Jesus did not die on the Cross

“Jesus didn't die” would have been more interesting.

0ne-answer said:

Jesus peace be upon him said that he didn't come to destroy the law, he came to fulfill it. This is key here. According to this law, as I showed, anyone who is hung on the tree is cursed and I mentioned the reference. This means anywhere, if they were able to crucify Jesus peace be upon him, he wouldn't be a prophet, or it will disprove who he was or what he said he was even if they crucified him on the moon. The law of the prophets goes everywhere and not only in a certain place.

Click to expand...

My example stands. The priesthood had no authority to render judgement rendering the trial moot. Since the Duet verse in in relation to the law yet Jesus' trial was anything but within this law the curse need not apply. The curse is not for the pole but the punishment of a capital offense. You have quoted out of context thus your argument is invalid.

You are free to believe what you want. However as I have said nothing you or I have said proves either case. One could pick either argument but can not prove either. Heck one could take the stance of Judaism. Since Jesus failed to fulfill all of the prophecies he is a false prophet/messiah.

I have already read the Quran and have rejected it's claims.

Syed Ahmad said:

Hi

Just to add a bit, I actually do agree with the forumer who says that there are clues in the gospels that Jesus didn't die on the cross. To name a few:

He bled when pierced on the side.
He was given healing herbs/ointments when taken down from the cross.
He went into hiding and didn't proclaim himself after he left Joseph's tomb.

The above are just a few out of many.

Thanks

Syed

Click to expand...

there are clues in the gospels that Jesus didn't die on the cross

Click to expand...

There are indeed very strong clues in the Bible to confirm that Jesus could not and did not die on the Cross.

Regards

paarsurrey said:

There are indeed very strong clues in the Bible to confirm that Jesus could not and did not die on the Cross.

Regards

Click to expand...

No there is not.

You have no clue what your talking about.

You promote bias and hatred of others beliefs

syed ahmad said:

I completely agree that myrrh and aloe were used in burial practices, but would like to make the point that I am not aware of any practice where these two herbs, both renown for their healing properties were applied to dead bodies, and in particular such a huge amount.

These spices were used for scent a lot, where they were burnt, and in some other cases spices/oils were applied to the body in order to wash it, as mentioned in the Tamara and earlier Jewish traditions: Shab 23:5 indicates that the corpse was anointed and washed, i.e. it was first smeared with oil to remove the dirt and then washed to cleanse it of the oil.

Jesus’ body was anointed with the spices, but was not washed, so it cannot be for this reason. Furthermore, it would have been a complete waste of money and effort to wash a body with myrrh and aloe, both of which were incredibly expensive; more expensive than gold.

A further point is that, later in the gospels it is recorded that some women came to the tomb days later to 'anoint Jesus with spices'. According to Mark (15:46), Joseph took the body of Jesus and wrapped him in linen cloths. But he would not have done so if he had not already cleaned the body; otherwise the sweat and blood of the body would have stuck to the cloth. Then leaving the body for a day and a half in such a state would have made it almost impossible to access it to clean; since it would have required peeling off the sheets, which would probably have peeled off parts of the skin as well. No Jew would therefore wrap a body in linen cloths without first cleaning it. However, neither Mark nor the other gospels mention anyone washing the body of Jesus before wrapping it, which would have been the standard procedure for shrouding a dead body.

Click to expand...

None of the gospels mention washing his body, PERIOD!

Of the 4 gospels, only 2 mentioned (Luke 23:55-56) anything about spice to be used on the body. And of the two that do, neither of them remotely or explicitly suggest it was to be used for medicine or healing.

In John 19:39, it say Nicodemus brought the myrrh and aloes, and it was done before laying body in the tomb, but in Luke 23:53, it only Jesus was wrapped in linen, and laid in tomb, and verse 23:55-56 the unnamed spices were prepared by the women who followed Jesus since from Galilee, with no mentioned of Nicodemus at all. Because it was evening, day of sabbath has begun, hence the day of rest, the spice weren't applied till after the sabbath.

Luke 23:52-56 said:

52 This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. 53 Then he took it down, wrapped it in a linen cloth, and laid it in a rock-hewn tomb where no one had ever been laid. 54 It was the day of Preparation, and the sabbath was beginning. 55 The women who had come with him from Galilee followed, and they saw the tomb and how his body was laid. 56 Then they returned, and prepared spices and ointments.

Click to expand...

Of the other 2 gospels, there are no mention of spices at all. That Jesus had his body wrapped in linen and lay in tomb.

Matthew 27:59-60 said:

59 So Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth 60 and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn in the rock. He then rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb and went away.

Click to expand...

15:46 said:

46 Then Joseph[l] bought a linen cloth, and taking down the body, wrapped it in the linen cloth, and laid it in a tomb that had been hewn out of the rock. He then rolled a stone against the door of the tomb.

Click to expand...

As you can see, Mark 15:46, Matthew 27:59-60 & Luke 23:53 all clearly state that nothing was put on his body and only say covering his body with linen before placing him in a tomb. If the spices were used for healing, Jesus would be without medicine until the day after sabbath. Both Matthew and Luke confirmed the earlier gospel of Mark, about the details of the women going to Jesus' tomb after the sabbath.

Mark, Matthew and Luke all say women brought the spices and ointment on the day after the sabbath had finished. Only John say the spices were being applied on the same day of Jesus' death.

John 19 is the only gospel that provide very different detail. It was the last gospel to be written, and it is least reliable of the 4.

You are just making claims, and applying interpretations to verses, without comparing john 19 against the other related verses.

If Jesus was alive then why leave the body in tomb without food and water? If the spices were medicine, why do the 3 others gospels say nothing about it being used before putting Jesus into the tomb?

It really doesn't help your argument, when you only look at gospel, without reviewing details from other gospels of the same event.

to Syed Ahmad
I provided evidence of history and reason to prove that Christ was on the cross
And it does not Eugdnschh
Punishment was on Christ
But you want to prove that Christ was replaced on the Cross
Here, I want to ask you one question
Do you believe that the Gospel which we believe is not distorted
I said if he interpolated
This means that you can not support the Koran by
He interpolated
But if I said that it is not distorted
It is useful slitting

Paarsurrey,
Muslims find themselves faced with a stark choice. They are expected to believe that the Qur'an is the inerrant word of God, and that Muhammad was a sinless prophet. Yet the Qur'an relies upon making connections with the scriptures of the Jews and Christians to validate its message.

The consequence of the claims made in the Qur'an are significant, unto death.

Either the Qur'an is a true prophecy, delivered by a true prophet, or the Bible is a true prophecy, delivered by true prophets. The two are mutually exclusive because the messages are incompatible. Any attempt to resolve this difference by claiming mistranslation or error in the Bible (as is usually the position adopted by Muslims) does not stand up to scrutiny.

My own position is certain. I believe that the Qur'an is a false prophecy, and that Muhammad was a false prophet. One of the reasons I believe this is because the Qur'an states unequivocally that Jesus was not crucified. This one statement is so fundamental that it needs to be thought about carefully and with all seriousness.

The Christian belief, supported by scripture, is that Jesus HAD to die. The New Testament does not come into effect until the death of the testator. Listen to these words;
'For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.' (Hebrews 9: 16,17)

Jesus came to deliver a baptism in the holy spirit. This baptism was not available until after he had died and been resurrected. He had to die to take away the sin of mankind. He had to be raised as justification that he was a 'lamb without spot', a perfect sacrifice before God.

The Old and New Testaments of the Bible point to Jesus Christ as the son of God and Saviour. He is raised to heaven to sit upon his throne. (Matthew 25:31) He will judge all nations, casting some into 'everlasting fire' whilst blessing others with eternal life.

The supposed prophecy of Muhammad is unsupported. He stands alone. The Bible, on the other hand is written by up to 40 different prophets, all of whom were inspired by God to add their thread to a glorious tapestry of scripture.

I have nothing against Muslims. My responsibility towards you is to present the Gospel that I understand to be true. It's up to you to study the evidence carefully because it is, most assuredly, a question of life and death.

Redemptionsong said:

Either the Qur'an is a true prophecy, delivered by a true prophet, or the Bible is a true prophecy, delivered by true prophets


.

Click to expand...

Well your factually wrong.

It is not either OR


They both could be wrong. And by all historical accounts they both are :slap:

Originally Posted by paarsurrey
There are indeed very strong clues in the Bible to confirm that Jesus could not and did not die on the Cross.

Click to expand...

outhouse said:

No there is not.

You have no clue what your talking about.

You promote bias and hatred of others beliefs

Click to expand...

I will provide my arguments from Bible.

The First Argument from Bible

Matthew 12:39

[38] Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying: Master we would see a sign from thee. [39] Who answering said to them: An evil and adulterous generation seeketh a sign: and a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.[40] For as Jonas was in the whale' s belly three days and three nights: so shall the Son of man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.

Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible, Gospel According to Saint Matthew Chapter 12

And Jonah as per OT Bible:

1. entered in the belly of the fish alive;
2. remained in the belly of the fish alive,
3. came out from the belly of the fish alive and
4. went to his people and they saw him alive; just in the same body in which he was before he went into the belly.

So must Jesus.

Jesus did not die a cursed death on the Cross.
The creed that "Jesus died a cursed death on the Cross" is a fabrication of Paul,Church and their associates.

Regards

You have no clue what your talking about.

You promote bias and hatred of others beliefs

The whale story was for Jonas. You have no argument here. It is a very weak correlation which can be dismissed. There is also other miracles one could point to as a sign; healing, walking on water, fish sandwichs, etc. There a number of signs and miracles many prophets supposedly did. There are a number of miracles prophets did not do which others did.

gnostic said:

The 2nd thing I want to address, in that same quote of yours:


No where does the Acts or in any Pauline letters mention anything about Jesus being in India.

It is quite clear you have never read Acts or Paul's letters, because if you have read any of these NT texts, you would know this.

You are basing your claim about Jesus in India, on 19th and 20th century myth, in which a few authors. Each of these claims about India, that have cropped up every now and then, has been repeatedly refuted and rejected, and criticised for shoddy scholarship.

So you can't blame Paul about this pseudo-scholarship and pseudo-history that first began in 1869.

You should really do better research, because you are being sloppy, and no one is going to take you seriously if you keep bringing up claims that you can't back up.

Click to expand...

It does get tiresome to hear the claims about Jesus in India. I really appreciate this post of yours. Thank you, I tried to give a frubal, but couldn't. I guess it's been too soon since the last one.

InChrist said:

It does get tiresome to hear the claims about Jesus in India. I really appreciate this post of yours. Thank you, I tried to give a frubal, but couldn't. I guess it's been too soon since the last one.

Click to expand...

Jesus did not reach India
Who come to India is the apostle Thomas
The Repertoire of any remnants of his body is preserved in the Church of Mar Thoma in Mosul
And before they hit wetrdalmsihiin which returned to India
In India there is a range called almlbareyen walmlkaneyen
Chaldean and Assyrian weather followed by mother tongue
It is possible that the Indians know this community and to the point

outhouse said:

Well your factually wrong.

It is not either OR


They both could be wrong. And by all historical accounts they both are :slap:

Click to expand...

What is the correct attitude in your opinion
Do you have evidence
We Christians have
Proof
History of books
Because a book like the Bible were the focus of the movement of the Middle East
Over 3500 years
Cannot be burned by what the man came from the Arabian Desert

Shad,
It's worth looking at the 'whale story' a little closer!
When the scribes and pharisees demanded that Jesus show them a sign to prove he was the Christ, Jesus said, 'For as Jonas was three days and nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.' (Matt. 12:40)
He also said;'An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.' (Matt.12:39)

So Jesus himself points to the story of Jonah as an important sign demonstrating the authenticity of his ministry. What is he pointing to? To the fact that as the Christ and Saviour he, Jesus, will have to die. He will die and then remain in the grave for three days and three nights.

Some people think that Jonah never died when he entered the whale's belly, but the text clearly states that he did. The same was true of Jesus.

'Out of the belly of hell (sheol) cried I' (Jonah 2:2)
Sheol is the place where the souls of the dead descend.
'For thou wilt not leave my soul in sheol; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.' (Psalm 16:10)

Like Jonah, the soul of Jesus descended into sheol.
This is confirmed in Ephesians 8:9, 10 where it says,'Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended above all heavens, that he might fill all things.' (Ephesians 4:8,9)

We are told that Christ preached to the departed souls so that his word might fill all things.

Jesus says these things to the Pharisees whilst free and under no threat of crucifixion. To the likes of Outhouse, it is prophecies like this that should add credibility to both Jesus as a true prophet and the Bible as a true prophecy. A true prophet does not provide false information about future events.

onah in the belly of the whale
A novel of the Torah
A prophecy of the Messiah
Because the hard date to Nineveh did not believe in Greece
But they believed in Christ
And to this day the East Christians fasting fast call it albaoutha
Three days
Bible related

Redemptionsong said:

Shad,
It's worth looking at the 'whale story' a little closer!
When the scribes and pharisees demanded that Jesus show them a sign to prove he was the Christ, Jesus said, 'For as Jonas was three days and nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.' (Matt. 12:40)
He also said;'An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.' (Matt.12:39)

So Jesus himself points to the story of Jonah as an important sign demonstrating the authenticity of his ministry. What is he pointing to? To the fact that as the Christ and Saviour he, Jesus, will have to die. He will die and then remain in the grave for three days and three nights.

Some people think that Jonah never died when he entered the whale's belly, but the text clearly states that he did. The same was true of Jesus.

'Out of the belly of hell (sheol) cried I' (Jonah 2:2)
Sheol is the place where the souls of the dead descend.
'For thou wilt not leave my soul in sheol; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.' (Psalm 16:10)

Like Jonah, the soul of Jesus descended into sheol.
This is confirmed in Ephesians 8:9, 10 where it says,'Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended above all heavens, that he might fill all things.' (Ephesians 4:8,9)

We are told that Christ preached to the departed souls so that his word might fill all things.

Jesus says these things to the Pharisees whilst free and under no threat of crucifixion. To the likes of Outhouse, it is prophecies like this that should add credibility to both Jesus as a true prophet and the Bible as a true prophecy. A true prophet does not provide false information about future events.

Click to expand...

When the scribes and pharisees demanded that Jesus show them a sign to prove he was the Christ, Jesus said, 'For as Jonas was three days and nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.' (Matt. 12:40)

Click to expand...

Let us see as to what happened to Jonah from Jewish Bible (OT):

Jonah - Chapter 2:1-3
1. And the Lord appointed a huge fish to swallow up Jonah, and Jonah was in the belly of the fish for three days and three nights.
2. And Jonah prayed to the Lord his God, from the belly of the fish. 3. And he said: I called out from my distress to the Lord, and He answered me; from the belly of the grave I cried out, You heard my voice.
3. And he said: I called out from my distress to the Lord, and He answered me; from the belly of the grave I cried out, You heard my voice.

Yonah - Chapter 2 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible

Matt. 12:40 is wrong; Jonah was in the belly of the fish for three days and three nights; and he was alive in the belly and prayed to G-d.

Regards

Yes, he cried out from the GRAVE. This is sheol, where his soul resided in death. He was conscious in the grave. See Luke 16:19-29.

Redemptionsong said:

Yes, he cried out from the GRAVE. This is sheol, where his soul resided in death. He was conscious in the grave. See Luke 16:19-29.

Click to expand...

So, you agree that Jesus did not die on the Cross; he was delivered from it in the near-dead position and put in a solitary tomb for treatment; when Jesus recovered from unconsciousness; he cried.

Regards

inChrist said:

It does get tiresome to hear the claims about Jesus in India. I really appreciate this post of yours.

Click to expand...

Well, I am skeptical of the whole Jesus' death and resurrection being "historical", but this aside from what I believe.

I am not looking at Jesus die on the cross or not, as historical perspective; I am looking at perspective of literary evidences, and nothing in the canonical gospels, or the texts from the NT Apocrypha, or gnostic texts or church traditions say that Jesus was ever in India before his ministry or after his death.

The whole hypothesis of Jesus-in-India are based on the mid-19th century pseudo-scholarship and baseless speculations.

Asking paarsurrey for sources to his claim about Jesus-in-India is like asking a rock to make pasta. He has being evasive. Either A) he produce his sources or B) admit that he has none and was just speculating.

And from recent experiences with him on the topic about the bible, I am not holding my breath that he will do either.