Reason for Jesus Death Explained

[Brickjectivity]

And Jesus was only for a few hours on the Cross, he was of a strong physique* , it was impossible to die by Jesus in 2/3 hours.

There seems zero indication by the gospels that Jesus survives. His reappearance is directly called a resurrection. The gospels say professional soldiers stab him in the side releasing a mixture of blood with water. They say when he dies the ground quakes, the sky is darkened, and people come out of graves. That is the opposite of claiming he doesn't die.

If you would argue that he doesn't really die, then your path is to show that the gospels are not literal, and that is not a difficult case to make. I won't make the argument for you, but its not hard. How can Jesus and Israel both be called the Son of God by Isaiah as Matthew claims? How are they both the Son of God? How does Jesus have 2 different geneologies in 2 different gospels? Jews have been asking this for 1000 years, but you seem to ignore it and go for the most difficult argument.

 

[paarsurrey]

There seems zero indication by the gospels that Jesus survives. His reappearance is directly called a resurrection. The gospels say professional soldiers stab him in the side releasing a mixture of blood with water. They say when he dies the ground quakes, the sky is darkened, and people come out of graves. That is the opposite of claiming he doesn't die.

If you would argue that he doesn't really die, then your path is to show that the gospels are not literal, and that is not a difficult case to make. I won't make the argument for you, but its not hard. How can Jesus and Israel both be called the Son of God by Isaiah as Matthew claims? How are they both the Son of God? How does Jesus have 2 different geneologies in 2 different gospels? Jews have been asking this for 1000 years, but you seem to ignore it and go for the most difficult argument.

"There seems zero indication by the gospels that Jesus survives. "

I don't agree with one. Jesus was seen by many people mentioned in the Bible. This is a strong clue that Jesus survived. Right, please?

Regards

 

[sooda]

"There seems zero indication by the gospels that Jesus survives. "

I don't agree with one. Jesus was seen by many people mentioned in the Bible. This is a strong clue that Jesus survived. Right, please?

Regards

Do you believe in Noah's flood or the Exodus or the grandeur of Solomon?

 

[12jtartar]

Your assuming the Bible is accurate as written and interpreted literally. I do not hold that view. It reflects the ancient perspective of those that edited, redacted and compiled it.[/QUOTE

shunyadragon,
Well, think about what the Bible says about God’s written words.
It seems that God did not want His word to remain just words spoken by someone who thinks he knows truth. It seems that God wanted His word written, and copied many times. The reason being, men can change the meaning of words they heard. A long time ago, I remember that a story was told to a friend, the story circulated for some time, and when it got back to the person who started the story, it had changed so much, that the original storyteller did not even recognize his own story. This is what would have happened to the stories in the Bible. God had His word written so that anyone could go to the Bible, and make sure what God’s message was.
Notice that the Bible says that God’s word will endure forever, Isaiah 40:8, 1Peter 1:24. If the word changed, it would not really be God’s word any longer.
It seem that God did not want His word to change, so He promised to keep His word pure through all generations, Psalms 12:6,7. It seems that God has protected His words from being changed, so that we could never be sure, if what we read is what He originally had written.
It is true that there are mistakes in every Bible. This is true, because no imperfect person can translate a complete Bible without making mistakes. The truth though, can easily be found by comparing different Bibles, just as God said, He has protected His word.
Consider what is said at 2Peter 3:15,16. Here Peter is making the point that a person who does not understand God’s word well, should not translate a Bible, because, even making mistakes because of ignorance, could get you condemned by God.
I have about 60 Bible translations, which I compare, if I have a question. Invariably, I can find the truth, the one truth that agrees with everything the Bible says.
The Holy Scriptures tell ONE story, harmonious throughout!!!
It seems that, no one else can produce a book like The Bible!!!
Agape!!!

 

[Brickjectivity]

"There seems zero indication by the gospels that Jesus survives. "

I don't agree with one. Jesus was seen by many people mentioned in the Bible. This is a strong clue that Jesus survived. Right, please?

Regards

The gospels are using something I will call D13 Irony. In English we have a lot of brief ironic phrases that we use for jokes and to enliven conversation. We also have situational irony where the audience knows things that characters don't. Irony isn't considered dishonest, but its not literally true. The gospels also have a form of irony which we have no name for in English. Some users at RF have called it lying. Some have called it fiction. Its neither lying nor simple fiction. Its an ironic writing device which I will call Deteronomy 13 irony for lack of a better name. That's what the gospels are using.

When it says Jesus is seen by many people after his resurrection its saying "This is written to Jews who will automatically disregard any claim based upon miracles and focus upon whether the ideas are a proper interpretation of Torah. The message is that you should make peace with the Romans. The message is that your temple has not been destroyed for the same reasons as last time. The message is that the temple has been destroyed to prepare for an expansion of the covenant to all people and a new era of freedom. The message is also this and that..." There are also implied similes. Jesus dies without having sinned, so the temple is destroyed not for having sin but for another purpose. It is a message written from Jews to Jews, not to you or to me who easily read it somewhat like if we are overhearing half of a telephone conversation.

Gospels are very, very ancient documents with a very unusual writing style unfamiliar to us today. They are not what people think who just grab a New Testament from the drawer of a hotel. The way that they have been used in modern times is irresponsible.

Whether Jesus is resurrected in the gospels is not even in question. They clearly claim he is resurrected, but they counter themselves in saying that its a reason to accept his testimony. It can't be a reason to accept his testimony. That would be wrong. Hence it can't be intended literally. There are many other indications, too, that its not meant literally. This is merely that which is plainest. Others are that the gospels clearly delineate alternative meanings for resurrection, namely that it equals repentance from evil.

 

[paarsurrey]

The gospels are using something I will call D13 Irony. In English we have a lot of brief ironic phrases that we use for jokes and to enliven conversation. We also have situational irony where the audience knows things that characters don't. Irony isn't considered dishonest, but its not literally true. The gospels also have a form of irony which we have no name for in English. Some users at RF have called it lying. Some have called it fiction. Its neither lying nor simple fiction. Its an ironic writing device which I will call Deteronomy 13 irony for lack of a better name. That's what the gospels are using.

When it says Jesus is seen by many people after his resurrection its saying "This is written to Jews who will automatically disregard any claim based upon miracles and focus upon whether the ideas are a proper interpretation of Torah. The message is that you should make peace with the Romans. The message is that your temple has not been destroyed for the same reasons as last time. The message is that the temple has been destroyed to prepare for an expansion of the covenant to all people and a new era of freedom. The message is also this and that..." There are also implied similes. Jesus dies without having sinned, so the temple is destroyed not for having sin but for another purpose. It is a message written from Jews to Jews, not to you or to me who easily read it somewhat like if we are overhearing half of a telephone conversation.

Gospels are very, very ancient documents with a very unusual writing style unfamiliar to us today. They are not what people think who just grab a New Testament from the drawer of a hotel. The way that they have been used in modern times is irresponsible.

Whether Jesus is resurrected in the gospels is not even in question. They clearly claim he is resurrected, but they counter themselves in saying that its a reason to accept his testimony. It can't be a reason to accept his testimony. That would be wrong. Hence it can't be intended literally. There are many other indications, too, that its not meant literally. This is merely that which is plainest. Others are that the gospels clearly delineate alternative meanings for resurrection, namely that it equals repentance from evil.

"The gospels are using something I will call D13 Irony."

Did Jesus tell it, please? If yes, please quote from Jesus.
Regards

 

[Brickjectivity]

Did Jesus tell it, please? If yes, please quote from Jesus.
Regards

I can only quote a few related teachings from the gospels, but Jesus does not directly quote the law instead requiring that people know it already. Then he alludes to it.

Nathaniel one of the 12
Here in John Jesus says something like it to Nathanael. Nathaniel in the story is clearly disregarding Deuteronomy 13. Jesus says Nathaniel will see something greater than a miracle: angels ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.

John 1:49-51
Then Nathanael declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.” Jesus said, “You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that.” He then added, “Very truly I tell you, you will see ‘heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on’ the Son of Man.”

Lazarus A and B

Lazarus A
Here is Jesus parable where Abraham concludes with a similar message: He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ” (Luke 16:31)

Lazarus B
In John chapter 11 Jesus raises a friend named Lazarus from the dead, however this changes no hearts.

Believing without seeing is blessed:
In John 20:29 we have this "Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

 

[paarsurrey]

Brickjectivity said: ↑
The gospels are using something I will call D13 Irony. In English we have a lot of brief ironic phrases that we use for jokes and to enliven conversation. We also have situational irony where the audience knows things that characters don't. Irony isn't considered dishonest, but its not literally true. The gospels also have a form of irony which we have no name for in English. Some users at RF have called it lying. Some have called it fiction. Its neither lying nor simple fiction. Its an ironic writing device which I will call Deteronomy 13 irony for lack of a better name. That's what the gospels are using.

I can only quote a few related teachings from the gospels, but Jesus does not directly quote the law instead requiring that people know it already. Then he alludes to it.

Nathaniel one of the 12
Here in John Jesus says something like it to Nathanael. Nathaniel in the story is clearly disregarding Deuteronomy 13. Jesus says Nathaniel will see something greater than a miracle: angels ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.



Lazarus A and B

Lazarus A
Here is Jesus parable where Abraham concludes with a similar message: He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ” (Luke 16:31)

Lazarus B
In John chapter 11 Jesus raises a friend named Lazarus from the dead, however this changes no hearts.

Believing without seeing is blessed:
In John 20:29 we have this "Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

"D13"

So, one meant from D13 "Deuteronomy 13". Is it so, please?

Regards