Was Jesus Eaten By Dogs?

[waitasec]

I don't fit inside you're little box but since you think I do, explain, what do I know?

no as i do not presume to know anything about you...
however you are assuming what cynthia's intentions are...

and it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread,

don't worry i already reported you

 

[waitasec]

And you would like that because it lets you think that you are somehow better than He was?

and i reported this one too...

 

[Sleeppy]

My motive is simply to find out what really happened. I just want the truth rather than myth

How do you plan to find it?

 

[ChristineES]

The Gospels say that Jesus was laid in a tomb that had never been used (As for as I know, more than one person would be laid in a tomb).

 

[Super Universe]

and i reported this one too...

Half the replies to this thread have been off topic, including most of yours which have been directed at me.

You reported me? I have friends with the police department, not really worried there but have at it. If you want to report me some more you should look into the Philosophy folder under the thread titled "Selfishness". I actually accuse everyone of being selfish.

Throws you off when you go somewhere thinking that you're just going to be able to walk all over those Jesus lovers then you find out they're not all sheep.

 

[InChrist]

Had the body of Jesus been throw to the dogs there would have been plenty of witnesses. The Roman authorities and the Jewish leadership would certainly have attested to this to discredit the account of Jesus' resurrection as it spread through Jerusalem and to stop the news of such a miraculous account in its tracks...but they didn't because Jesus was buried and rose again according to scripture and history.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Had the body of Jesus been throw to the dogs there would have been plenty of witnesses. The Roman authorities and the Jewish leadership would certainly have attested to this to discredit the account of Jesus' resurrection as it spread through Jerusalem and to stop the news of such a miraculous account in its tracks...but they didn't because Jesus was buried and rose again according to scripture and history.

I doubt they gave any credence to the account in the first place. Jesus to them would have been a nobody from the hill country with delusions of importance. He wasn't that famous, was widely rejected and only had a small following, so I doubt the Romans and Jewish authorities would conspire to discredit him or his followers at the time

 

[CynthiaCypher]

How do you plan to find it?

Ummm...study

 

[Father Heathen]

How would Crossan know? It's speculation.

Everything regarding Jesus is speculation (at best).

 

[Father Heathen]

And you would like that because it lets you think that you are somehow better than He was?

I think someone is getting emotional.

 

[Sleeppy]

Ummm...study

But as people keep pointing out to me, as if I'm not aware, most of it is speculation.

 

[fallingblood]

It's a possibility. Looking at the idea of crucifixion historically, it would not be out of the question for Jesus to have been disposed of like most other victims of crucifixion. However, and this is coming from someone who subscribes to Crossan, I don not think this is the case for Jesus.

Jesus would not have been the only victim of crucifixion who was laid to rest in a tomb. There is another somewhat famous case (just google crucified man, and I'm sure it should pop up. I forget the persons name) of such a thing happening.

The key would be whether or not Jesus had followers or follower who were well connected or had money. The Gospels say yes. More so, Matthew tells us that there had been a tradition among some Jews who said the body of Jesus was stolen from the tomb. So we know the story is old enough for opposition to form and not just a denial of Jesus being placed in a tomb.

More so, the fact that women were said to have found the tomb empty seems to me quite important. Primarily because it is an embarrassing point. I see no reason to make up such a story considering how women were viewed in that time.

And really, a tomb never was necessary. A missing body wasnt necessary. He idea of resurrection needed neither.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

One has to wonder what Crossan will say next. :biglaugh:

 

[CynthiaCypher]

One has to wonder what Crossan will say next. :biglaugh:

What Crossan said isn't at all absurd. He just applied what is known historical fact about how the Roman dealt with the corpses of criminals to Jesus.

They often left the bodies to the dogs.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Crucifixion bodies were thrown into the burial pits of Gehenna where they were exposed to wild beasts.

Is that what Crossan says?

Looks like it's fresh from someone's booty. Or in the case of Crossan, it could be old crap.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What Crossan said isn't at all absurd. He just applied what is known historical fact about how the Roman dealt with the corpses of criminals to Jesus.

They often left the bodies to the dogs.

I don't think that it's absurd. I think that he's saying something that he knows is stupid (or just historically plausible enough to be provocative) to sell books to people like you.

I'd do the same thing if I didn't have a soul.

 

[Super Universe]

I doubt they gave any credence to the account in the first place. Jesus to them would have been a nobody from the hill country with delusions of importance. He wasn't that famous, was widely rejected and only had a small following, so I doubt the Romans and Jewish authorities would conspire to discredit him or his followers at the time

If Jesus was a nobody with a small following then why was He crucified?

 

[Super Universe]

Is that what Crossan says?

Looks like it's fresh from someone's booty. Or in the case of Crossan, it could be old crap.

No, that's from the UB.

 

[Father Heathen]

If Jesus was a nobody with a small following then why was He crucified?

Were the two thieves important people with large followings?

 

[waitasec]

It's a possibility. Looking at the idea of crucifixion historically, it would not be out of the question for Jesus to have been disposed of like most other victims of crucifixion. However, and this is coming from someone who subscribes to Crossan, I don not think this is the case for Jesus.

Jesus would not have been the only victim of crucifixion who was laid to rest in a tomb. There is another somewhat famous case (just google crucified man, and I'm sure it should pop up. I forget the persons name) of such a thing happening.

The key would be whether or not Jesus had followers or follower who were well connected or had money. The Gospels say yes. More so, Matthew tells us that there had been a tradition among some Jews who said the body of Jesus was stolen from the tomb. So we know the story is old enough for opposition to form and not just a denial of Jesus being placed in a tomb.

More so, the fact that women were said to have found the tomb empty seems to me quite important. Primarily because it is an embarrassing point. I see no reason to make up such a story considering how women were viewed in that time.

And really, a tomb never was necessary. A missing body wasnt necessary. He idea of resurrection needed neither.

given the idea that flesh an blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, i don't see why jesus had to be buried. something paul wrote...before the gospel narratives were written setting up a context for which jesus would be set a part from the other messiahs running around...