What Happened To Jesus???

[paarsurrey]

Yep ... they ate him. Good talk. Maybe you should start a fourth thread about it.

Who ate him? Do you mean the Romans? Right?
Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

But i don't believe your story, and you don't believe mine.
You don't believe their story and they don't believe your story
I don't believe their story and they don't believe mine.

You'll say my book say so and the others will say otherwise,
What the benefit then from such discussion?

#57

1-Stubborn and ardent clinging to one's opinion is the best proof of stupidity.
Michel de Montaigne
2-We can't fix stupid

 

[FearGod]

1-Stubborn and ardent clinging to one's opinion is the best proof of stupidity.
Michel de Montaigne
2-We can't fix stupid

Please.

 

[Sister Cyber]

The Gospel Of Mark, the earliest written gospel, has no virgin birth and no resurrection. You are mistaken.

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to put a lot of stock in Mark's gospel. For example, in Mark, female disciples found the stone rolled away and they saw a young guy dressed in white who told them that jesus got up and was on his way to Galilee (8:31; 9:9, 10:34, 14:28). The guy told them to report that to the disciples AND PETER and they ran away too shocked to say anything at all to anyone, and that's how Mark ended his story ~ that the women never told anyone about their experience. IN FACT, later editors came along and tacked on the new ending (Mark 16:9-20).

So now you understand Jesus was alive when he was taken down from his cross. We are made to understand from the story that he was then placed in a tomb, but disappeared. Different accounts express different scenarios. Truth is, his disciples came to help him out and moved h im to a tomb closer to them where he could heal enough, then he spent a little over a month with them before they ate him.

 

[paarsurrey]

According to scripture, Jesus commanded them to. Catholics and Christians today perform a ritual ceremony (some every month) called "communion," "sacrament" or "eucharist" of eating wafers and drinking grape-juice (or wine) based on the disciples obedience to Jesus' command to his disciples to eat his flesh and drink his blood.
Yes, he did. But not on the cross. Keep reading; I'll explain.
Take a look at the Roman crucifixion scene. The Romans killed jesus, not the jews. Cruel and ruthless imperialists crucified anyone who rebelled against their rule. Crucifixion was meant to be death by asphyxiation. Christianity grew out of judaism, but was developed in the Roman world and implemented as the state religion, so bear in mind that christians and jews were both being wiped out by the Romans. The canonical gospels offer stories of what the first eyewitnesses actually saw, and they do all agree that the man called jesus hung on a cross and female disciples were there; Mary Magdalene is named constantly in each (Mark 15:37-41, Matthew 27:50-56, Luke 23:46-49, John 19:25-30).
First and foremost, it is very important that you understand that he was not on the cross long enough to die ~ only three hours, an insignificant fraction of the length of time that death by crucifixion took. Death by Roman crucifixion was meant to be a painful and prolonged form of state-sanctioned execution that was reserved for thieves and rebels. Im those days it took several days for criminals to die on the cross. They suffered the pangs of hunger and thirst and in most cases their legs were broken. They died a lingering death extending over several days. Jesus was very-much alive when Joseph of Arimathea put him in the tomb, and the man called jesus was not dead when the stone was rolled in front of the tomb. I'll tell you why.
First I just want to point out something that a great many are not aware of. This is the crucifixion scene typically depicted to the masses:
View attachment 13476
However, the scene you would have been viewing in those times would have more accurately looked more like this:
View attachment 13478
Hundreds of crosses and those in various stages of death by crucifixion lined the road entrance to the city, serving as a visual warning to those coming into the city of the penalty for not abiding by the authority of Roman rule at that time.
Remember, two other criminals hung with him on that same day and they were both very alive when they were taken down from their respective crosses. So what makes you think that a Master healer of the Human body and reknown performer of many great and spectacular miracles could not bear in his mind and body far beyond what those two ordinary criminals did? Also important to note is that the Roman soldiers only considered breaking his legs at the end of the day, but they didn't break them. They broke the legs of the other two criminals who were hung with him on the same day, didn't they? Do you know why? Because they were alive TOO! Again, I point out that death by crucifixion was A PROLONGED PROCESS, and it being the eve of the sabbath, their legs were broken as the Roman soldiers' cruel means to ensure that they would not be able to escape from where their bodies were buried, and thus would slowly starve or bleed to death while abandoned in their graves.
Jesus' legs were not broken because the Roman soldiers THOUGHT he was dead because he appeared to them to be dead due to his superconscious state, but they, too, missed the mark in their assumption. All the Roman soldier did to him was stab him in the side with his dagger. Big deal. The text says when he was stabbed, blood and water (they apparently did not know the scientific term is "plasma," which is a clear fluid in our blood) came out.
I thought it would make sense to bring to your attention that generally speaking, there are a whole bunch of people (and you may even know one or two or perhaps be one yourself) who are walking around today with scars from stab wounds that were inflicted on them in their past, even in their sides. So it is very, verily reasonable to say that it was not a stab that killed him at all.

A marvelous post indeed. Please add more, if you have more information.
Thanks and regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to put a lot of stock in Mark's gospel. For example, in Mark, female disciples found the stone rolled away and they saw a young guy dressed in white who told them that jesus got up and was on his way to Galilee (8:31; 9:9, 10:34, 14:28). The guy told them to report that to the disciples AND PETER and they ran away too shocked to say anything at all to anyone, and that's how Mark ended his story ~ that the women never told anyone about their experience. IN FACT, later editors came along and tacked on the new ending (Mark 16:9-20).
So now you understand Jesus was alive when he was taken down from his cross. We are made to understand from the story that he was then placed in a tomb, but disappeared. Different accounts express different scenarios. Truth is, his disciples came to help him out and moved h im to a tomb closer to them where he could heal enough, then he spent a little over a month with them before they ate him.

You mean Paul and his associates ate him?
Regards

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

My thoughts on what happened:

Either prior to or during the Passion torture stuff, Jesus developed serious health conditions, possibly congestive heart failure or some other fluid overload related issue like pneumothorax or something. I am not a big fan of John (I hate this author), but in his story, a soldier pokes Jesus with a spear and water comes out as well as blood, which shouldn't happen in a healthy individual. I believe that due to this, he fainted and was considered dead (we don't see any evidence of anyone trying to prove death). He was entombed and it took three days for him to recover, as the stabbing had relieved the pressure on his heart and lungs, much like how we use chest tubes nowadays to let fluid drain out that isn't supposed to be there. Then, after leaving the tomb, he realized his mission didn't go the way he had thought it would and so he went to the mountains (to "heaven") and fled the area entirely.

 

[paarsurrey]

My thoughts on what happened:
Either prior to or during the Passion torture stuff, Jesus developed serious health conditions, possibly congestive heart failure or some other fluid overload related issue like pneumothorax or something. I am not a big fan of John (I hate this author), but in his story, a soldier pokes Jesus with a spear and water comes out as well as blood, which shouldn't happen in a healthy individual. I believe that due to this, he fainted and was considered dead (we don't see any evidence of anyone trying to prove death). He was entombed and it took three days for him to recover, as the stabbing had relieved the pressure on his heart and lungs, much like how we use chest tubes nowadays to let fluid drain out that isn't supposed to be there. Then, after leaving the tomb, he realized his mission didn't go the way he had thought it would and so he went to the mountains (to "heaven") and fled the area entirely.

What a good post from friend @Kelly of the Phoenix ! Please write more.
Thanks and regards

 

[idav]

According to scripture, Jesus commanded them to. Catholics and Christians today perform a ritual ceremony (some every month) called "communion," "sacrament" or "eucharist" of eating wafers and drinking grape-juice (or wine) based on the disciples obedience to Jesus' command to his disciples to eat his flesh and drink his blood.



Yes, he did. But not on the cross. Keep reading; I'll explain.



Take a look at the Roman crucifixion scene. The Romans killed jesus, not the jews. Cruel and ruthless imperialists crucified anyone who rebelled against their rule. Crucifixion was meant to be death by asphyxiation. Christianity grew out of judaism, but was developed in the Roman world and implemented as the state religion, so bear in mind that christians and jews were both being wiped out by the Romans. The canonical gospels offer stories of what the first eyewitnesses actually saw, and they do all agree that the man called jesus hung on a cross and female disciples were there; Mary Magdalene is named constantly in each (Mark 15:37-41, Matthew 27:50-56, Luke 23:46-49, John 19:25-30).

First and foremost, it is very important that you understand that he was not on the cross long enough to die ~ only three hours, an insignificant fraction of the length of time that death by crucifixion took. Death by Roman crucifixion was meant to be a painful and prolonged form of state-sanctioned execution that was reserved for thieves and rebels. Im those days it took several days for criminals to die on the cross. They suffered the pangs of hunger and thirst and in most cases their legs were broken. They died a lingering death extending over several days. Jesus was very-much alive when Joseph of Arimathea put him in the tomb, and the man called jesus was not dead when the stone was rolled in front of the tomb. I'll tell you why.

First I just want to point out something that a great many are not aware of. This is the crucifixion scene typically depicted to the masses:
View attachment 13476

However, the scene you would have been viewing in those times would have more accurately looked more like this:
View attachment 13478

Hundreds of crosses and those in various stages of death by crucifixion lined the road entrance to the city, serving as a visual warning to those coming into the city of the penalty for not abiding by the authority of Roman rule at that time.

Remember, two other criminals hung with him on that same day and they were both very alive when they were taken down from their respective crosses. So what makes you think that a Master healer of the Human body and reknown performer of many great and spectacular miracles could not bear in his mind and body far beyond what those two ordinary criminals did? Also important to note is that the Roman soldiers only considered breaking his legs at the end of the day, but they didn't break them. They broke the legs of the other two criminals who were hung with him on the same day, didn't they? Do you know why? Because they were alive TOO! Again, I point out that death by crucifixion was A PROLONGED PROCESS, and it being the eve of the sabbath, their legs were broken as the Roman soldiers' cruel means to ensure that they would not be able to escape from where their bodies were buried, and thus would slowly starve or bleed to death while abandoned in their graves.

Jesus' legs were not broken because the Roman soldiers THOUGHT he was dead because he appeared to them to be dead due to his superconscious state, but they, too, missed the mark in their assumption. All the Roman soldier did to him was stab him in the side with his dagger. Big deal. The text says when he was stabbed, blood and water (they apparently did not know the scientific term is "plasma," which is a clear fluid in our blood) came out.

I thought it would make sense to bring to your attention that generally speaking, there are a whole bunch of people (and you may even know one or two or perhaps be one yourself) who are walking around today with scars from stab wounds that were inflicted on them in their past, even in their sides. So it is very, verily reasonable to say that it was not a stab that killed him at all.

You didn't give verses about the disciples eating Jesus. Instead you show stuff about Jesus being crucified.

 

[oldbadger]

Very great, an excellent post. Wish you add more all the intense evidence.

I just try to work objectively, with no agenda.
Unfortunately, those with an agenda at one moment like me and shake my hand, the next moment hating me and shaking fist.

The Christianity people should be jubilant on your evidences as it save the life of their beloved Jesus.

Sadly, if I had written that on some extreme Christian forums I should have been warned or banned, for intentional blasphemy. People have burned for less, I believe.

Please Regards

And to you, and thankyou for your kind message.

 

[oldbadger]

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to put a lot of stock in Mark's gospel.

It is the best account, and may be the memoirs of Cephas, passed on for a few years by oral tradition.

For example, in Mark, female disciples found the stone rolled away and they saw a young guy dressed in white who told them that jesus got up and was on his way to Galilee (8:31; 9:9, 10:34, 14:28).

That fits perfectly with your belief that he lived, got up and went to Galilee.

The guy told them to report that to the disciples AND PETER and they ran away too shocked to say anything at all to anyone, and that's how Mark ended his story

That fits perfectly with your belief that Jesus did not die. Further, it fits with the facts that no disciples were p[resent at the execution, only Magdelene and Salome and some other women.

~ that the women never told anyone about their experience.

Well, at that time they were wise to keep quiet.
I exp[ect that the women spoke up later on, after Jesus had passed through Cap[ernaum.

IN FACT, later editors came along and tacked on the new ending (Mark 16:9-20).

...so we disregeard those additions......

So now you understand Jesus was alive when he was taken down from his cross. We are made to understand from the story that he was then placed in a tomb, but disappeared. Different accounts express different scenarios. Truth is, his disciples came to help him out and moved h im to a tomb closer to them where he could heal enough, then he spent a little over a month with them before they ate him.

Just help me here......
Questions:-
How did they kill Jesus?
How did they cook Jesus?
How did they eat Jesus?
Why didn't witnesses to this killing, cooking, eating tell others, who then would have written reports?
Since tis was never reported, how did you find out about it?
Do you have any evidence?

 

[George-ananda]

Hello George Ananda. I used to read your posts a lot, before I went 'walkabout' for a year.
I only look at what little evidence is available, and come to my perceptions based upon (my) balance of probabilities and/or possibilities.

Cephas was not there.
Although Mother Mary was reported to be there as written 50 or 80 years after the event by a doubtful witness, imo. He changed too much of the original reports, he played down the more common 'casting of spirits' etc, and felt it necessary to start actually raising the dead. He changed Jesus's description of self (son of man) into Lord and such. He played down the importance of John the Baptist to nothing. I cannot trust much that John wrote.
Magdalene and Salome were there, as reported 20 (ish) years after the event by a person who may well have heard Magdalene'#s or Salome's accounts.
Buit the tomb was left by the witnesses for one or two nights before they returned and were told that Jesus was 'gone'. No entry in the best report (Mark) mentions resurrection.
When Jesus appeared at Capernaum he was alive, and either well or recovered. If his hands were wounded then that suggests that he may have survived the cross, just as Josephus's friend survived (as reported in Life)
Capernaum would have been on the way North, and travelling towards areas which would be en-route for the Mid and Far East.

That's just off the top of my head. The evidence can be more intense than that, but an audience could find for this proposal in a public debate. Pilate's words. Pilate's attempts to sway the crowd. Pilate's meeting with Joseph. Joseph's p[ersonal handling of the taking down, taking away, entombing in Joseph's own tomb!! The unobserved dissappearance. The very late and questionable accounts of 80 and 110-120 CE (Luke and John) both long after Paul's death, who wrote NONE of it.

I'm sorry..... I'm 'going on..'

Magdalene viewed the event of the execution from 'afar'.

These details are interesting and we can not know for sure but I have to believe someone closely related and involved with Jesus would have prepared him wrapped him or whatever and placed him in the tomb. I am not sure what the motive would be for creating an elaborate story if the authors and close associates knew the truth.

 

[oldbadger]

These details are interesting and we can not know for sure but I have to believe someone closely related and involved with Jesus would have prepared him wrapped him or whatever and placed him in the tomb. I am not sure what the motive would be for creating an elaborate story if the authors and close associates knew the truth.

That is fine.
As you wrote ,'I have to believe....'
That is the basis for most Christians, they have faith.
it is your call.....

 

[blue taylor]

Faith in words, written on paper by unknown people. Fools faith.

 

[paarsurrey]

hat fits perfectly with your belief that Jesus did not die. Further, it fits with the facts that no disciples were p[resent at the execution, only Magdelene and Salome and some other women.

A marvelous point. From among-st men nobody was present, not even John. Please
Regards

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

He continued to travel around the region of Galilee and surrounding lands preaching God's Message until death overcame him in the natural way of things (he did not die on the cross). He was then born again into this world, where the Devil and their servants entrapped him, so that he forgot his true identity and became lost in the world over successive reincarnations. But he will return (with the knowledge of who he truly is, and his Mission).

Whoa! That's a new one! Care to expand on that? I'm honestly interested. Where are you getting this from?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What Happened To Jesus???

The Christianity people should be happy. A good tiding for them,their beloved Jesus simply did not die on the Cross.
He spent a natural life and death afterwards. NT is totally wrong the Jesus died on the Cross, absolutely no chance of dying on the Cross. It never happened. Please

Regards

No, it's not a "good tiding" for us since Christianity falls apart if Christ did not die on the Cross. Our Salvation has not been won, then.

 

[paarsurrey]

He continued to travel around the region of Galilee and surrounding lands preaching God's Message until death overcame him in the natural way of things (he did not die on the cross). He was then born again into this world, where the Devil and their servants entrapped him, so that he forgot his true identity and became lost in the world over successive reincarnations. But he will return (with the knowledge of who he truly is, and his Mission).

Please write more on the subject.
Thanks and regards

 

[roger1440]

According to scripture, Jesus commanded them to. Catholics and Christians today perform a ritual ceremony (some every month) called "communion," "sacrament" or "eucharist" of eating wafers and drinking grape-juice (or wine) based on the disciples obedience to Jesus' command to his disciples to eat his flesh and drink his blood.



Yes, he did. But not on the cross. Keep reading; I'll explain.



Take a look at the Roman crucifixion scene. The Romans killed jesus, not the jews. Cruel and ruthless imperialists crucified anyone who rebelled against their rule. Crucifixion was meant to be death by asphyxiation. Christianity grew out of judaism, but was developed in the Roman world and implemented as the state religion, so bear in mind that christians and jews were both being wiped out by the Romans. The canonical gospels offer stories of what the first eyewitnesses actually saw, and they do all agree that the man called jesus hung on a cross and female disciples were there; Mary Magdalene is named constantly in each (Mark 15:37-41, Matthew 27:50-56, Luke 23:46-49, John 19:25-30).

First and foremost, it is very important that you understand that he was not on the cross long enough to die ~ only three hours, an insignificant fraction of the length of time that death by crucifixion took. Death by Roman crucifixion was meant to be a painful and prolonged form of state-sanctioned execution that was reserved for thieves and rebels. Im those days it took several days for criminals to die on the cross. They suffered the pangs of hunger and thirst and in most cases their legs were broken. They died a lingering death extending over several days. Jesus was very-much alive when Joseph of Arimathea put him in the tomb, and the man called jesus was not dead when the stone was rolled in front of the tomb. I'll tell you why.

First I just want to point out something that a great many are not aware of. This is the crucifixion scene typically depicted to the masses:
View attachment 13476

However, the scene you would have been viewing in those times would have more accurately looked more like this:
View attachment 13478

Hundreds of crosses and those in various stages of death by crucifixion lined the road entrance to the city, serving as a visual warning to those coming into the city of the penalty for not abiding by the authority of Roman rule at that time.

Remember, two other criminals hung with him on that same day and they were both very alive when they were taken down from their respective crosses. So what makes you think that a Master healer of the Human body and reknown performer of many great and spectacular miracles could not bear in his mind and body far beyond what those two ordinary criminals did? Also important to note is that the Roman soldiers only considered breaking his legs at the end of the day, but they didn't break them. They broke the legs of the other two criminals who were hung with him on the same day, didn't they? Do you know why? Because they were alive TOO! Again, I point out that death by crucifixion was A PROLONGED PROCESS, and it being the eve of the sabbath, their legs were broken as the Roman soldiers' cruel means to ensure that they would not be able to escape from where their bodies were buried, and thus would slowly starve or bleed to death while abandoned in their graves.

Jesus' legs were not broken because the Roman soldiers THOUGHT he was dead because he appeared to them to be dead due to his superconscious state, but they, too, missed the mark in their assumption. All the Roman soldier did to him was stab him in the side with his dagger. Big deal. The text says when he was stabbed, blood and water (they apparently did not know the scientific term is "plasma," which is a clear fluid in our blood) came out.

I thought it would make sense to bring to your attention that generally speaking, there are a whole bunch of people (and you may even know one or two or perhaps be one yourself) who are walking around today with scars from stab wounds that were inflicted on them in their past, even in their sides. So it is very, verily reasonable to say that it was not a stab that killed him at all.

You are suggesting a conspiracy. It’s already been done. Read the best seller, “The Passover Plot”. It was written in 1965. As far as dying only after a few hours, it’s very possible. I really don’t think he was the epitome of health shortly before he was crucified. Constantly running away from the mean Jews and being beat by the horrible Romans would certainly put a damper on my health. If Jesus claimed to be the King of the Jews he could have been convicted for high treason. That is much worse than being convicted of murder, stealing, and rape; whatever. No government would take it lightly when you want to over throw them. Centuries later the Brits had a very effective way of handling people convicted of high treason, “Drawn, quartered and hung”, OUCH.

 

[blue taylor]

No, it's not a "good tiding" for us since Christianity falls apart if Christ did not die on the Cross. Our Salvation has not been won, then.

Salvation from what?