Hello guys. Firstly, Please do not take offence to my question. I am seriously trying to reason out the bible.

I agree to the fact that Jesus Christ was indeed crucified. But I have my doubts to whether he actually died on the cross. The following are the reasons for my doubts:

1. "He keepeth all his bones, not one of them is broken." Psalm 34:20. This prophecy does indeed belong to Jesus. However, if the bones of a victim were protected from harm, it would be beneficial only if the victim were alive. For a person already dead, it does not make a difference if the bones are broken or intact. However, it did make a difference to a living person. The pagan Romans were not duty bound to fulfill any prophecy. They just "saw that he was dead and broke not his bones". There was no verification done to test whether he was dead. They just surmised that he was dead. In this I see God's all merciful ploy in saving the innocent Jesus.

1. One of the soldiers did indeed pierce the side of Jesus, from where blood and water flowed. Due to immense fatigue, immobility and an unnatural stance on the cross, the blood circulation of Jesus must have slowed down. Upon being thrust with the spear, the circulation gained rhythm. Also, the very fact that the flow of water and blood was instantaneous, showed that Jesus was indeed alive, cause blood does not flow out of a dead body.

1. "Pilate marvelled if he were already dead, and to him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead." Mark 15:44. Why was Pilate surprised? Pilate must have known from experience that it was not normal for a person to die on the cross within three hours, unless the leg-breaking procedure was followed, which was not done on the case of Jesus. If a person is sent to the gallows and later it is discovered that he is dead, is it a matter of surprise? But if he is found to be alive, it is indeed a matter of surprise. Conversely Pilate expected Jesus to be alive and hence was surprised that he was dead so soon.

1. And if Pilate had his doubts about Jesus being dead, he could have made sure he was. But why would he do that? Was he not the one who found Jesus innocent of all the charges levied against him? Did not his wife tell him to spare Jesus due to the dream she had? Was he not blackmailed by the people into having Jesus crucified? Therefore Pilate must have given permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take away the body of Jesus.

1. The so called "companions", of Jesus fled away when he really required them. There is also a high possibility of them not being present at the scene of crucifixion, as the people would have also had them arrested for supporting Jesus. The secret disciples of Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, who had the body of Jesus lowered from the cross, would never have been heard of had it not been for Jesus' ordeal. The shrouding, the burial bath, and the burial ceremonies could well have taken more than 2 hours. Had anyone of the near ones of Jesus seen any hint of life in the body, they would not have been foolish enough to shout and declare he was alive, lest the Jews would make doubly sure his life was snuffed out.

1. "Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance" (John 20:1). Why did Mary Magdalene go to the tomb? As Mark 16:1 tells us, to anoint his body. Now the question to be popped up is, do the Jews or Christians anoint a dead body after 3 days? Rigor Mortis sets in the body, due to which the body becomes stiff and any attempt to touch it; let alone anoint it, will result in the body crumbling to pieces. Does anointing make any sense then, unless the person is suspected to be alive?

1. The bible tells us that when Mary Magdalene reached the tomb, she found the sheets to be bundled in a corner and the Stone at the entrance was removed. If the body was resurrected, i.e, it was a spiritualized body, then it was not required for the sheets to be unwound or the stone to be moved, unless Jesus was alive.

1. Mary Magdalene did not recognise Jesus when she saw him and thought him to be a gardener. Why was that? Because he was disguised as a gardener. Why was he disguised? Because he was afraid of the Jews. And why was that? Because he had not died nor did he conquer death, cause if he had done so and his body was indeed spiritualized, then he would not have had to fear death and to put on a disguise. It was only when Mary heard him calling out her name, in the way her master used to call her, did she recognise him.

1. "Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away." (John 20:15). Mary refers to the body as "him" and not "it". Also she wants to "take him away". How can she do it alone? The body, with the linen sheets and embalming together would weigh more than she could even attempt to lift.

1. On calling out her name, Mary is thrilled and lunges forward to grab Jesus in reverence. But Jesus disallows her to touch him. Why? Cause he says he has not ascended to his father yet. It is very obvious Jesus has not ascended to his father yet as he is standing in front of Mary. Why then does Jesus say this? It is common parlance in any culture to refer to a dead person as having attained the abode of God. This was Jesus' way of telling Mary that he was alive, not dead, and so he did not allow her to touch him, as even though he seemed normal, he had gone through a very violent ordeal, and it would hurt him if she did so.

1. Again there is the instance where Jesus appears to his disciples and confirms that he is not a ghost or spirit, but flesh and blood. The angels at the tomb ask Mary why she was searching for the living amongst the dead. Why was Mary jubilant when she saw Jesus at the tomb alive and why were the disciples afraid when they saw their Master. For the simple reason that Mary was present during the burial and was expecting to see a live Jesus, whereas the disciples were nowhere to be seen during the burial and hence they thought Jesus was a ghost or a spirit.

Finally a quote from Matthew 12:40, "For as Jonah was THREE days and THREE nights in the whale's belly; so shall the son of man be THREE days and THREE nights in the heart of the earth." Remember these words are said by Jesus himself. Jesus compares himself with the ordeal of Jonah. Firstly Jonah had agreed to sacrifice his life for having disobeyed God. Did Jesus agree to sacrifice his life for having disobeyed God?Was Jonah dead in the whale's belly? No, he was alive, and there was no case that he was dead and came back to life? So if we compare should not Jesus be alive in the tomb? Jonah was in the whale's belly for 3 days and 3 nights. On simple calculation it is revealed that Jesus was in the tomb for 2 nights (Friday and Saturday) and 1 day (Saturday). So did Jesus really prophesy his crucifixion with this comparison or is it just a misplaced analogy by us?

Actually, there is no evidence that a person known as Jesus of Nazareth ever existed much less was crucified. The only place this story could be found until after the middle of the 2nd century CE was in a series of so-called gospels (of which only 4 were accepted by the current version of Christianity) that were written generations after the fact by non-witnesses who probably had no access to eye-witnesses. Heck, even the town of Nazareth didn’t exist until the middle of the 2nd century, so that shows how accurate these gospels are .

Come on Mako, that's a bit too much. A false tale can fool some people for some time. But the existence of Jesus has been around for centuries. A lie cannot survive for so long, however cleverly it has been fabricated. My concern is not the existence of Jesus, but the way the world perceives him and his life. Among all the prophets and messengers of God, I consider Jesus to be the most unfortunate. His own people deserted him, his own disciples did not clearly understand his teachings and his followers all around the world do anything but follow his teachings. Christians all over the world find the easier way of instant salvation by believing in his sacrifice and saving their own skins rather than believing in his teachings and living the exemplary life that he propounded; which I presume they find it very difficult to do in this age and time.

There is no evidence that Jesus existed other then the writtings that mako talks of, there were many "sons of god" living around the time Jesus was supose to have lived, and they all did that same thing.

~Thanato

Very very interesting points you brought out there. Most of which I had never thought about and make a lot of sense. I admit I am not a Christian however I do believe that Jesus walked the earth and was a very very spiritual man. His life is quite interesting and I think the bible only covers about half of it.

Well, Hmmmm, Let’s see……a false tale fooled the Egyptian people for over 4000 years. A false tale has fooled the Persian people (certain ones) for well over 3000 years. A false tale has fooled the Hindus for nearly 4000 years. A false tale has fooled the Mithrans for over 2300 years. A false tale has fooled the Jews for over 2600 years. Lies can and do survive for extremely long times. Around 1274 BCE, the Egyptian army under Pharaoh Ramesses II and the Hittite army under King Muwatalli met in battle near the town of Kadesh in modern Syria. Although the battle was a near disaster for the Egyptians (Ramesses was almost captured and a large part of his army destroyed) and was in all actuality a draw (the Hittites could not actually defeat the Egyptians) and both armies withdrew back into their own territories and later signed a non-aggression pact; Ramesses II had the story of his great victory over the Hittites engraved on the walls of the temple at Abu Simbel. This story was believed by scholars until the Hittite language was deciphered in the early part of the 20th century. At this time this lie that had lasted for over 3200 years was exposed. Yes, lies can last for a long long time. Jesus was not the only “prophet/son of god/savior” that was abandoned by his own people. This story is a common theme among a number of religions that predated Christianity and since we only have information written down generations after he supposedly lived, information (gospels) that have been edited and reedited to conform with changing church dogma, we have no way of knowing what he said or even if he had disciples (something that those older religions gave to their saviors, even the same number often). History has shown us that upon close scrutiny, these “gods” and “godlings” are nothing more than tall tales and mythology. Jesus shows all the earmarks of being such.

As Mako says a Lie can last for thousands of years though this particular one seems to be dying off after only 2000 years compared to some that Mako cited that seems little more then a short fairy tale.

As to Jesus's Crucifixion if he did live then and was considered a criminal then he probably was crucified as most criminals were around that time. If the same thing happened today maybe cristians would be wearing miniature electric chairs or small Hypodermic needles and calling them 'holy'

If you know anything about Roman crucifixion, you'd realise Jesus was indeed dead, by the description in the gospel's.

How does one die when put on a cross? Blood-loss? No. Heatstroke? No.

Death on a cross occurs when one becomes too tired to support one's own weight with their arms and legs. They slump forward, the ribs crush the lungs and they suffocate. As a result, the lungs get filled with fluid, as you literally drown in your own body-liquid.

Piercing the lung, as is described, shows proof that Jesus had indeed died on the cross. THe side was pierced, blood and water gushed out. Not just a small dribble, but a large quantity. Jesus had suffocated on that cross!

Additionally, the Roman's were meticulous in everything they did. WHen smeone is put on a cross, they make sure they're dead before they come down. As incentive, the Roman's precision was heightened over years, as the soldier's lives would be forfeit if they didn't do their job correctly. No excuses. No second chances. If a criminal isn't dead on the cross when they're taken down, the soldier's are killed.

Since it is obvious that Jesus did indeed die (according to the scripture's), the rest of the opening post is now moot.

Regards, PA

Was there a Jesus?


Was there a Nazareth?


As an added bonus: Was there all 12 Apostles?

Actually, there are accounts given by Josephus (I believe it was Josephus) of criminals actually surviving crucifixion. I'll look for the exact passages.

Brother PA. I still stand by my stance of Jesus not being dead. As u said that the soldiers had to pay for their lives when they did not do their job correctly. Is there any account of what happened to the soldiers after they had declared that Jesus was dead? Do any of the accounts mention anything about those soldiers? Even if they had, it has been very cleverly blotted out cause if it was found out that these soldiers were punished for error, it would have gone without saying that Jesus' death on the cross would have been disproved.

Again one of the Roman soldiers said that Jesus was indeed a man from God. Did he say that due to the thunder, solar eclipse and earthquake? Would he have said that if Jesus died? Indeed not. He said that because he saw that Jesus still lived, even after the tremendous ordeal he had suffered.

Agreed that death on crucifixion comes due to suffocation, but such death is not swift. Usually a wooden seat is placed at the seat or between the legs of the victim to support his body weight. This prolongs the agony and time of death. The speed with which Jesus supposedly died would be possible only if his legs were broken. But as we all know, this was not the case. Jesus may have fainted, but not died.

Even if I do believe for a second that Jesus did die, I still cannot figure out why Mary Magdalene went to the tomb to anoint the corpse even on the 3rd day or of Pilate's pro-Jesus behaviour or even Jesus' repeated claims that he was still body and flesh and not a spirit.

Please don't make an error by casting a blanket on the rest of my post cause even if Jesus died, as u say, the rest of claims which are from the same scriptures, become even more dubious and doubtful.

After Christ was removed from the cross he was placed in a sepulcher, fearing that the body may be stolen the religious leader begged Pilate for a Roman Guard, I believe consisted of 10 fully armed soldiers, I know Mako will correct me on this if needed.

Mat 27:64 Command therefore that the sepulcher be made sure until the third day, lest haply his disciples come and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: and the last error will be worse than the first.
Mat 27:65 Pilate said unto them, Ye have a guard: go, make it as sure as ye can.
Mat 27:66 So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, the guard being with them.


Mat 28:4 and for fear of him the watchers did quake, and became as dead men.

Apparently these fully armed Roman soldiers fell into a state of shock at the appearance of an angel. Whether shock or even falling asleep they would have been punished severely if not put to death for failing in there duty to keep the sepulcher sealed and secured.
Irish

The crucifiction didn't happen and its meant as a metaphore none the less...If you look at in a metaphorical sense it literally says that any other beleifs but the prevailing ones of the day were crucified ( that still goes on today), i have never thought that Jesus was 'real' ect etc...just my 2 cents....

Found this on Roman crucifixion:

Undoubtedly, one of the cruelest and most humiliating forms of punishment in the ancient world was, according to ancient sources, crucifixion. The Jewish historian Josephus best described it following the siege of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 66-70 as "the most wretched of deaths."1 Whereas in Seneca's Epistle 101 to Lucilius, he argues that suicide is preferable to the cruel fate of being put on the cross.

Roman crucifixion

Thanks Zandore good artical

Thanks Zandore. Nice article...

Including...?


I had to visit the site on my home computer, because I tried visiting it at school but got a message saying it was blocked because it matched the categories for "Intolerance" and "Religious Discrimination." The landoverbaptist site I couldn't get to at all because it was described as being in the previous ones plus "Obscene; Pointless"


I'm not trying to sound condescending, but how to you mean it's speaking metaphorically? I'm interested in your viewpoint

It is a metaphor, a symbol of what your soul must go through to reach ultimate enlightenment.You must, so to speak, crucify your "self" to become one with God. "I and my father are one". this is something for all of us to achieve.

I get it now

Gideon, just curious, does your name have to do with the Bible character Gideon who led an Israelite army of 300 armed with only a torch, clay pot, and a trumpet and defeated an enemy army of 100,000+ (something like that ). We were learning about it in my youth group and was wondering if UM name had anything to do with it. If so, good choice

Perhaps according to Christians....the web site was set up by ex-Christians that include Pastors, Priests, and I would imagine Nuns.

Also if you could run the Christian Bible through a V-chip (do you know what a V-chip is) it would not pass (violence, sex, intolerance, religious discrimination).

Ah, that explains it

As it has been pointed out......Christianity is in a downward spiral.