Jesus King of Edessa

mP

Theres an interesting new book out that claims that Jesus of the Bible shares many similarities with a historical character who was the king of Edessa. His name was Izus and Manu. Supposedly there is a reference in Mt about Jesus being called Emmanual when this only happens once. The royal crown of Edessa was a crown that looks like thorns and the kingdom was also known as the kingdom of heaven. The father of this character has a quite unsual name that also appears in Acts. Interestingly these jesus character was the friend that Josephus rescued after he had been crucified. The other two that Jospehus asked to be removed died. You can read more about this historical death and resurrection in Josephus last book.

Anyway you can watch an interview about this by searching UT for "Jesus King of Edessa".

Im sure we all are away of the hidden name puns in the gospels to historical characters. Joseph of Arimathea = Josephus, Iscariot = Sicarri, Peter = father etc.

glenster

I found this on Abgar V:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abgar_V#The_historicity_of_the_Abgar_legend

The historicity of the Abgar legend

The Abgar legend has played an important part in the self-definition of
several Eastern churches, but its historicity is extremely doubtful. Two recent
histories of the Church of the East, Baum and Winkler's The Church of the East
and David Wilmshurst's The Martyred Church, have addressed this issue and have
discussed the growth and development of the legend.[12] Alexander Mirkovic also
argued against the historicity of the legend, pointing out at that the legend is
not the only one of its genre. There were many conversion stories coming out of
the Middle East in the 3rd and 4th centuries. In many ways these stories repre-
sent a model for the conversion of Constantine.[13] Notice the similarity be-
tween the Book of Abgar and the conversion of Helena of Adiabene and her son
Ezad II in Josefus Flavius: Jewish Antiquities, XX 2. In the story told by
Josephus there is a Jewish merchant by the name Ananias and the question is of
circumcision of Ezad.

In the Book of Abgar, Ananias is the messenger sent by King Abgar to Jesus.
Ezad’s son was Abgar VII of Edessa (Ostroene). The origin of the story may be
that Ezad, the father of Abgar VII, had exchanged letters with somebody in Jeru-
salem, but more probably with the Nasi Gamaliel than with Jesus.

Author of the idea Ralph Ellis and Tom Verenna back and forth on it at the
next link:
http://tomverenna.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/a-new-theory-that-jesus-was-king-of-edessa-not-so-fast-mr-ellis/

mP

I had a quick read of the blog entry, and i spotted some easy mistakes. I cant recall which gospel but Jesus is mentioned as a Nazarene which is different from someone from Nazareth. Samson in the OT was a Nazarene which was some holy man devotion.

ALso it has never been explained why the romans added the "King of the Jews" plaque to the cross, when jesus was king of nobody, but was a leader who walked about. To claim that Luke uses king because Jesus was king in heaven is a little weak and a convenient excuse which is never actually stated in the BIble.

THe then says that Izus is not Hebrew, but we also have the same problem in that Jesus is not relatd to Yeshua.

The blog is lastly not familiar with the Saul - Josephus connection. A quick search will find that Pauls trip to Rome has over a dozen matches with Jospehus own journey. Shipwreck, places and people visited all of which must mean they were either on the same boat or perhaps the same person. Somebody copied somebody here.

Interestingly the first christian nation in the world was Armenia which is next door to Edessa.

glenster

Ralph claims Jesus was a descendant of Cleopatra
that he was the king of Edessa
that the events of the Gospels take place decades after the time they describe
Josephus was Saul
that all Hyksos pharaohs were Jews, and
Jesus was King Arthur.

I think Ralph is just goofing on these things to sell a book.
Here's another post about it.
http://gilgamesh42.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/ralph-ellis-swings-and-misses-again-more-on-jesus-as-king-arthur-and-other-oddities/

mP

@glenster

Well i gave a proof that at best part of the Saul story was copied from Josephus. Do a search and cehck the scroptres against Josephus writings.

You may very well think its all bulldust, but in religion there are always rediculous claims. If i retold you the story of the Bible but changed the names you would think that its all completely idiotic, and yet billions believe.

I already gave partial evidence that the blog you are quoting is seriously wrong, but you failed to correct me. Im not stickin gup for Ellis, all im saying is your blog is broken and misinformed.

glenster

I'm pretty sure I don't want to go through all the research. I'm just another
shlub who can look these things up and will take it seriously when the ac-
credited historians say them. At least the Hyksos/Exodus idea is debated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyksos

The God concept regards a choice to hope or not for a possible God beyond the
known things. I recommend a liberal stance that includes keeping up with the
known things, not Bible inerrancy, and, since it's a possibility not a proven,
not wanting harm over it. I think Ellis is playing with the known things in a
way that causes harm if you take his conclusions given above as history (Jesus,
Cleopatra's great grandson, was deported by the Romans to England where he be-
came king?). It might be better to think of it as "JFK"--you might like it as a
movie but it's conspiracy theorist stuff. I don't recommend Ellis inerrancy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_of_Arimathea#Britain

I remember his idea of Josephus and Paul being the same person--it was brought
up several years ago on the Internet message boards. Some links for it are
below--it went on for pages and included posts by Ralph Ellis. It reminds me of
the Lincoln/Kennedy--more than coincidence?--idea except with belabored persua-
sion to discredit historians for not taking it as history.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread206916/pg1&colorshift=yes
http://vridar.wordpress.com/2007/04/25/the-shipwrecks-of-josephus-and-paul-part-3/

mP

@glenster

id be happy to talk about the other pov that you have raised, but this is becoming chaotic. You just keep raising more and more points without addressing some of my responses to your own questions.

Im not here to defend Ellis.

The Lincoln/Kennedy link is nothing compared to saul/josephus. Somebody copied the other persons trip. There are a dozen or more details. Either they were on the same ship at the same time and did exactly the same things and saw the same people on their trip or they are the same person.

Its good that you are aware about it, but you didnt offer a pov. I just finished eatting some ice cream, thats all very interesting for me, but i doubt that you care.

glenster

It's okay, but when I Google it I see the back and forth over it short of
the same conclusion giving me the idea that it's forced (unsurprising given
Ellis seems to have Stone's ambition of selling an Untold History). One of the
disputes over the Josephus Luke/Paul ideas:
http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/did-luke-use-josephus-when-writing-acts-2/

Jesus King of Edessa

Share this