truth is arrived at much more quickly because religiously motivated reasoning doesn't get in the way as much? I'm starting to trust this Thomson guy more and more despite still barely having read any of him. I should probably still withold judgment, but the Carrier comparison is 100% a point in Thomson's favor to my mind.

>>18433049
>So much more reliable historians never mentioned that
Who else consulted this archive where these documents were kept?

We have better sources for this than we do entire Roman Emperors. For Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, Lucius Verus, and Commodus you basically have just two historical sources for a big picture view of their reign: Cassius Dio and the Historia Augusta, both of which are really bad sources in their own ways.

Eusebius and Khorenatsi citing original documents from official archives is leagues better than we have for narratives of the reigns of any of these entire Emperors!

>some obscure Armenian guy wrote it
Khorenatsi was the official historian to the prince of Armenia, Sahak Bagratuni. He is absolutely indispensable for Armenian history and our only historian from the Persian Empire who wrote a history of the Persian Empire. Calling him obscure denigrates only yourself.

>There's precisely zero evidence that Tiberius mentioned Jesus anywhere.
...Other than letters between heads of state preserved in government archives?

>Ancient historians made shit up all the time.
This is a non-statement. You could use it to handwave away absolutely any historical evidence.

>Why would Pilate sentence Jesus to death if he believed he has super powers?
The Gospels make it pretty clear: he gave in to pressure and threats.

>He never gave a shit about Jews, he was literally called back to Rome because of his brutality.
...So you point out he was a brutal man, and then ask "so why would he crucify somebody"?

>>18433057
The Carrier comparison is essentially "guy with a bone to pick deliberately studying something he hates who other scholars think is a radical nut".

>>18433098
Armenia is irrelevant.

And yeah, I'm asking why Pilate was more afraid of Jews than of a man he believed has super powers. And why he wasn't afraid of Jews when he ordered the massacre of samaritans.

How did you schizos even find this website?

>>18433103
>Armenia is irrelevant.
...Not if we're talking about an Armenian king?

>And yeah, I'm asking why Pilate was more afraid of Jews than of a man he believed has super powers.
Jesus never hurt a single person. Tiberius sure did and the Jews were accusing Pilate of being treasonous if he refused to kill Jesus.

Pilate seems to have seen it more as he let them kill Jesus rather than Pilate himself being responsible. Hence washing his hands of it.

>And why he wasn't afraid of Jews when he ordered the massacre of samaritans.
Jews hated Samaritans anon

>>18433108
No, even Armenian king is irrelevant. You still didn't answer my question. If Pilate believed that Jesus have super powers why wasn't he afraid to kill him? The samaritan massacre was just an example, he was recalled to Rome after this.

Why do you believe in some fringe nonsense like this? Let me guess, you are Armenian and of course Christian, so criticak thinking is beyond your understanding?

Do you believe that hagiographies are actually factual? That all those miracles were real?

There are people who believe that the Pilate cycle is real. I think social media made all those fringe theories popular again.

From an essay written by Lucian of Samosita, a 2nd century syriac-greek discussing how a known con man became a christian leader to get rich off of christian indifference to wealth, and was imprisoned for professing christianity
>The activity of these people, in dealing with any matter that affects their community, is something extraordinary; they spare no trouble, no expense. Peregrinus, all this time, was making quite an income on the strength of his bondage; money came pouring in. You see, these misguided creatures[, the Christians,] start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sophist, and live after his laws. All this they take on trust, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property. Now an adroit, unscrupulous fellow, who has seen the world, has only to get among these simple souls, and his fortune is pretty soon made; he plays with them. . .The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day, – the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account
That descriotion of jesus as "the ceucified sophist" always stuck with me

>>18432782
Jesus moved to Japan where he settled in Shingō, Aomori Prefecture. He became a rice farmer, married a local woman, had daughters and died of natural causes at age 106. The narrative that he died on the cross is propaganda of the Catholic Church. In reality it was Jesus' brother Isukiri who died on the cross. This is the truth proven by testimonial and documented evidence.

>>18433139
He was acknowledged at least, as a wise teacher and while I know some people take umbridge of the description of the naked young man fleeing, no ancient account of Jesus derides his personality so it seems even in his own time, he was seen as good.

>>18433114
>even Armenian king is irrelevant
...When he's the one investigating Jesus because he's interested in getting a healing?

>You still didn't answer my question. If Pilate believed that Jesus have super powers why wasn't he afraid to kill him?
...I did answer? To reiterate:
"Jesus never hurt a single person. Tiberius sure did and the Jews were accusing Pilate of being treasonous if he refused to kill Jesus.

Pilate seems to have seen it more as he let them kill Jesus rather than Pilate himself being responsible. Hence washing his hands of it."

And this is like saying "if people believed witches had supernatural powers, why weren't they afraid to kill them?". If anything, historically, people believing you have powers makes them MORE likely to kill you!

>The samaritan massacre was just an example
...of Pilate killing people, which you seem to be of the opinion was out of character for him

>Do you believe that hagiographies are actually factual?
These are completely different. These letters are official correspondence between heads of state preserved in a central government archive.

>>18433422
Not him but is there a book i can read compiling sources like here >>18432791

>>18433427
I don't know of a full book, but https://www.amazon.com/Christians-Arsenal-Samuel-M-Breckenridge-ebook/dp/B09V2F25Q9/ has a large section dedicated to this

lots of jewish lies ITT

File: Juba the Botanist.png (1 MB)

1 MB PNG

>>18432782
>>18432793
Jesus was a member of the Essenes, an isolationist physician priesthood practicing similar stuff as later medicinal monastics of europe.
Jesus' father was Juba II, the brief 2nd husband of Glaphyra (originmother of the christian armenians) whom protected her from the Herods. Juba II dabbled in medicine himself, and his personal physician was the little brother of Augustus' own famous personal physician, - because Juba II had been adopted by Julius Caesar/Augustus' family. Real medicine was not a "real thing" back then, so if anyone gave you a treatment without also doing some bullshit voodoo ritual or chant audibly dedicated to a specific God, you were seen as a magician. Jesus was an essene physician whom had access to the literal cutting edge medicine of Egypt/Rome, because his father was the singular man who worked to connect all the medicinal priesthoods, because of his interest in botany.

>>18433740
If this is true, hypothetically, was Jesus' words actually him just trying to get people to allow him to treat them or did he genuinely believe what he was saying?

File: Know Your History or get teabagged by media and religion.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

>>18433839
Jesus was an essene who treated people for physical ailments plus spoke about morals through stories. This much anyone agrees with. Wether you want to categorize his words through a modern irrelevant lens to smear or discredit him or to admit that our current context provides zero help in trying to interpret the reality behind Jesus' third-hand censored "quotes" is up to you.
My post simply points out the highly relevant people that many people refrain from ever mentioning, and what these peoples' and Jesus' own job description was.
Given who Juba II was, which you can verify for yourself, all of Jesus' words make sense including him talking about "his fathers legions". Wether one looks at his words through the lens of Jesus talking about the theological God as he relates to scripture or his real fathers role as he related to Judea's imminent fall, all his words make sense.
If your father happens to be the husband of the discontinued pharaoh dynastys daughter (Cleopatra Selene II), any talk about your own identity versus theology would be doomed to be riddled with misconceptions and erroneous syncretisms among people trying to stitch together your stories.
People in Jesus' time were still worshipping Juba II and Cleopatra Selene II as Gods' representatives on earth. Was Jesus supposed to deny the fact that his father was "God" to the faces of people who knew who Juba II was. And ontop of this, Jesus also knew that the "Messiah" terminology was minted on his specific family, plus that he was indeed legally adopted into the tribe who venerated his family? Jesus handled the situation just fine by focusing his life and legacy back on theology and how the Pharisees would have a very hard time ahead if they didn't practice what their scriptures preached.
The Massylii tribe are authentically part of the exact same Osirian faith which Israel were part of. Jesus couldn't have distanced himself from Israels Messiah mythos without lying about his heritage.

>>18433975
Seems like a genuinelly smart and grounded man. Is there books supporting what you are saying? Cause at a minimum we can see Jesus as a brilliant doctor and wise man.

File: Aw Lawd.png (1.2 MB)

1.2 MB PNG

>>18434061
>Is there books supporting what you are saying?
Considering Pope Leo XIV is the first ever Augustinian Pope and that he also just the other day was the first Pope to visit Algeria (St. Augustine and Juba II's birthplace. Funfact; St. Augustine was the son of a christian berber mother and was buried in Hippo Regius/Annaba, which is where Juba II was born.), I'd be surprised if he didn't at the minimum grant secret access to any hypothetical preserved books of Juba II in order for his works to be included in other period-play movies or entertainment. He absolutely knows who Juba II is. Only question is wether they're in posession of anything worth revealing, or wether they're mature enough to even cryptically discuss it through popculture without disclosing their involvement.
I for sure know the average Joes haven't even considered looking into this, because they don't even know Juba II existed.