Sabour
Well-Known Member
Still I don't think that addresses why Pilate would choose to crucify him instead of directly killing him
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
why did they want to crucify jesus
- Thread starter Sabour
- Start date
Still I don't think that addresses why Pilate would choose to crucify him instead of directly killing him
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Still I don't think that addresses why Pilate would choose to crucify him instead of directly killing him
I hope that columbus doesn't mind, but let me jump in on this.
Crucifixion was an absolutely horrible and degrading death-- one of the worst anyone could have even devised. It was excruciatingly slow, some lasting several days, plus it had the added dimension of "advertising" of what would happen to you if you dared to upset the Roman authorities, as these crosses were put on higher ground so that those in the town could easily see.
Most died of asphyxiation because their diaphragm couldn't rise and fall while their arms were supporting their own weight, so one would push/pull up to take a breath, and then have to repeat it every X number of seconds. After a while, sometimes a long while, one got too tired whereas they couldn't elevate their body, and then finally they would die.
Sabour
Well-Known Member
What was Jesus peace be upon him thing that he suddenly did ti deserve that punishment?
I don't think the problem was with initially with the romans.
Mark 12:14-17
King James Version (KJV)
14 And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?
15 Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it.
16 And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's.
17 And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.
outhouse
Atheistically
Still I don't think that addresses why Pilate would choose to crucify him instead of directly killing him
It would or could, start a riot. that means no money flow
Not only that he was ment to made an example of what not to do.
You don't start trouble at Passover period.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I already dealt with this on one thread-- maybe it was this one. In brief, crucifixion was a Roman punishment, and the Romans had no interest in Jewish religious Law. However, Jesus' actions at the Temple overturning the tables and using a whip, would have really upset the Romans big time.
Also, monarchies don't like competition, so Jesus talking about another "kingdom" would not be welcomed.
All scripture is subjective, so we shouldn't read them as literal history, and there would be a logical reason why Jews who didn't covert into the church would be demonized.
outhouse
Atheistically
How popular do you think he was?
Do you think his teachings were so different from thousands of other teachers and their messages, that he would be singled out! of a half million people crammed into a very small place??? And who all had different beliefs about god and Judaism.
Or does it make more sense that he caused a disturbance as written, and was made an example of what not to do at Passover?
Sabour
Well-Known Member
But still, any one crucified would be cursed according to the law, right ?
If we view all scripture as subjective than we can't figure anything out.
I believe Jesus was a minor revolutionary who would now be forgotten except for Paul picking up a garbled and incomplete version of His story and starting a new religion from it.
Tom
Sabour
Well-Known Member
I disagree that he was a minority.
Even though many people, in my opinion, are following what Paul thinks instead what Jesus peace be upon him taught, they still say we are Christians, that they are following the teaching of Jesus peace be upon him.
If I in my time was a hero and example to follow, and than someone came to put words into my mouth that I never said, people would be following that someone thinking they are following me and than they begin to justify things put in my mouth in any way because they know the fact that I was an example to follow but they don't know that these are not actually what I was teaching.
Had no body came to put things into my mouth, than people would had followed what I really stood for.
So whether people are actually following paul or Jesus peace be upon him doesn't much tell what you have said.
Last edited:
The reason I believe Jesus was a minor character in His day is because nobody noticed Him enough to mention it. It was only after Paul started a religion in His name that anybody bothered to write a Gospel.
Tom
Sabour
Well-Known Member
Not really.
There is the injil revealed to him that is not the bible we see today. So there was a scripture that got twisted by the word of man. ( This is the islamic view).
In addition, had this been the case, we wouldn't have seen in the bible two views which are 100 percent opposite.
Sabour
Well-Known Member
At the times of Muhammad peace be upon him there were still people following the true teaching of Jesus peace be upon him and they later came to Islam.
That is because muhammad peace be upon him coming was known in the Injil.
This still can be seen in the bible too
John 16
5 But now I go my way to him that sent me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou?
6 But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart.
7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
I don't know what injil means. But apparently you and I agree that the Bible was invented by humans, because God wasn't able to get His meaning across. I also think that about all other scriptures.
Including the Quran. I think it was invented by human beings just as the Bible and Darwin's" Origin of Species". The biggest difference is that Darwin actually researched his subject.
Tom
Sabour
Well-Known Member
No not really.
Injil was a revelation revealed to Jesus peace be upon him. It is the word of God. However what we see today as the bible is not that word of God. But I do say that part of it is true.
How do I know? From the Quraan, the final revelation.
Quraan is very clear that Jesus peace be upon him wasn't crucified and they didn't kill him.
He was raised to God alive at the age of 33 as I remember. He has a second coming to kill the antichrist.
And why should I care about the Qur'an has to say about it, especially since it was written centuries after the fact? What you're saying is that even Christians in the first century were wrong about such an important thing. That's preposterous!
outhouse
Atheistically
It is not the bible we see today.
It has ZERO historical value, it carries no credibility at all towards the man from Galilee known as Jesus.
outhouse
Atheistically
Sabour
Well-Known Member
Because Quraan is the word of God just like the Injil was.
It is guarded against change, it is the same as it were 1400 years ago.
And Quraan is the last revelation and Muhammad peace be upon him was the final prophet.
I didn't say people of the first century are wrong. I am saying how can you tell from the bible what the first century people actually said.
Sabour
Well-Known Member
Perhaps you need to look up the definition of the word revelation