+++ No Piercing At Jesus' Side +++

[sandy whitelinger]

Here are three reasons why Jesus was never pierced at his side on the cross:

1- The custom to rush the death of all the Jews crucified by the Romans was Jewish and not Roman; and the practice was done only on Fridays,
so that the bodies would not be left hanging during the hours of the Sabbath. And the method was leg-breaking and not spear-piercing.
The Romans wouldn't care less if the Jewish Sabbath got desecrated by the bodies on the crosses.

2 - There is a tradition that the Centurion was richly bribed by Joseph of Arimathea, who was a very rich man in Israel, to just let him - Joseph - take
Jesus off the cross and report back to Pilate that Jesus was indeed already dead.

3 - That Centurion and his men could never by their own accord pierce Jesus after their recognition that Jesus was indeed the son of God.
This is for lack of any other option, a confession that they had converted themselves to the Cause of Jesus. That's in Matthew 27:54.

The first and third reasons dispense with any other evidence that the piercing of Jesus' side by a Roman spear was an interpolation by
either the writer of the Gospel or by the Fathers of the Church in 327 CE, when they selected the books into the Canon of the NT.

Ben

I love a good fantasy. Good work Ben....keep hallucinating for our amusement.

But seriously...do really call that and argument?

 

[doppelganger]

Here are three reasons why Jesus was never pierced at his side on the cross:

1- The custom to rush the death of all the Jews crucified by the Romans was Jewish and not Roman; and the practice was done only on Fridays,
so that the bodies would not be left hanging during the hours of the Sabbath. And the method was leg-breaking and not spear-piercing.
The Romans wouldn't care less if the Jewish Sabbath got desecrated by the bodies on the crosses.

According to the Gospel of Peter the crucifixion was carried out by the Jews and the method of hastening the death was poisoning with vinegar and bile in fulfillment of Psalm 69:21.

If you want a fun Bible study topic, trace each author's attempt to relocate the vinegar and gall and what they do with the eclipse and the breaking of legs. As a thought experiment, start with the notion that Peter is closest to the original version and that later authors were trying to change the story so that the Jews weren't doing the crucifying themselves.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Way to go Troublemane! I mean, Troubleshooter. You are rather a trouble shooter.
I agree with you even with regards to the drug. After all, they did give him some
bitter stuff to drink at the cross. Then, as a matter of fact, two rich men did offer him VIP treatment.

Ben :bow:

He was really taken by aliens who did experiments on His body...that's why there was so much desecration. Remember when there was darkness during the crucifixtion? that's when the mothership arrived and was soooooo massive it blocked out the sun.

This is really fun!!!!!!!! Everyone should try.

 

[Ben Masada]

He was really taken by aliens who did experiments on His body...that's why there was so much desecration. Remember when there was darkness during the crucifixtion? that's when the mothership arrived and was soooooo massive it blocked out the sun.

This is really fun!!!!!!!! Everyone should try.

It's allowed to speculate on existent evidences. This of aliens is a joke. I hope you
are not serious, are you?

Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

According to the Gospel of Peter the crucifixion was carried out by the Jews and the method of hastening the death was poisoning with vinegar and bile in fulfillment of Psalm 69:21.

If you want a fun Bible study topic, trace each author's attempt to relocate the vinegar and gall and what they do with the eclipse and the breaking of legs. As a thought experiment, start with the notion that Peter is closest to the original version and that later authors were trying to change the story so that the Jews weren't doing the crucifying themselves.

Crucifixion was never one of the methods of execution used throughout Jewish History. It was brought by the Romans everywhere to where they would conquer.
The Jews would never even adopt the method in order not to assimilate a Gentile practice.

Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

I love a good fantasy. Good work Ben....keep hallucinating for our amusement.

But seriously...do really call that and argument?

Yes, you can call it a fantasy, but I am sure deep down in your heart you are ready
to admit that's a very intelligent speculation. At least, the evidence is on the record.

Ben

 

[Deut 13:1]

On a side note, something interesting that I thought of after reading the thread is Psalm 22.

One of the common verses here that is applied to jesus is 22:16

Psalms 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

כִּי סְבָבוּנִי, כְּלָבִים: עֲדַת מְרֵעִים, הִקִּיפוּנִי; כָּאֲרִי, יָדַי וְרַגְלָי

Psalm 22:21 Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

הוֹשִׁיעֵנִי, מִפִּי אַרְיֵה; וּמִקַּרְנֵי רֵמִים עֲנִיתָנִי

In both verses the same hebrew word is used, ari which means lion. The verses translate the same word differently in the first, as "they pierced my hands and my feet", which some believe to refer to jesus. 5 verses down, they translate that word correctly as "lion". Just thought I'd share this since your thread made me think of it.

 

[Ben Masada]

On a side note, something interesting that I thought of after reading the thread is Psalm 22.

One of the common verses here that is applied to jesus is 22:16

Psalms 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

That's something I cannot understand: You use Psalm 22:16 to apply the piercing of hands and feet to Jesus.
How about the other thousands of Jews the Romans crucified? How do you think their hands and feet were pierced, with chocolate sticks?

That's simply not fair at all to the others. Did they not bleed when they were pierced? Did they not cry when the nails went through their flesh?
Did they not feel the same agonies that Jesus went through?

But I know you are not responsible for this individualization as if Jesus had been the only Jew crucified by the Romans.
The crooked mind behind the stratagem was Paul, who individualized the cruel fate of thousands of Jews, who went through the same torture.

Ben <*)))>< :sad4:

 

[kai]

According to the Gospel of Peter the crucifixion was carried out by the Jews and the method of hastening the death was poisoning with vinegar and bile in fulfillment of Psalm 69:21.

If you want a fun Bible study topic, trace each author's attempt to relocate the vinegar and gall and what they do with the eclipse and the breaking of legs. As a thought experiment, start with the notion that Peter is closest to the original version and that later authors were trying to change the story so that the Jews weren't doing the crucifying themselves.

what leads you to beleive that crucifiction was carried out by "Jewish" authorities, when its a well documented fact that it was a Roman means of execution

 

[Charity]

That's something I cannot understand: You use Psalm 22:16 to apply the piercing of hands and feet to Jesus.
How about the other thousands of Jews the Romans crucified? How do you think their hands and feet were pierced, with chocolate sticks?

That's simply not fair at all to the others. Did they not bleed when they were pierced? Did they not cry when the nails went through their flesh?
Did they not feel the same agonies that Jesus went through?

But I know you are not responsible for this individualization as if Jesus had been the only Jew crucified by the Romans.
The crooked mind behind the stratagem was Paul, who individualized the cruel fate of thousands of Jews, who went through the same torture.

Ben <*)))>< :sad4:

Hello Ben, It's time for the cookie monster to make a statement on your post....
I personally would never minimize the fact that thousands of Jews were put to a horrible death. Nor do I think that others would have the intention to downplay their death. Excuse me for asking, but why do you place blame on Paul here?
I don't think that Jesus himself would downplay the death of those Jews. He loved them, they were God's chosen people. He chose to fulfill the plan of the Father and suffer the same fate and painful death as those who had gone before him. Even though thousands died the death of Jesus was the one death that brought lasting life to all who desire to accept it....
Just trying to understand your thoughts and reasoning behind the Paul theory....:sad:

 

[Ben Masada]

Hello Ben, It's time for the cookie monster to make a statement on your post....
I personally would never minimize the fact that thousands of Jews were put to a horrible death. Nor do I think that others would have the intention to downplay their death. Excuse me for asking, but why do you place blame on Paul here?
I don't think that Jesus himself would downplay the death of those Jews. He loved them, they were God's chosen people. He chose to fulfill the plan of the Father and suffer the same fate and painful death as those who had gone before him. Even though thousands died the death of Jesus was the one death that brought lasting life to all who desire to accept it....
Just trying to understand your thoughts and reasoning behind the Paul theory....:sad:

Hi Charity! Welcome back! Did you bring me some cookies? How I wish it was true and not only in my dreams!

The fact that I blame Paul is because he was the one who fabricated the whole thing
about 30 years after Jesus' crucifixion by founding Christianity, officially in Antioch,
and then spreading his weed like fire in dry grass throughout Asia minor and North
Africa. (Acts 11:26) Then, the Roman cruelty was inherited by Christianity under
whose power we lost so many of our People.

Ben: <*)))>< :sad4:

 

[Charity]

Hi Charity! Welcome back! Did you bring me some cookies? How I wish it was true and not only in my dreams!

The fact that I blame Paul is because he was the one who fabricated the whole thing
about 30 years after Jesus' crucifixion by founding Christianity, officially in Antioch,
and then spreading his weed like fire in dry grass throughout Asia minor and North
Africa. (Acts 11:26) Then, the Roman cruelties was inherited by Christianity under
whose power we lost so many of our People.

Ben: <*)))>< :sad4:

Thanks for your response, Ok I now realize why you feel the way you do. I may not agree but I understand your reasoning.
Benny sometimes dreams do come true.....

 

[Ben Masada]

Thanks for your response, Ok I now realize why you feel the way you do. I may not agree but I understand your reasoning.
Benny sometimes dreams do come true.....

You may not agree. That's intriguing! I am sure you know a lot of History. Why
would you not agree with History? Have you ever read about the Christian Crusades?
How about the Christian Inquisition? Not to talk of Christian pogroms throughout
History expelling Jews from place to place when hundreds of Jewish children would
die as a result of forced transfers. I don't even like to think about those times when
Christianity had the power and used it in a manner worse than the Roman cruelties.

Ben: <*)))>< :sad4:

 

[Charity]

You may not agree. That's intriguing! I am sure you know a lot of History. Why
would you not agree with History? Have you ever read about the Christian Crusades?
How about the Christian Inquisition? Not to talk of Christian pogroms throughout
History expelling Jews from place to place when hundreds of Jewish children would
die as a result of forced transfers. I don't even like to think about those times when
Christianity had the power and used it in a manner worse than the Roman cruelties.

Ben: <*)))>< :sad4:

Ben do you also think that Paul was responsible for the actions of Hitler?
Excuse me but wasn't the disciples out there in the world spreading the gospel before Paul was converted? How can you blame Paul for everything?
Since I have so much respect for you I will honor your thoughts and shut up as all good Christian women were told to do by Paul. After all Paul seemed to think that men rule and women should be silenced.....:foot: Uh oh! that went against the teaching of Paul didn't it? See I told you I have a mind of my own, Had I lived back then I would probably stood up and argued with Paul, I'm outspoken at times.
See I told you I enjoy bringing out the defensive mechanism in you Benny. I like it when men assert themselves......Have a cookie Benny and remember I'm not the enemy.......

 

[Ben Masada]

=Charity;1368980. Ben do you also think that Paul was responsible for the actions of Hitler?
Excuse me but wasn't the disciples out there in the world spreading the gospel before Paul was converted? How can you blame Paul for everything?

But to answer your first question above, I might be exaggerating but we could very well have not had the Holocaust if it were not for the NT.
But I don't want to go deep into that in order not to raise the eyebrows of many in this site.
Anyways, sometimes I think that the Holocaust happened because too many Jews were on the wrong place at the wrong time.

Now, with regards to your second question yes, but the disciples were Nazarenes and their gospel had nothing of the things in the gospel of Paul.
According to Acts 21:20 the converts of the Nazarenes would become staunch defenders of the Law. According to Paul, his Christ had been the end of the Law. (Rom. 10:4)
This is only one of the instances to corroborate my assertion that the whole of the NT was written agains the Jewish People.

Ben: <*)))>< :sad4:

 

[sandy whitelinger]

It's allowed to speculate on existent evidences. This of aliens is a joke. I hope you
are not serious, are you?

Ben

Just speculating on existent evidences.

 

[Charity]

But to answer your first question above, I might be exaggerating but we could very well have not had the Holocaust if it were not for the NT.
But I don't want to go deep into that in order not to raise the eyebrows of many in this site.
Anyways, sometimes I think that the Holocaust happened because too many Jews were on the wrong place at the wrong time.

Now, with regards to your second question yes, but the disciples were Nazarenes and their gospel had nothing of the things in the gospel of Paul.
According to Acts 21:20 the converts of the Nazarenes would become staunch defenders of the Law. According to Paul, his Christ had been the end of the Law. (Rom. 10:4)
This is only one of the instances to corroborate my assertion that the whole of the NT was written agains the Jewish People.

Ben: <*)))>< :sad4:

Ben if the NT was written against the Jewish people then why do we see just how important the Jewish people were to God. :sad: I only see God's love for the Jews when I read the NT.
Ben, Jesus came not to change the law, but that it would be fulfilled.
Please sometime pm me tell me your thoughts on the Holocaust and the NT. I am really interested in hearing how you feel about this.
Have a good day

 

[doppelganger]

Crucifixion was never one of the methods of execution used throughout Jewish History. It was brought by the Romans everywhere to where they would conquer.
The Jews would never even adopt the method in order not to assimilate a Gentile practice.

Ben

Right. So do the suggested thought experiment. Imagine that later authors are working off of something like the Gospel of Peter and it occurs to them that the Jews would never have used crucifixion, but they now have the problem of dealing with the eclipse, the vinegar and gall and the breaking of legs, which all play a very specific purpose in the Petrine version of the Passion - but make less and less sense in later versions.

 

[doppelganger]

what leads you to beleive that crucifiction was carried out by "Jewish" authorities, when its a well documented fact that it was a Roman means of execution

Exactly what I said, the Gospel of Peter has it that way. Of course, I don't regard the Passion as historical. But for someone who does, having the Jews perform the crucifixion is a bit of a problem. So, bearing that in mind, compare GPet to the four canonical gospels with regard to the manner of death of Jesus, the breaking of legs, the presence of vinegar and/or gall (or bile), and the signficance of the eclipse. I would submit that of the five accounts, the version of the Passion where these elements make the most sense is in GPet.

 

[kai]

Exactly what I said, the Gospel of Peter has it that way. Of course, I don't regard the Passion as historical. But for someone who does, having the Jews perform the crucifixion is a bit of a problem. So, bearing that in mind, compare GPet to the four canonical gospels with regard to the manner of death of Jesus, the breaking of legs, the presence of vinegar and/or gall (or bile), and the signficance of the eclipse. I would submit that of the five accounts, the version of the Passion where these elements make the most sense is in GPet.

well if i remember rightly Herod gives the order not Pilot it still has Romans actually doing the crucifiction (which i dont think would be possible without orders from a Roman) its certainly an odd one thats for sure doesnt have a speaking cross?