94 replies to this topic

[Ben Masada]

Bluefinger, on 27 November 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

Quote

The two beside Jesus had their legs broken because of the Sabbath.  For the reason that people could live for days on the cross, the Romans broke the legs of the two so that they could quickly be buried.  They wouldn't be able to push themselves up to breath and would this aphexiate and die.  They pierced Jesus, though, to make sure he was dead.

Now, imagine the Romans piercing the thousands and thousands throughout the Empire to verify if they were already dead. It makes absolutely no sense. Spear-piercing was never in the agenda of the Romans. They didn't care less if the Jews decayed on the croos.

Quote

And the unit he sent to guard the tomb was an elite and extremely well disciplined group called the 'Custodians.'  They were able to fend off 100 men with only ten of them.  These men would have paid with their lives if they took such a bribe.  Given that, it is very improbable that they would have been bribed.

Have you ever checked with the other three gospels if there was ever such a unity of guards to watch Jesus' tomb? No, only the guy who wrote Matthew fabricated the idea. Besides, why does he claim that the guards accepted bribe from the Jewish priests to say that the disciples had come by night and stole the body? (Mat. 28:15) That's an embarrassment!

Quote

"And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb." (Mark 16:2 ESV)

"Just after sunrise". That's what Mark says. The tomb was empty. God knows since when. Okay, "they went to see the tomb." Did they see the guards? This story is getting more and more embarrassing.

Quote

They didnt get to the tomb on Saturday night.  They got there Sunday morning.

Mark 16:1 says "When the Sabbath was over..." In Israel, the Sabbath is over at sunset. Perhaps he didn't know about this Jewish custom. Was it so?

Quote

Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.

Including the nights, according to Mat. 12:40. Don't forget the nights! Then, try to count "three days and three nights."

Quote

Even Matthew 28 shows that they get there on the dawn of the first day (Sunday.)  So did the author err between Matthew 12 and Matthew 28?  Or was Jonah quoted to add context to Nineveh rising up in judgment against the Jews in the first century?  (Matthew 12:41)

  

You tell me! It is called contradictions.

Quote

Perhaps.  But it is likely that the myrrh and aloes were for embalming Jesus' body for burial according to tradition rather than for healing.  The implication was likely to illustrate that Jesus received a king's burial in a rich man's tomb.

Luke says that on the first day of the week at dawn, the women came to the tomb bringing the spices they had prepared. What for? That should have been done before burial and not afterwards. Besides, how could they have done it if the guards were there to prevent the approach of anyone? Well, the tomb was empty. When did it happen? Amazing!

Quote

John wrote about how the Romans pierced him with a spear and water cane out.  Likely, Jesus couldn't have survived that.  It was much like soldiers of WWII shooting bodies to make sure they were dead and not faking it.  It wasn't a new practice.

That was written by the author of that gospel about 70 years after Jesus had been gone. Josephus, a Historian addicted to details never mentioned such a thing done by the Romans to anyone crucified. Who asked for Jesus to be pierced? Because it was not a Roman practice.

Quote

Luke 24 gives account of the resurrection.  That means that Jesus resurrected after three days and then went revealing himself to His disciples for 40 days afterward.

"...and three nights." If you don't want me to remind you of Mat. 12:40, admit the contradiction of a non-fulfilled prophecy.

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada, 13 December 2012 - 07:34 PM.

[Paranoid Android]

Ben Masada, on 13 December 2012 - 07:30 PM, said:

Mark 16:1 says "When the Sabbath was over..." In Israel, the Sabbath is over at sunset. Perhaps he didn't know about this Jewish custom. Was it so?

And Mark 16:2 says that it was early on the first day of the week, "when the sun had risen".

That said, I'll try addressing your five points in your first post:

Ben Masada, on 03 October 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

1 - According to Josephus, a famous Jewish Historian of the First Century, "It was not uncommon for crucifieds to linger on their crosses, passing out and back up to three or four days till death would eventually catch up on them." Jesus was removed from his cross after only a few hours.

Jesus was harshly treated before his crucifixion.  He was beaten, flogged, and a crown of desert thorns rammed into his skull, rending flesh.  His harsh treatment left him highly vulnerable and so he died quickly - hence the surprise and eventual spear-thrusting.

Ben Masada, on 03 October 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

2 - According to Mark 15:44, when Joseph of Arimathea went to Pilate for permission to remove Jesus from the cross for burial, Pilate, an expert in the crufixion of thousands of Jews, "Was deeply concerned and surprised that Jesus had died so soon. Therefore, he summoned the Centurion to verify." Considering that the Roman soldiers were highly
corrupt and that Joseph was quite a rich man in Israel, God knows the size of a possible bribe which affected the reply of the Centurion to Pilate that Jesus was already dead.

Speculation.  I suppose if we are talking Court of Law then anything's possible.  We've got Reasonable Doubt.  Of course, anyone that's watched a legal drama probably knows how unreasonable Reasonable Doubt can sometimes be.  I guess I concede that this point is possible, but at the same time you have to concede then that an equal possibility exists that any other number of things could have happened.

Ben Masada, on 03 October 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

3 - According to Mark 16:1, when that Sabbath was over, which in Israel is at sunset, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to Jesus' tomb to anoint his body, when they were surprised to see that the tombstone was removed and the tomb was empty. According to Mat. 28:2, there was an earthquake, an angel came down, removed the tombstone and became equally surprised that the tomb was indeed empty. Never mind the three days and three nights of Mat. 12:40. That supposed-to-be prophecy never got fulfilled.

Don't forget that Jesus was crucified on the Passover, a Jewish High Sabbath.  Most probably a Wednesday, if Jesus had been crucified on Wednesday afternoon before the Passover, he would be dead for:

Night 1 - Wednesday evening, the Sabbath
Day 1 - Thursday day, the Sabbath
Night 2 - Thursday evening
Day 2 - Friday day
Night 3 - Friday evening, the normal Sabbath
Day 3 - Saturday, the Sabbath

If Jesus were to resurrect sometime on the evening of Saturday, perhaps just before the sun set, because of the Saturday Sabbath no one came to check on the tomb, so the first time someone came, early on the morning of the first day - as per Mark 16:2, count them up and Jesus was in the ground for three days and three nights.

Ben Masada, on 03 October 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

4 - According to John 19:39, Nicodemus, another rich man in Israel, had brought along about 100 pounds of medication to help Joseph take care of Jesus. It is highly possible that Joseph laid Jesus in his walk-in tomb for an hour or two to prevent unnecessary onlookers and returned later with his men to remove Jesus unto another safer place to mend his wounds.

Only if he was not already dead.  And the spear in the side ensured he was dead - the point pierced his lung, which had filled with fluid because he was dead.  Even if he was alive before the spear, no one in the 1st Century AD survived long with a punctured lung.

Standard procedure to ensure someone died on the cross was to just let them hang there for a couple of days.  However, because of the Sabbath two alternatives were allowed - breaking legs was most common because most people were still alive and the broken legs ensured they suffocated.  If someone was dead though, it was far easier to spear them through the lungs.  One thrust as opposed to a couple of whacks to the kneecaps.

Ben Masada, on 03 October 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

5 - According to Acts 1:3, Luke said that, "After his suffering, aka, passion, Jesus appeared to his disciples for 40 days with many convincing proofs that he was alive, in flesh and bone, eating and driking with his disciples to prove he was not dead. (Luke 24:42,43) Focus that Luke said that Jesus appeared after his suffering (passion) and not after his death. And, if we consider resurrection here, the evidence goes way out of proportion because, to eat and drink after resurretion just as one used to before death, brings down the whole concept of the Pauline gospel of spiritual body. (I Cor. 15:35-44)

Ben

If Jesus was resurrected, it makes sense that Luke writing after the event would refer to his time on the cross as a time of "suffering", rather than death.  As for Paul's views from 1 Corinthians, there are several ways of examining it.  The most obvious is that Jesus' resurrection was unique.  He was sinless (if you believe the scriptures) and so death had no hold of him.  He went to death, and then came back again.  From this, God exalted him and lifted him up to sit at his right hand (Philippians 2:5-8).  For the rest of us, we were sinful and so when we die we die, and Christians believe that by the Grace of God we will be reborn into sinless bodies that will not perish, hence the resurrection spoken of in 1 Corinthians 15.

That said, having an imperishable body does not necessarily mean that one cannot eat.  Throughout the Hebrew scriptures messengers from God (angels) routinely eat and drink and take shelter and all the things regular people do.

Just a few thoughts to consider

~ Regards, PA

Edited by Paranoid Android, 15 December 2012 - 10:54 PM.

[the L]

Ben Masada, on 13 October 2012 - 08:28 PM, said:

Yes, but the gospels were written 50+ years after Jesus had been gone. Paul wrote his letters about 10 to 30 years prior to the gospels. The gospels were, so to speak, a paraphrasing of the gospel of Paul, as the writers were his former disciples.

Ben

So as many things in history. One of it is money pit on Oak island. So what now Oak island doesnt exist?

[the L]

Ben Masada, on 13 October 2012 - 08:35 PM, said:

agree with me that Jesus was Greek.

Ben

Based on what?Because he knew Greek?

[the L]

karina_28, on 06 October 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

Who are humans to say that all mythology is a lie? Some may be unreal, some may be real. Only God really knows what he created.

Once who study history after a while will soon start realizing that mythology is based on fact.
Soon you will realize that beside history you need others branches of science in this order-Astronomy, Geology, Biology, Palaetnology, Archaeology, Mythology, History.
History on some languages means story. English have two words but I think that Spanish have one not sure. French word for history is same word for story.
History starts from written words.

[the L]

Do we have others sources that Jesus existed?

Yes we do. Others non Biblical scripts.

[the L]

I would like you to think about something. When I read Bible I stumble upon scene where Jesus said to one of his followers, somthing like this:

Ask and it shall be given to you. Would you give your child a snake if child ask you for a fish?
Same is God. He will not gave you snake if you ask for fish.

That message is strong imo. Because think about it. Would you give you child Christianity if was it poison? Snake? Then we can follow the trace all the way to apostoles who all died on cross beliving that he was the one.

Just a thought. Thats something what cross trough my mind after I read it.

[the L]

Alienated Being, on 03 October 2012 - 11:12 PM, said:

Give me five pieces of evidence to prove he existed.

What about four almost indentical accounts on same event? Canonical Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. You are aware that those are four different sources? Bible is compilation of books. Bible isnt one source. So four people told almost a same story. When historians found out that four sources claim same thing they usualy take it for granted.

Thats four evidences. For fifth I can mentioned non canonical gospels such as Thomas, Philip, Mary, Judas.

Edit: I wonder what would be evidences that you existed in year 4012....

Edited by the L, 16 December 2012 - 12:05 AM.

[the L]

„In a certain sense all men are historians.“ Thomas Carlyle

Why Thomas, Mark or Luke would be different?

[MysticStrummer]

the L, on 15 December 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

What about four almost indentical accounts on same event? Canonical Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. You are aware that those are four different sources?

I don't think the four gospels are anywhere near close enough to call them almost identical.

[Cassea]

markdohle, on 03 October 2012 - 10:22 PM, said:

When  the Romans crucified someone they were not taken down until they were dead.  Legs were broken, or in Jesus case he was pierced by a spear.  In any case, after being scourged, crowned with thorns, nailed through the wrist and feet on the cross, I doubt even if he lived he would be able to appear before the apostles, or even walk or use his hands.  He rose from the dead, that is the whole point of the New Testament, a document that tells us of the early experiences with the risen Lord.  

Peace
Mark

Said perfectly.

[The Silver Thong]

Ben Masada, on 03 October 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

FIVE EVIDENCES THAT JESUS COULD HAVE SURVIVED THE CROSS

Before presenting here the following evidences that Jesus could have survived the cross, I take it as my duty to clarify my point, that I am not affirming that Jesus survived the cross, but that he could have. In other words, to say that Jesus died on the cross is not 100% safe to assert. It is just one more item of faith, with a high probability to have been true.

1 - According to Josephus, a famous Jewish Historian of the First Century, "It was not uncommon for crucifieds to linger on their crosses, passing out and back up to three or four days till death would eventually catch up on them." Jesus was removed from his cross after only a few hours.

2 - According to Mark 15:44, when Joseph of Arimathea went to Pilate for permission to remove Jesus from the cross for burial, Pilate, an expert in the crufixion of thousands of Jews, "Was deeply concerned and surprised that Jesus had died so soon. Therefore, he summoned the Centurion to verify." Considering that the Roman soldiers were highly
corrupt and that Joseph was quite a rich man in Israel, God knows the size of a possible bribe which affected the reply of the Centurion to Pilate that Jesus was already dead.

3 - According to Mark 16:1, when that Sabbath was over, which in Israel is at sunset, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to Jesus' tomb to anoint his body, when they were surprised to see that the tombstone was removed and the tomb was empty. According to Mat. 28:2, there was an earthquake, an angel came down, removed the tombstone and became equally surprised that the tomb was indeed empty. Never mind the three days and three nights of Mat. 12:40. That supposed-to-be prophecy never got fulfilled.

4 - According to John 19:39, Nicodemus, another rich man in Israel, had brought along about 100 pounds of medication to help Joseph take care of Jesus. It is highly possible that Joseph laid Jesus in his walk-in tomb for an hour or two to prevent unnecessary onlookers and returned later with his men to remove Jesus unto another safer place to mend his wounds.

5 - According to Acts 1:3, Luke said that, "After his suffering, aka, passion, Jesus appeared to his disciples for 40 days with many convincing proofs that he was alive, in flesh and bone, eating and driking with his disciples to prove he was not dead. (Luke 24:42,43) Focus that Luke said that Jesus appeared after his suffering (passion) and not after his death. And, if we consider resurrection here, the evidence goes way out of proportion because, to eat and drink after resurretion just as one used to before death, brings down the whole concept of the Pauline gospel of spiritual body. (I Cor. 15:35-44)

Ben

And yet not one single historian at the time documented Jesus even being a person after raising from the dead. Jesus is a myth that requies as much faith as that of those that believe in bigfoot.

[Ben Masada]

Paranoid Android, on 15 December 2012 - 10:49 PM, said:

Quote

And Mark 16:2 says that it was early on the first day of the week, "when the sun had risen".

And of course, I hope, you know what it means: Contradiction.

Quote

Jesus was harshly treated before his crucifixion.  He was beaten, flogged, and a crown of desert thorns rammed into his skull, rending flesh.  His harsh treatment left him highly vulnerable and so he died quickly - hence the surprise and eventual spear-thrusting.

The Romans did not have a different method to deal with people sentenced to crucifixion. The scourge was part of the agenda and all had to go through it to make actual crucifixion easier. The objective was to break down natural resistence.But the spear-piercing business was a late interpolation to fit in some prophecies. Isaiah 53:5 and Zech. 12:10, which BTW, had nothing to do with crucifixion.

Quote

Speculation.  I suppose if we are talking Court of Law then anything's possible.  We've got Reasonable Doubt.  Of course, anyone that's watched a legal drama probably knows how unreasonable Reasonable Doubt can sometimes be.  I guess I concede that this point is possible, but at the same time you have to concede then that an equal possibility exists that any other number of things could have happened.

Oh gosh! What is not speculation? Every single time you or any other Christian use an OT prophecy to fit Jesus in is speculation.

Quote

Don't forget that Jesus was crucified on the Passover, a Jewish High Sabbath.  Most probably a Wednesday, if Jesus had been crucified on Wednesday afternoon before the Passover, he would be dead for:

What makes a Jewish High Sabbath is not the festival per se but the fact that it falls on the weekly Sabbath. It just happens that the Passover that year fell on the Sabbath and it was called a High Sabbath, or solemn Sabbath, or a Shabbaton. And Jesus was not crucified on Wednesday but Friday. If you read Mat. 27:62, the reference is made to "The Day of Preparation." In Israel, Friday was always traditionally known as "The Day of Preparation." BTW, the text reminds us all that the next day was the Sabbath. A High Sabbath because it coincided with being Passover.

Quote

Night 1 - Wednesday evening, the Sabbath
Day 1 - Thursday day, the Sabbath
Night 2 - Thursday evening
Day 2 - Friday day
Night 3 - Friday evening, the normal Sabbath
Day 3 - Saturday, the Sabbath

Day 1 - Friday. If we are to grant a day for those few minutes that Joseph of Arimathea took to lay Jesus in the tomb just before sunset.
Night 1 - From Friday to Saturday.
Day 2 - Saturday.
Night 2 Saturday night till dawn.
Day 3 - Those few minutes after dawn if we are to close our eyes to the contradictions. The tomb was empty  anyways, when the tombstone was removed. It means that the prophecy of the three days and three nights of Mat. 12:40 did not get fulfilled.

Quote

If Jesus were to resurrect sometime on the evening of Saturday, perhaps just before the sun set, because of the Saturday Sabbath no one came to check on the tomb, so the first time someone came, early on the morning of the first day - as per Mark 16:2, count them up and Jesus was in the ground for three days and three nights.

No, he was not. When the tombstone was removed, the tomb was empty. God knows when it got empty and by who. IMHO, Joseph did the job during the night of Friday to Saturday, when he removed Jesus' body to a safer place. And BTW, there were no guards at the tomb. They were settled there, if it ever happened, Saturday morning. (Mat. 27:62)

Quote

Only if he was not already dead.  And the spear in the side ensured he was dead - the point pierced his lung, which had filled with fluid because he was dead.  Even if he was alive before the spear, no one in the 1st Century AD survived long with a punctured lung.

There was no spear-piercing; and I already explained above why.

Quote

Standard procedure to ensure someone died on the cross was to just let them hang there for a couple of days.  However, because of the Sabbath two alternatives were allowed - breaking legs was most common because most people were still alive and the broken legs ensured they suffocated.  If someone was dead though, it was far easier to spear them through the lungs.  One thrust as opposed to a couple of whacks to the kneecaps.

The Centurion would not have allowed the spear-piercing for two reasons: Either for a possible fat bribe or because he had already declared that Jesus was indeed "the son of God." Read Mark 15:39.

Quote

If Jesus was resurrected, it makes sense that Luke writing after the event would refer to his time on the cross as a time of "suffering", rather than death.  As for Paul's views from 1 Corinthians, there are several ways of examining it.  The most obvious is that Jesus' resurrection was unique.  He was sinless (if you believe the scriptures) and so death had no hold of him.  He went to death, and then came back again.  From this, God exalted him and lifted him up to sit at his right hand (Philippians 2:5-8).  For the rest of us, we were sinful and so when we die we die, and Christians believe that by the Grace of God we will be reborn into sinless bodies that will not perish, hence the resurrection spoken of in 1 Corinthians 15.

See what I mean? Speculations. And for the resurrection, the idea is not Jewish. Jews do not believe in bodily resurrectio.

Quote

That said, having an imperishable body does not necessarily mean that one cannot eat.  Throughout the Hebrew scriptures messengers from God (angels) routinely eat and drink and take shelter and all the things regular people do.

Never in the whole of the Hebrew Scriptures there was a case of spirits eating and drinking. Here is where members of the literal interpretation club get trapped. It all happened in the dreams of the prophets.

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada, 17 December 2012 - 09:16 PM.

[Ben Masada]

the L, on 15 December 2012 - 11:20 PM, said:

So as many things in history. One of it is money pit on Oak island. So what now Oak island doesnt exist?

Yes L, everything is up for the grabs of faith. If you are ready to accept by faith, you got the deal. If not, there is nothing for sure. But hey! What's life without illusion? Not worthy living.

Ben

[Ben Masada]

the L, on 15 December 2012 - 11:21 PM, said:

Based on what?Because he knew Greek?

No, based on the concept of the demigod, which is the son of a god with an earthly woman. The Greeks were famous for that if you read the Iliad and the Odisey of Homer. Doesn't the NT claim that Jesus was the son of God? There!

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada, 17 December 2012 - 09:41 PM.