• 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

SpeaksForTheTrees

Well-Known Member
“And being in an agony, he prayed the longer. And his sweat became as drops of blood, trickling down upon the ground” (Luke 22:44 KJV).

Every attempt imaginable has been used by modern scholars to explain away the phenomenon of bloody sweat, apparently under the mistaken impression that it simply does not occur. A great deal of effort could be saved by consulting the medical literature. Though very rare, the phenomenon of hematidrosis, or bloody sweat, is well documented. Under great emotional stress, tiny capillaries in the sweat glands can break, thus mixing blood with sweat. This process alone could have produced marked weakness and possible shock.

Although Jesus’ betrayal and arrest are important portions of the passion story, the next event in the account which is significant from a medical perspective is His trial before the Sanhedrin and Caiaphas, the High Priest. Here the first physical trauma was inflicted. A soldier struck Jesus across the face for remaining silent when questioned by Caiaphas. The palace guards then blindfolded Him, mockingly taunted Him to identify them as each passed by, spat on Him, and struck Him in the face.

Before Pilate

In the early morning, battered and bruised, dehydrated, and worn out from a sleepless night, Jesus was taken across Jerusalem to the Praetorium of the Fortress Antonia, the seat of government of the Procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate. We are familiar with Pilate’s action in attempting to shift responsibility to Herod Antipas, the Tetrarch of Judea. Jesus apparently suffered no physical mistreatment at the hands of Herod and was returned to Pilate. It was then, in response to the outcry of the mob, that Pilate ordered Barabbas released and condemned Jesus to scourging and crucifixion.

Preparations for Jesus’ scourging were carried out at Caesar’s orders. The prisoner was stripped of His clothing and His hands tied to a post above His head. The Roman legionnaire stepped forward with the flagrum, or flagellum, in his hand. This was a short whip consisting of several heavy, leather thongs with two small balls of lead attached near the ends of each. The heavy whip was brought down with full force again and again across Jesus’ shoulders, back, and legs. At first the weighted thongs cut through the skin only. Then, as the blows continued, they cut deeper into the subcutaneous tissues, producing first an oozing of blood from the capillaries and veins of the skin and finally spurting arterial bleeding from vessels in the underlying muscles.

The small balls of lead first produced large deep bruises that were broken open by subsequent blows. Finally, the skin of the back was hanging in long ribbons, and the entire area was an unrecognizable mass of torn, bleeding tissue. When it was determined by the centurion in charge that the prisoner was near death, the beating was finally stopped.

Mockery

The half-fainting Jesus was then untied and allowed to slump to the stone pavement, wet with his own blood. The Roman soldiers saw a great joke in this provincial Jew claiming to be a king. They threw a robe across His shoulders and placed a stick in His hand for a scepter. They still needed a crown to make their travesty complete. Small flexible branches covered with long thorns, commonly used for kindling fires in the charcoal braziers in the courtyard, were plaited into the shape of a crude crown. The crown was pressed into his scalp and again there was copious bleeding as the thorns pierced the very vascular tissue. After mocking Him and striking Him across the face, the soldiers took the stick from His hand and struck Him across the head, driving the thorns deeper into His scalp. Finally, they tired of their sadistic sport and tore the robe from His back. The robe had already become adherent to the clots of blood and serum in the wounds, and its removal, just as in the careless removal of a surgical bandage, caused excruciating pain. The wounds again began to bleed.

Golgotha

In deference to Jewish custom, the Romans apparently returned His garments. The heavy patibulum of the cross was tied across His shoulders. The procession of the condemned Christ, two thieves, and the execution detail of Roman soldiers headed by a centurion began its slow journey along the route which we know today as the Via Dolorosa.

In spite of Jesus’ efforts to walk erect, the weight of the heavy wooden beam, together with the shock produced by copious loss of blood, was too much. He stumbled and fell. The rough wood of the beam gouged into the lacerated skin and muscles of the shoulders. He tried to rise, but human muscles had been pushed beyond their endurance. The centurion, anxious to proceed with the crucifixion, selected a stalwart North African onlooker, Simon of Cyrene, to carry the cross. Jesus followed, still bleeding and sweating the cold, clammy sweat of shock. The 650-yard journey from the Fortress Antonia to Golgotha was finally completed. The prisoner was again stripped of His clothing except for a loin cloth which was allowed the Jews.

The crucifixion began. Jesus was offered wine mixed with myrrh, a mild analgesic, pain-reliving mixture. He refused the drink. Simon was ordered to place the patibulum on the ground, and Jesus was quickly thrown backward, with His shoulders against the wood. The legionnaire felt for the depression at the front of the wrist. He drove a heavy, square wrought-iron nail through the wrist and deep into the wood. Quickly, he moved to the other side and repeated the action, being careful not to pull the arms too tightly, but to allow some flexion and movement. The patibulum was then lifted into place at the top of the stipes, and the titulus reading “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews” was nailed into place.

The left foot was pressed backward against the right foot. With both feet extended, toes down, a nail was driven through the arch of each, leaving the knees moderately flexed. The victim was now crucified.

On the Cross

As Jesus slowly sagged down with more weight on the nails in the wrists, excruciating, fiery pain shot along the fingers and up the arms to explode in the brain. The nails in the wrists were putting pressure on the median nerve, large nerve trunks which traverse the mid-wrist and hand. As He pushed himself upward to avoid this stretching torment, He placed His full weight on the nail through His feet. Again there was searing agony as the nail tore through the nerves between the metatarsal bones of this feet.

At this point, another phenomenon occurred. As the arms fatigued, great waves of cramps swept over the muscles, knotting them in deep relentless, throbbing pain. With these cramps came the inability to push Himself upward. Hanging by the arm, the pectoral muscles, the large muscles of the chest, were paralyzed and the intercostal muscles, the small muscles between the ribs, were unable to act. Air could be drawn into the lungs, but could not be exhaled. Jesus fought to raise Himself in order to get even one short breath. Finally, the carbon dioxide level increased in the lungs and in the blood stream, and the cramps partially subsided.

The Last Words

Spasmodically, He was able to push Himself upward to exhale and bring in life-giving oxygen. It was undoubtedly during these periods that He uttered the seven short sentences that are recorded.

The first – looking down at the Roman soldiers throwing dice6 for His seamless garment: “Father, forgive them for they do not know what they do.”

The second – to the penitent thief: “Today, thou shalt be with me in Paradise.”

The third – looking down at Mary His mother, He said: “Woman, behold your son.” Then turning to the terrified, grief-stricken adolescent John , the beloved apostle, He said: “Behold your mother.”

The fourth cry is from the beginning of Psalm 22: “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”

He suffered hours of limitless pain, cycles of twisting, joint-rending cramps, intermittent partial asphyxiation, and searing pain as tissue was torn from His lacerated back from His movement up and down against the rough timbers of the cross. Then another agony began: a deep crushing pain in the chest as the pericardium, the sac surrounding the heart, slowly filled with serum and began to compress the heart.

The prophecy in Psalm 22:14 was being fulfilled: “I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint, my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.”

The end was rapidly approaching. The loss of tissue fluids had reached a critical level; the compressed heart was struggling to pump heavy, thick, sluggish blood to the tissues, and the tortured lungs were making a frantic effort to inhale small gulps of air. The markedly dehydrated tissues sent their flood of stimuli to the brain. Jesus gasped His fifth cry: “I thirst.” Again we read in the prophetic psalm: “My strength is dried up like a potsherd; my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou has brought me into the dust of death” (Psalm 22:15 KJV).

A sponge soaked in posca, the cheap, sour wine that was the staple drink of the Roman legionnaires, was lifted to Jesus’ lips. His body was now in extremis, and He could feel the chill of death creeping through His tissues. This realization brought forth His sixth word, possibly little more than a tortured whisper: “It is finished.” His mission of atonement had been completed. Finally, He could allow His body to die. With one last surge of strength, He once again pressed His torn feet against the nail, straightened His legs, took a deeper breath, and uttered His seventh and last cry: “Father, into Your hands I commit My spirit.”

Death

The common method of ending a crucifixion was by crurifracture, the breaking of the bones of the leg. This prevented the victim from pushing himself upward; the tension could not be relieved from the muscles of the chest, and rapid suffocation occurred. The legs of the two thieves were broken, but when the soldiers approached Jesus, they saw that this was unnecessary.

Apparently, to make doubly sure of death, the legionnaire drove his lance between the ribs, upward through the pericardium and into the heart. John 19:34 states, “And immediately there came out blood and water.” Thus there was an escape of watery fluid from the sac surrounding the heart and the blood of the interior of the heart. This is rather conclusive post-mortem evidence that Jesus died, not the usual crucifixion death by suffocation, but of heart failure due to shock and constriction of the heart by fluid in the pericardium.

Resurrection

In these events, we have seen a glimpse of the epitome of evil that man can exhibit toward his fellow man and toward God. This is an ugly sight and is likely to leave us despondent and depressed.

But the crucifixion was not the end of the story. How grateful we can be that we have a sequel: a glimpse of the infinite mercy of God toward man–the gift of atonement, the miracle of the resurrection, and the expectation of Easter morning.

*Dr. C. Truman Davis is a graduate of the University of Tennessee College of Medicine
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Jesus did not die on the Cross. This is a fact which did happen in real life and Quran does not claim that it is first to claim it.

Does it?

Your thoughts please; anybody believing in a religion or no religion.

Regards

I believe the texts are pretty clear once one understands them. Jesus did not die on the cross but it only appeared that way. However Jesus ended up dead anyway but not by dying. He expired instead.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
well...in the ancient age, thousands of people died on the cross.
The Greeks crucified the Carthaginian prisoners even in IV century BC
so...why not Jesus?

God splits hairs. It isn't that the Romans didn't try to crucify Him but simply that He wouldn't go through with it. He went as far as He needed to go to complete His mission.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Personally, I believe that Jesus did die on the cross. For one thing, there are several non-Christian references to his crucifixion as seen here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion_of_Jesus#Other_accounts_and_references
And for another thing, the Romans were experts at crucifying criminals. They would have made absolutely certain that he was dead before they took him off the cross.

The Roman Official was not interested in Jesus' death on Cross.
Regards
 
Jesus did not die on the Cross. This is a fact which did happen in real life and Quran does not claim that it is first to claim it.

Does it?

Your thoughts please; anybody believing in a religion or no religion.

Regards
Facts:

1. Jesus is mentioned in the Quran more than Mohammad.
2. Jesus is the only prophet claimed by Islam that did not marry or have children.
3. Jesus was a Jew and born of a virgin - Bible and Quran
4. Jesus performs miracles in the Bible and Quran - Mohammad does not
5. Jesus ascended into heaven and will come again - Bible and Quran
6. First Gospel of the NT was written within 50 years of his death.
7. Quran was finished in 632 (600 years after his death.
8. The Gospels were written by the apostles who saw the events first hand.
9. The Quran was written by Mohammad over 23 years claiming the Angel Gabriel told him what to write.

Conclusion:

The Quran ripped the Bible off and Jesus died on the cross per the testimony of the apostles.
 

SpeaksForTheTrees

Well-Known Member
God splits hairs. It isn't that the Romans didn't try to crucify Him but simply that He wouldn't go through with it. He went as far as He needed to go to complete His mission.
The romans finished the job however was the Pharisees that condemn Jesus to death .
Jesus died for the sin of the Pharisees .
 

SpeaksForTheTrees

Well-Known Member
Facts:

1. Jesus is mentioned in the Quran more than Mohammad.
2. Jesus is the only prophet claimed by Islam that did not marry or have children.
3. Jesus was a Jew and born of a virgin - Bible and Quran
4. Jesus performs miracles in the Bible and Quran - Mohammad does not
5. Jesus ascended into heaven and will come again - Bible and Quran
6. First Gospel of the NT was written within 50 years of his death.
7. Quran was finished in 632 (600 years after his death.
8. The Gospels were written by the apostles who saw the events first hand.
9. The Quran was written by Mohammad over 23 years claiming the Angel Gabriel told him what to write.

Conclusion:

The Quran ripped the Bible off and Jesus died on the cross per the testimony of the apostles.
Both are a rip off , Jesus to this day is criminal within the parent religion of judaism .
Both of them defy Yahweh law of idolation , and both are disowned by the parent .
Yahweh is his name is only one god the God of Israel
 

SpeaksForTheTrees

Well-Known Member
The Roman Official was not interested in Jesus' death on Cross.
Regards
Was the Pharisees sin that cause Jesus to die.
Roman like American today , romans just finished the job
Was the sins of the Pharisees he die for ,not the Christian.
Was no Christian to die for , only sins of Pharisees
 
Both are a rip off , Jesus to this day is criminal within the parent religion of judaism .
Both of them defy Yahweh law of idolation , and both are disowned by the parent .
Yahweh is his name is only one god the God of Israel
Christ came not to replace the law or the prophets but to complete them.
 

SpeaksForTheTrees

Well-Known Member
Christ came not to replace the law or the prophets but to complete them.
What which laws Gods or the Pharisees that had him crucified . He got crucified is a fail in my books the laws of the Pharisees not changed from before Jesus and still same today .
So was just a fail in the bigger picture .
Christ is a criminal to be hated to this day in Judaism .
In worship Christ is idolater who should be put to death however is not practical to enforce , but is still the law of the parent .
 
What which laws Gods or the Pharisees that had him crucified . He got crucified is a fail in my books the laws of the Pharisees not changed from before Jesus and still same today .
So was just a fail in the bigger picture .
Christ is a criminal to be hated to this day in Judaism .
In worship Christ is idolater who should be put to death however is not practical to enforce , but is still the law of the parent .
There is no greater love than to give your own life for others. I rejoice that my Lord and Savior loved me that much.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Facts:

1. Jesus is mentioned in the Quran more than Mohammad.
2. Jesus is the only prophet claimed by Islam that did not marry or have children.
3. Jesus was a Jew and born of a virgin - Bible and Quran
4. Jesus performs miracles in the Bible and Quran - Mohammad does not
5. Jesus ascended into heaven and will come again - Bible and Quran
6. First Gospel of the NT was written within 50 years of his death.
7. Quran was finished in 632 (600 years after his death.
8. The Gospels were written by the apostles who saw the events first hand.
9. The Quran was written by Mohammad over 23 years claiming the Angel Gabriel told him what to write.

Conclusion:

The Quran ripped the Bible off and Jesus died on the cross per the testimony of the apostles.
#8 is incorrect. There is no reason to conclude as "fact" that anyone who knew Jesus first hand wrote the gospels. In fact, Most of Paul's letters are earlier than Mark, and he doesn't mention details of crucifixion/resurrection -- and his ideas of resurrection are different from the ones illustrated in the gospels.
 
#8 is incorrect. There is no reason to conclude as "fact" that anyone who knew Jesus first hand wrote the gospels. In fact, Most of Paul's letters are earlier than Mark, and he doesn't mention details of crucifixion/resurrection -- and his ideas of resurrection are different from the ones illustrated in the gospels.
We must keep in mind that the ancient world, authorship was designated in several ways: First, the author was clearly the individual who actually wrote the text with his own pen. Second, the individual who dictated the text to a secretary or scribe was still considered the author. Third, the individual was still considered the author if he only provided the ideas or if the text were written in accord with his thought and in his spirit even though a "ghost writer" did the actual composition. In the broadest sense, the individual was even considered the author if the work was written in his tradition; for example, David is given credit for the psalms even though clearly he did not write all of the psalms.

Also we should not discount Gospel Q:

Gospel Q:

In biblical scholarship, Q is a hypothetical source that both Matthew and Luke supposedly used. The reason people talk about it is that there are about 235 verses in Matthew that are paralleled in Luke but not in Mark or John.

This is a significant number. Matthew has 1,071 verses and Luke has 1,151. If they both have 235 verses uniquely in common with each other then that’s quite a substantial portion of the two gospels—more than a fifth. This is a significant enough portion that many have felt it isn’t due to random chance and there must be a reason.

One reason could be that Luke drew upon Matthew for these verses. Alternately, Matthew could have drawn upon Luke for them. Today most scholars don’t think that either of these was the case, however. Instead, they think that Matthew and Luke wrote independently of each other, which would suggest a different source for this material.

In the 1800s, this source was dubbed “Q,” allegedly from the German word Quelle (“source”), though this is unclear.

Today the most popular view among biblical scholars is that Matthew and Luke both drew upon two main sources in writing their Gospels—Mark and Q. This is known as the “two-source hypothesis.”

I believe it is fair statement based on all of the above to say that the gospels were written using first hand account of the apostles and those that knew Jesus.

Also since the Catholic Church selected which books are now cannon for the new testament in all Christian dominations lets look at the criteria for selections:

Criteria for selection by the bishops of the Catholic Church:

1. Written by a recognized prophet or apostle

2. Written by those associated with recognized prophet or apostle

3. Truthfulness (Deut. 18:20-22)

4. Faithfulness to previously accepted canonical writings

5. Confirmed by Christ, prophet, apostle (e.g. Luke 24:44; 2 Pet. 3:16)

6. Church Usage and Recognition
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
We must keep in mind that the ancient world, authorship was designated in several ways: First, the author was clearly the individual who actually wrote the text with his own pen. Second, the individual who dictated the text to a secretary or scribe was still considered the author. Third, the individual was still considered the author if he only provided the ideas or if the text were written in accord with his thought and in his spirit even though a "ghost writer" did the actual composition. In the broadest sense, the individual was even considered the author if the work was written in his tradition; for example, David is given credit for the psalms even though clearly he did not write all of the psalms.

Also we should not discount Gospel Q:

Gospel Q:

In biblical scholarship, Q is a hypothetical source that both Matthew and Luke supposedly used. The reason people talk about it is that there are about 235 verses in Matthew that are paralleled in Luke but not in Mark or John.

This is a significant number. Matthew has 1,071 verses and Luke has 1,151. If they both have 235 verses uniquely in common with each other then that’s quite a substantial portion of the two gospels—more than a fifth. This is a significant enough portion that many have felt it isn’t due to random chance and there must be a reason.

One reason could be that Luke drew upon Matthew for these verses. Alternately, Matthew could have drawn upon Luke for them. Today most scholars don’t think that either of these was the case, however. Instead, they think that Matthew and Luke wrote independently of each other, which would suggest a different source for this material.

In the 1800s, this source was dubbed “Q,” allegedly from the German word Quelle (“source”), though this is unclear.

Today the most popular view among biblical scholars is that Matthew and Luke both drew upon two main sources in writing their Gospels—Mark and Q. This is known as the “two-source hypothesis.”

I believe it is fair statement based on all of the above to say that the gospels were written using first hand account of the apostles and those that knew Jesus.

Also since the Catholic Church selected which books are now cannon for the new testament in all Christian dominations lets look at the criteria for selections:

Criteria for selection by the bishops of the Catholic Church:

1. Written by a recognized prophet or apostle

2. Written by those associated with recognized prophet or apostle

3. Truthfulness (Deut. 18:20-22)

4. Faithfulness to previously accepted canonical writings

5. Confirmed by Christ, prophet, apostle (e.g. Luke 24:44; 2 Pet. 3:16)

6. Church Usage and Recognition
First of all, this is all "bible 101" stuff, learned long ago. I happen to fall in the "Q"camp, myself. Second, none of what you presented is a basis for believing that the gospels were written "using first-hand account of the apostles..." There is too much evidence to suggest otherwise. Mark is the oldest gospel, and was not written until after 70 c.e. That places Mark at least 40 years after the fact. Most people of that time didn't live beyond 40 or 50 years. Luke was definitely Gentile in origin, and was not written until possibly the second century, which would place it way too late for a Jesus-contemporary. Third, just because something was written "in the tradition of" someone does not mean that the person is dubbed as the author. David is traditionally credited with the Psalms, but no scholar worth his salt thinks that David wrote them. Fourth, Paul was written before any of the gospels, and his theological direction is different than any of the gospels. That means that the gospels were all of later origin. None of this is compelling for a statement that says, "it's fair to say that the gospels were written using first hand account of the apostles..." It's debatable that they were written "in the tradition of" the apostles, or anyone who knew Jesus "firsthand." Point #8 still has no compelling evidence to point to it as "fact."

beyond all that, the canon was set by the year 450 c.e., so the bible was written before the Koran.
 
And what evidence do we have that Jesus never died, other than "the Qur'an said so"?

The Quran is actually ambiguous on the question, and some passages seem to suggest that he was killed. It was medieval exegetes who decided that 'only a likeness' was crucified, a substitute.

Other exegetes disagreed though and there were contradictory explanations in different tafsir. Seeing as this is quite a 'big issue', you'd have thought they would have remembered such an important point. Apparently not though, leaving scholars to speculate about how to interpret the ambiguous information in the Quran meaning exegesis on this issue is somewhat speculative.
 
Top