Is Jesus' Resurrection a Fact-Event?

[taijasi]

We have it on good faith, from several individuals who know Jesus of Nazareth now better than you know your own spouse, mother or father, that Jesus appeared in the Old Testament several times prior to being born in Bethlehem. We are also told that he was indeed reincarnated as the great soul Appollonius of Tyana. And Appollonius raised the dead, healed the sick, cast out demons, etc., just like Jesus.

There are also indications that Sri Ramanujacharya, of India, was an additional reincarnation of Jesus of Nazareth. More recently, in the latter 19th and early 20th Centuries, it is clear that Jesus was again in physical incarnation ... and we may safely assume that this had been the case for easily 100, perhaps as many as 2 or 3 hundred years (for reasons that I can explain, if necessary, but which amount to efficiency and economy of energy).

Again, a Master of the Wisdom tells us in the 1920s that Jesus was preparing for an incarnation that would be of great importance in this time of the Return (Reappearance of the Christ). It is quite possible, then, that this incarnation has already been made, but you may rest assured that if so, it will be one that lasts well into the 22nd Century. And so what?

As for 2100 years ago, I find it quite likely that Jesus of Nazareth expired on the cross, dying bodily just as was the intended result of his crucifixion. He had all the ability in the world to avoid this death, had he so desired, but that would have accomplished nothing - or would only have prolonged the inevitable. The world was not ready then for the lessons of the Christ - for which Jesus was the vehicle - nor is it now. Look around, does it look like people are "going about, loving one another, and calling all men `Brother'?"

Jesus is said to have continued to teach the "faithful" (meaning the twelve, and those who were likewise prepared) for fifty years in the subtle body. He most certainly could have appeared to Mary Magdelene following the completion of his 4th Initiation (the Renunciation), during which the Initiate must spend 3 days `descending into hell.' This was, after all, nothing new with Jesus; it was the tradition, and a part of the Initiation Ceremony, as with EVERY Great Initiate before and since.

But notice that Jesus did say, "Touch me not, for I am not `ascended.'" Well, they don't call them, "Ascended Masters" for nothing! Nevermind that it is safe to say, that almost anywhere you see this phrase - `ascended master' - you can be certain that what follows is a glamorized travesty of the truth. That is beside the point. The origin of this term can be traced to the Gospel narrative.

So, as the fundamentalist and the literalist will be quick to point out, Jesus also allowed the disciples (I forget who, it's been awhile) to actually touch his wounds. This makes all the sense in the world. With so little faith (as in, "oh ye of -"), even where seeing is usually believing, the Master clearly knew his followers well. No sense trying to communicate with them while they were still sitting there incredulous and presuming a spectre.

I realize this isn't a forum about the Masters of the Wisdom, but suffice it to say, that ANY Master, by definition, can manifest himself bodily (as did Jesus, who was NOT a Master after the Resurrection - at least not yet). He can do this when and where he needs to. And if you were concentrating on the space where he chose to do this, you would perceive him gradually concretizing, as a vapour, then into an ethereal, wispy form, and finally he would take on all the solidity that you have (or the appearance thereof). To shake hands would be no different than with your nextdoor neighbor.

Or, if he so desired, he would appear instantly - though it is my understanding that this is almost infinitely more difficult to do, because a tremendous degree of `displacement' is necessary - and also because the type of rarified matter which is necessary to accommodate even the tip of his little finger is greater than is normally found in an entire CITY of people. Ahh, we don't consider these things. We still like to believe in - miracles. And not Jesus, not Christ, not God Himself, has the least thing in the world to do with miracles. A smile or a flower, perhaps.

A Master, Jesus or otherwise, can wink out of manifestation much more easily than he can appear - since this simply returns a room (or space) to its condition prior to his appearance ... more or less (though His Blessing will have forever conditioned that area and its inhabitants). There are countless firsthand testimonies of the methods of appearance, and disappearance, of the various Masters Who have allowed Themselves to become known - during the past 130 years or so. I heartily recommend an open-minded investigation, if one has the slightest interest in understanding what went on 2100 years ago.

Or then, we may always continue to speculate ... and maintain our present beliefs, whatever they may happen to be.

My speculations (since some will charge me with offering nothing more), are at least based on verifications of my own, and sufficient direct experience to have removed the matter from the realm of belief ... long ago. However poorly I may live up to the ideals I once held dear, do not accuse me of confabulation. What I tell, I know as fact. What I believe ... well that is another story entirely.

Namskar,

andrew

[jiii]

All right, maybe it is the term 'fact-event' that I'm getting lost on?

[kenod]

Science does not exclude the possibility of the supernatural. String theorists posit extra dimensions and parallel universes ... only they wouldn't use the term supernatural. Although they claim mathematical validation, other physicists still regard their notions as philosophy.

Nearly all of us have experienced, or know someone who has experienced, the supernatural (paranormal, if you prefer). That such events occur - events that are unexplainable by the scientific laws as we understand them - is accepted by very many, whether religious or not. (Watch the movie The Blue Butterfly for an enjoyable way of considering this point).

So things beyond our ken do happen. Did the resurrection of Jesus happen - of course that is ultimately a matter of faith - but supernatural events occur, so why not resurrection?

[taijasi]

I only argue that God does not need to invent `miracles' - either to impress us, or to correct a broken universe (earth, world, etc.). Nor do I think there is anything wrong with our human nature ... at least, not at heart, not fundamentally (to use a word that is getting much traffic on these forums these days). Fundamentally, we are sound.

My point about Jesus of Nazareth (and the Christ) and the Resurrection, is that survival of death is a universal "fact-event" ... for every single one of us. This is no different in the past 2100 years than it was a million years before. We die, we continue on, and we return. This has always been known, and is verified by modern science.

There are holdouts, as well as people who believe otherwise, but we have it on the testimony of people on all sides of the equation ... as to just how things "work" as concerns bodily death, and the return of the soul to form. Again, we do not need to speculate, or simply hope that we survive death. Those who have done so, have testified from the other side, as well as from the standpoint of a new incarnation - remembering the past. And though still a minority, the numbers are already in the many thousands. I myself have memories of my own, and I know plenty of other people who do likewise.

This is why I think the Liberal Christianity forum is so helpful. It explores such questions as, if Christ's bodily appearance after death was nothing new, and not the point of His coming, then what was it? And in answering that, I think we finally, truly begin to get at the heart of the matter. Those who say, and have always said, that Christ came to teach us Love, and how to Love, would seem to "on to" something.

But to become sidetracked on the question as to just exactly what happened at the death of Jesus, in the days afterward, and in the accounts of his appearance to his followers ... is to miss the point almost entirely. The real value of the accounts is in their agreement that he was an advanced enough individual that he could and did reappear, and demonstrate his Mastery over the grave. This does emphasize a distinction, since the rest of us are continuing to strive toward this Mastery, but have not yet accomplished or attained it. This, to me, is an important and helpful distinction. But only if we find encouragement and empowerment in the knowledge that we too, shall attain.

Again, there are plenty of stories of the wonderful abilities of the Masters of the Wisdom, including the minor demonstrations of the least of their abilties to certain potential followers in the latter 19th Century, but the point was never to become sidetracked by the parlor tricks. So what if someone can levitate a house, or walk through walls, walk on water, etc. So what? The real value of such demonstrations comes, only if there are people who are just on the verge of true belief and acceptance ... and who need a tiny little push, to help them pass the hurdle. Additional tests of faith will come, but at certain stages, a reinforcement can make all the difference in the world.

It is when there is gathered the gullible and superstitious multitude ... that this kind of thing does more harm than good. Having do ability, nor desire, to understand how or why such things (as walking on water, or raising the dead) are possible, the only outcome will be to cry `miracle!' ... to bow down on hands and knees, and to immediately elevate the performer of the deed to a god. There, he may be safely worshipped (throughout the ages), with not the slightest worry or fear - that maybe what we should have done all along was to emulate, or seek to emulate, the GOOD DEEDS ... which uniformly accompany the good name, of the Masters.

Indeed, para-normal, seems to be an apt description of many of the mysterious occurrences and abilities, not just of Masters, but of increasing millions, in this time of awakening. There is still the mundane, or more commonplace (`normal'), then there is that which is beyond - or Supermundane. And what is supernatural relative to our physical realm, or the abilities of most, will be natural in another state, or for another order of being(s). We should find no big surprise in this, yet I think for many, it's something they don't often consider.

Namaskar,

andrew

[wil]

There are a lot of questions surrounding the 'fact' private land in which the crucifiction occurred, short time on the cross, level of Roman documentation regarding these events and no reference to it...

But the flip side, whether it is a literal fact, the story of crucifiction and resurection is where the power is to me. I don't need to concern myself whether it happenned or not...as I can learn from the story, and annually rejoice in the possibility of living through my personal crucifictions, just as I annually rejoice in continual birth of only begotten sons and daughters...

[earl]

While I'm with the gang who see the crucifixion-resurrection story as being profoundly meaningful for what it illustrates regarding the power of the Spirit to transform/transcend in the face of the geatest of human suffering and limitation regardless of whether events unfolded in a fully literal sense, I will add that there are similar beliefs among Tibetan Buddhists. That is among some sects they believe rare highly advanced practitioners upon death remain in bodily form for a few days while still absorbed in meditative state then their bodies (minus finger and toe nails whatever that's about) disappear into a "rainbow light" body. There have been a number of anecdotal reports published of this but nobody's filmed a home video so there ya go have a good one, earl

[Thomas]

Hi Ruby -
A rhetorical question ...

Can love be a Fact-Event?

Pax,

Thomas

[RubySera_Martin]

I skimmed this thread just now and hope to come back later when I have more time to address jiii's questions if no one else beats me to the task.

Thomas, I guess rhetorical questions doesn't need answers

[Thomas]

Perhaps ... but it might be worth thinking about, at least.

[flowperson]

Actually, resurrection from death was a popular theme among the deity myths of ancient middle eastern cultures, notably Atra-hasis among the Caananites, and Osiris among the Egyptians.

The Jesus story is not unique in this regard, just a bit more contemporary than the way-back myths.

flow....

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by jiii

All right, maybe it is the term 'fact-event' that I'm getting lost on?

Jiii, thank you for pointing out the weaknesses of how I expressed my question. I am sorry this caused you so much distress.

By fact-event I mean something that literally took place, something that could be recorded by a video camera or some other means of reproduction. That is the definition that fundamentalist used and it seemed decent to me.

If you don't believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus' body then I guess you don't consider it a fact-event.

I will try to clarify my question.

1. I expected people to read the entire post in order to know what the title means. The title may not be all that relevant but I can't post anything without a title.
2. The argument I am making depends in part on the Matt. passage I quote at the beginning of the post.
3. The fundamentalist with whom I wanted to discuss the issue claimed that the Matt. passage should not be taken literally; that it is fantasy or embellishment.
4. She insists that Jesus' resurrection happened as a fact-event that could have been recorded by a webcam or video camera.

My Argument:

• If the Matthew passage is not to be taken as a fact-event, why would one take the resurrection as a fact-event?
• We know that playrights and authors of that time normally embellished their stories with miracles and resurrections. I provide one example in which the author (Lucian) openly confesses it.

QUESTION:

• If Lucian embellished his story, how do we know that the NT writers did not embellish their stories about Jesus?
• I understand the Christian faith depends on the physical resurrection of Jesus' body for salvation.
• If the NT writers embellished their stories about Jesus so that the miracles, the virgin birth, and the resurrection did not happen as fact-events, what happens to the Christian faith?

Is that clearer?

[RubySera_Martin]

originally posted by Thomas:

Hi Ruby -
A rhetorical question ...

Can love be a Fact-Event?

Pax,

Thomas

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

Thomas, I guess rhetorical questions doesn't need answers

originally posted by Thomas:

Perhaps ... but it might be worth thinking about, at least.

Okay, I've thought about it. Here is what I think:

1. As explained to Jiii, I am using the term "fact-event" as something that can be captured by video camera.
2. The feeling emotional part of love can probably not be photographed. The only part of love that can be photographed is things like happy expressions on faces or other behavioural evidence.
3. From that perspective, love is not a fact-event.

I suspect jiii is not the only person who did not understand my question correctly. As jiii pointed out, it was not stated too clearly. I restated it in Post 26. I hope it's better now.

Ruby

[flowperson]

Ummmm, Ruby,

I dislike pointing this out, but...practically all images rendered by recording devices these days may be digitally altered in some way, automatically making them into "not a fact-event". In other words we may believe that what we see as a recorded image was an image of reality captured and preserved in that moment of time, when actually it may have been altered in some way and hence is not a recording of a moment of reality but an altered construct of some kind.

Lots of lawsuits flying around in the media about all this these days. The new technologies allow many exceptions to reality now.

flow....

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by Ruby

If the NT writers embellished their stories about Jesus so that the miracles, the virgin birth, and the resurrection did not happen as fact-events, what happens to the Christian faith?

Well, I don't think it necessarily collapses. At one point in its evolution the Gospel of Mark ended with Jesus still in the tomb. The Christ that Paul was talking about, a cosmic Christ whose death was essentially a rite of initiation, doesn't really need to be physically resurrected, it seems to me. Sure he's glorified and transfigured and is now high priest of the Cosmic Order/ defense attorney before, and conduit to God, Supreme Logos...whatever. None of that really requires a physical resurrection back into a human body.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, I screwed up on the genealogy thing and got caught. It's Jacob and Eli (Heli). It was late and I didn't bother to look it up before wrote it down. Sorry, my bad.

Chris

[China Cat Sunflower]

That's it! The Gospels were photoshopped. Wow, you know, I knew it all along.

Chris