Did Jesjuah stage his own death in order to escape from it all?

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
Christians are baptised, and in baptism we die.

No. See my earlier post -- you have this completely backwards. Christians are born in Christ through baptism, they don't die in it.

So when you are unable to use scripture against my claims, I am the one who needs to support evidence.

Unable to use scripture against your claims? The whole of scripture is counter to your claims! There is nothing in scripture to support your claims. The reason that you do not cite scripture is because there is no support there for your conjecture and unrealistic views.

Scripture says Jesus died on the cross. Dead is dead. End of story.

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by Soldier of God

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by Soldier of God

 

The text says he stopped breathing while crying out "It is done". The next moment we meet him he is breathing end even eating a fish. Haven't you read the story?

Give me the chapter and verse, I feel we may be reading two very different "Books".

OK, hee you are: John 19:30 (he takes his "last breath") and John 20:15 (he is speaking, and breath is needed to speak). You have to think too you know....

John 19:30 (King James Version)
When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

John 20:15 (King James Version)
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.

I don't see anything that says he stopped breathing for a little while. He died.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
Christians are baptised, and in baptism we die.

No. See my earlier post -- you have this completely backwards. Christians are born in Christ through baptism, they don't die in it.

How about Romans 6:4 and Collosians 2:12? Is suddenly Shaul Paulus not good enough for you?

So when you are unable to use scripture against my claims, I am the one who needs to support evidence.

Unable to use scripture against your claims? The whole of scripture is counter to your claims! There is nothing in scripture to support your claims. The reason that you do not cite scripture is because there is no support there for your conjecture and unrealistic views.

Scripture says Jesus died on the cross. Dead is dead. End of story.

Tell me using extra Paulian quotes where the book says Jesus died on the cross... At best scriptures take Longinus words that Jesjuah was dead when he pierced his thorax, which would be virtually true, allthough they weren't that good at CT- and PET scannings back then.

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by adjensen
I'm still wondering where you keep coming up with superficial wounds resulting from scourging.

Scourging wasn't practised by the Jews back then, and what we do know is that the toughest punnishment the Sanhedrin could demand back then was 40 minus one whip-stokes. So much for scorging.

What makes you think that the Jews did this? Christ was in Pilate's custody, Pilate ordered the punishment, and it was carried out by Roman soldiers. Jews had the 39 lash limit, Romans had no such thing. Jews also did not have crucifixion, which was why the case had to be made that Christ was a threat to the Roman government in order for him to be put to death.

Originally posted by Soldier of GodJohn 19:30 (King James Version)
When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

The word translated ghost here, is mostly translated spirit or breath, which is the same word in Hebrew. Are you really prepared to make the Spirit suffer too?

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by adjensen
I'm still wondering where you keep coming up with superficial wounds resulting from scourging.

Scourging wasn't practised by the Jews back then, and what we do know is that the toughest punnishment the Sanhedrin could demand back then was 40 minus one whip-stokes. So much for scorging.

What makes you think that the Jews did this? Christ was in Pilate's custody, Pilate ordered the punishment, and it was carried out by Roman soldiers. Jews had the 39 lash limit, Romans had no such thing. Jews also did not have crucifixion, which was why the case had to be made that Christ was a threat to the Roman government in order for him to be put to death.

Jesus was firstly tortured until the unrecognisable by the priests and the Sanhedrin, who were all Jews. When he was put before Pilate, he understood the man was innocent from seeing the preposterous allegations, so he wanted to scorge him and let him go, but the mob cried for crucifixion. When the soldiers hit him, it was mere whooping and show off. The initial torture with 40 minus one whipstrokes was performed during the night by the hand of the Sanhedrin. Do your homework.

Originally posted by adjensen
Jews also did not have crucifixion, which was why the case had to be made that Christ was a threat to the Roman government in order for him to be put to death.

OK, what happened at Ba'al Peor then? Weren't the offenders nailed to a tree in broad daylight for worshipping Ba'al of Peor? Again, do your homework, your "knowledge" only please your own stomac. Mine is getting real sour here now, and I have to get to bed. The Jews simply couldn't kill anyone without being procecuted. Only Rome could perform capital punnishment, which is one good reason while the "cast your first stone" can't simply have been included in the original Gospel, which is also weren't. Jews would suffer greatly if they let's say stoned someone or otherwise killed a convict. The dead would be avenged atleaset sevenfold by Rome to show who was their daddy.

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by adjensen
No. See my earlier post -- you have this completely backwards. Christians are born in Christ through baptism, they don't die in it.

How about Romans 6:4 and Collosians 2:12? Is suddenly Shaul Paulus not good enough for you?

This says exactly what I am telling you. Christians believe that we are dead in sin, and reborn in Christ through baptism. Symbolically, our dead selves, our sin, is buried with Christ (when he was buried) and are born again with his resurrection.

Scripture says Jesus died on the cross. Dead is dead. End of story.

Tell me using extra Paulian quotes where the book says Jesus died on the cross... At best scriptures take Longinus words that Jesjuah was dead when he pierced his thorax, which would be virtually true, allthough they weren't that good at CT- and PET scannings back then.

If you want to claim that Matthew 27:50, Mark 15:37, Luke 23:46 and John 19:30 don't all specify that Jesus died, you're just arguing semantics, and once again have no basis.

But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.
-- John 19:33 (NIV)

"Already dead". What is your argument with that statement?

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by adjensen
Jews also did not have crucifixion, which was why the case had to be made that Christ was a threat to the Roman government in order for him to be put to death.

OK, what happened at Ba'al Peor then? Weren't the offenders nailed to a tree in broad daylight for worshipping Ba'al of Peor? Again, do your homework, your "knowledge" only please your own stomac. Mine is getting real sour here now, and I have to get to bed. The Jews simply couldn't kill anyone without being procecuted. Only Rome could perform capital punnishment, which is one good reason while the "cast your first stone" can't simply have been included in the original Gospel, which is also weren't. Jews would suffer greatly if they let's say stoned someone or otherwise killed a convict. The dead would be avenged atleaset sevenfold by Rome to show who was their daddy.

Sure. Familiar with Acts 7:54-60?

Once again, you're just making things up to fit what your view needs to be. Please provide a source indicating that the Roman scourging didn't happen and was "just for show." I grow tired of listening to the same unsubstantiated claims, followed by demands that the Christian needs to provide proof that you are wrong, rather than you proving you are right.

Either provide something other than speculation and conjecture to back your claims, or accept the fact that no one is going to take you seriously.

You've already made up your mind so why start a thread and scoff at any ideas that don't coincide with yours?
If your mind's made up then just be happy. You are awfully angry for someone who has all the answers.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by adjensen
No. See my earlier post -- you have this completely backwards. Christians are born in Christ through baptism, they don't die in it.

How about Romans 6:4 and Collosians 2:12? Is suddenly Shaul Paulus not good enough for you?

This says exactly what I am telling you. Christians believe that we are dead in sin, and reborn in Christ through baptism. Symbolically, our dead selves, our sin, is buried with Christ (when he was buried) and are born again with his resurrection.

We are buried through baptism means we are ressurected? That's Paulus' words against even his Pharicee decree. The Tanakh says that God will raise ancient humans from bones and the dust of the earth. Being baptised and pulled up, simply means you died and survived.

Scripture says Jesus died on the cross. Dead is dead. End of story.

Tell me using extra Paulian quotes where the book says Jesus died on the cross... At best scriptures take Longinus words that Jesjuah was dead when he pierced his thorax, which would be virtually true, allthough they weren't that good at CT- and PET scannings back then.

If you want to claim that Matthew 27:50,

Jesjuah "gave up his spirit/breath"

Mark 15:37

Jesjuah breathed out

Luke 23:46

Jesjuah takes "a last breath" again

and John 19:30

Again, Jesjuah gives his last breath

don't all specify that Jesus died, you're just arguing semantics, and once again have no basis.

But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.
-- John 19:33 (NIV)

"Found that he was already dead" as in SAID that he was already dead, which was the lie that would eventually save Jesjuah's life and bring Longinus Panthera into marthyrdom.

"Already dead". What is your argument with that statement?

You don't believe when I explain how the same people declaring him dead also declared his "death" was a murder of justice, but you do believe their only white lie. In Hebrew and Biblical thought, Life is contained in the blood and the spirit of God making us animated souls, is the continuance of the breath God breathed through Adam's nostrils. Jesjuah lost blood, hence he lost his life, and Jesjuah lost his ability to breathe, hence God's spirit left him. "Elí Elí lemá sabaktáni...."

Besides, the OP has a fully woriking explanation in point #3

Originally posted by Soldier of God
You've already made up your mind so why start a thread and scoff at any ideas that don't coincide with yours?
If your mind's made up then just be happy. You are awfully angry for someone who has all the answers.

Yeah, no kidding. I'm always amused when people come to a website whose motto is "Deny Ignorance" and then go out of the way to declare their embracement of it.

Crackpot theory... check.
Complete lack of evidence... check.
Criticism of anyone who disagrees, regardless of basis... check.
Righteous indignation when the world ignores you... check.

reply to post by adjensen


And this lead to further explanation? None. Check.
And you provided no further evidence? None. Check.
And you sustained your own mind. Yes. Check.
And leaving me behind thinking you only discuss in order to make your voice heared? Yes. Check.
And so on. What makes you think I am angry? I couldn't care less, that's the main point. And when it comes to hostility, your way of sustaining it had it been oresent would be tremendous. Check.

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic


Again, you are arguing semantics, have provided no evidence that your conjectures have any basis, and fail to make a salient point. You've come up with a theory, one without basis, and one which few will find any merit in. Appreciate your perspective, and just accept the fact that it requires a leap in faith and logic that few will see as realistic.

I'm glad that you have found what you believe to be the truth. Be glad that I have found it for myself, as well, regardless of whether it is the same as yours.

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

 

Again, you are arguing semantics, have provided no evidence that your conjectures have any basis,

So linguistics and religious science doesn't work with you? I am sorry to hear that from someone who says "In the begining was the Word" and I guess, since you'd embrace that you'd also say that God is evil and kills his babies too. Sorry, I don't follow you. Is this all you can come up with in return? You sound like a baby to be honest. "Maaaaaa! he says my god is aliiiiiive! Please woooooop him maaaaa! For God is DEAAAAD!"

and fail to make a salient point. You've come up with a theory, one without basis, and one which few will find any merit in. Appreciate your perspective, and just accept the fact that it requires a leap in faith and logic that few will see as realistic.

I'm glad that you have found what you believe to be the truth. Be glad that I have found it for myself, as well, regardless of whether it is the same as yours.

Oh dear. Saying God killed his only son makes sense, while the Word of our Christ in motion, working like a symphony doesn't. Oh my. No wonder I am lost....

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
Is this all you can come up with in return? You sound like a baby to be honest. "Maaaaaa! he says my god is aliiiiiive! Please woooooop him maaaaa! For God is DEAAAAD!"

So, lacking evidence, the best that you can manage is to criticize my character?

Not really the way to convince anyone that you've a corner on the truth, sorry to say. The only thing I've learned here is that you are rude and ill tempered when someone questions your authority to make outlandish claims without any evidence what so ever.

Wow, talk about grasping at straws.
In the search to prove your 5 scholastic Biblical points... EPIC FAIL!!!!!

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
Is this all you can come up with in return? You sound like a baby to be honest. "Maaaaaa! he says my god is aliiiiiive! Please woooooop him maaaaa! For God is DEAAAAD!"

So, lacking evidence, the best that you can manage is to criticize my character?

Not really the way to convince anyone that you've a corner on the truth, sorry to say. The only thing I've learned here is that you are rude and ill tempered when someone questions your authority to make outlandish claims without any evidence what so ever.

Not to sort myself out as Christ, but has it ever occured to you that your and my hero held many, if not all the of the same characteristics when he argued his opositious "Pharicees and scribes"? I call you a baby and you go on to underline it. I am one against all of you here, and you claim I am the one who is angry here. To be hionest I have followed this discussion with a happy tone, only I cannot sit and listen to Kreuderwelsch and silly distractions without knocking your balls through the squared holes they are supposed to fit into. I am not angry. Eager perhaps, but certainly not angry. Why would anyone question MY authority, when the authority in question is the Gospel itself. Find me the place in the Gospel where Jesjuah is proinounced dead by or based on anyone else than his friends and I'll hold my tongue. For a whort while that is.

Originally posted by Soldier of God
Wow, talk about grasping at straws.
In the search to prove your 5 scholastic Biblical points... EPIC FAIL!!!!!

Good luck, you wouldn't be the first to fail at that. You would, like me, only read what pleases the eye, and knowing how I have studied and come up with all of this on my own in about ten years, I find it hard to believe that anyone could refute these ideas in a day or perhaps two. The text claims that Jesjuah was alive three days after crusifixion. That means he survived. Ask any doctor. Besides, when discussing Biblical texts, online searchengines might be a good tool, but it is nothing worth unless you actually now the stories in advance. Completely stripped of any personal or institutional bias whatsoever. Which you have already shown that you fail grately in. You are in fact already "in habilus", so whatever you manage to provide of claims against my own claims would wear off like water on a goose on me. But good luck in prooving Nietzche's saying "God is Dead". For that is what you are saying, you are trying to proove that Jesjuah died, while the only word you have for it is some soldier's words who just prior to his finding "Jesjuah is dead" declared that Jesjuah was the Son of God and didn't bother to kill him, but rather sting him in the side "finding God is Dead". Like I said, good luck, but may I remind you of the consequences if you manage to proove Jesjuah was actually braindead for three days. It would mean that not only is God dead, but he also killed his own son and even made the whole world believe he did it out of Love. Sick bastards. Whole lot of this mob.

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic


The Jewish rulers wanted to be quite sure Jesus was dead. They were present to witness the event (Mt 27:41, Mk 15:31, Lk 23:35) and even objected to the wording of Pilate's superscription on the cross (Jn 19:21).

The Roman soldiers wanted to be quite sure Jesus was dead. This was to be a quick execution, since Jewish customs did not allow the bodies to be left hanging on a holy day. However, as noted above, they couldn't afford to bungle the operation. They broke the legs of the two thieves, a standard method of accelerating death. Jesus, who we must remember had been flogged prior to his crucifixion, appeared to be dead already: but that wasn't good enough for them: so one of the soldiers stabbed him in the side with his spear, just to make quite sure. This incident is mentioned only in John's gospel, where it is strongly emphasised that this is not hearsay but an eye-witness report (Jn 19:31-5)

Following Jesus' death, the bodies were not immediately removed from the cross, but were left hanging. Jesus died at about 3pm (Mt 27:45-50, Mk 15:34-7, Lk 23:44-6) yet the bodies were not removed until the evening (Mt 28:57-8, Mk 15:42-6, Lk 23:50-3, Jn 38-42

Pilate also wanted to be quite sure Jesus was dead. Mark records that he would not agree to the removal of the body, until after he had summoned the centurion and obtained confirmation that Jesus had been dead for quite some time (Mk 15:42-6).

That is no doubt why both Jewish and Roman authorities are absolutely adamant on this: Jesus Christ was crucified - Finis! Given the facts, there was no way they could possibly deny it.