THE NICODEMUS DISORDER – THE BLIND GUIDE THE BLIND – Jesus simply just survived the crucifixion and it explains a lot.
According to the quite anti-Jewish and antisemite Gospel of John, in the chapter 3, Jesus / Yeshua / Yoshke told it to the Sanhedrin-member Nicodemus that you do not have too much spiritual knowledge though you are a teacher of Israel, and as such you should know almost everything about how to be born again in order to enter Heaven.
Of course, it is not known whether this encounter really happened or not. Especially, when most scholars think that Nicodemus lived a generation later, as Nicodemus ben Gurion is mentioned by Josephus.
Although the answer Jesus/Yeshu / Yoshke gave in the Gospel is not completely wrong that someone must be spiritually reborn by two procedures. First is the water, which meant that the true repentence, symbolized by submerging in water, is necessary, which is eventually the T’shuva, which also meant returning to God by keeping all the 613 Torah commandments.
The second is the touch of the Holy Spirit, the so called Shekina, the presence of God in someone’s heart, which is eventually observing of the major commandment that You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. (The Shema, observing it rightfully out of Kavanah only.)
Nicodemus in the Gospel sympathized with the movement led by Jesus/Yeshu / Yoshke, nonetheless he became a by-Gospel- eternalized-statue of a blind leader though a benevolant one in this case, who, as a blind person, was not supposed to lead the similarly blind people into the pit.
The Nicodemus Disorder, where the blind lead the blind, was always and is still all over in the Christian church, and it will be one of the major Christian phenomenon till the very end of Christianity.
We must add that the historicity of the very existance of Nicodemus is questionable, though researchers think that someone like him lived way of decades later than Jesus, and that later lived person might be identified as Nicodemus. The Gospel of John is mixing up and turmixing events in a gnostic way to fulfill its agenda of hellenizing the unhellenizable.
Accusing a Sanhedrin member with not knowing anything of the spiritual world is a kind of anti-Judaism attack wrapped in a Hellenistic gentile storyline incorporated into a gentile story book called the Gospel of John.
However the Nicodemus Disorder is all over the globe, it covers the Earth like a giant cloud of pollution, in almost all churches, of all time. Especially the Easter season is very characteristic with parroting of blindfolding bunkums.
For example The Rt. Rev. Joey Royal, who is a suffragan bishop in the diocese of the Arctic, in the Anglican Church of Canada, wrote a counter-opinion piece in the Anglican Journal, titled The Resurrection Is Not All In Your Head , bashing some Rev. Wayne Holz, a Lutheran minister who dared to express his science based doubts of the bodily resurrection of Jesus /Yeshu/ Yoshke. Also beside scientists almost everybody knows that the dead do not usually resurrect.
Of course Holz tried to use some common sense to say approximately that we do not really know what happened, whatever happened regarding resurrecting from the dead, it might have been a spiritual-psychological event, but it was not a physical-biological-factual reality.
To suffragan bishop Royal, it looks like, this sounds like the denial of core Christian tenets. And he is right. It is the denial of a major Christian tenet which is ‘he is risen, indeed’.
However, here comes the right of Rev. Holz to question the physical factuality of the resurrection, because the very Christian pivotal tenet of the resurrection of Jesus/Yeshu/Yoshke is all bunkum. The most possible explanation of the Easter Sunday event that Jesus SURVIVED the crucifixion, and it was planned all the way.
Why the resurrection of Jesus is the cornerstone of Christianity ? Because everything goes back to Paul. Some say the Apostle Paul, otherwise he is the Apostate Paul. In a nutshell: Paul invented his own Gospel, he calls it “My Gospel” (Romans 2:16), an ideology, probably to justify his own actions.
… “in the day when God will judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ.” Romans 2:16
The Gospel he invented goes like this: God ordered that his Son as a sacrificial lamb would suffer the crucifixion, and by the power or the merit of his sacrifice whosoever believes in him, will gain forgiveness of sins and eternal life in Heaven. Nice, delusional theoretical construction, a fictional story without any proof.
However, Paul insists, that there is a proof of this, and the very proof is the resurrection of Jesus. He is proven only to be the Son of God, because of the very fact of his resurrection.
As Paul wrote it himself in his letter to the Romans in chapter one: ” concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord … “
and also in his first letter to the Corinthians chapter 15:
“14 If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, and your faith also is in vain. 15 Yes, we are also found false witnesses of God, because we testified about God that he raised up Christ, whom he didn’t raise up, if it is so that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead aren’t raised, neither has Christ been raised. 17 If Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain; you are still in your sins. “
In large, this Pauline view is echoed by bishop Royal as a standard “orthodox” tenet, almost like a creed. The following is quoted from the article of Anglican Journal as Bishop Royal wrote that : “If the dead aren’t raised, then our faith is in vain, and we may as well find another cause to which we can commit our lives. But if the dead are raised, and Jesus is the forerunner in resurrection life, then our hope is sturdy, because Jesus has defeated Satan and disarmed the powers of death and sin.”
However of course that the Apostate Paul is completely wrong. It means also that Bishop Royal is completely wrong as well, because of the blindfolded parroting of the agenda-having imbecility of Paul.
Rev. Holz has a point, just his answer is wrong as well, but even in his wrong answer he is too close to Bishop Royal’s view, because both clergymen is eventually defending the blindfolding message of the Chrisitian Church, which message is ultimately “made in Paul”.
Like, either physically or spiritually Jesus has risen, it is almost anyway, he is proven to be the Son of God. Whosever believes this or that method, but in the resurrection, they will have the forgiveness of their sins, and will enter Heaven, by the merit of the resurrection of Jesus.
However the Christian mythology is so mistaken that both ministers are blindfolded by it and both are wrong, because Jesus did not resurrect from the dead, but simply survived the crucifixion.
Beside of the early alleged witnesses of the resurrected Jesus, also Paul is adamant that not only that the resurrection is a fact, but he himself saw Jesus and talked to him on the road to Damascus. About Damascus everybody should know that Damascus was exactly the very codename of the Qumran, in the secretious writings of the community.
Most of the scholars and bishops state the same thing that Paul never met Jesus in life. However, there is a real chance for that, because a surviving Jesus having the cross stigmas on his body for life, hiding in the Nazerene settlements around the Mount Karmel or in the Qumran, could have really met Paul in person. Especially, when the Qumran settlements of the Essenes had the documented code name of Damascus itself, in their very Damascus Codex.
Technically Paul was not only a Roman citizen, but a Roman and Herodian agent to hunt down the Nazarenes, the followers of the Way.
When finally the decision was made to raid the Qumran, Paul headed not to the Syrian Damascus, but to Qumran Damascus. Thus, Jesus could have met Paul on the road in person, who saw a man, whose death was declared by the Roman authorithy with a lot of witnesses, with an executing squad. This person was obviously and professionally crucified and dead for sure. The only explanation what remained for Paul, that this person, Jesus was indeed resurrected from the dead.
According to the Acts Jesus indentified himself to Paul in chapter 9:
“But Saul, still breathing threats and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest,and asked for letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. As he traveled, it happened that he got close to Damascus, and suddenly a light from the sky shone around him. He fell on the earth, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”
He said, “Who are you, Lord?” The Lord said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.”
So let us see what logic says.
John the Baptist was an important person. The Herodean power-house wanted him dead for a great reason. Not only because a big crowd followed him, but he was born into a Zadokite priest dynasty, thus having a high-priestly authority claim, and also he had the reputation of being a true prophet. Even after his death he was revered and a couple of groups maintained to follow him exclusively, like the Mandaeans.
However, in large, his cousin, Jesus took it over, who even had a greater pedigree than John. First of all he had the same Zadokite priestly roots as John, but Jesus also claimed royal lineages. Either he was simply from the line of King David or he had Hashmonean roots or both.
There is also an unorthodox opinion, held by Robert Graves and others that Jesus was a son of the eldest son of Herod, Antipater II, and his second wife a high ranking Hashmonean princess.
Herod the great made Antipater II his only heir, though later he got him tried for treason and executed. Theory has it that his widow, being a daughter or granddaughter of the last Hasmonian King Antigonos II Mattathias and also being a so called Temple virgin raised in the Temple, held her pregnancy in a secret, fled and married Joseph. Of course they had to hide, exactly before the wrath of Herod the Great.
Whatever happened around his birth Pontius Pilate acknowledged the royalty claim from Jesus, yet he still publicly ordered the crucifixion, putting the reason of the death sentence on a tablet sign that this is Jesus Nazarenus the King of the Jews.
Interesting enough only the Herodian kings were defined as kings of the Jews, the title of the Messiah king was the King of Israel. Thus Pontius Pilate did not use a Messanic title but a Hashmonean or Herodian title for Jesus.
In the New Testament there are some clues in the very text that Jesus had a real chance to survive the ordeal of the crucifixion.
It is in the very New Testament that the wife of Pilate was a secret follower and she wanted to save him pushing her husband.
It looks that Jesus was from either a Davidic or Hashmonean or Herodean or mixed royal line, and it was acknowledged by his Roman death sentence, as the king of the Jews.
From some political angle to secretely spare the life of Jesus and to put him in the talons of a political card game, could have been seen feasible by Pilate. Also it is in the Gospel that first he even said that this man is innocent according to the Roman criminal code, and he tried to release him, thus even sparing him in a secret method was not that illegal from a Roman point of view.
The Roman centurion at the execution site might have been the same whose servant was healed by Jesus.
During the execution Jesus said I am thirsty, and they gave him a liquid in a sponge.
“After this, Jesus, seeing that all things were now finished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, said, “I am thirsty.” Now a vessel full of vinegar was set there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop, and brought it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished.” He bowed his head, and gave up his spirit.
John:19:28-30
It could have been even opium potion or whatever to help him enter into unconsciousness. And in the Gospel, it happened immediately after he received the drink.
They did it with the other prisoners beside Jesus, but they did not brake his legs with iron sticks. It was a usual though brutal method to end the execution, because the victims had no more leg-power to support themselves into a breathing position on the cross, thus usually they had a minute to die via suffocation.
Instead of that a soldier pierced his side with a spear to make it sure that Jesus is dead. It is in the gospel that from the wound blood and water came out. The Roman soldiers were certified killers, thus not only that they would have known from the flowing blood that Jesus is still alive, but they knew it.
The spear thrust was not deadly, quite the opposite. It opened the chest of Jesus by the move, which called today in hospitals the chest draining operation. It relieved the pressure in the lungs accumulated by the liquids in it. This enabled Jesus to breathe. Especially also because his legs were not broken by the Romans. Deliberately.
He had a real chance to survive, and remarkably all the clues are in the Gospels.
Also, it was completely unusual that Pontius Pilate handed over Jesus’ body to his family / to Joseph Arimathean. It is also more than suspicious that the burial cave of Joseph Arimathean was an exactly neighboring spot to the place of execution, like the place of crucifixion was carefully selected. It created a privacy and an oppurtunity to revive him. The Essenes were called also Therapeuts in Greek, they were known of their extraordinary healing capabilities.
Thus they had to massage Jesus back into life with an enormous amount of aloe and myrrh.
The very Christian twist in logic insists that the Tomb was, became empty and in itself it is also a proof of the resurrection of Jesus.
The very Right Rev. Suffragan Bishop Royal joins the choir stating in the article mentioned above that “… Jesus has defeated Satan and disarmed the powers of death and sin. That means that our bodily existence—with all the accompanying wreckage and failure and vulnerability and unrealized hopes—is caught up in, and finds ultimate meaning in, the reality of the empty tomb. ” Even just reading it, someone should feel it what an orbital rot this statement is.
Anyhow, that tomb would have been empty in any scenario. It was a temporary location, not a final resting place. Nonetheless the tomb became empty because Jesus survived the crucifixion and he went into hiding, and none should have been told what really happened because of the persecution. The dead was free of that but not a survivor.
For the disciples, he was resurrected, they saw him dying, even he was buried.
He was able physically meet them, because he survived the crucifixion and that event made the story extraordinary and enduring.
Sometimes mere martyrdom is enough for immortal fame, but a believable resurrection is really something in a kind.
That event made Paul to change from a bloodthirsty sociopath inquisitor to a megalomaniac Gospel spreader and the founder of Christianity.
His madness as a part of inventing Christianity as a pseudo religion, is described in the book of Acts, chapter 26, talking to Herod Agrippa: “Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, I stand to this day testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses did say should come, how the Christ must suffer, and how he first by the resurrection of the dead should proclaim light both to these people and to the Gentiles.” As he thus made his defense, Festus said with a loud voice, “Paul, you are crazy! Your great learning is driving you insane!”
The Christian doctrines are made up stories with background agendas, resulting in senseless creeds, twisting and binding, transforming facts as they wanted. The Christian leaders are blind Nicodems, at best, leading the blindfolded people to nowhere.
It is time to sobering up. GOD is one and only one.
VERSUS PAUL 