CNN'S FINDING JESUS SERIES: John the Baptist stories...

The latest installment of CNN’s FINDING JESUS: FAITH, FACT, FORGERY series focused on JOHN THE BAPTIST and the testing of his bones kept as relics all around the world.

CNN decided to dramatize the Gospel stories as they related to John the Baptist while showing the scientific testing of bone fragments said to be that of John the Baptist. CNN reasoned that if the bones were that of John the Baptist (which is impossible to prove) than that is a clue as to the existence of Jesus? 

That does not really make sense since John the Baptist is a historic figure (there is non-biblical evidence of his existence) while there is no non-biblical evidence of the existence of Jesus. Gospel stories tie the two men together but the Gospel stories are just that, stories with no historical basis.

The historic existence of John the Baptist is documented by the Jewish/Roman historian JOSEPHUS who mentions him in his history of the Jews and connects him to Herod Antipas who executed him.

John was one of many so called prophets that preached that the end of the world is coming and that people needed to repent before that happened. John offered baptisms in the River Jordan by which people were cleansed of their sins in preparation for what happens at the end of the world when a new kingdom of God will emerge.

John was very popular but entered the history books because of his criticism of Herod Antipas who divorced his wife and married his brother’s wife which according to John was a sin within Jewish law. His connection with a historic king earned him a mention in world history.

The Gospel writers incorporated John into their story (not history) of Jesus knowing full well that John was an actual historic figure. Many Bible scholars believe that Jesus was actually a follower of John (a disciple of John) as were others, some who later became disciples of Jesus.

After John was beheaded Jesus stepped into his shoes and took some of John’s disciples with him while other disciples of John stuck together and continued to wait for John’s new kingdom of God to arrive; they eventually died out.

After the death of Jesus, his disciples / apostles also stayed together for many years waiting for Jesus to return. They also eventually died out and if it was not for St. Paul and his use of Jesus in his new religion of Christianity; Jesus would have disappeared from history together with his apostles.

The relics of John’s bones examined in this CNN program showed that the bones found in Bulgaria at a church dedicated to John the Baptist did come from the time of John and from a Middle Eastern man while those found in other places were from much earlier times.

Relic sales in the Middle Age were a huge source of revenue. Many bone relics tested were found to be the bones of animals but in those days people were a lot more gullible than now….not really, we are just as gullible as many worship relics today as if they were real just remember the Shroud of Turin, a proven fake, still held to be the holy shroud of Jesus by the Catholic Church which to this day makes millions from it.

As to CNN’s program I can only say that it is a lure to get religious viewers to tune in at Easter time to see more dramatic re-enactments they so love. As far as real science, real proof of the existence of Jesus or the historical validity of the Gospels…well not so much.

An additional note to insert here is the fact that both John and Jesus were absolutely wrong as to the end of the world and the coming of a new kingdom of God no matter how much others try to spin that.

Bill O'Reilly's book KILLING JESUS vs Robert Price's KILLING HISTORY...

I have just finished the book KILLING JESUS; A HISTORY by Bill O’Reilly of FOX NEWS fame and his co-author Martin Dugard.

First I have to say that O’Reilly has been doing quite well writing “Killing” books about Abe Lincoln, General Patton, JFK and others.

O’Reilly has also been embroiled in a media battle where journalists are pointing out the numerous occasions where O’Reilly has either flat out lied or misrepresented himself in stories he has filed as a reporter, facts he had mentioned on his weekly show at FOX or things he has written in his many books.

The reporters accusing him of playing with the truth have their accusations backed up by facts on the ground but O’Reilly is great at using an offense as a defense and has been calling his accusers all sorts of derogatory names.

The fact that FOX NEWS also plays fast and loose with FACTS, makes it is no wonder that they would defend O’Reilly to the hilt. His ratings for his show have actually gone up since his viewers unfortunately are people that feel that facts are true because they want them to be true and not because they are true.

His “killing” books are popular and sell as “history” even if some of the history is kind of made up; makes for good reading though.

In his book KILLING JESUS; A HISTORY it is hard to imagine that there is any history since the one thing about Jesus that we do know is that there are absolutely no historical records of Jesus’ presence on earth. In fact there are the few who actually question if Jesus ever existed because of the lack of any hard historical evidence. These people believe he was invented to promote Christianity.

I happen to believe Jesus did exist because of the history that developed after his death which would be a stretch if he never existed.

Robert M. Price wrote a book titled KILLING HISTORY; JESUS IN THE NO-SPIN ZONE. The “no-spin zone” phrase is actually what O’Reilly headlines his show on FOX with as if to say just the facts, no bullshit.

Many of the “stories” about Jesus that we are all familiar with come from either the GOSPELS in the Bible or are “traditions” people have kept for thousands of years even to this day; THEY ARE NOT HISTORY and that is where O’Reilly does a disservice to himself as a self-described HISTORIAN.

What O’Reilly does is tell a dramatic story of the death of Jesus using various Gospel accounts which in some cases contradict themselves, traditional non-historic beliefs and in some cases, stuff he feels should be part of the account even if there are no sources supporting what he adds to his telling of the story.

Robert Price in his book KILLING HISTORY shows how O’Reilly is killing history by making up his own history. He takes his book page by page and shows how absurd his statements are.

The really sad thing about this book, as I see it, is the fact that many, many people will read O’Reilly’s book as real history based on O’Reilly’s reputation and media exposure.

That said, most of the people reading KILLING JESUS are not people that, as I said before, have an objective or critical eye towards history; they believe facts are facts because they want them to be facts.

It is a sad state of affairs that some media types use their positions of seeming authority to mislead the people that listen to them but hey, this is something that is not new but has been going on since the beginning of history.

All I can do is point this out to people that may care about “real” history.

CNN's Finding Jesus / Clues first episode did not find anything!

I was so excited that CNN was going to air a documentary on Jesus (they always do before Easter) and this time do some historical investigation that would actually teach us something…NOT!

The first episode was about the historical evidence left by Jesus confirming his existence and so they picked on the Shroud of Turin which was purportedly to be a cloth that covered him after death and has an image of him embedded in the cloth.

The problem with the Shroud is that it has already been scientifically proven to be a Middle Ages hoax so why are they perusing something that has been scientifically discredited but still maintained by the Catholic Church and displayed because it draws so many paying viewers.

That first episode of their Jesus series was especially disingenuous because it did not use any critical historical methods to conduct their investigation but used dramatic images of Jesus and the crucifixion based on the Gospels (which do not agree with each other as to what happened) which are not considered history but myth.

I was especially irritated at their use of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, both members of the Jewish Sanhedrin which condemned Jesus according to the gospel, as the main characters that could have provided the Shroud of Turin and a similar cloth depicting the face of Jesus.

Joseph and Nicodemus were members of the Sanhedrin where all members voted to hand over Jesus to the Romans for execution according to the Gospels so how could they turn around and support Jesus and his mission after voting to kill him. Many historians doubt this ever occurred and believe it was inserted by the Gospel writers to show that Jesus was actually buried because if he was not, he could not be resurrected.

Another very improbable part of the Gospels and of the CNN report was that Joseph of Arimathea was granted permission by Pilate to take Jesus off the cross and bury him.

Pilate is known through historical records to have been an especially cruel man, a person that would not bend to anyone and especially to a Jew asking to do something that the Romans never did. They always let the crucified stay on the cross as an example to all who would cross them, until the body decomposed and fell to the ground where dogs would tear apart the flesh. At that point, the Romans would throw the person’s remains into a pit dug especially for such remains.

I realize that the whole Christian theology would be useless if Jesus was not buried in a tomb from which he would be resurrected but I feel CNN as an investigative body should not have basically dramatized the issue as if it really happened especially when they knew the Shroud of Turin is a fake and therefore cannot be used to prove Jesus was buried after dying on the cross.

CNN wants ratings too so I guess they will bullshit as much as any network to get people to watch.

There are more episodes to go so we will see if things get any better…I doubt it.

Boehner / Netanyahu circus not sitting well with me!

I will admit that this whole Netanyahu being invited by John Boehner and then speaking before our Congress has been really irritating me…building up progressively!

John Boehner is a political ass. The whole political scene in Washington has me pissed and totally disillusioned. These people that are supposed to represent us are not behaving like responsible adults or even as civil adults; they are rude and stupid and only care about their own re-election and their party’s re-election to power.

There are no longer “statesmen” or “stateswomen” (well maybe a few) that actually care about their constituents and their country; it’s all about them and their agenda.

The fact that John Boehner invited Netanyahu to speak before Congress is a direct insult to our president who normally has done the inviting. Boehner insults not only the president and the Democrats but he insults us all as Americans by behaving like a total ass and spitting on protocol and the separation of powers.

The way Congress responded to Netanyahu before and during his speech was extremely troubling. There is no question that Americans support Israel and have from the beginning. Israel gets billions in aid, material and technology.

Israel is a democracy (some say theocracy) and is part of the Judeo-Christian culture and we like that. Israel is also in the Middle East where everybody else is an Arab, a Muslim or both. Israel has also stood its ground militarily against a number of attacks by its neighbors who have vowed to eliminate Israel from the earth.

That said, by behaving the way we did with Netanyahu, we have also shown the world that a small minority in our country but with lots of money, can influence our government to the level it has now and throughout our history. In essence, the Israeli / Jewish lobby is the tail that wags the dog and it is painful and embarrassing to watch.

As far as this Iran/atomic bomb issue…I am puzzled by our determination to prohibit Iran from developing an atomic bomb. Yes, Iran has shown in the recent past that it is unstable politically because it is a theocracy based on religious bullshit that in its extreme moments has vowed to wipe out Israel (atomically) off the face of the earth; OK so it would be good for everyone, especially Israel if they were not allowed to develop an atomic bomb.

BUT we allowed crazy-ass North Korea to develop one and crazy-ass Pakistan to develop one. Hey, Israel has one and so Muslims think that if they don’t get one, the Jews will eliminate them from the earth.

How do we legally have the right to tell Iran what it can develop when we sure did not see a right to prevent all the rest of the nutty countries from getting one?

We are negotiating with Iran for the sake of Israel. But Netanyahu does not want us to negotiate with Iran, he wants us to invade Iran and occupy it so we can keep Israel safe from them…is he fucking kidding me?

Netanyahu is telling our government and our president what we need or MUST do because he knows best even though he has been an alarmist and totally wrong about his predictions on many occasions.

The fact that he was allowed to come in and “lecture” our congress on what it must do just pisses me off to no end.

I will admit that we will protect Israel from destruction always but we should not have to kiss their ass and obey them like we were vassals of Israel.

I have Jewish friends and acquaintances but I would think that as Americans, they would have to feel Netanyahu went too far; I hope he loses the election in Israel in two weeks as a sign that he fucked up and pushed us way too far.

SELMA THE MOVIE: Don't fuck with history!

I went to see the movie SELMA and thought that it was a very powerful and very inspirational film but I just could not get over the revisionist history it was trying to sell.

As a history purist I wince at every attempt to revise history no matter whose history and no matter how painful or embarrassing the history may be; we deserve to know what really happened.

What makes it even more distressing is the fact that black children, on a national level, are being given free tickets to see the movie. For many of them, this will be the history they will remember and not the history in history books.

The revisionist history I am talking about is the treatment of Lyndon Baines Johnson, the president at that time, by director Ava DuVernay. She showed him as an obstructionist or more bluntly, an antagonist of the movement and that was a blatant falsehood; without him the Civil Rights Movement would not have moved forward.

Director Ava DuVernay in defending her rationale for altering history came off as arrogant when she said she was not making a white savior movie and is not a historian or a documentarist. To me, if you’re recreating a historical moment than get the history right; don’t fuck with it.

This Sunday’s New York Times had a great article by Maureen Dowd called “NOT JUST A MOVIE” where she echoed the sentiments of many and but mostly the people who were actually there with Johnson during this time.

Dowd said that in this country, on matters of race – there is even a higher responsibility to be accurate.

In my mind, DuVernay had crossed a line and therefore her reputation as a movie maker will be tarnished and suspect and the movie and all the fine actors in it will also suffer because of her arrogance and plain stupidity; the movie has been nominated for Best Picture but that is all…a snub…maybe…but to me a deserved snub of the director…she probably will call this racism.