• 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!

Did Jesus Christ actually die?

Muffled

Jesus in me
Magenta above ^, please.
If Jesus had been to die and resurrect, I understand, then he would have definitely told it in clear terms, please. Right friend, please?
Why involve Jesus into things he never told would happen to him, please? I figure, one's motive to get Jesus killed for one's sins is very selfish, I must say, please. Right friend, please?

Regards

I believe He did.

I believe it was not our selfishness but His love: For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I believe that is false. The eisegesis is about the Qu'ran not in it.

I believe the swoon theory is completely non-scriptural.

The swoon theory doesn't have eyewitness evidence. The Crucifixion of Jesus and Islamic denial | carm.org

The historical evidence of the crucifixion
#1 Eyewitness’ Sources
There are many streams of evidence from which one can argue for the historicity of Christ’s death by crucifixion, of which I will use only a few. The first line of evidence for Jesus’ crucifixion is from the testimony of eyewitness sources. Many Muslims do not believe there is eyewitness’ material in the accounts of the crucifixion of Jesus. In fact, one Muslim claims that:

“Not a single one of the Christians was a witness with them [the Jews]. Rather the apostles kept a distance through fear, and not one of them witnessed the crucifixion.” Matthew 26:56 which says, “Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.” Though the disciples forsook Jesus, some of them were still witnesses from a distance (Mark 14:54). Also, there was an anonymous disciple whom Jesus, while on the cross, commanded to take care of Mary, (John 19:26-27). The Gospel of Luke reports that while Jesus was carrying the cross:

“…there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him,” (Luke 23:27).

In addition to these people already mentioned, the Gospels also reference Jewish leaders (Mt. 27:41; Mk. 15:31), Roman centurion (Mt. 27:54; Mk. 15:39; Lk. 23:47) and soldiers (Mt. 27:35; Mk. 15:24; Lk. 23:35; and John 19:18, 23) who all witnessed Jesus’ crucifixion. For Muslims to argue that the crucifixion is not historical simply does not square with the historical data because there were multitudes of witnesses to the fact that the Romans crucified Jesus.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
The Bible does not fulfill historical standards, whereas theology is only restricted by ones imagination.

The book of Acts has details that line up with history. 84 Historical Facts In The Book Of Acts | Reasons for Jesus

84 HISTORICAL FACTS LUKE GETS RIGHT
1. the natural crossing between correctly named ports (Acts 13:4-5)

2. the proper port (Perga) along the direct destination of a ship crossing from Cyprus (13:13)

3. the proper location of Lycaonia (14:6)

4. the unusual but correct declension of the name Lystra (14:6)

5. the correct language spoken in Lystra—Lycaonian (14:11) According to Tim McGrew: “This was unusual in the cosmopolitan, Hellenized society in which Paul moved. But the preservation of the local language is attested by a gloss in Stephanus of Byzantium, who explains that “Derbe” is a local word for “juniper.” Hemer lists many other native names in the Lystra district.”

6. two gods known to be associated with Lystra—Zeus and Hermes (14:12)
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Neither do the crucifixion or resurrection.

Quoted from way of the master by ray comfort.

Eyewitnesses saw Jesus after He rose. There are not one or two, but hundreds of eyewitnesses to prove it really happened. Jesus rising from the dead wasn't a fairy tale conjured up in the minds of crazy or deluded men; this is factual history. These witnesses were so absolutely certain that they saw Christ after He rose that many endured severe persecution and even died for Him as martyrs when they could have denied Him and lived.

The witnesses had no reason to lie about seeing Christ after he rose and being persecuted. They had no reason to become martyrs.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
And yet the first part of that text, Luke, does not sport such detail in quantity.

How do the details of Luke take away from the historical nature of the book of Acts? 84 Historical Facts In The Book Of Acts | Reasons for Jesus

7. the proper port, Attalia, which returning travelers would use (14:25)

8. the correct order of approach to Derbe and Lystra from the Cilician Gates (16:1; cf. 15:41)

9. the proper form of the name Troas (16:8)

10. the place of a conspicuous sailors’ landmark, Samothrace (16:11)

11. the proper description of Philippi as a Roman colony (16:12)

12. the right location for the river (Gangites) near Philippi (16:13)
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Quoted from way of the master by ray comfort.



The witnesses had no reason to lie about seeing Christ after he rose and being persecuted. They had no reason to become martyrs.
Stories of people seeing Jesus post resurrection do not constitute the authors actually eye witnessing the events or talking to eyewitnesses.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Because Luke/Acts was originally a single document. You can’t exegete one without the other.

Most Palestinians didn’t write history; they recited it.

That means that all of these details have to do with the book of Luke. 84 Historical Facts In The Book Of Acts | Reasons for Jesus

13. the proper association of Thyatira as a center of dyeing (16:14)

14. correct designations for the magistrates of the colony (16:22)

15. the proper locations (Amphipolis and Apollonia) where travelers would spend successive nights on this journey (17:1)

16. the presence of a synagogue in Thessalonica (17:1)

17. the proper term (“politarchs”) used of the magistrates there (17:6)
 
Top