30 verses of Bible say " Jesus did not die on the Cross".

Status
Not open for further replies.
muhammad_isa said:
I don't believe that he did skip off to sea. :)

Wouldn't those in power have wondered how Jesus had seemingly escaped death?
..or do you think think they were unaware of his reappearance?
Click to expand...
Ok. But the inescapable conundrum from the New Testament is that if Jesus reappeared to his closest followers after the crucifixion, they clearly went on to believe that he had died on the cross and had risen from the dead -- Paul spent 15 days with Peter and met Jesus's brother James.

It's impossible they did not discuss the crucifixion (and the resurrection) and it is unlikely beyond belief they had misunderstood Jesus's reappearance to them after the crucifixion.

So it always comes around to did Paul not understand and so misrepresented what Peter and James told him -- or worse did he lie about having met them? He was the first Christian writer, before the gospels.

All of them died for their belief (in the crucified and resurrected Christ)
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
Ok. But the inescapable conundrum from the New Testament is that if Jesus reappeared to his closest followers after the crucifixion, they clearly went on to believe that he had died on the cross and had risen from the dead..
Click to expand...
Well, as in the whole of the NT overall, yes.
..but I was not talking just about the NT, but from an historical viewpoint.
We have to consider what the Roman governance thought about it all.
When did they find out that Jesus reappeared etc?
 
muhammad_isa said:
Well, as in the whole of the NT overall, yes.
Click to expand...
Of the 27 New Testament books, I wonder if there a single one does not refer to the death on the cross (and resurrection)?
muhammad_isa said:
..but I was not talking just about the NT, but from an historical viewpoint.
Click to expand...
And this is the difficulty because, along with scant contemporary references by Josephus, there seems to be virtually no other evidence beyond that of the NT – and that's no help because it strongly attests to the death on the cross (and resurrection). There may be a couple of obscure apocryphal writings that question the death of Jesus on the cross, but they are later writings, and not generally regarded as reliable?
muhammad_isa said:
We have to consider what the Roman governance thought about it all.

When did they find out that Jesus reappeared etc?
Click to expand...
The NT Jesus does not seem to have been regarded by the Romans as a direct threat.

"My kingdom is not of this world"

The Romans don't seem to have been much worried about Jesus? Pilate just needed to keep the fractious Jews quiet and avoid riots and demonstrations, to keep the tax revenues flowing to Rome, as was his function as governor. That's all Rome cared about from its provinces. He didn't want trouble on his watch?
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
The Romans don't seem to have been much worried about Jesus?
Click to expand...
That's the second time that you avoid the issue I raise..
We know that "the Romans" end up with Christianity as their state religion.
That means that they preferred some beliefs over others .. certainly not Jewish ones.

Did they know, at the time of Jesus' crucifixion, that he re-appeared again or not?

If not, that assumes that the whole of Christianity relies on a few people saying that he "wasn't dead".
..or are you claiming that he could only be seen by some spiritual mechanism,
and nobody else could see him .. and his wounds .. and eating fish?
 
muhammad_isa said:
That's the second time that you avoid the issue I raise..
We know that "the Romans" end up with Christianity as their state religion.
That means that they preferred some beliefs over others .. certainly not Jewish ones.
Click to expand...
Oh sorry. This would seem to be a different issue?
muhammad_isa said:
Did they know, at the time of Jesus' crucifixion, that he re-appeared again or not?
Click to expand...
I don't know. Do you have evidence either way?
muhammad_isa said:
If not, that assumes that the whole of Christianity relies on a few people saying that he "wasn't dead".
Click to expand...
The passages that refer to Jesus's reappearance are quite clear that they describe the resurrected Christ. There's no room for doubt. Please don't require me to post the passages again?
muhammad_isa said:
..or are you claiming that he could only be seen by some spiritual mechanism,
and nobody else could see him .. and his wounds .. and eating fish?
Click to expand...
The only evidence is the New Testament. Do you have external evidence? Where the gospels describe Jesus's reappearance after the crucifixion, they leave no room for doubt they are talking about the risen Christ.
 
Last edited:
He appeared to his closest followers, and to his own brother. Surely Peter and James were amongst the earliest Christians? They did not think he had survived. They told others, and told Paul -- and went on to die for their belief in the death of Jesus on the cross (and resurrection).

They told everyone that Christ appeared to them after the crucifixion. There's no question that anybody misunderstood the appearance of the risen Christ for that of Jesus who had not died . They knew Jesus well.

So it's not about whether it happened, whether a person believes it happened; if someone wants to dispute it, there needs to be external evidence -- because the NT can't be made to support the 'swoon' theory.

Whatever the Romans might have thought or known about Jesus's reappearance is not written down. So we don't know?
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
I don't know. Do you have evidence either way?
Click to expand...
No .. all we have is what was not destroyed by the Romans. :)

RJM said:
The passages that refer to Jesus's reappearance are quite clear that they describe the resurrected Christ. There's no room for doubt.
Click to expand...
No, there isn't. Not in the canonical scripture of the NT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
RJM said:
He appeared to his closest followers, and to his own brother. Surely Peter and James were amongst the earliest Christians? They did not think he had survived. They told others, and told Paul -- and went on to die for their belief in the death of Jesus on the cross (and resurrection).
Click to expand...
That is your belief.

RJM said:
So it's not about whether it happened, whether a person believes it happened; if someone wants to dispute it, there needs to be external evidence -because the NT can't be made to support the 'swoon' theory.
Click to expand...
Well, if somebody takes the Bible to be "the word of G-d" or the only accurate belief .. then he died on the cross.
..but what about all the rest of the hype about him dying?
That is contrary to Jewish belief, and the Romans obviously knew that.

RJM said:
Whatever the Romans might have thought or known about Jesus's reappearance is not written down. So we don't know?L
Click to expand...
No .. we don't know. The history has been "erased" for some reason.
 
Then it can be turned around to ask what reason is there to believe Jesus did not die on the cross?

The Quran says -- seems to say -- he did not. That's all good. Ok, the two books differ. But the NT cannot be manipulated to support the Quran about it. The fact is the two books are diametrically opposed on the issue.

Best just agree to differ, imo?
 
Last edited:
Thomas said:
And what did they make of it? Who knows?
Click to expand...
Well, Pilate apparently didn't get into trouble .. so I assume that Jesus kept a low profile on purpose.
No more public appearances .. no more going to the temple in Jerusalem..
 
Well, mostly John, but as you choose to dismiss him, there's little point.

Simply, Christian Scripture is explicit that Christ will send 'another' and the Acts of the Apostles is also known as the Gospel of the Holy Spirit.
 
muhammad_isa said:
Jesus kept a low profile on purpose.
Click to expand...
The risen Christ was in control of manifesting, or weaving, a physical body, choosing whatever appearance he decided. He could appear and disappear at will or appear in several different places at the same time, imo

He had transcended the material dimension of nature?

EDIT
He is higher than all the angels
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
The risen Christ was in control of manifesting, or weaving, a physical body, choosing whatever appearance he decided. He could appear and disappear at will or appear in several different places at the same time, imo
Click to expand...
..and the disappearance of his body from the tomb was part of that "illusion"?
It seems strange that none of this happened before his crucifixion.. :)
 
muhammad_isa said:
..and the disappearance of his body from the tomb was part of that "illusion"?
Click to expand...
His body was transformed into an immortal body that he had complete control over. Angels appeared as men and ate with Abraham. The angel Gabriel hugged and shook Muhammad (pbuh). Jacob wrestled with an angel. Several other appearances of angels as physical beings.

There are branches of yoga devoted to transforming the physical to become an immortal spiritual body (neidan, kundalini and others) and it is the occult root of alchemy. Christ is above all the angels.
 
Last edited:
muhammad_isa said:
seems strange that none of this happened before his crucifixion.. :)
Click to expand...
The crucifixion was part of the deliberate plan of the incarnation of the Christ. Jesus gave himself to become human and to suffer and to die. He came for the hopeless and the lost and broken. Those who suffer, turn to Jesus for comfort.

It appears foolish to anyone who is not able to understand what it means. Paul says: The foolishness of God surpasses the wisdom of material (minded) men.
 
Last edited:
muhammad_isa said:
Was the beheading of John the Baptist, also part of a "deliberate plan" ?
Click to expand...
John was not the incarnate Christ, if that's what you mean. He foretold of the one to come 'whose sandal I am unworthy to untie, who will baptize you not with water, as I do, but with the Holy Spirit and with fire'
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top