Freethought & Rationalism Archive

06-04-2006, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one allegiance

If romans did use tombs, why wouldn't they put people who died in them?

Are you done with these strawmen? No one here has said that the Romans didn't use tombs. What they didn't do is put the crucified people in them. Again, if you claim that this has been proven provide some evidence. The link posted before didn't back up your claims and in fact made no claim that crucified people were buried. So, can you now provide the evidence?

06-04-2006, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one allegiance

Nope. You can do that yourself.

You're the one making the claim that the Romans put crucified people in tombs so it's up to you to provide the evidence. So since you continue to dodge the question I'll just accept this as your retraction of your previous comments.

one allegiance · 06-04-2006, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

OA, the ONLY reason the Romans went to the expense of a crucifixion was so that the body of the crucified would hang there and rot for weeks until it fell to bits and the rats and dogs ate it. This was as a warning to potential law breakers.
Otherwise the just stabbed people. No muss, no fuss, quick and cheap.
They NEVER put crucified people in tombs because there was nothing left to put in the tomb. They NEVER went to all the trouble to hang someone on a cross and then change their minds and take him down.

Regardless. As soon as Jesus died they took him down and put him in a tomb. You can go against history if you want..but I'm not debating this anymore.

one allegiance · 06-04-2006, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piking Viking

You're the one making the claim that the Romans put crucified people in tombs so it's up to you to provide the evidence. So since you continue to dodge the question I'll just accept this as your retraction of your previous comments.

I didn't make the claim at all. You seem to want evidence contrary to what is widely known, so you can do that yourself.

EDIT: I'm talking about Jesus being put in a tomb. All the other roman rituals are irrelevant.

06-04-2006, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one allegiance

Nope. You can do that yourself.

It's rather amusing but even many, many Christian sites (if you just google Roman Crucifixion and left to rot) that you will find will acknowledge that the act of just leaving them up to hang and rot was the standard practice of the Romans.

06-04-2006, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one allegiance

Regardless. As soon as Jesus died they took him down and put him in a tomb.

Then provide the Roman records backing this up. If you claim that they petitioned this there must be some record, right?

06-04-2006, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one allegiance

I didn't make the claim at all.

Yes, you did. Repeatedly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by one allegiance

You seem to want evidence contrary to what is widely known, so you can do that yourself.

No actually it's widely known that the Romans just left people up to hang and rot. They didn't bury them in tombs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by one allegiance

EDIT: I'm talking about Jesus being put in a tomb. All the other roman rituals are irrelevant.

Again, crucified men were not put in tombs. If you truly claim that the Romans did something special in Jesus' case then provide the Roman records to back this up.

Javaman · 06-04-2006, 01:17 PM

(forget it - not worth the effort if he's (she's?) bolting)

Patriarch Verlch · 06-04-2006, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

We have done just that. There is nothing to even suggest that Jesus was an actual person. ALL of his life story is based on the “lives” of various pagan gods and demigods.
There is no record of an actual person living who might have been the inspiration of the fiction Jesus as there are for King Arthur and Robin Hood.
There is nothing from the time he was supposed to have lived that mentions him. Nothing.

I don’t know who is feeding you this baloney that Jesus was a real person but if you do any actual research you will find that there is nothing... seriously.

That is Babylonian and Freemason in Origin.

In the Bohemian Groove they sacrifice an effigy to Mo lech, does that mean then they are sacrificing to the same god Molech in Cannaite times?

http://www.answers.com/topic/moloch
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread131887/pg5

Just because you say Jesus copied supposedly, the lives of other gods and demi gods doesn't mean that, say the devil didnt' suspect how the Messiah would come in the flesh and they he didn't try to imitate it, and say look, they are copying 'me'.

RGD · 06-04-2006, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patriarch Verlch

That is Babylonian and Freemason in Origin.

In the Bohemian Groove they sacrifice an effigy to Mo lech, does that mean then they are sacrificing to the same god Molech in Cannaite times?

http://www.answers.com/topic/moloch
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread131887/pg5

Just because you say Jesus copied supposedly, the lives of other gods and demi gods doesn't mean that, say the devil didnt' suspect how the Messiah would come in the flesh and they he didn't try to imitate it, and say look, they are copying 'me'.

Patriarch, are you even going to try to provide evidence for any of these claims? 'cause you haven't even supplied evidence for one of them. You're making nonsensical, non-sequitur, non-answers to fairly simple, direct questions.

Here, let's start with a simple one:

There is no evidence that the disciples were martyred. None.

Prove me wrong. Cite research and sources.

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

06-04-2006, 01:17 PM	#48
Javaman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Nebraska Posts: 1,708	(forget it - not worth the effort if he's (she's?) bolting)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.