The Death Of Jesus

[nyh4225]

I have often wondered about the death and resurrection of Jesus. Could it have been possible for Jesus not to have died on the cross? I have some medical knowledge and have and thought about his wounds none of which seemed that devastating. Could he, have passed out and was thought to be dead placed in the tomb and regained consciousness opened the tomb himself,

Then knowing the danger went into hiding and after his first contacts with his followers, then went to other countries to spread his teaching, Because the Koran has a lot of similarities and Muhammad received his teaching from the archangel Gabriel.

The teaching of other Religions also follow closely the teaching of Jesus.

This is just one of the questions rolling around in my head.

[PaulS]

I guess anything's possible but if the biblical account of the Romans stabbing Jesus in the side is true, I can't imagine him surviving. This was after all an execution - the Romans were pretty good at these! Also, the stone seems to have been put there to prevent unauthorised entry, so I don't expect one man to be able to push it aside.

 

I suspect the growth of religions that resembled Jesus' teachings was a product of the developing mindsets around that time influenced by a number of teachers as well as Jesus, although I think Jesus did have a spectacular impact.

 

Just my thoughts.

[JosephM]

Michael,

 

Welcome to the forum. Since you are new here, would you be so kind to take a few moments to introduce yourself in the watercooler area and share a bit about yourself?

 

Concerning your thoughts of the death of Jesus, going by the biblical account, if it is accurately described it would seem an improbable scenario as Paul has said. However, you are not alone in those thoughts. There are a number of scholars who question the whole cross crucifixion on the basis that there are no other reliable ancient texts that indicate that the crucifixion was an execution method of the era. Some say there are no explicit references to the use of nails or to crucifixion - only that Jesus bore a "staurus" towards Calvary which is not necessarily a cross but can also mean a "pole".

 

Personally, i don't know and it isn't all that important to my journey or faith since my faith is not in a book.

 

Joseph

[Luvtosew]

I question it as well, if one reads Josephus you will also find 3 men hung on crosses and one survived, Josephus had many similarities of Paul, did he read the gospels, write the gospels or what. So many coincidences. Also Julius Caesar was stabbed a lot and by whom Brutus, he knew there was no way out and he pulled his robe over his head they say. They made a clay man of Caesar and put him on a cross to adore at his funeral , and they say they sacrificed a lamb in honor of him at the funeral. He was known as a God, and had adopted a son and denied the son he supposedly had with Cleopatra who some say is Jesus. We will never know as the rCC and Constantine burned so much history, and the convient fire at the library at Alexandria. I believe the Vatican knows the truth and has it hid but one day it will be known.

[PaulS]

Wow, hadn't heard the Caesar/Cleopatra/Jesus connection before! I doubt it has any substance, but hey, who knows!

 

The concept that Jesus didn't actually even exist as a person is not new either actually. Paul, who is the earliest recorded writer of Jesus-related matter admits that he never met Jesus in real life, and the 'eye-witness' Gospels are all hearsay (i.e. it is only others saying what Jesus allegedly said). With no records made by Jesus and no external records acknowledging Jesus*, it could be quite possible the man Jesus never existed or never existed in the fashion so described.

 

I've recently read that Christianity had no more than about 3,000 followers within the first 50 years after Jesus' death which does seem pretty small. Almost as though it didn't 'catch on' because he never really existed as a person, but then 40 or 50 years later when the Gospels get written it starts to develop and grow, almost myth-like.

 

*There is Josephus' account which is reported as this:

"Josephus Flavius, the Jewish historian, lived as the earliest non-Christian who mentions a Jesus. Although many scholars think that Josephus' short accounts of Jesus (in Antiquities) came from interpolations perpetrated by a later Church father (most likely, Eusebius), Josephus' birth in 37 C.E. (well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus), puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote Antiquities in 93 C.E., after the first gospels got written! Therefore, even if his accounts about Jesus came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay.

[romansh]

I have often wondered about the death and resurrection of Jesus. Could it have been possible for Jesus not to have died on the cross?

 

Funnily enough this is what Islam believes. They hold Jesus in very high regard. He was born of god, by the virgin Mary, performed miracles and was crucified. Though he did not die on the cross, he was not resurrected, nor was he "god" in the shape of man.

 

I would bet Jesus was a historical character, though I don't think we can ever be sure. We can also bet that Christ is a myth. I don't mean this in negative manner. Myths can be extremely powerful with a "useful" interpretion.

[soma]

romansh I also think the Bible is mythology and powerful in that format and not the law book that fundamentalist throw at people.

[PerpetualSeeker]

soma, the more I study the biblical text, the more I am headed your way. I watched "Zeitgeist" this weekend on You Tube (2hrs but I recommend it). The first section is on biblical concepts followed by sections on politics, the financial system, and conspiracy theories (I could have skipped those). In short, it crushed me. It was a well put together explanation for much of the biblical writings and reasoning for why Christian holidays fall where they do. My fundamentalist upbringing had me hornswaggled. There is also a wonderful list of historians (about 30) during the time of Jesus and it is highlighted that NONE of them mention him. The Creation and Flood stories are equally crushed based on parallels from other like myth stories of the time.

[soma]

Perpetual Seeker it is so refreshing to see sincere young people spending time and searching out the truth. I think the Bible is mythology, but powerfull inspiration in that format. The Bible shows us with symbols that there is no such thing as luck or fate, but that divine law governs every action and thought. The time for individual development has come so we can interpret the symbols and discover for ourselves why we must do certain things in life. The cause of our good and bad fortune lies in ourselves because we set them in motion in our unit mind, the good and bad things that baffle us and put us in our own unique place in the universe. We do reap what we sow because we generate the energy behind our bad or good fortune. The religious symbols in the Bible when interpreted correctly not only provide a window into the realm of Christ pure consciousness, but also allows the mind to make the right choices by enlightening the mundane world and transforming it into a realm of experience that cannot be described by words.

Edited June 25, 2013 by soma
added content

[Luvtosew]

soma, the more I study the biblical text, the more I am headed your way. I watched "Zeitgeist" this weekend on You Tube (2hrs but I recommend it). The first section is on biblical concepts followed by sections on politics, the financial system, and conspiracy theories (I could have skipped those). In short, it crushed me. It was a well put together explanation for much of the biblical writings and reasoning for why Christian holidays fall where they do. My fundamentalist upbringing had me hornswaggled. There is also a wonderful list of historians (about 30) during the time of Jesus and it is highlighted that NONE of them mention him. The Creation and Flood stories are equally crushed based on parallels from other like myth stories of the time.

Oh I understand, it is crushing, For me after over 50 years of total belief (a born and raised RC) I believed it all, and now I realize the the OT is a lot about astronomy and the NT is about creating a new God. I don't know if Jesus is historical or not, but I still believe in God. I see the crucifixion as kind of the death of the old religion Judaism and birth of Christianity , and also end of the age of Aries and beginning of Pisces. When I actually starting reading the Bible with no preconceived ideas , it was clear as day. It became so obvious. Like soma said though there are many great inspirational lessons in the Bible, and I feel people so miss out on the spiritual lessons to be learned when reading it so literally.

[matteoam]

I have to say that I do believe that Jesus was resurrected. I can't prove it. I don't really care if it happened or not. My belief has been less about "proof" as our post-enlightened minds are shaped. That being said, I just as much believe that the Buddha attained nirvana and he was not reborn into the cycle of samsara. I also believe that what is documented, more or less, in the Mahabharata is true to some extent, as are most scriptures. I believe Krishna's claims about himself are as true as Jesus'. I mean, Jesus said him and God were one and we are too. Why should I doubt that? I also believe that the meaning of the resurrection, as Spong and Borg and others speak about are true. I don't get fixated on the empty tomb, which I how I can say I believe in the resurrection. What happened to Jesus' body after crucifixion doesn't matter. He is Risen. So, too, in a way, as Islam sees Jesus being substituted on the cross, well, yeah, that makes sense, as well. I say that because of the transformation that took place. Can it take place now? Well, sure, why not? I mean I accept what Ram Dass says about his experience of his yogi after his yogi Neem Karoli Baba left his body. That is resurrection to me.

[renewedfaith1964]

A GREAT book to read is "Who Moved the Stone" by Frank Morrison. A fantastic analysis of the entire Resurrection event. The book was written about 90 years ago by a guy who was an atheist at the time. It's not your typical modern, bull crap. Very, very well-written.

[PaulS]

Being a 70 yr old book I'd think current biblical scholarship may have quite an impact on the bible-based 'evidence' that Morrison uses as arguments. I found the book to be quite biased toward a fundamental view of Christianity and not genuinely questioning.

 

I'm always suspicious of anyone that can 'prove' what happened 2000 years ago, particularly using texts (of which there are no originals) which weren't even written until decades after the event, by authors whom nobody knows.

 

I suspect this book will be appreciated by those who are looking for confirmation of an already held belief, and not who genuinely seek a balanced presentation of Jesus' final days.