Jesus did not die on the Cross

[outhouse]

This separate topic
But do you think that the Bible is inconsistent
Where is the proof

This is one of many.

chew away

Matthew 2:15, 19 & 21-23 The infant Christ was taken into Egypt.

Luke 2:22 & 39 The infant Christ was NOT taken to Egypt.

Why would your god write such a confusing book if this was so important?

 

[outhouse]

Flight into Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Historicity
The Gospel of Luke makes no mention of this event at all, relating instead that the Holy Family went to the Temple in Jerusalem, and then directly home to Nazareth.[3]
Robert Funk of the Jesus Seminar has suggested that both Luke's and Matthew's birth and infancy accounts are fabrications.[4][5] A theme of Matthew is likening Jesus to Moses for a Judean audience, and the Flight into Egypt does just that.[6] Some skeptics interpret the passage as part of a lengthy justification for how Jesus could have grown up in Nazareth, a minor and little known town in Galilee, while still have been born in Bethlehem, which was a town of great religious importance because it was attached to King David

Matthew's use of Hosea 11:1 has been explained in several ways. A sensus plenior approach states that the text in Hosea contains a meaning intended by God and acknowledged by Matthew, but unknown to Hosea. A typological reading interprets the fulfillment as found in the national history of Israel and the antitypical fulfillment as found an event in the personal history of Jesus. Matthew's use of typological interpretation may also be seen in his use of Isaiah 7:14 and 9:1, and Jeremiah 31:15.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

This is one of many.

chew away

Matthew 2:15, 19 & 21-23 The infant Christ was taken into Egypt.

Luke 2:22 & 39 The infant Christ was NOT taken to Egypt.

Why would your god write such a confusing book if this was so important?

First-this is not a contradiction and reason that Matthew wrote in more detail from Luke
This is our understanding and our interpretation of the Gospel
The Gospel is written to the life of Jesus on Earth and his works
Four persons
Each of them has a style of writing
Luke does not speak about the novel birth details
The novel is a novel conveyed the birth and they did see with their own eyes
Therefore do not lie they write up their transport
This faith in the Gospel
Christian does not believe the Gospel
And illustration
Two people from a novel about the birth of Jesus
Each one wrote the novel style
I posted more details I
So there is no contradiction in the topic

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

Christian understands and believes in the Gospel of the following form
The Gospel written by four people
These disciples of Christ
Wrote the deeds and sayings of Jesus is important in the life of Jesus and the three-year term
No such that what was written down from the sky
Or he owners landed him
Therefore, in the Gospels, some of the details vary from gospel to country and this is not a contradiction
But speech transmission method from one person to another
For example
Try me, football player
Witness football match
The lawyer wrote in the description of the elbaraa and also wrote a football player
Writing style will vary on these almbiarah the reason that counsel method differs from the style of football player
The same applies to the books of the Gospels
Luke was a doctor
Mona was ashara collects taxes
Each method is different in explaining the novel
Novel movable and not Christmas sees them
This is a right and not a diminution of Christianity because Christianity to understand lying

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

You have the right to debate me on the health of my faith
If I told you the Gospel came down from heaven
Here you have the right in aigadhza contradiction
But I tell you
To my understanding the Gospel
I am not saying that came down from heaven
I tell you
Four disciples of Jesus wrote the biography of Jesus

The question of the birth of Jesus wrote what they have heard
And in the matter of hard what they saw

And in his life that knew him and discovered him hiding
So the question is not a contradiction
Even on the issue of steel
The four wrote in literary style
But they agreed that the important issue is the fact they saw steel.
In their time did not appear to question the evidence for that wrote the right
It is that Jesus was on the cross his body which was with them in the Jewish and the Galilee

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

The essence and heart of Christian education
Is in two words
God is love
God so loved the world as I am I have loved you
Does this definition of love in Islam
So I hope not they put Islam and Christianity in one box
Islam we are talking about style and interpretation
It is alleged that the speech House
This great fairy tale
Therefore, the Qur'an translated texts look and meaning
And not in the Koran which calls the meaning of love in Christianity
And I did not study other religions
Let them speak those who explain to us the meaning of their religion is love
Or hatred and murder

 

[outhouse]

First-this is not a contradiction and reason that Matthew wrote in more detail from Luke

Well your wrong!

deal with it.


Luke states they did not go to Egypt period.



Flight into Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Historicity

The Gospel of Luke makes no mention of this event at all, relating instead that the Holy Family went to the Temple in Jerusalem, and then directly home to Nazareth.[3]

Robert Funk of the Jesus Seminar has suggested that both Luke's and Matthew's birth and infancy accounts are fabrications.[4][5] A theme of Matthew is likening Jesus to Moses for a Judean audience, and the Flight into Egypt does just that.[6] Some skeptics interpret the passage as part of a lengthy justification for how Jesus could have grown up in Nazareth, a minor and little known town in Galilee, while still have been born in Bethlehem, which was a town of great religious importance because it was attached to King David

Matthew's use of Hosea 11:1 has been explained in several ways. A sensus plenior approach states that the text in Hosea contains a meaning intended by God and acknowledged by Matthew, but unknown to Hosea. A typological reading interprets the fulfillment as found in the national history of Israel and the antitypical fulfillment as found an event in the personal history of Jesus. Matthew's use of typological interpretation may also be seen in his use of Isaiah 7:14 and 9:1, and Jeremiah 31:15.

 

[outhouse]

If you don't have credible sources don't reply back with your unsubstantiated opinion.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

If you don't have credible sources don't reply back with your unsubstantiated opinion.

Is this method dialog
I'm with me Bible
And don't count on alokibdia
I believe in every word I type
Gospel understand simply full in two words
God is love
And as the novel the birth of Christ
Yes there is in the Gospel of Matthew more detail from the Gospel of Luke
This is not a conflict of
And there is no contradiction
The two men did not see the birth of Jesus
Wrote the novel according to the conveyed
Therefore, you cannot impose your explanation on the Christian
You grab their interpretation

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

I offer you the Gospel as I understand
No roll, no spin
Gospel hoktab written by four people

These were the four disciples of Jesus wrote what they have heard from Jesus

Of words
And actions of each person through books aslo its literary writing
And messages are written by the disciples of Jesus also but it was addressed to the people to explain the faith in Jesus
All this happened under the guidance or revelation from the Holy Spirit
That is what is written in the Bible is right
No lie
Hence, Christianity away from all the other myths
But Islam make invented the myth of the word of God
The word of God is the one who invites you to love it in our minds
Christianity revealed this to human
And gave him the freedom to write the word of God
Therefore the word of God this easy translation into the languages of the world
While the speech which cannot be translated
Not as God spake greetings

 

[029b10]

Jesus was put to death by being nailed to a stake, or upright wooden pole. Acts 5:30 reports; "The God of our forefathers raised up Jesus, whom you killed, hanging him on a stake." So Jesus died on a stake, not a cross. I believe it is on the basis of Jesus ransom sacrifice we have the hope of everlasting life. (John 3:16)

The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
Acts 5:30

Tree, cross, stake, while intrinsically the same, three different perspectives of the one. Kinda like, the Torah, Gospel and Quran, three different perspectives of the same One.

The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
John 19:31

His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
Deut 21:23-22:1

[18] I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. [19] And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Deut 18:18-19

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
1 Cor 12:3

I would suggest that the Holy Ghost should not be interpreted Holy Spirit except as provided for in Matthew 4:4. John 5:26 "For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;"

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus did not die on the Cross

Following points have been submitted for discussion:

1. Jesus did not fulfill "Sign of Jonah"; please read the argument from post # 109.
2. "Jesus' prayers in the Garden";please read the argument from post # 153.
3. "Jesus' words right on the Cross" from post # 188.
4.“Jesus was on the Cross for few hours only” from post # 211

Jesus did not want to die; so why should Jesus die?

We are still discussing the above arguments, therefore, while writing a post please quote which argument you are commenting on for clarity of the viewers please.

Regards

 

[dantech]

You're spectacular Paar.

 

[paarsurrey]

You're spectacular Paar.

Thanks for your appreciation.

Regards

 

[outhouse]

Jesus did not die on the Cross

Following points have been submitted for discussion:

Nothing credible sorry.

Bring real evidence and quit posting garbage.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Shad,
Like so many historians and sceptics, you have adopted an approach to the study of scripture that dismisses the possible omniscience of the author. Thankfully, there are many eminent scholars whose approach is more open-minded.

To suggest that the four Gospels are all based on one Gospel source is a fanciful explanation offered by men who know little of God's prophetic word. Had they known better, they would have been aware that all four Gospel perspectives appear in the foreknowledge of God as uttered by Isaiah, Jeremiah and Zechariah.

I understand that there is a certain mindset that is blind to the truth of the Gospel. It's the same mindset that reads the first words of scripture, 'In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth' and rejects the existence of God.

If you can't get beyond the first verse of scripture then there's not much chance of convincing you that the rest of scripture is a revelation of His will and purpose.

Like outhouse, you think you're qualified to pronounce on the nature of truth whilst rejecting the Holy Spirit. According to Jesus it just doesn't work like that.

As Jesus said: 'He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.'

If you think that's a bit harsh, try reading the rest of Jesus' words in John 8:42-46.

 

[outhouse]

To suggest that the four Gospels are all based on one Gospel source is a fanciful explanation offered by men who know little of God's prophetic word. .

You need comprehensive skills my friend.


Only Matthew and Luke plagiarized Mark as its foundation.


Calling it gods word is fanaticism and fundamentalism as your placing mythology before reality.


It factually is not gods word, or your god likes making errors one after another just like a human author would.

 

[outhouse]

If you think that's a bit harsh, try reading the rest of Jesus' words in John 8:42-46.

Sorry those are no more jesus words then mine are.


Those are the unknown authors from a Johannine community that wrote that gospel probably in three different parts and time periods.

Finished about 60-80 years after Jesus death.

 

[Nakosis]

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

If Jesus didn't die on the cross then why did he predict he would? Was Jesus mistaken?
If so kind of makes for a questionable Prophet.

Mark 10 32 They were on their way up to Jerusalem, with Jesus leading the way, and the disciples were astonished, while those who followed were afraid. Again he took the Twelve aside and told them what was going to happen to him. 33 “We are going up to Jerusalem,” he said, “and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will hand him over to the Gentiles, 34 who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. Three days later he will rise.”

 

[Redemptionsong]

'The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.' (Psalm 14:1)