• 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!

Jesus did not die on the Cross

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
outhouse, you are clearly of a higher educational level than me, and probably all the rest of us mortals here. Now that you feel better, and elevated above the rest of us, maybe you'd like to stop procrastinating and start detailing the contradictions that you say are so clearly evident in the New Testament.

I'm not the smartest person around however it's not really that hard to understand the evidence and conclusions from that evidence Outhouse uses in argument.

I don't necessarily agree with Outhouse on many things however I've taken the time to see for myself his conclusions are well founded based on evidence and the opinion of people who have credible expertise.

However why take his word or my word. There are plenty of resources available to you.

The reality is it is hard to deal with every objection and every excuse someone might create to defend their position. Literally years go by on forums as such arguments go back a forth.

If I could find the evidence and expert opinion to defeat Outhouse I would. However I think it would be my responsibility to bring that to the table. Not expert else to answer every objection or excuse I could possibly dream up.

I have a really good imagination, almost impossible to defeat with facts and evidence.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
outhouse, I'm not asking you to list every apparent contradiction in the New Testament. All I asked is that YOU give me one teeny weeny contradiction that you think proves the New Testament to be unreliable.
If Dale.B.Martin were on-line, I would talk with Dale.B.Martin. It just happens to be you that I disagree with, and it's you I would like to hear argue the case.
Why is that such a problem?
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
outhouse, if you can make that apparent contradiction a passage about the crucifixion we would also be following the theme of the thread!
 

outhouse

Atheistically
outhouse, I'm not asking you to list every apparent contradiction in the New Testament. All I asked is that YOU give me one teeny weeny contradiction that you think proves the New Testament to be unreliable.
If Dale.B.Martin were on-line, I would talk with Dale.B.Martin. It just happens to be you that I disagree with, and it's you I would like to hear argue the case.
Why is that such a problem?

So do you think it is wrong that different people far removed from jesus life would write different legends about him?
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Outhouse, I don't want to labour the point but you said in an earlier post that the Gospels contradicted each other. Please give an example of a contradiction from within the Gospels.
Since I happen to believe that the scriptures are 'God breathed', this is your chance to prove that they are no more than myths and legends written by 'people far removed from Jesus'. Fire away.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Outhouse, I don't want to labour the point but you said in an earlier post that the Gospels contradicted each other. Please give an example of a contradiction from within the Gospels.
Since I happen to believe that the scriptures are 'God breathed', this is your chance to prove that they are no more than myths and legends written by 'people far removed from Jesus'. Fire away.

You demand so much out of me, but cannot answer a simple question?


Well they are not god breathed, only primitive men wrote these legends who factually used rhetoric and mythology to tell their pseudo history.


The fact you do not have a clue how these books were put together, being completely ignorant to the cultural anthropology of the Hellenist in the Diaspora far removed from Israel who wrote these books for jesus enemies the Romans. I already know there will be no debate here, your wrapped up in apologetics and no matter how credible the information I present, you wish to remain willfully ignorant.


But here chew away

Matthew 2:15, 19 & 21-23 The infant Christ was taken into Egypt.

Luke 2:22 & 39 The infant Christ was NOT taken to Egypt.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
outhouse, since we're using dental terminology, I'd like to say I'm happy to go away and chew it over. It's taken me a long while to extract the information requested.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Jesus did not die on the Cross



1. Jesus did not fulfill Sign of Jonah. Please read the argument from post # 109.
2. Jesus' prayers in the Garden were not heard. Please read the argument from post # 153.
3. Jesus' words right on the Cross from post # 188.

Jesus did not want to die; so why should Jesus die?

We are still discussing the above arguments, therefore, while writing a post please quote which argument you are commenting on for clarity of the viewers please.

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Jesus did not die on the Cross


I give the Fourth Argument from the Christian scripture.

Jesus was on the Cross for few hours only

MARK 15:34
34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Pilate delays in judgment

Pilate intentionally delayed in giving his verdict and did not deliver his judgment until and unless he was sure that due to the Sabbath, Jesus would be on the cross for only a few hours. Jesus a thirty-three years young person was on the cross for only few (3-6) hours.

Read more: 65 Reasons to Believe Jesus Did Not Die on the Cross | The Muslim Times

The creed that "Jesus died a cursed death on the Cross" is a fabrication of Paul , the Church and their associates and has got nothing to do with Jesus and his teachings.

Regards
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Outhouse,
Good morning.
I think it's important to stand up for what one believes to be true. It's important that others see this as well.

Over a period of time, I have become convinced that God's word is perfect and without error.

So let's look at the so-called contradiction that you raise. The difficulty is not actually one of contradiction at all, it is one of harmony. The four Gospels must harmonized into a single credible narrative if it is to tell the complete story of Jesus Christ combining the four different perspectives - as the Messiah (Matthew), the servant of God (Mark), the Son of Man (Luke), and the Son of God (John).

You are saying that Matthew chapter 2 cannot be harmonized with Luke chapter 2. I say it does so beautifully, so long as you know where to divide the scriptures on the basis of time. This is not some wild theory of mine, for scripture says that this is what you are meant to do!
'Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.' (2 Tim:2:15)

As an example, let me point you to Jesus, who does exactly this with the scriptures. In Luke 4:16 we read that Jesus read from the book of Isaiah in the synagogue in Nazareth. He read from Isaiah 61. Strangely, he stopped reading in the middle of a passage. He said (verse 2),'To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD..' and stopped. If you look at Isaiah 61:2, you will see that there is then a comma followed by the words 'and the day of vengeance of our God'. Why did he not read these words as well? Because these had not yet been fulfilled. The vengeance of God is still future to us now! So two thousand years of time is held in one little comma! Check it out for yourself.

OK, so we have to be ready to divide the scriptures to allow for the passage of time. The problem is knowing where to make those breaks.

If we now look at Matthew chapter 2, we can begin to solve our problem.

If you have a KJV of the Bible, look through this chapter and pick out the expression 'And when ...' because it's a clue to the dividing of time.

[I'll be back, I just have to walk the dog!]
 
Last edited:

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Matthew chapter 2 covers a period of time that must have extended into years. From the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem to the setting up of home in Nazareth following the death of Herod, king of Judea.

Luke chapter 2 covers the period from the tax decree issued by Augustus to the time that Jesus was twelve years old and in Jerusalem for Passover.

Here is how the two gospel accounts can be married together without there being any contradiction:

Luke 2:1-7 Jesus is born
Luke 2:8-16 Shepherds visit
[Notice verse 17, 'And when..', time passes]
Luke 2:21 Circumcision [Brit Milah at 8 days old according to the law of Moses, Leviticus ch. 12:3]
Luke 2:22-38 Purification of Mary and sacrifice of 'A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons'.[Leviticus 12:4-8, this sacrifice must have taken place 33 days after the circumcision of Jesus]

Now we turn to Matthew's gospel to follow the chronological order of events. In Matthew 2:1-12 we read of the visit of the wise men to see the 'young child'. In verse 12, it says that the wise men 'come into the house' in Bethlehem [notice, no mention of a stable or manger]

Notice verse 13 begins, 'And when..' so time has passed. An angel warns Joseph of the threat from Herod and the family depart for Egypt. They remain in Egypt until the death of Herod, king of Judea. While they are away Herod slaughters all the children 'two years old and under'. This is significant because it shows that Herod must have been calculating the time to ensure he killed the threat to his throne.

In verse 19 we read, 'But when..' and are told that Herod was dead. Joseph is now visited by an angel and told it is safe to return to Israel. Archelaus now ruled in Judea, so avoiding Judea they go to Galilee to 'the city called Nazareth'.

We now return to Luke's gospel to pick up the tail-end the story. In Luke 2:39 we read, 'And when..' suggesting that time has passed, and the words,'And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth. And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit...' (verse 40)

The reason that people get confused is that they assume that the words 'performed all things according to the law of the Lord' refers only to the circumcision and purification of the previous verses, when in fact it must also encompass the fulfilment of the word by the prophet; 'Out of Egypt have I called my son.'[Hosea 11:1 and Matthew 2:15]

When Mary and Joseph went back to Nazareth, they went to set up a home together. There is no indication that they lived together before leaving Nazareth to go to Bethlehem. In fact, in Matthew 2:5 it says he went 'To be taxed with Mary his ESPOUSED wife, being great with child.'

I hope this careful reading of the text shows that you cannot cast sweeping aspersions on God's word without showing that you can back it up with documentary evidence.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
So let's look at the so-called contradiction that you raise. The difficulty is not actually one of contradiction at all, it is one of harmony. The four Gospels must harmonized into a single credible narrative if it is to tell the complete story of Jesus Christ combining the four different perspectives - as the Messiah (Matthew), the servant of God (Mark), the Son of Man (Luke), and the Son of God (John).

All Gospels are based on Mark. Mark and a Q source, which we never found. So to see harmony in texts based on other texts is a given. However since the other Gospels are based on Mark an argument from harmony fails. It is no more true or proof if I were to copy a text on special relativity. It is just repeating the claims not proving the claims.

The two source hypothesis is the leading theory in, honest, Biblical Scholarship.
 

mahasn ebn sawresho

Well-Known Member
The topic of the crucifixion of Jesus
And not the true Gospels

Because this is a separate topic
First, there is no contradiction in the four Gospels
But there is harmony
And consensus
The crucifixion of Jesus
Muslims look for any word to prove a false Quran

Differently and want to interpret according to their mood and desire
 

mahasn ebn sawresho

Well-Known Member
Muslims understand the following
Gospel is the Greek word
The good human sense
Jesus did not write any word from the Bible who wrote the Gospel four pupils
Viewed and checked the
They wrote what they saw no increase and not decrease
Therefore we find different configurable
But it is not essential
Fundamental difference in the person of Jesus
The four agree that the cross is Jesus
In this ahagh for a Muslim to uphold the Gospel to validate novel Quran
Because the Bible says Muslim typeface
But when he needs the Gospel to prove the Qur'an uses to prove the Qur'an
Therefore we ask the Muslim to give us proof of authenticity of the Qur'an from a third source novel
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Over a period of time, I have become convinced that God's word is perfect and without error.


God does not have any words, only man does.


And their are many errors, you just deny them.


You can try and rationalize the contradiction any way you want, but that doesn't make it credible.

You failed at harmonizing these two different events
 
Top