be a message board where people will debate whether or not there really was an L. Ron Hubbard or whether or not he was made up by 22nd century new age gurus as an amalgamation of 20th and 21st century teachers. Maybe 2,000 years from now people will debate there was really a Cecil Adams. I mean, none of us even know what he looks like now. Just sayin'... Yeah, this is more or less my guess. It would explain some of the minor anomalies between the Gospels. You probably couldn't swing a cat in Judea, or anywhere within a few hundred miles of same, without hitting some young rabbi/preacher proclaiming he had the hotline to God. One guy died and was buried; another took his place, prompting the beginnings of the "Resurrection." (Think of this as my "Jesus of Sherwood" theory ) The hypothesis of a new Messiah figure being taken to be a dead Messiah "risen from the dead" is actually given plausibility by Mark 6:14-16: Quote: And king Herod heard thereof; for his name had become known: and he said, John the Baptizer is risen from the dead, and therefore do these powers work in him. 6:15But others said, It is Elijah. And others said, It is a prophet, even as one of the prophets. 6:16But Herod, when he heard thereof, said, John, whom I beheaded, he is risen. If nothing else, this suggests that such a line of belief was possible. If Antipas really thought that