Did Jesus survive the crucifixion?

[jaylemurph]

I bet they were. Cruxifiction was used to send a political message. The message wouldn't be as effective with people slipping off or not visibly suffering for days. The Romans built quality and for endurance: there are still places using their roads and aquaducts. (Besides there are many liars, thieves and idiots who still claim to have part of that cross, so clearly it was well made /and/ made of magic perpetual wood.)

--Jaylemurph

[+DieChecker]

They had to be Cruel, and enforce suffering in a dramatic and public way. How else would they have a Pax Romana except by over enforcing the laws?

[docyabut2]

I think he did survive the cross, his uncle and some others took his injured body to his tomb barely alive nurse him, and carried him to his meeting with his disciples where he then died. I just don't Jesus could have just walked away with those injuries.

[Sundew]

Known as the "swoon theory" as put forth by skeptics. Doesn't explain how anyone could survive a beating, a Roman scourging, carrying and being nailed to a cross, exposure, blood loss, having a spear thrust into your heart (which would explain the blood and "water" that the wound produced) and three days mummified in a tomb.

I would say "no."

Plus, the Romans certainly knew how to carry out a death sentence and were very familiar with executions. The spear was thrust into Jesus to make doubly sure He was dead.

Again, "no."

[SHaYap]

I didn't mean the Romans couldn't make well crafted / made crucifixes ... just that there was no need for it as its used only once and it is done ... slipping would not be a concern at all I don't think ... one thing that they most certainly would know well is how to nail someone to a crucifix and not have them fall back down ... they do it all the time for a long time during those times ... and the point of this form of punishment / execution is slow death ... usually taking days in many cases ... prolonging the torture for as long as possible ... else its but a swift hanging or beheading ~ seems that was not fun enough for public entertainment so the games got creative with wild animals being fed with the surplus prisoners and enemies available ~

The one main factor that was unconventional regarding JC's case as told (according to the opinions of researchers and numerous material published that I have read) was JC's 'body' was allowed to be claimed ... the usual SOP is no one is even allowed anywhere near those executed or their remains ... families, relatives, brothers in arms or even those wishing to offer religious rites for the dead ...

~

[Dash--]

The one main factor that was unconventional regarding JC's case as told (according to the opinions of researchers and numerous material published that I have read) was JC's 'body' was allowed to be claimed ... the usual SOP is no one is even allowed anywhere near those executed or their remains ... families, relatives, brothers in arms or even those wishing to offer religious rites for the dead ...

~

Joseph of Arimathaea was said to be a rich man,and Philo mentions that Pilate wasn't above taking bribes.

[+DieChecker]

I didn't mean the Romans couldn't make well crafted / made crucifixes ... just that there was no need for it as its used only once and it is done ...

I've never seen a source that said they didn't reuse the crucifixes. Do you have a reference for that, or is it an opinion? Either way, I'm just curious.

[+DieChecker]

It is Islam where they are taught that Judas was substituted for Jesus...

Surah 4:157-158

“And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the apostle of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure. Nay! Allah took him up to Himself; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.”

http://www.fortressoffaith.org/blog/2012/06/28/did-judas-die-in-place-of-jesus-on-the-cross/

Also appears to come out of the Gnostic Gospel of Barnabas...

The Gospel of Barnabas was written by an Ebonite and is an epistle that was rejected as being scripture by the early saints. It says:

“Truly I say that the voice, the face, and the person of Judas were so like to Jesus, that his disciples and believers entirely believed that he was Jesus; wherefore some departed from the doctrine of Jesus, believing that Jesus had been a false prophet, and that by art magic he had done the miracles which he did: for Jesus had said that he should not die till near the end of the world; for that at that time he should be taken away from the world.” (Barnabas 217:14)

[docyabut2]

It is Islam where they are taught that Judas was substituted for Jesus...

http://www.fortresso...s-on-the-cross/

Also appears to come out of the Gnostic Gospel of Barnabas...

At the meetings his disciples didn't even recognize him, his body was so swollen and disfigured from his injuries, there for giving droughts to many that it was really Jesus.

[jaylemurph]

At the meetings his disciples didn't even recognize him, his body was so swollen and disfigured from his injuries, there for giving droughts to many that it was really Jesus.

They seemed to have left that bit out of all four gospels.

--Jaylemurph

[docyabut2]

They seemed to have left that bit out of all four gospels.

--Jaylemurph

Matthew28; 17

And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted it was Jesus

Mark 16:12-13, Jesus “appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country.

John 21, “Jesus on the shore; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus

[jaylemurph]

Matthew28; 17

And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted it was Jesus

Mark 16:12-13, Jesus “appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country.

John 21, “Jesus on the shore; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus

Ohh. I thought when you said "droughts", you meant droughts. Silly me. But you know, Jesus once threw a temper tantrum because a fig tree wasn't in fruit, so such petty acts of vengeance aren't completely out of character for the Almighty.

--Jaylemurph

[+DieChecker]

At the meetings his disciples didn't even recognize him, his body was so swollen and disfigured from his injuries, there for giving droughts to many that it was really Jesus.

I had to read that a couple times... "Therefore giving doubts..."

I don't think it says his body was swollen and disfigured anywhere. But he was supposed to be dead and so people did not expect to see him. Some doubted and Jesus told them to put their hand into his side (where the spear pierced him) as proof it was Him.

The reason in part of the post-resurrection part of the OT that people did not recognize Jesus, was because Jesus did not want to be recognized by they at that point. The man could raise the dead and transform matter. I don't think a little mental (or physical) illusion of a different appearance was beyond him.

[jmccr8]

I thought that they didn't recognize him because he had been glorified so it that is so I may have looked glorified on several occasions given your description.

jmccr8

[docyabut2]

Sorry for the missing spelling:( , did mean doubts. But Jesus had to appear so grotesque after all those injuries to his body, that people didn't recognize him; he even said to Mary don't touch me for I have yet descended to my father in other words he was dying.

Edited July 20, 2014 by docyabut2

[+DieChecker]

he even said to Mary don't touch me for I have yet descended to my father in other words he was dying.

If you don't mind my asking, where does that come from? The Gospel of Mary? It is not from the 4 main Gospels. Mary speaks to Jesus (post-resurrection) only in one and she initially takes him for a gardener, not a corpse.

John 20:13-17

13 They asked her, “Woman, why are you crying?”

“They have taken my Lord away,” she said, “and I don’t know where they have put him.” 14 At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus.

15 He asked her, “Woman, why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?”

Thinking he was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him.”

16 Jesus said to her, “Mary.”

She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means “Teacher”).

17 Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

https://www.biblegat... 20&version=NIV

Edited July 20, 2014 by DieChecker

[SHaYap]

Joseph of Arimathaea was said to be a rich man,and Philo mentions that Pilate wasn't above taking bribes.

Probable ~ but done in such a manner recorded in the gospels would just give Pilate a whole lot of explaining to do when news reached Rome ~ JC was executed as an enemy of ROME not just crimes in Jerusalem if I understand it correctly ~ anyhow that's just what I have read ... not particularly well read on the 'purely historical' context come to think of it ~

I've never seen a source that said they didn't reuse the crucifixes. Do you have a reference for that, or is it an opinion? Either way, I'm just curious.

I wouldn't know where to reference it truth be told ~ but it is implied ~ implicitly even ~

'Although the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refers to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus. This was discovered in Jerusalem in 1968. It is not necessarily surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archaeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular individual a customary burial.

(emphasis mine)

• wiki link
  

but it also states that customary burials though rare ~ does occur ~

~

[jaylemurph]

Sorry for the missing spelling:( , did mean doubts. But Jesus had to appear so grotesque after all those injuries to his body, that people didn't recognize him; he even said to Mary don't touch me for I have yet descended to my father in other words he was dying.

I try not to make fun of anyone's grammar or language skills (unless they get all snarky about it themselves and then make amusing errors), but this was just too well set up. I just love the idea of Jesus as a b****y queen. "You don't like my gospel of love and acceptance? Fine. I'll smite you and your little dog with glitter."

--Jaylemurph

[SHaYap]

I try not to make fun of anyone's grammar or language skills (unless they get all snarky about it themselves and then make amusing errors), but this was just too well set up. I just love the idea of Jesus as a b****y queen. "You don't like my gospel of love and acceptance? Fine. I'll smite you and your little dog with glitter."

--Jaylemurph

That quote wasn't from my post ~ you kinda lost me here ~ multi quote all mixed up somewhere ?

~ edit : I see it now you Quoted DieChecker post #41 to my post #42 ~

Edited July 21, 2014 by third_eye

[+DieChecker]

'Although the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refers to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus. This was discovered in Jerusalem in 1968. It is not necessarily surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archaeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular individual a customary burial.

wiki link

That could very well be true. The only reference saying that they took them down for the Sabboth was in John 19:33. It does say it was a High Day, so maybe it was not a weekly happening?

Also your quote says that relatives took the body and buried it. And I suspect that if Joseph of Aramethia had not collected Jesus' body, someone would have. He was not a common thief after all.

31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2019&version=KJV

[docyabut2]

Joseph of Aramethia was Jesus`s uncle no one could have taken the body but a relative.Who else would have given Jesus his tomb.

http://en.wikipedia....ph_of_Arimathea

Edited July 21, 2014 by docyabut2

[+DieChecker]

Joseph of Aramethia was Jesus`s uncle no one could have taken the body but a relative.Who else would have given Jesus his tomb.

http://en.wikipedia....ph_of_Arimathea

The story that Joseph was Mary's, or Joseph's (Mary's husband) uncle can be traced back only as far as the Medeival period. People wanted to be descended (Genealogy became really important when nobles needed justification to rule.) from famous people and so Joseph of Arimathea was a good target, as were Mary and Joseph of Nazareth. Very few Biblical scholars believe that to be true.

Who else would give Jesus their tomb? Have you read the Bible? Jesus's followers were just about fanatics. Any of them that had money would have bought him a tomb.

Plus it says that Joseph had to go and Beg for the body. A family member wouldn't have had to beg for the body, just ask for it.

[Abramelin]

I have read a lot of theories about Jesus' possible survival after his crucifixion, even that it wasn't him who was being crucified, but his son, look-alike, brother, and so on.

But IF he was crucified, and IF he survived, then why did no one notice..... he had problems walking after he got 7-inch nails hammered through though the bones of his feet??

It's these tiny details that I like, heh.

.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

It is Islam where they are taught that Judas was substituted for Jesus...

http://www.fortresso...s-on-the-cross/

Also appears to come out of the Gnostic Gospel of Barnabas...

Actually, the idea was around long before the Qur'an was even 'received' by Mohammad.

You can find hints at this in the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, all of which are centuries older than the Gospel of Barnabas.

.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Abramelin

[SHaYap]

Actually, the idea was around long before the Qur'an was even 'received' by Mohammad.

You can find hints at this in the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, all of which are centuries older than the Gospel of Barnabas.

.

Hey Abe ... how goes ?

I believe the 'alternative' don't go very far or carry much around these here parts ..

~