aa5874

It is most amazing that after 2000 years that Jesus worshipers like Samuelsson are still questioning the crucifixion of Jesus.

Once in the fiction story Jesus was crucified with nails then that is the story. The story cannot be changed unless there is actual evidence that Jesus really existed.

"I don't believe Harry Potter's last name was Potter" is an irrelevant claim when dealing with a fiction character called Harry Potter.

The crucifixion of the fiction character Jesus was unique and is extremely significant in understanding that the author wanted to portray the Jesus character as a sacrifice.

The claim that Jesus was not crucified is irrelevant in a fiction story where Jesus was crucified.

Iskander

The Holy and Noble Qu’ran says that the prophet Jesus was crucified, but he did not die.
So, yes he was crucified

Kapyong

The Holy and Noble Qu’ran says that the moon was split in two.
So, yes the Moon WAS split in two.


Kap

Littlejohn

Are you sure?...


.

Iskander

It was said in jest .I am not a Muslim.

spamandham

But is it reasonable to believe the story of the Gospels? I don't think it is. It seems to me to be clearly an invented story. Just as Herod's involvement in the birth narrative does not indicate that any of it is historical, likewise, Pilate's involvement in the death story does not indicate any of it is historical either.

If Christianity had died off 2000 years ago and we came across the gospels, I doubt anyone would consider them as more than literary works - maybe legends at best.

aa5874

The investigation of the actual crucifixion of a character, the offspring of a Ghost of God, in a FICTION story is like trying to investigate the manner of death of Achilles the offspring of a sea-goddess.

It is already shown that humans were NAILED to Crosses in antiquity.

But, Jesus was not REALLY a part of the human race.

Listen to the CLOUD.

Mr 9:7 - The investigation can end.

aa5874

It is IMPERATIVE that Jesus be positively identified.

It must be known whether Jesus could have been crucified.

After all it is the NT Canon which claimed there was a character called and that Jesus was crucified. And it is the very same Canon which claimed Jesus was the Creator and offspring of the Holy Ghost, walked on water, transfigured and resurrrected.

The abundance of EVIDENCE from apologetics including the NT Canon suggest Jesus was not human but a product of belief or mythology.

The Jesus story of the Canon is mere fiction where a fictitious character was crucified. One cannot investigate the true activities or events surrounding myths.

Mars Man

First of all, we'll have to admit that while it wouldn't more reasonably be best to go as far as aa5874, on his/her take of the story at large (not details, here), it would be ignoring a whole lot of data and best understood facts of natural history to take it as literally being the 'case presented in the canonical texts is truest.' In other words, I would consistently argue that we should not write off the general historically recorded story as 100&% make believe, it would be very wrong to argue that because a document, or a number of documents regarding a certain point, use a certain word, or say a certain thing, that detail is absolute accurate history.

Again, we do not really have the ability to put a finger on that historical personage (as aa5874 has correctly pointed out), and the character of the embellished story lines, is much more obviously and evidently, just that--a very embellished character in a story line. It cannot be determined, therefore, whether the actual Yeshua of that small cult (used in the original meaning) had been impaled, stoned, or died a basically natural death. What we can be much more sure of, however, is that that Yeshua from which the story lines had come, had been no more than our typical, pretty much normal (with maybe some outstanding charismatic personality traits) H. sapiens...nothing more, nothing less.

aa5874

Please state the history of Jesus that you know should not be written off.

1. The conception of Jesus without a human father.

2. The birth of Jesus.

3. The temptation of Jesus

4. The healing of INCURABLE diseases by Jesus.

5. The walking on the sea during a storm by Jesus.

6. Cursing a tree so that it died.

7. Talking to a storm at sea to calm the waves.

8. The transfiguration of Jesus.

9. The resurrection of Jesus.

10. The ascension of Jesus.

You cannot argue for history by using fiction. You need a history book to argue history. The NT Canon is a compilation of the theology of mythology.

I am arguing that the option that Jesus was a myth is FAR BETTER than Jesus was an historical figure.

To argue history one needs history.


The authors of the NT and the Church writers by concensus presented EVIDENCE of a myth.

If it is considered that Jesus believers should be HONEST and TRUTHFUL about their LORD and SAVIOUR Jesus who supposedly said he was the "TRUTH" then it must be that Jesus was HONESTLY believed to have existed by his followers or else they would lying if they knew he was just a mere man but yet claimed he was the Creator of heaven and earth and was RAISED from the dead on the third day.

The Jesus story is compatible with HONEST BELIEF not HONEST HISTORY.