Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 05-19-2007, 06:09 AM

I look forward to reading comments from readers.

Joan of Bark · 05-19-2007, 08:51 PM

Virtually none.

Toto · 05-20-2007, 01:48 AM

True, there is virually no reliable evidence that Jesus was crucified, but it is considered to be the most reliable assertion about the historical Jesus, since Paul mentions Christ crucified.

A number of people were crucified, so this is not an extraordinary claim. And there seems to be little reason to invent it. But that's about it.

Clouseau · 05-20-2007, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joan of Bark

Virtually none.

Why do so many intelligent and educated people believe that Jesus was crucified?

David B · 05-20-2007, 01:53 AM

Well, there are loads of bits of the true cross in churches all over the place.

An eminent Christian, John Calvin, said that there is enough wood to build a ship.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calvin via Wiki

There is no abbey so poor as not to have a specimen. In some places there are large fragments, as at the Holy Chapel in Paris, at Poictiers, and at Rome, where a good-sized crucifix is said to have been made of it. In brief, if all the pieces that could be found were collected together, they would make a big ship-load. Yet the Gospel testifies that a single man was able to carry it.

— Calvin, Traité Des Reliques.

And if getting enough wood to fill a ship from one cross isn't a miracle, I'd be hard pressed to say what is.

So why should the cross be that miraculous?

Well, you've got to consider the miraculous origins of the tree it came from.

The true cross, according to another eminent Christian, Jacopo de Voragine, Bishop of Genoa, in 1320, was from a magic tree!!!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiki

This states that the wood of the True Cross came from a seed of the Tree of Life which grew in the Garden of Eden. When Adam lay dying, he begged his son Seth to go to the Archangel Michael and beg for a seed from the Tree of Life. As he died, the seed was placed in Adam's mouth and was buried. The seed grew into a tree and emerged from his mouth.

So that explains how it was miraculous enough to get a shipload of wood from one cross.

But there is more that is remarkable about the wood of that tree.

Again, according to the bishop quoted above (via Wiki) "After many centuries the tree was cut and the wood used to build a bridge over which the Queen of Sheba passed, on her journey to meet King Solomon. So struck was she by the portent contained in the timber of the bridge that she fell on her knees and worshipped it. On her visit to Solomon she told him that a piece of wood from the bridge would bring about the replacement of God's Covenant with the Jewish people, by a new order. Solomon, fearing the eventual destruction of his people, had the timber buried. But after fourteen generations, the wood taken from the bridge became the Cross of the Crucifixion."

This from a bishop in antiquity. so, if one takes the traditions of the RC church as evidence of the supernatural, as many people do, then there you are.

The catholics of the day seem to have believed these stories.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiki again

In the late Middle Ages and Early Renaissance, there was a wide general acceptance of the origin of the True Cross and its history preceding the Crucifixion, as recorded by Voragine. This general acceptance is confirmed by the numerous artworks that depict this subject, culminating in one of the most famous fresco cycles of the Renaissance, the Legend of the True Cross by Piero della Francesca, painted on the walls of the chancel of the Church of San Francesco in Arezzo between 1452 and 1466, in which he reproduces faithfully the traditional episodes of the story as recorded in The Golden Legend.

There are further miracles. The shipload Calvin attested to has miraculously shrunk!

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiki

, Rohault de Fleury in his Mémoire sur les instruments de la Passion (1870) made a study of the relics in reference to the criticisms of Calvin and Erasmus. He drew up a catalogue of all known relics of the True Cross showing that, in spite of what various authors have claimed, the fragments of the Cross brought together again would not reach one-third that of a cross which has been supposed to have been three or four meters in height, with transverse branch of two meters wide, proportions not at all abnormal. He calculated: supposing the Cross to have been of pine-wood (based on his microscopic analysis of the fragments) and giving it a weight of about seventy-five kilograms, we find the original volume of the cross to be .178 cubic meters. The total known volume of known relics of the True Cross, according to his catalogue, amounts to approximately .004 cubic meters (more specifically 3,942,000 cubic milimeters), leaving a volume of .174 cubic meters lost, destroyed, or otherwise unaccounted for. A large quantity of wood from the True Cross exist in Mount Athos. Four cross particles - of ten particles with documentary proofs by Byzantine emperors - from European churches, i.e. S.Croce in Rome, Notre Dame, the cathedral of Pisa and the cathedral to Florenz, were microscopically examined. "The pieces came all together from olive." (William Ziehr, Das Kreuz, Stuttgart 1997, p. 63) [5], in German

I could go on, but surely that is enough.

When we have evidence like this, surely it is conclusive. We have, as supporting evidence for the crucifixion, from the traditions of churches that people believe in, a magic tree grown in the mouth of Adam the wood of which the queen of Sheba had miraculous intuitions about, and which can grow and shrink in volume. All mutually supportive! And, apparently, part of the Christian tradition.

Just have faith, Johnny

David B

Clouseau · 05-20-2007, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David B

Just have faith, Johnny

Who has more faith, those who deliberately misdirect faith in the crucifixion of Jesus by fabricating bits of 'His cross', or those who feel the need to persistently deny it occurred, without evidence?

David B · 05-20-2007, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

Who has more faith, those who deliberately misdirect faith in the crucifixion of Jesus by fabricating bits of 'His cross', or those who feel the need to persistently deny it occurred, without evidence?

Who cares:huh:

What does it matter if there was some charismatic cult leader in the area at the time, who got crucified, or not?

I'm certainly not going to deny the possibility of a historical Jesus who got crucified.

But it should be pretty clear from my post above that using the traditions of the church as evidence for what happened is a pretty poor reason to accept any supernatural claim.

Seed in Adam's mouth:rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

David B

Clouseau · 05-20-2007, 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David B

Who cares:huh:

What does it matter if there was some charismatic cult leader in the area at the time, who got crucified, or not?

You tell us. You posted.

Quote:

But it should be pretty clear from my post above that using the traditions of the church as evidence for what happened is a pretty poor reason to accept any supernatural claim.

What is abundantly clear to this observer is that you are so desperate to sabotage this discussion that you bring up the nincompoopery of persons you know to have been just as embarrassed by Jesus' crucifixion as you are.

So let's get back to the OP question.

David B · 05-20-2007, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

You tell us. You posted.

OK, it matters not at all whether some charismatic cult leader got crucified or not.

Quote:

What is abundantly clear to this observer is that you are so desperate to sabotage this discussion

Showing evidence (even from wiki) that the traditions of the various churches are suspect counts as sabotage? Just how so?

Quote:

that you bring up the nincompoopery of persons you know to have been just as embarrassed by Jesus' crucifixion as you are.

The nincompoopery of Calvin and Voragine were embarrassed by the alleged crucifixion? They were believers!! What else could you be talking about? I'm not in the least embarrassed by the alleged crucifixion and fail to understand why you should ratinally believe that I would be.

Quote:

So let's get back to the OP question.

Good idea - as I did before your interruption.

T

Clouseau · 05-20-2007, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David B

OK, it matters not at all whether some charismatic cult leader got crucified or not.

Then why your post?

05-19-2007, 06:09 AM	#1
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	What historical evidence is there that Jesus was crucified? I look forward to reading comments from readers.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-19-2007, 08:51 PM	#2
Joan of Bark Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Pua, in northern Thailand Posts: 2,823	Virtually none.

05-20-2007, 01:48 AM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	True, there is virually no reliable evidence that Jesus was crucified, but it is considered to be the most reliable assertion about the historical Jesus, since Paul mentions Christ crucified. A number of people were crucified, so this is not an extraordinary claim. And there seems to be little reason to invent it. But that's about it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.