Glenn Kimball challenges Jesus’ historical authenticity, arguing Josephus’ credibility is suspect while citing Edward Gibbon’s claim that Tiberius Caesar sought to elevate Jesus as a deity post-crucifixion. He links the Sadducees—Rome-aligned Jewish elites—to Pilate’s blackmail via Sejanus ties and Tiberius’ Druid-influenced court, suggesting suppressed records and altered traditions. Kimball claims 500 witnesses documented resurrections in Jerusalem and Rome, with descendants of Jesus’ royal blood (Judaic-Greek) embedded in European dynasties today. Resolving the "three days" discrepancy, he favors John’s eyewitness account over later scribal edits, framing resurrection as supernatural yet mortal. Ultimately, his theories recontextualize biblical events through political intrigue and lost manuscripts, urging a reevaluation of orthodox narratives. [Automatically generated summary]
From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you all.
Good evening or good morning, as the case may be, across this great land of ours, and it is a great land.
It doesn't always do great things, but it's a great land indeed.
From the Tahitian and Hawaiian islands in the west, eastward to the Caribbean and the U.S. Virgin Islands, south into South America, north to the Pole, and worldwide on the internet.
Thanks to broadcast.com and Intel.
Don't forget, you can go to my website, get the G2 player, download it, go back to my website, and you can see me doing this program in almost TV.
Well, the news of the day, the big news, of course, is that we are hitting downtown Belgrade now, dropping bombs on buildings, government-associated buildings in downtown Belgrade.
It probably was the most dramatic attack in the 11 days of dropping bombs thus far.
In the meantime, it doesn't really look like the air campaign is going to accomplish the goal.
In fact, really the news is the Serbs are now about three or four days, or days at least, from accomplishing their goal.
Driving out the ethnic Albanians.
Anyway, it's going to be Easter, so we will turn our attention to many other things.
Good morning, everybody.
And by the way, we've got some new bumpers from Ross.
Glenn Kimball's coming up, and he sent me a PAX way back when it said, hey, Art, want to take a ride for Easter?
And I thought, well, sure, why not?
And then along came Ross with some new phone bumpers.
Here's an example of the beginning of another one.
Want to take a ride?
That's Ross Mitchell.
Good morning, everybody.
Coming up in a moment, we are going to take a ride with Glenn Kimball.
He's 49 years of age, divorced now 14 years.
A BA in journalism, MA in communications, PhD in Southern Illinois University Communications.
Taught Southern University, Southern Illinois University, 76 through 9.
President of the International Exchange School, 1980 through 84.
Vice President of Cell West Communications.
Ah, went into the private sector, eh?
84 through 89.
And he's an incredible guy.
He's written The Hidden Politics of the Crucifixion.
It's the most recent book, and you can get it, and we'll tell you how.
And of course, Hidden Stories of the Childhood of Jesus that we've talked about before.
Hidden Politics of the Crucifixion, huh?
Well, you can bet there was an awful lot of politics that surrounded the crucifixion, huh?
We are coming up on Easter, so it is an appropriate topic.
And I think that politics would not have been, frankly, very much different than politics really is today.
What do you think?
Don't you think it would have been about the same?
Maybe with an older flavor, but it would have been about the same.
Rotten to the core.
I'll bet you.
We'll ask.
We're going to try this now.
Bear with us.
If our power goes off, we lose all phone lines for some god-forsaken reason.
I don't know why.
And that means that I lose my guest or whoever I have on the line.
So it looks like we're in for another night of joyful uncertainty with regard to the power.
I mean, we've gone years and years and years.
Now, all of a sudden, blip, blip, blip, blip, blip, blip, all the time.
Beginning on the 1st of April, I am highly suspicious.
Highly.
By the way, the other question that I was going to ask John Voigt, the Michio Kaku-like question, he first responded to, I thought, very well, too, if the universe is everything and scientists say that the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into?
The other possibility was, if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to see it, do the other trees make fun of it?
I think if we take the single perspective that comes biblically to us from history, we're looking at a very narrow perspective, not narrow in a critical sort of way, but certainly in terms of perspective, it's a single perspective in history.
And historians in our day have quoted Josephus as being the only other voice of historical records from the time of Jesus, which is blatantly false.
Josephus was the greatest traitor the world has ever known and wrote his histories of the Jewish wars as an adopted son of the Caesars after having betrayed his own people and won that adopted status for having betrayed his own people.
And that's like trusting Hitler to write the history of the Second World War for everything.
And for anyone to think that Josephus was the only voice that evidences the existence of Jesus in the world at the time of Jesus is just simply not True.
We can return, for example, in history to the great book written in 1782 by Gibbons called The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, which we all have on the tip of our tongues, most of us.
Tiberius Caesar, in that book, is quoted as having gone to the Roman Senate just after the death of Jesus, after the crucifixion, and petitioned the Roman Senate to raise Jesus as a God, little G, alongside Mars and Saturn and Jupiter in the house of Rome.
Now, if that's not a voice evidencing that Jesus exists, I don't know what was.
Well, I think if we do this macrocosmic thing that we tried to do back in December, one of the ways that you can evidence those kinds of things is if you get both the enemies and the allies to agree on something, it's likely to be true.
We have, for example, I have in my possession the reports of the Sanhedrin at the time of Jesus who went out to investigate what kind of person Jesus was because they were expecting the Messiah to come and his family had been telling people for generations that he would be born through the royal house of David.
And the enemies in the Sanhedrin left a very clear trail of the investigation of Jesus.
I have to laugh sometimes because Gamaliel, who was one of the investigators assigned by the Sanhedrin to investigate the reality of Jesus, says in his report that Joseph, who was married to the Virgin Mary, was a stupid person and that Mary was too beautiful for him and that Jesus was lazy, but he kept performing all these miracles and causing all this trouble.
Well, as a child, he was often doing the work of his father and not around tending to the construction and architectural business of his father.
And so when Gamile had a hard time finding Jesus in the business offices of his father, he alluded to the fact that perhaps he was a lazy worker because he wasn't paying attention to the business of the family.
But that's a critical view of Jesus.
But he goes on to talk about in his treatise that every time that Jesus turned around, there were miracles and angels and things that were happening around Jesus and surrounded him.
It's a backhanded vindication of the fact that Jesus was in fact who he said he was.
And there are many, many enemies or opposite opinions about Jesus himself that have survived into our day.
And it's my, getting back to your question, if both the enemies and the allies agree that Jesus was in fact a miraculous healer and a performer of miracles, we got something there.
They come to us from so many perspectives that once again, I think it's like hanging a picture on the wall.
And if you use one nail, you can still turn the picture around in circles.
But if you get them from a variety of different sources, then you begin to suspect that maybe you've got something real by the hand.
We get these miracle reports from people like the great Muslim culture, the great Hindu culture, from the visitors to Jerusalem, from the Roman Empire Senate records themselves, from people who you would never expect to vindicate Jesus under any circumstances, but in which did vindicate Jesus during his life and shortly after his life.
That is what has converted me to being a Christian and being a believer in that as a total atheist.
Well, I often have asked that question of myself, but the reality of the matter is that they quote Jesus firsthand in the Vishnu Purana and the Rish Vidas.
They are followers of Jesus.
They have raised him to the status of special prophet within the Hindu faith.
Jesus had spoken on the Lips of the common people in the streets in India, but of course they quote their own scriptures with regard to his sayings.
And if anything, he was the major prophet of all times amongst the Hindus, with the exception of their own holy men who were the rulers of their country throughout the centuries.
It's amazing that they would exonerate any foreigner as a holy man.
And how could they regard miracles as anything less than a validation of something they should be involved in, worshiping, understanding, being part of, and yet they're not?
The saga of Jesus is a shared saga amongst all of the cultures of the world, and we can take each one of them apart at one at a time, and we probably ought to do that at some moment in time.
Well, Art, we have to remember that the closer you get to Jesus, the more defensive people have become over the years in preserving his words.
It was the case at the time of the Jews during the life of Christ.
By the time Jesus emerged into the world, they had banned all of the records outside the Torah or the five books of Moses from Jerusalem, and they had to travel in 73 B.C. with a contingency of seven priests from each of the tribes of Israel to Alexandria, Egypt, to the great library there to retrieve the Old Testament because they had banned everything.
That was not the case in other cultures.
We know that the great Hindu culture, for example, one of the representatives or the magi who visited the birth of Jesus was in fact from India and took back with him a wealth of information about the Messiah from their own culture, from their own traditions.
And they did not play the defensive game that often Christianity did.
And as a result, many of the records, many more of the records were preserved in India than perhaps in Christianity itself.
And we today hold up the Bible and say, this is all.
Don't look at anything else.
And so we have done the same thing the Jews did.
The closer we come to Jesus, the closer the cultures teach about Jesus, the more restrictive the records become.
If Jesus, we're going to talk about the crucifixion and politics of that in a moment, but if Jesus were to appear today as he did then, now just about 2,000 years ago, If he were to appear today, what do you think would happen?
At the time of the birth of Jesus, Palestine had already been in civil war for 300 years from the days of 300 B.C. and the Maccabean movement.
They had shed each other's blood over the fight over a princess of Benjamin who had been molested by one of the ten tribes of the north in Galilee.
And you know, Jerusalem was the home of two tribes, Benjamin and Judah, and the ten other tribes were up north, and they had been in civil war with each other.
And the fact that Jesus himself lived in Galilee, he was considered the rich kid from the wrong side of the tracks whenever he visited Jerusalem.
When he was in Galilee, he had thousands of followers and advocates, and he fed the 5,000 with the loaves and the fishes.
But when he got to Jerusalem, the people were much more defensive because, in fact, he was a Jew, which was a descendant of the families of Jerusalem, but he was a kid from the wrong side of the tracks and actually lived amongst the perceived enemies.
It's much like the Union and the South in the Civil War.
Let's talk a little bit about politics then and politics now.
Yes, we argue about different things, and yes, it's different in discernible, definable ways, but really it's not that much different now than it was then, is it?
As a matter of fact, the Roman Empire felt much the same about itself as we feel in the United States today.
The hundred years surrounding the birth of Jesus was the most free economy in the history of the world had ever known.
You could literally walk a paved road from Egypt all the way to France, a paved road now, with one single passport, and that had never existed in the history of the world up until that time.
Prophecy records long before, millennium before Jesus, that the ending, the 7th,000th year will be the millennium of the year of peace where no man will shed another man's blood.
And so we have, we're right on the doorstep, Art, of the legacy that we have hoped for for thousands of years for our children.
And in fact, maybe our children will live in that time when no man will shed the blood of another man.
And that's prophecy.
It is the secret of the end of the seven years of apocalyptic era that we are about to face.
The ending condition of that will usher us into a new millennium of peace.
We look at the records from the Mayan text, the cosmogenesis of the Mayan calendar.
The interesting wording in that for the year 2012 is that they are celebrating the beginning of a new world, the ushering in of a new thousand years of peace.
The Mayans, I've sat amongst the heirs to the throne of the Incas, and they say exactly the same thing.
If we were to believe the Incas and the Mayas, and if we were to believe the ancient Hebraic text and the Druid text, they all focus around the years 2008 through 2012.
I would suggest that we are very close to that and that that is probably the era that we're looking at.
Now, there are prophecies during the time of Jesus where he says, no man will know the day and the hour of my coming.
Well, Pontius Pilate, we have to back up just one step to understand how Pontius Pilate came to be blackmailed.
He was born in Seville, Spain.
As a matter of fact, Raymond Brown in his book on the book of John in the New Testament, and by the way, Raymond Brown, who just passed away, and I'm sorry to hear that, but he's been passed on for a couple of years now, is the foremost scholar in our day with regard to Pontius Pilate.
He suggests that the real name of Pontius Pilate was Lucius.
Lucius is another synonym for saying from Seville.
In other words, Pilate was born in Seville, Spain, as was a gentleman called Lucius, also born in Spain, Sejanus.
Lucius was the Praetorian prefect of Tiberius Caesar.
And as such, he brought Pilate from Seville, Spain, through the universities in England where he studied and brought him to Rome as his patron.
But Sejanus now, you've got to understand how this affects the crucifixion because this is critical.
Sejanus was beheaded in 31 AD, two years before the crucifixion, because of a failed coup attempt.
And because Pontius Pilate was his, not only came from the same city, but was his actual patron, that failed coup attempt reflected on Pontius Pilate as well.
Now, Tiberius Caesar had allowed Pontius Pilate to be married to his granddaughter, and so he still had a tongue-in-cheek faith in Pontius Pilate, and he did not have any evidence that Pontius Pilate had anything to do with the failed coup attempt.
The motivation of the blackmail was Jesus represented a threat to the liaison between the Sadducean leaders who were allies of Rome, and he represented a threat for two reasons.
First of all, Jesus was well known by Tiberius Caesar.
He was known because Jesus' foster father, Joseph of Arimathea, was named by Tiberius Caesar personally as noblest occurio.
In addition, Tiberius Caesar's granddaughter was a fledgling disciple of Judaism, and she was talking to Tiberius Caesar about Jesus.
And so on one hand, the Romans were starting to lean toward Jesus, and they actually went to the, as I suggested before, they actually went to the floor of the Roman Senate and proposed that Jesus be raised to the status of God, little G. So on one hand, Jesus is gaining power in Rome.
On the other side, in the Jewish Sanhedrin, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus had gone to the floor of the Senate three years before the crucifixion and proposed to the Sanhedrin that they integrate Jesus' teachings within their religious traditions.
You write that Pilate, in fact, now here's support for all of this, that Pilate wrote a letter that survives today, revealing the fact that he met the resurrected Jesus in the streets after the crucifixion in the company, get this, of 50 armed guards, and that this letter survives today in the Royal British Museum.
You've got to remember, we have evidence everywhere in the Bible for this blackmail scenario.
Herod, for example, who was one of the three people responsible for the death of Jesus, his father looked for the baby Jesus and killed babies two years old and under trying to find Jesus.
And this Herod tetriarch, who was in power at the time of the crucifixion of Jesus, killed his mother, killed his wife, killed his children.
He'd have killed anybody who threatened his life.
And Pontius Pilate sends Christ to Herod and says, do with him as you will.
And did Herod kill Jesus?
No.
Did Herod slaughter him like he did his wife and his children?
No.
Why when he was given the golden opportunity to shed the blood of Christ, the person his father had sought for all of his life, why didn't he kill him?
And I'm telling you why he didn't kill him, because the bait had already been, the blackmail scheme was already in.
They already knew that Herod did not want to be the one that kills Christ because it may have put him out of favor with the people.
And the Sadducees didn't want to be the one to kill Christ because they had a law against murder.
And so they picked the guy that they wanted to be responsible.
And that guy was Pontius Pilate.
He was the Patsy in the whole game, and he was blackmailed and doing what he did.
Glenn Kimball is here, and we're kind of taking a ride for Easter.
It's a discussion of Jesus now, the politics of the crucifixion.
That's exactly where we're going when we get back.
All right, back to Glenn Kimball.
Hi, Glenn.
How are you doing?
Very well and very surprised.
Here's another one for you.
If, as you have mentioned, we are to see again Jesus, he will come back, he will once again return.
When you look at the Hindus and you look at the various other religions around the world, why shouldn't we equally believe it possible that their prophecy will be the prophecy that will be accurate?
And we both agreed that whether we were going to be anonymous for the rest of our lives or not, we were going to dedicate a good portion of our lives to make sure that people knew the historical records, the authentic historical records, which vindicate Jesus from multiple perspectives, especially with regard to the crucifixion and Easter.
You know, to be honest with you, I figured that someone would raise a cross in my backyard and I'd be hanging there probably this afternoon.
To be honest with you, 99% of the population, to my great surprise, has been delighted.
There are people who have jumped up and they've emailed me by thousands and told me that they've jumped up and down on their beds and have celebrated that somebody finally came out and talked about the things that they themselves have found in their own personal research.
You know, when the site gets back up and running, I have over a million pages of research Of ancient manuscripts that people can read on my site.
It would take them 10 years to read all of the ancient manuscripts posted on the site.
And people have come back with their own brands of research, and I have been delighted.
Actually, it had to come through Art Bell.
It's that open-minded thinking the view are that.
I have to give you credit for everything that's happened good to me in recent days.
It's because, you know, modern organized religion serves it up in a certain way, and a lot of people just can't wrap their minds around it properly.
But when they hear you saying, well, look, a lot of things went on you really don't know about, you didn't hear about, that really parallel a lot of what happens today, that we're very human and very good and very bad and just very human, even though it's not what they specifically were taught, it validates the real core of what they believe.
You say that Caesar, in the year 100 A.D., created a law requiring Christians to confess three times, not once, but three times before they could be fed to the lions.
We've heard this bloodshed scenarios all through our lives through the movies and through books that the Romans were thirsty after the blood of the Jews.
And that is not true.
The Jews were the goose that laid the golden egg for the Roman Empire.
They were the gateway between the Orient, the riches of the Orient, and the Mediterranean Sea.
And Herod the king, who was the first political ally of Rome and was the most recent contact after the conquest of Palestine, had built a seaport, the most modern seaport the world had ever known, built of underwater concrete in Palestine to be the gateway to the east.
And the Jews were the goose that laid the golden egg in terms of taxes for the Romans.
The Romans did not want to crucify or annihilate the Jews.
They were a source of money for these people.
So the only reason that they did this was because of a paradoxical reason.
Tiberius Caesar knew and liked Joseph of Arimathea, the foster father of Jesus.
He knew and liked Jesus.
He wanted to raise him to the status of godhood.
But when Jesus was crucified, the earthquaked in Rome as well as it did in Jerusalem, and that the dead were rising in Jerusalem, but they also were rising in Rome.
And it scared the Khajibis out of Tiberius Caesar.
He turned around and sealed the crypts, all of the tombs in Rome, because of the dead were rising.
It scared him so bad that he went back to Palestine to do what?
Not to kill the goose that laid the golden egg, but to vindicate a God that could cause the earth to quake in Rome.
Those records are missing from our canon, and it's the saddest thing I've ever heard in my life.
Nicodemus records that there were over 500 witnesses to the fact that the great prophets from history, Abraham, Noah, Moses, were walking the streets at the scene of the resurrection of Jesus, lamenting what the Jews had done to Christ.
And the very dead were also rising in Rome.
They scared the Romans half out of their wits.
There are records in Roman history that talk about the dead's rising.
They sealed the tombs.
And as a matter of fact, we've only excavated those tombs in the last 15 years beneath the streets of Rome.
He says, I am the first fruits of them that slept.
He was not the only fruit of them that slept.
He was only the first fruits.
And if you read Nicodemus' account of Jesus' descent into the world of the dead, they were waiting to come back and gain their resurrection along with everyone else.
This is why the Pharaohs built the resurrection machines in Egypt, which were the great pyramids.
This is why people have been so fascinated with the concept of resurrection forever in every culture of the world.
Well, there is a special feeling about the actual places and artifacts that were surrounding Jesus, and that was, in fact, the very reason why the pursuit of the artifacts was pursued so intently after the crucifixion.
You've got to remember that the Romans, when they destroyed the Temple of Herod in 70 AD, and they carted off all the artifacts out of the temple, they did not melt them down and put them into the treasury of Rome.
They preserved the artifacts out of the Temple of Herod.
They reported on the pillar that they left at the site of the destruction of the Temple that they took the artifacts to the Pyrenees to preserve them and keep them holy.
And why would the Romans want to keep Hebraic artifacts and Christian artifacts holy?
Why would they want to do that if they were out throwing the Christians to the lions because they thought them disgusting people?
They did not do that.
And also on that same pillar that was left on the site of the destruction of the temple, Caesar gave us the reason why he destroyed the temple.
He destroyed the temple not to persecute Jews and Christians, but to vindicate the death of Jesus.
There's a lot of people who have suggested they know where it is that was the subject of a great expose and documentary recently where some suggest that it may even be in Costa Rica where the Spaniards brought it to this country to carry before them in the destruction of the great American Indian people.
You've got to remember that a thousand Spaniards killed 8 million Indians in this country.
And this was a religious war for them against the American Indians.
And many have thought that perhaps the Ark of the Covenant was brought from its place in the Pyrenees, which was in Spain, by the way, Pyrenees are in Spain, and taken to this country and left here.
Now, there are other people that believe it's in Constantinople or in Northern Africa.
I myself have never seen it, nor would I ever be granted that permission.
I would certainly take that if I were given the opportunity.
But it survives into our day, as do many of the artifacts, and they are kept secret and sacred because of the power that they represent to the people.
Now, is it possible that one of the reasons that Pilate didn't want to kill Jesus is that Jesus was, in fact, a Roman citizen, and what is it that you're suggesting made Jesus a citizen of Rome?
Well, Jesus' foster father, remember that Jesus' earthly father, Joseph, who was married to the Virgin Mary, died when Jesus was about 14 or 15 years old.
And under Jewish law, the one that took over the protectorship of the family was his foster father, Joseph of Verimathea.
But Joseph of Verimathea was named noblest of Curio by the Roman Empire and thus made a Roman citizen.
So Jesus' foster father was, in fact, a Roman citizen.
And that made his family Roman citizens by law under Roman law.
And so one of the reasons why Pilate totally rejected the idea of crucifying Jesus was because he was a Roman citizen and not just a captive person.
The other reason why Pontius Pilate didn't want to crucify Jesus, there were two other reasons.
One was because his wife was a fledgling disciple of Judaism.
But the other reason was, remember that Pontius Pilate was educated at the great Druid universities in England, or in Scotland, I should say.
And that was the homeland where Joseph of Arimathea had his tin and lead mines.
And both Jesus and Pontius Pilate had attended that great university.
And they, at the site of the crucifixion, at the time of the crucifixion, a very strange thing happened.
Pontius Pilate and Jesus exchanged the Druid passwords to enter the Druid debates in order to identify one another.
Now, these are fraternal type systems.
You know, you have a handshake or a salute that you give each other to enter the Masonic temples or in the fraternal orders of the pirates or in the Templar movement today or whatever.
We can get back to this scenario for a moment that we must remember that there's another coincidental thing.
If you go back to, once again, Gibbons' book, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, he makes a very, very curious statement.
He says that the Roman armies were rampaging all of the world with the exception of one people.
And those people that they deliberately avoided during the life of Tiberius and Caligula, who was his successor, were the great Druid peoples.
And they avoided them for a reason.
They avoided them because that was the homeland of the great educational institution that was alive and well at the time of Jesus, that was educating the sons and daughters of Rome.
They could not send them to Alexandria anymore because at the time of Cleopatra and her war with her little brother Ptolemy, Ptolemy burnt the Library of Alexandria in 63 B.C. and thus destroyed the great educational institution in Egypt.
And the greatest university that survived that time was the emerging University of the Druids in England that had 60,000 students and eight courses of study.
And we have to understand, from a political standpoint, who were the only people that stood to gain anything.
And the only people that stood to gain anything from the death of Jesus was one faction of the Jews who were called Sadducees.
The Pharisees weren't at fault.
The Sadducees composed about 8% of the population.
The Pharisees composed about 12% of the population.
The rest of the population were Essenes and lay members of the Jewish faith.
But the Sadducees were the rulers.
They were the political allies of Rome.
And Jesus represented a threat to their relationship with Caesar because he favored Jesus so highly.
And because the great Joseph of Arimathea was a member of the Sanhedrin, so was Nicodemus.
And these two gentlemen were Pharisees and not particularly fond of the Sadducees.
And they had gotten the vote, they had swayed the majority of the vote on the floor of the Sanhedrin to favor accepting Jesus as the Messiah within their own traditions.
And the Sadducees saw themselves on the way out of power, on the way out of a job, on the way out of their prestigious positions as rulers of the city.
And they were the ones that were most threatened by Jesus.
We have to understand that the night of the crucifixion, there was a police force that arrested Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane.
The head of that police force was the son of Caiaphas, a Jew.
This police force, the Sadducees, were such good allies of the Romans that they were allowed to have an autonomous police force.
They were not Roman soldiers that arrested Jesus.
They were the police force of the Sanhedrin itself that arrested Jesus that night.
And the evidence is clear in the Bible because who did they take Jesus to the very first thing?
Did they take him to a Roman jail?
No.
Did they take him to Pontius Pilate?
No.
The first place that police force took Jesus was the house of Attas, who was the father-in-law and the former head of the Sanhedrin.
The next place that Jesus was taken that night was to Caiaphas.
And that reveals the secret of the blackmail, that these two men were behind the arrest of Jesus.
Their own sons were the ones that were the militia that arrested Jesus.
They were the ones That did this deed, and they were behind the crucifixion of Jesus.
And I encourage everybody to go back to their own tradition with a renewed sense of faith and hope that Jesus was, in fact, a real person.
We have been so distanced because of our defensive nature about ancient manuscripts that we have lost the real Jesus in history.
And I hope that people will take this information back to their own traditions, back within their own chapels, and use it to help them restore their faith and hope that Jesus was, in fact, the Savior of the world as I believe him to be.
Jesus stood firm fast that he was the way, the truth, and the light, and he that believeth in him, though he were dead, yet shall he live.
Obviously referring once again to the resurrection.
But he had made a comment in the streets at the time of the crucifixion that you could tear down this temple and I would rebuild it in three days.
That made him a large target because the Pharisees even then began to worry because they were the great wealthy people in town and they didn't like any destruction of property.
They didn't want to have any invitation for people to destroy their property, especially their religious holy shrines.
And so there were in fact some Pharisees in the crowd who were concerned.
But they weren't the instigators of the crucifixion.
The instigators were in fact the Sadducees.
And the Sadducees and the Pharisees didn't get along very well with each other.
We only have a fraction of the words that Jesus said in his whole life.
We call those words agraphas as they are recorded in history.
But everyone who knew Jesus, his family, his surroundings, all of them knew that this great Messiah would be the Son of God, the Savior of the world.
The prophecies were clear all the way back from the time of Daniel and Micah, that this person who was coming into the world would be a supernatural being on one half and mortal on the other half.
And yes, he knew exactly and perpetrated exactly who he was in his lifetime, and everyone who knew him knew that.
Remember the last time we were on the, I think I asked you, if we could get a sample of the DNA of Jesus, would we discern, in your view, a difference in the DNA, some small difference between human DNA and that of Jesus?
We are getting close, and perhaps the very reason that there will be a millennium, a thousand years of peace, will because of a DNA change of some sort.
Like Jesus criticized the Sadducees and the Sanhedrin for the knowledge that they had that they were given to share, and yet they kept it for themselves.
They were chosen to disperse certain information, but they didn't.
The name Messiah means the anointed king with oil.
And so we can put arbitrary labels on it, but those are the denotative or the epistemological roots of those names.
unidentified
Right.
And when we consider Jesus Christ, the Nazarene, wouldn't it be, instead of him being named after the place supposedly Nazareth, wouldn't Nazarene come from Nazar, which means one who is set apart?
As a matter of fact, the prophecy said that he would be a Nazarene.
We know that Samson was a Nazarite, and those are two derivatives of the same group.
So as a matter of fact, at the time of Jesus, when he was born, there was no such town as Nazareth.
In fact, the maps of Judea at the time of the birth of Jesus don't even register that town.
He was raised in a town that subsequently became called Nazareth, recorded in history.
unidentified
And in the early establishment of the church as we know it, the one known as the Christian Church, which has its base with Rome, during Alexandrian times, the library at Alexandria, wasn't there a young mathematician's daughter, Hytatia?
I just know a very little bit, but that she was slain because she would tell the truth and would distinguish between fact and fiction and the early establishment of the church when they were trying to pull together paganism and what was going on at the time as far as a Messiah coming and all of these kinds of things.
It was quite a soup, and she tried to keep things straight and in order, the laws of the universe, etc., and the separation of religion from all of the other, and it all kind of got mixed up, and she was destroyed in the process.
She was a great mathematician, and she was actually considered a priestess in many senses of the word.
And anyone who studied the art of mathematics in those days, much like the Pythagorean theorem was considered a holy theorem at one point in time, many people were destroyed because of their knowledge of mathematics and astronomy.
And she portrays this incident very accurately.
And there were many people who were persecuted in Egypt, in Palestine, in Rome, etc., because of their secret knowledge of mathematics and astronomy.
Interestingly enough, the sightings of the resurrected Jesus continued until the 5th century A.D., where he walked around with the people and taught amongst the people.
The sightings of Jesus didn't discontinue until the onslaught of the Dark Ages.
As a matter of fact, there are many scholars today that secretly believe that the reason we call them the Dark Ages is because Jesus said, I am gone and I will not return until my second coming.
And as a matter of fact, on the tomb of King Arthur, which was the lead-line tomb from the minds of his family, the descendant of Jesus, he says that he will return with his ancestor Christ in the second coming and that there would be no more appearances of the resurrected Jesus walking the earth.
I don't know about being a big shot, but attaining the largest listening audience and number of affiliates in the history of nighttime talk radio is pretty cool.
All right, Doctor, here's a good one for you.
Since Easter cometh, I wish to ask you about what remnants remain of actually, I guess, the crucifixion and this.
Well, the legend of the Easter egg is very ancient.
Mary Magdalene, when she came to prepare the body of Christ finally, you see, Joseph of Arimanthea and Nicodemus had already thrown 100 pounds of precious spices over the body.
You remember the earthquakes and the lightnings probably frightened them too, and they didn't prepare the body properly.
But however, on Easter morning, Mary Magdalene came to the site where there were, once again, the Sadduceean police force guarding the tomb of Jesus.
She took boiled eggs with her to bribe the guards into allowing her to prepare the body properly.
And that's where we get the concept of Easter eggs.
Again, I'm still focusing a little bit on the resurrection, not just of Jesus, but of other dead.
How many, how widespread, what reaction was there?
I mean, aside from the resurrection of Jesus, this had to have been such an event that there must have been so many recordings of this event because people just don't come back to life like that.
We have the account in my book, at the end of my book, where two of the resurrected beings came back to the floor of the Sanhedrin and left witness records independently in separate rooms to testify and witness that Jesus had, in fact, been resurrected and that they were among the fruits of the resurrection.
And those records survive in our day and are in my book, The Hidden Politics of the Crucifixion.
But it amazed me because it showed photos of apparently the tanks were there during the Easter season or during this time when the high priest goes in and visits this supposed Ark of the Covenant there.
And I thought it was a fascinating comment.
And I don't know.
You're asking a guy who has never seen the Ark of the Covenant personally, but I would be the first in line if they would allow me to butt in line.
It's a matter of, it's not only a sense of curiosity, but you mentioned earlier the overwhelming sense of omniscience that you have when you meet history face to face and what it does to change your life.
And for me, I would go.
If I was commanded by the heavens not to enter, I would not go.
If I were told not to go by my mother, I wouldn't go.
Mom, you're out there, I know.
But if no one told me no, I could not go and wouldn't prevent me.
Well, you might be a pillar of salt, but anyway, you'd go.
I'm Mark Bell, and I'd go too.
This is Coast to Coast AM, and we will be right back.
unidentified
There's a point on a western bay And it serves a hundred ships a day Lonely sailors pass the time away And talk about their homes And there's a girl Thank you.
In this harbor town, she works, laying whiskey down.
She went through one of the portals that allowed her to see that experience first.
If you notice one curious thing about an NDE experiences that might help us here explain this phenomena that you're talking about, that when you pass on, one of the facilities that you have in an out-of-body experience like an NDE is the fact that you have multiple perceptions and the ability to see what you will to see.
Perhaps she was afraid at the moment of death, and that fear launched her into this experience.
I noticed that many people who come back from NDE, like Betty Edie and Daniel and etc., they talk about being able to see out of their fingertips.
They talk about the ability to go wherever they wanted to go and learn whatever they wanted to learn at will.
I think if you were to go back to the original Aramaic, it does not suggest God-fearing.
It means God-respectful.
We'd have to talk to Eric Rocco, who has done some of the great translations from the original Aramaic Bible that was found in the Vatican.
And by the way, those books are hosted on the site as well, and they're hard to get a hold of.
But I think the translations of God-fearing are probably a problem more in translation and the verbiage and the connection with the word fear than they are literal.
That's all it is, is talk, so don't worry about it.
unidentified
Thank you, Mr. Bell.
Well, that's something everybody tells me I'm good at.
So anyway, I've been on a quest for some commentaries on the Old Testament written before the first century A.D. Would that be available on your website, sir?
We'd be delighted, and my email's there, and you may ask questions, and I respond to all email.
unidentified
Well, the problem is I'm computer illiterate, and I was going to tell Art if I ever needed any, oh, excuse me, if anybody ever needed to contact me, it would have to be through a post office box, but it is Y2K compliant, and it's virus-free.
By the way, they caught the little crud that apparently or allegedly created the Melissa virus named after, I might add, a topless dancer.
Maybe going away for a while.
This is very interesting.
When about 1,000 years ago, this comes from a person, a very good friend of mine, about 1,000 years ago, a very old and very wise Kabbalistic scholar was challenged by the Inquisition to summarize the teachings of the Judeo-Christian Bible and all of the holy books of the world's major religions while standing on one foot.
Without a pause, he complied, balancing himself as he instructed stating, quote, love thy neighbor as thyself.
I'd like to touch on once again, I know a previous caller talked about Lawrence Gardner's book, Bloodline of the Holy Grail.
He makes a contention there which struck a chord with me of a previous book that I had read before called Holy Blood, Holy Grail, regarding the offspring that Jesus had and that they survived and are supposedly some of the royal families of European dynasty.
Well, not only is Dr. Gardner correct about that, but the royal families throughout history were intermingled and related to Jesus in some way, shape, or form.
We have to remember that Jesus' grandmother was born in England.
She was born in England because her family was the royal house of David and had to escape the Babylonian conquest in the 6th century BC.
She only returned back to Palestine to marry someone of her own faith a generation before the birth of Jesus.
And not only was her royal family living in England at that time, but also the royal family of the Greeks who had fled the Trojan Wars, and also the royal families of many civilizations who were conquered by other civilizations.
But royal families had to get out of town.
They took their wealth with them.
They took it to England with them, which was the safest place on the earth, sequestered by an isthmus of water.
And these royal families intermingled and intermarried.
And in fact, Jesus himself had Greek royal blood in him as well as Judaic royal blood in him.
And today, the descendants of Jesus are, in fact, representative in the royal families of Europe.
He says, it's not what you put into your body that defiles a man.
It's what comes forth out of your mouth that defiles a man.
And Jesus was found in the company of all of the visiting dignitaries from foreign countries and was invited to do so because he himself was from the royal house of David and well respected amongst the Sanhedrin, the Romans, and everybody else in town and everyone else in other cultures.
And so when they came to town, when Jesus was found in the company of anyone, he was the target of the visits of the highest dignitaries in the world, which is evidenced from the fact right from his birth that he was visited by the royal magi from the east who came to visit him at his birth, and that scenario continued throughout his life.
He ate and supped and drank with them on those occasions and made many friends amongst the other cultures through his participation.
The fact that resurrected Jesus came back, and the stories of his resurrected visits throughout Europe, throughout Asia, throughout Palestine, all are accompanied by scenarios of him eating with them, them being able to touch his hands and feet and sight, and he participating with them in their dining experiences.
Well, the ancient manuscripts talk about there being an unbegotten one.
We speak of Jesus as being the only begotten, but there are many, many manuscripts talking about an unbegotten entity in the heavens, a self-generated, a self-made entity who is in fact God Big G. Where he began and what he did,
when he came into existence, that is a mystery that I know not of other than the fact that the ancient records from a number of different sources talk about him being the unbegotten.
FM stations are quickly learning that there's lots and lots of music all the way across the dial, and if they appear suddenly with something intellectually stimulating as an alternative, they win.
I don't do that, and the reason I don't do that is because I'm sure you are well-intentioned, but I've had several people give me website addresses that ended up taking them to 18-year-olds who bear it all, you know, that kind of thing.
So I don't do it on the air unless I check it out first.
And the other question I had was, how, Dr. Kimball, do you reconcile the only sign that Jesus gave for the proof of his mission to the people who were the Sanhedrin and so forth who were questioning him as being three days and three nights for the resurrection being 72 hours and how the way it's celebrated by the Christians only gives
about a day and a half from Friday morning to Sunday, Friday afternoon to Sunday morning.
Because it's actually from Thursday night, or no, from Friday night until Sunday night, I think it was Sunday night that the apostles were in the upper chambers.
That's when the body, being the believers, resurrected in their knowledge and belief of what Jesus was actually trying to tell them because they thought he was going to be the second Messiah and not the one that was going to be killed.
But I was wondering how you reconcile that, how you worked that out or if you had looked into that very much.
Actually, Art, it's a pretty good question because there is a discrepancy in the Bible itself.
All the Gospels, with the exception of John, suggest that Jesus was raised on the third day, which was the Sabbath.
However, the Gospel of John places the Last Supper on the day of Passover, which was the Sabbath day.
So there is a discrepancy in the Gospels themselves as to which day, in fact, Jesus was crucified and which day he was resurrected.
And so there's still a...
But there is a conflict in the scriptures themselves, and most of that can be resolved by the fact that the three of the Gospels that were written, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, were written long after the death of Jesus.
None of those mentioned Joseph of Arimathea at all.
The only gospel that mentions Joseph of Arimathea was the eyewitness gospel of John.
I want to talk a little bit about conflict in scriptures.
I do have a kind of a secret back-channel communication system to the technician at broadcast.com in Dallas, and he absolutely affirms for me that Yahoo did buy Broadcast.com for $5.7 billion.
He also says they're all a bunch of Yahoos, and I wouldn't work for him on a bet.
He says I'm quitting as soon as they take over.
Oh, no, wait a minute.
He didn't say that.
He said, let's see, what did he say?
They're a top internet company.
We're very pleased about it.
It won't be finalized for a few months, so tech changes are not yet to be seen.
Fingers are crossed.
That's the way he really said.
Anyway, good luck to you guys.
Big fish keep gobbling the little fish, and bigger fish gobble the medium-sized fish, and that's the way the world works.
We'll be right back.
unidentified
Oh, forgive me.
I've just got to pull the words together.
But the temple worship and the priestly line that was ensconced, you know, was in place at the time of Jesus was not linear.
You know, it didn't go back.
It was an appointed priesthood.
And I've just been examining and exploring the indications that there were two different calendars that were used.
There were many Essene.
In fact, the Essenes didn't hold to the priests and the timings of the sacrifices that were in place at the time that Jesus was there.
And what did it was that earlier caller trying to place the timing of Passover?
And you were saying that maybe it was a discrepancy.
And I'm wondering if it just might have been simply the difference between the 360-day calendar, which placed Passover on an earlier day, and the 365-day lunar calendar that had come into practice.
I think that's such a brilliant comment, and I think you've got to the core of much of the problems preceding the century of 533 AD.
You see, the calendars were not standard.
They did not share calendars.
In fact, they didn't even share calendars within a common culture.
And that's one of the reasons why Dionysius Ignatius was commanded by Caesar in 533 AD to standardize a calendar system.
It was partially an economic issue because they would set dates and times for people to meet merchant vessels and to do business transactions.
And because they used different calendar systems, they couldn't transact business.
And so Dionysius Ignassius creates our calendar for us from the year 533 AD.
However, he goofed.
He was originally instructed by Caesar to use the beginning of the Roman Empire when Romulus and Remus founded the city of Rome.
However, with the onslaught of Christianity, Dionysius decided and convinced Caesar to use The year of Jesus' birth as the year zero, but he missed in that one too.
You notice a very coincidental thing between 33 AD and 533 AD.
They both have a 33 in them.
Dionysius presumed that Jesus was born or died 500 years prior to that celebration when he created the calendar.
He missed the date by seven years.
unidentified
Yes.
Well, the aspect that I find interesting, and again, I'm just in my walk, and again, it's I don't, I have not, in fact, I do feel like another earlier call, like a chosen one, one that the creator of the universe found and allowed me to see, you know, just the littlest bit of who this Yeshua, you know, this Jesus Christ is.
And one of the things that I'm seeing is that, well, one of the things that kept me from seeing is what I've coined a phrase as, is Churchianity, having very little, just a great number of traditions.
And Jesus, in fact, spoke of the traditions of the Pharisees that rendered the word of God null.
And art, you'll recognize, a null meter.
And that's a word that indicates current and power.
And that's what traditions do.
That's what Churchianity has done.
You notice the same 2,000-year number that we're coming up with.
It was 2,000 years between the giving of the law and when Jesus came to finally say, wait a minute.
Okay, I have read through the Bible at times, but I'm not one of those to memorize all the areas and things in, you know, like as in verses and word of etc.
But I had found an area in Matthew somewhere it said going back to how Jesus was accused of all kinds of things, including smoking flax.
And, you know, it kind of makes me wonder if, but they were talking about smoking flax.
I mean, he was alleged to have, you know, been in gluttony and drunkenness and smoking flax.
Yes, Jesus lived an exemplary life, and we can talk about those who may have criticized some of his personal behaviors, but they were not the eyewitnesses of Jesus.
Those who knew him best commented on the exemplary nature of his life, his sacrifices, etc.
And not only that, but the fact that he was a great one to fast.
He was a great one to control his urges, his life, his times, his behaviors, and his comments.
And so anyone that might suggest that he might have been a drunkard or a pot smoker or something like that were critiques from a distance, not those who knew him best.
There are many historical and detailed conflicts in Scripture.
They can be resolved oftentimes by coordinating calendars, coordinating festivals, and comparing documents back and forth.
We have to remember that the scribes were an imperfect system.
They recorded, oftentimes, interpreted many of the sayings of Jesus and many of the things in history from their own perspective rather than from the perspective of the person saying the words.
The scribes were an actual religious group, though they were literally the secretaries of history.
But they were given the freedom and free agency to add their own interpretations into the popalry of what emerged into our time.