Jesus did not die on the Cross

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

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

In the beginning
Tell
We must know the difference between reality and steel
And the person who was crucified
The incident steel
The reality is historical evidence of the mechanism through
Romans 1.
2-Jews
3-apostles of Christ
4 wrote DATE
Romans 1 -
The known history of Palestine during the life of Christ was a Roman colony and that the ruling was Romania
For this, which issued a ruling Steel is the Roman governor
2-Jews
They had Amlhmrf suit to the Roman governor, and they did not crucify Christ, because the validity of the issuance of the matter is the governor or judge
3 apostles of Christ saw and examined with the naked eye
4 history books and the most famous Jewish writer Yu Sifnos
They said all these steel Event in Jerusalem
* And now to the person who was crucified
Is Christ's body
All the above sources say yes
600 years before Islam Tafraba
But when it came Mohammed came a strange idea, he said is crucified
* Christ-like
Now we discuss this idea
Why was put similar to Christ on the Cross
What is the reason
Second
Of legal concepts
The punishment Hachksah
And is not permitted to inflict punishment on the other
Does God accept that puts innocent people replace Christ on the Cross
Why is this a big lie divine
* The hidden came to Islam and declared
One explanation for this idea
Suppose
The judge issued the ruling or the referee called crucifying Christ
Christ was replaced Judas
Do you think that God is just in this direction
Do you think the people who had gathered in the area of ​​steel did not Alahzaw this replacement process
Questions from a mind write them here shed light on the false God here Amtlksfah on humans
Facts and concealer for 600 years
Do you think the validity of this novel Quranic
The problem is that the Koran contradicts himself
In another state says
Peace Day on myself and I was born and the day I die and the day I alive
Verse says the occurrence of death before lifting
When was this death
So Dutnaqd verses
Trend remains the Christian faith is the strongest in the health

 

[gnostic]

The 2nd thing I want to address, in that same quote of yours:

Act is written by Paul; he usurped religion of Jesus and doctored anonymous writings in absence of Jesus while he was had gone to India. Paul invented new creeds unknown to Jesus.

No where does the Acts or in any Pauline letters mention anything about Jesus being in India.

It is quite clear you have never read Acts or Paul's letters, because if you have read any of these NT texts, you would know this.

You are basing your claim about Jesus in India, on 19th and 20th century myth, in which a few authors. Each of these claims about India, that have cropped up every now and then, has been repeatedly refuted and rejected, and criticised for shoddy scholarship.

So you can't blame Paul about this pseudo-scholarship and pseudo-history that first began in 1869.

You should really do better research, because you are being sloppy, and no one is going to take you seriously if you keep bringing up claims that you can't back up.

 

[paarsurrey]

The 2nd thing I want to address, in that same quote of yours:


No where does the Acts or in any Pauline letters mention anything about Jesus being in India.

It is quite clear you have never read Acts or Paul's letters, because if you have read any of these NT texts, you would know this.

You are basing your claim about Jesus in India, on 19th and 20th century myth, in which a few authors. Each of these claims about India, that have cropped up every now and then, has been repeatedly refuted and rejected, and criticised for shoddy scholarship.

So you can't blame Paul about this pseudo-scholarship and pseudo-history that first began in 1869.

You should really do better research, because you are being sloppy, and no one is going to take you seriously if you keep bringing up claims that you can't back up.

There are enough clues in Gospels that tell us that Jesus did not die on the Cross and migrated from that place for fear of persecution.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

There are two 'versions' going on here, one for crucifixion, the other denying it. The big difference here is that Jesus is far more integral to the beliefs of Christians, therefore in some sense we are obliged to "value" the traditional narrative of Christians view of Jesus as opposed to another group.


Now, there is a caveat, namely that not all Christians always believed in the crucifixion, though the majority do seem to have.

That proves my point that Jesus did not die on the Cross.
There were Gospels that showed that Jesus did not die on the Cross; but at canonization these were not included in the Bible. Paul, Church and their associates suppressed such information.

Thanks and regards

 

[Desert Snake]

That proves my point that Jesus did not die on the Cross.
There were Gospels that showed that Jesus did not die on the Cross; but at canonization these were not included in the Bible. Paul, Church and their associates suppressed such information.

Thanks and regards

I don't think it proves that, it is simply useful for argumentation against the crucifixion narrative. Jesus is undeniably the most important figure for Christianity, so that is the main hurdle of validity concerning your viewpoint. It isn't like this is an "equal" argument, even the Xians who didn't or don't view Jesus as God still perceive the Jesus narrative as accurate, in the way it is presented.

 

[Shad]

No it is a correlation. It does not prove your point. It is begging the question. One could argue that Islamic tradition followed previous Christian texts which promoted a "No-Death" view by just copying it. The view could still be factual wrong. Another could be he died with no resurrection rendering both religious views moot.

Suppression of information does not mean said information is correct. Suppression could be valid in the case of incorrect information. Suppression of the geocentric model in science classes as an example.

 

[gnostic]

There were Gospels that showed that Jesus did not die on the Cross; but at canonization these were not included in the Bible. Paul, Church and their associates suppressed such information.

If there are, then supply your sources, paarsurrey.

I have seen and read non-canonical gospels, including gnostic texts, and none of them even remotely suggest India. And yes, I have read and understood that a couple of them say that Jesus didn't die on the cross, but none of them say that he was in India.

The only gospel(s) or act, that speak of India, is that Thomas went to India, not Jesus.

Again, I would ask you for your sources about Jesus BEING IN INDIA, not Jesus didn't die on the cross, because I already know of the later.

 

[Sabour]

Even in the bible it shows that Jesus peace be upon him didn't die on the cross.

 

[gnostic]

Even in the bible it shows that Jesus peace be upon him didn't die on the cross.

Again, I would ask you the same question that I have ask from paarsurrey.

Can you supply your sources? Where is it in the bible that say Jesus didn't die?

Making claim is one thing, backing your claim is another. They are not mutually inclusive.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

Again, I would ask you the same question that I have ask from paarsurrey.

Can you supply your sources? Where is it in the bible that say Jesus didn't die?

Making claim is one thing, backing your claim is another. They are not mutually inclusive.

Can be eaten as the beast devoured from the Koran was when Aisha
* Bible is clear in steel
The cross and crucified
Romans and Jews
Do you think that the Jew could cover this error
Jews came to Christ solid reason because they had substantially
They wanted him to be the commander of the liberation of the Jews from the Roman colonization
And that the state builds Daoud
And also declare that Christ is God
This is regarded as blasphemous
And this charge they gave to the Roman governor
Do you think that Jews acquiesce if they knew it was not his blood and flesh of Christ

 

[outhouse]

There are enough clues in Gospels that tell us that Jesus did not die on the Cross and migrated from that place for fear of persecution.

Regards

You do not have the credibility, education or knowledge to make such a statement.


You have no business talking about things you have ABSOLUTELY no knowledge of :slap:



This whole thread is you on a boat dragging a lure around behind it.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

His information based on only the Koran
Because he believes in God Anaclam
* He does not know that the word of God is in our minds and our conscience and did not know that the Koran was written by a man
In the Koran many stories to mind Aaqublha
Including this novel about an innocent man put replaced Jesus on the cross
Is considered a big lie divine
* I do not know how this proud Muslim God who hid this novel
Not known to the world only after 600 years
Knew that a man who was on the cross is similar to Jesus
This poor man
Who died instead of Jesus
Matt guilt is not true
Islamist plot but the director of the art authorship Matguen

 

[Syed Ahmad]

Hi

Just to add a bit, I actually do agree with the forumer who says that there are clues in the gospels that Jesus didn't die on the cross. To name a few:

He bled when pierced on the side.
He was given healing herbs/ointments when taken down from the cross.
He went into hiding and didn't proclaim himself after he left Joseph's tomb.

The above are just a few out of many.

Thanks

Syed

 

[gnostic]

Just to add a bit, I actually do agree with the forumer who says that there are clues in the gospels that Jesus didn't die on the cross. To name a few:

He bled when pierced on the side.
He was given healing herbs/ointments when taken down from the cross.
He went into hiding and didn't proclaim himself after he left Joseph's tomb.

*sigh*

What part when someone ask a Muslim to provide a source or sources that Muslims don't seem to understand?

If you are going to make claim, then provide sources to back up claim.

I don't believe a lot of things that in the bible, Tanakh and Qur'an, and a lot of scriptures and other literature, but you need to back up any statement you make. Otherwise it is utter baseless.

But be warned, if you sources or articles or books or webpages, that have been refuted are pseudo-scholarship, pseudo-history or conspiracy theory, one of us will shoot you down, for providing disreputable sources.

So pleased some well-researched sources and not some hack jobs that theists like Muslims and Christian creationists like to quote from.

 

[Shad]

1. A person can still bleed after death due to gravity and pressure. Jesus was upright, more of less, on the cross so was subject to the effects of gravity. The same is true for a steak for example. The piece of meat has been dead for a long period of time yet still contains blood within it. If i leave the steak on a plate a small pool of blood and other liquids will form on the surface of the plate.

2. These herbs were used in burial practices. Ref. Chatper 10 Sketches of Jewish social life by Alfred Edersheim. There are also references to use spice as part of the burial practice in the Bible.
Ber. viii. 6; John xii. 7, John xix. 39, Beẓah 6a; John xix. 39, Jer. xxxiv. 5; II Chron. xvi. Chron 14, Chron xxi. 19. There are about a dozen or more verse in reference to specific burials of people in which spices and herbs, along with other items, were part of the practice.

3. Assumption.

 

[Syed Ahmad]

Gnostic

John 19:34 states that Jesus was pierced in the side and bled. Dead bodies don't bleed, in particular blood does not gush out.

In the same chapter, in verse 39 he was wrapped with healing ointments. Jews nor anyone wrap dead bodies with expensive healing ointments.

The part where he went into hiding... Well the omission of him showing himself to the world proves that he went into hiding, and also disguised himself as a gardener (John 20:15) hints that he did not die on the cross.

These are of course my interpretations, and you're free to present better ones, this is where the debate begins...

Thanks

Syed

 

[Syed Ahmad]

Shad

The blood 'gushed out' or came out immediately, al this from a small prick. I do not think blood would immediately come out like that from a dead body. Jesus wasn't lying on a plate like a steak. If I hang up a stake and prick it, I doubt blood gushes out, do you?


Can you show me where myrrh and aloes (two products priced sometimes more than gold) were applied to dead bodies? I agree they were sometimes used in burial practices, where they were burnt for odour. But never applied directly on the body, and that much (100 pounds). Unless you can provide an example of course.


And yes, the final point was an assumption/interpretation. I can't think of any other reason why Jesus would dress up as a gardener or not show himself to the outside world though.

Thanks

Syed

 

[Sabour]

Again, I would ask you the same question that I have ask from paarsurrey.

Can you supply your sources? Where is it in the bible that say Jesus didn't die?

Making claim is one thing, backing your claim is another. They are not mutually inclusive.

It all began with Jesus peace be upon him said that he came to fulfill the law.

According to the law, everything that is crucified would be cursed.

Deuteronomy 21:23 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.

So being able to crucify Jesus peace be upon him would disprove who he was because if he did come to fulfill the law, he can't be cursed by that law.

This is a video that explains it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMat9Iz8dPE





Also....

The disciples has heard that Jesus peace be upon him was crucified and were not eyewitness

Mark 14:50 And they all forsook him, and fled.

So that the disciples , they had heard that he was DEAD AND BURIED FOR THREE DAYS. If one is confronted by a person with such a reputation then the conclusion is inescapable; they must be seeing A GHOST. Little wonder these ten brave men were petrified."

So now let us look at the verses.

Luke 24 36-37 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.


They thought that Jesus peace be upon him was dead and they thought what they were seeing is a spirit. So Jesus peace be upon him wanted to prove to them that this is not the case.

And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.

41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?

42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.

43 And he took it, and did eat before them.



Also

Acts 1:3 o whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God

 

[outhouse]

Hi

Just to add a bit, I actually do agree with the forumer who says that there are clues in the gospels that Jesus didn't die on the cross. To name a few:

He bled when pierced on the side.
He was given healing herbs/ointments when taken down from the cross.
He went into hiding and didn't proclaim himself after he left Joseph's tomb.

The above are just a few out of many.

Thanks

Syed

You do not have the credibility, education or knowledge to make such a statement.


You have no business talking about things you have ABSOLUTELY no knowledge of

 

[Syed Ahmad]

You do not have the credibility, education or knowledge to make such a statement.


You have no business talking about things you have ABSOLUTELY no knowledge of

And who made you so mighty to assume that I or many others here have no knowledge?