Is the "crcifixion" just a metaphor?

[Bunyip]

I absolutely agree and concede to that point. But the point I am making, the reason it is relevant is this. NT is just a list, a list of 27 books. It is not one book.

That is false, the NT is not just a list, it contains translations of each of those elements and has been published and distributed for centuries with versions of those elements contained within it. Many of those books survive only in that compilation.

Your argument would make sense and be true IF those 27 books had all been preserved outside of the bible and so were not effected by having been compiled into it.

What of the other books not compiled? What of all of the other sacred texts not included in the bible? What if the people who compiled the NT selected only sources that gelled with their existing agenda?

No matter how you look at it, you still need external validation to the elements of that list.

Oh and here's the elephant in the room - and a question for you to answer if you can;

Guess how many of those 27 books on the list existed within a generation of Jesus death? Guess how many of those books were written long after the events they describe, and so contemporary corroborating evidence would still be desirable?

 

[outhouse]

This thread is about historicity, and you need sources external to the bible in order to establish it.

It has been posted. You threw that out as well.


And no, your in error, your methodology is not used by anyone.

Your whole position is unsubstantiated.

 

[outhouse]

Avoiding


.

Yep.


Like a YEC avoiding the evidence of evolution, he has painted himself in a corner with his own methodology.

 

[Bunyip]

It has been posted. You threw that out as well.

Pointing out that Josephus contains very litlle in the way of evidence for the crucifixion is not throwing it put. It is just a fact.

 

[outhouse]

How does compiling different stories into a single book, make it a single book?

Multiple authors from different time periods and different geographic locations.

It is factually a compilation of different books and different sources, on the same topic.

 

[outhouse]

Pointing out that Josephus contains very litlle in the way of evidence for the crucifixion is not throwing it put. It is just a fact.

It is there. It exist.

You cannot explain the evidence with any credibility can you?

 

[Bunyip]

It is there. It exist.

Yes, correct. I have acknowledged that from the outset.

You cannot explain the evidence with any credibility can you?

We have covered that before.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Can you understand? I'm not sure about the crucifixion..... (this is hard work)!!!

Surety is hard to come by, with or without hard work. But until I hear a compelling reason for fabricating such a death, I choose historicity over fabrication. There is, of course, a third option, that being that Paul and his followers were simply and grievously mistaken, but I see no reason why anyone should find it particularly attractive.

 

[Bunyip]

Multiple authors from different time periods and different geographic locations.

It is factually a compilation of different books and different sources, on the same topic.

Indeed. And of course none of those books were contemporary with the event in question.

 

[oldbadger]

Surety is hard to come by, with or without hard work. But until I hear a compelling reason for fabricating such a death, I choose historicity over fabrication. There is, of course, a third option, that being that Paul and his followers were simply and grievously mistaken, but I see no reason why anyone should find it particularly attractive.

Cool....... I suppose that 'open mind' could be a better description for my feelings, compared to 'unsure'.

I keep thinking about this passage in G-Mark:-
{15:4} And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing?
behold how many things they witness against thee. {15:5}
But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.
{15:6} Now at [that] feast he released unto them one
prisoner, whomsoever they desired. {15:7} And there was
[one] named Barabbas, [which lay] bound with them that
had made insurrection with him, who had committed
murder in the insurrection.

.......the 'with him' is excluded from my New English Translation Bible. This KJV bible was downloaded from the internet. This reads as if this convict had (possibly) been present with Jesus and his followers at the Temple, and had killed somebody............ Wishy washy?.. yes. Possible.... yes.

The permutations just around this cryptic 'word-play' of names are extensive. There is an outside chance that somebody else was crucified and that Jesus was reprieved but exiled...... oh the possibilities are many.

Weak? Yes. Confusing? Very. But this is all enough to plunge me into the 'open mind' camp.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Cool....... I suppose that 'open mind' could be a better description for my feelings, compared to 'unsure'.

I keep thinking about this passage in G-Mark:-
{15:4} And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing?
behold how many things they witness against thee. {15:5}
But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.
{15:6} Now at [that] feast he released unto them one
prisoner, whomsoever they desired. {15:7} And there was
[one] named Barabbas, [which lay] bound with them that
had made insurrection with him, who had committed
murder in the insurrection.

.......the 'with him' is excluded from my New English Translation Bible. This KJV bible was downloaded from the internet. This reads as if this convict had (possibly) been present with Jesus and his followers at the Temple, and had killed somebody............ Wishy washy?.. yes. Possible.... yes.

The permutations just around this cryptic 'word-play' of names are extensive. There is an outside chance that somebody else was crucified and that Jesus was reprieved but exiled...... oh the possibilities are many.

Weak? Yes. Confusing? Very. But this is all enough to plunge me into the 'open mind' camp.

I'm not at all sure how you come to read it that way. See here for example.

 

[Ken Brown]

Shalom disciple, no, it is not a metaphor, it was an actual event that FULFILLED what was WRITTEN in the OT Scriptures, especially, the Torah.

Lk 18:31 - 18:34

(31) Then he took [unto him] the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished.
(32) For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on:
(33) And they shall scourge [him], and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.
(34) And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken.

Acts 13:28 - 13:30

(28) And though they found no cause of death [in him], yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.
(29) And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took [him] down from the tree, and laid [him] in a sepulchre.
(30) But Elohim raised him from the dead:

Acts 24:14 - 24:15

(14) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the Elohim of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
(15) And have hope toward Elohim, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

Acts 26:22 - 26:23

(22) Having therefore obtained help of Elohim, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
(23) That Messiah should suffer, [and] that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

It should be evident to anyone who believes the Scriptures that Yeshua's suffering, death, burial, and third day resurrection was all ACCORDING to what had been previously WRITTEN. But even with such strong evidence, as what is WRITTEN by Moses, there are those who will NOT BELIEVE:

Acts 28:23 - 28:24

(23) And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into [his] lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of Elohim, persuading them concerning Yeshua, both out of the law of Moses, and [out of] the prophets, from morning till evening.
(24) And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.

Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

Shalom disciple, here is what you should do. Take all of the commentators, professors, theologians, and wannabe scholars, and combine all of what they have written, place it in a huge pile, and BURN it. At least you could roast some marshmallows and get some good out of what they have written.

Now, if you want to PROVE the crucifixion was an historical event, go and learn how the pure are defiled and the defiled are cleansed by the chukah of the Torah. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Now, if you want to PROVE the crucifixion was an historical event, go and learn how the pure are defiled and the defiled are cleansed by the chukah of the Torah. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

Gee, this is getting serious: after all, he wrote "PROVE" in capital letters!

 

[Ken Brown]

Gee, this is getting serious: after all, he wrote "PROVE" in capital letters!

Shalom Jayhawker Soule, shame on you. You KNOW what the chukah of the Torah is, and you mock? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I "KNOW" precisely what your posts are worth.

 

[Ingledsva]

Cool....... I suppose that 'open mind' could be a better description for my feelings, compared to 'unsure'.

I keep thinking about this passage in G-Mark:-
{15:4} And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing?
behold how many things they witness against thee. {15:5}
But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.
{15:6} Now at [that] feast he released unto them one
prisoner, whomsoever they desired. {15:7} And there was
[one] named Barabbas, [which lay] bound with them that
had made insurrection with him, who had committed
murder in the insurrection.

.......the 'with him' is excluded from my New English Translation Bible. This KJV bible was downloaded from the internet. This reads as if this convict had (possibly) been present with Jesus and his followers at the Temple, and had killed somebody............ Wishy washy?.. yes. Possible.... yes.

The permutations just around this cryptic 'word-play' of names are extensive. There is an outside chance that somebody else was crucified and that Jesus was reprieved but exiled...... oh the possibilities are many.

Weak? Yes. Confusing? Very. But this is all enough to plunge me into the 'open mind' camp.

Interesting, I hadn't looked at that one before.


It does use "sustasiastes" which does mean "fellow insurrectionist," "make insurrection with."


The (1587 Geneva): Then there was one named Barabbas, which was bounde with his fellowes, that had made insurrection, who in the insurrection had committed murther.


(KJV-1611) And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.


(Lamsa NT) There was one called Bar-Abbas, who was bound with those who made insurrection, and who had committed murder during the insurrection.


(LEB) And the one named Barabbas was imprisoned with the rebels who had committed murder in the rebellion.


I translated it this way -


Mark 15:7 There was also the one called Bar-Abbas, among his fellow insurrectionists bound, which same, in the uprising, murder committed.




*

 

[Desert Snake]

Shalom disciple, here is what you should do. Take all of the commentators, professors, theologians, and wannabe scholars, and combine all of what they have written, place it in a huge pile, and BURN it. At least you could roast some marshmallows and get some good out of what they have written.

Now, if you want to PROVE the crucifixion was an historical event, go and learn how the pure are defiled and the defiled are cleansed by the chukah of the Torah. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

Shalom Ken

That's interesting, not aware of that.

 

[Ken Brown]

I "KNOW" precisely what your posts are worth.

Shalom Jayhawker Soule, well thank you. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Interesting, I hadn't looked at that one before.


It does use "sustasiastes" which does mean "fellow insurrectionist," "make insurrection with."

At the risk of appearing dense, what precisely is deemed interesting here - especially if the 'him' refers to Barabbas?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Shalom Jayhawker Soule, well ...

( -- ignore list -- )