Did Jesjuah stage his own death in order to escape from it all?

Originally posted by Nathwa
reply to post by adjensen

 

The problem that I see is that for one to subsribe to the Bible and its teachings is to subsribe to that agenda, and that agenda has Jesus dying on the cross. As it is a religious text with an agenda, the possiblity that has been presented presumes that since religion often deals in mythology and not in fact, anyone who is Christian might not be able to see it.

You could say that about anyone who believes in anything. Isn't it true we latch onto ideas and follow those who have ideas that are aligned with ours? Do atheists not listen to people who share their ideas? Do muslims not do the same? Everything could have an agenda, how do you make a distinction?

reply to post by adjensen


Can you please tell us under worthy ones how it is possible to die from bloodloss from piercing skin of the head alone? Aswell as perhaps superficial wounds to the back? And ofcourse four nail wounds to the four greatest limbs. Admit it, you have no IDEA! And for your information, you could have cut off Jesjusah's four main limbs, and still he wouldn't die from blood loss. And your presumptions have no value other than to substanciate your own beliefs.

reply to post by The Endtime Warrior


Your absolutely correct. Once we subsribe to any given agenda, it is sometimes difficult to see things to the contrary. I for one do not see contradictions as an offense or threat, but rather as an oppurtunity to test beliefs and reinforce what you believe.

Originally posted by Nathwa
reply to post by adjensen

 

The problem that I see is that for one to subsribe to the Bible and its teachings is to subsribe to that agenda, and that agenda has Jesus dying on the cross. As it is a religious text with an agenda, the possiblity that has been presented presumes that since religion often deals in mythology and not in fact, anyone who is Christian might not be able to see it.

Well, I'm not sure. Right here we have a fellow who has come to a radically different conclusion, yet he claims it is scripturally based. Lots of Gnostic Christians do the same thing, and I've seen people with a belief in reincarnation pull out scripture that kind of supports it, given enough interpretive swing.

I take a more holistic approach -- look for harmony throughout, and that's where the truth is most likely to be. Believing the whole text to be wrong, save a couple of passages in 2 Corinthians, for example, I'm not sure how anyone rationalizes that, but there are those that do. Exegesis versus eisegesis, really. No value in the second, as I see it.

reply to post by Nathwa


Great answer. It turns out that questioning things is not such a bad thing after all. I applaud you for that.

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by adjensen

 

Can you please tell us under worthy ones how it is possible to die from bloodloss from piercing skin of the head alone? Aswell as perhaps superficial wounds to the back? And ofcourse four nail wounds to the four greatest limbs. Admit it, you have no IDEA!

Beat a guy, scourge him (how you think scourging is "superficial", I have no idea) pound thorns into his scalp and nails into his ankles and wrists, and then hang him on a cross in the afternoon sun, and I'd say anyone has an IDEA of how he might bleed to death.

And for your information, you could have cut off Jesjusah's four main limbs, and still he wouldn't die from blood loss.

Not sure how you come up with that one, sorry. Are you now claiming him to be the son of Jor-El, rather than the Son of God?

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by adjensen

 

Can you please tell us under worthy ones how it is possible to die from bloodloss from piercing skin of the head alone? Aswell as perhaps superficial wounds to the back? And ofcourse four nail wounds to the four greatest limbs. Admit it, you have no IDEA!

Beat a guy, scourge him (how you think scourging is "superficial", I have no idea) pound thorns into his scalp and nails into his ankles and wrists, and then hang him on a cross in the afternoon sun, and I'd say anyone has an IDEA of how he might bleed to death.

And he would loose about two liters of blood, since the body would stop bloodflow when the pressure drops. Are you a doctor since you now so much about bloodloss from looking at a meseaval picture?

And for your information, you could have cut off Jesjusah's four main limbs, and still he wouldn't die from blood loss.

Not sure how you come up with that one, sorry. Are you now claiming him to be the son of Jor-El, rather than the Son of God?

I have no idea about who is Jor-El, (is that some god you are praying to in the hidden?). I know only one God, and he is JHVH Elohim and his prophet was Jesjuah bin Joseph aka Jesjuah ha-Mesjiach. Disproof that and I'll be glad to enter your magic medicine school. I have seen people survive having all their limbs cut off, and I have seen people, among them meself, being cured from asfyxiation by havuing a knife piercing their thorax revealing blood and water. I know personally two people who has been braindead for upto an hour, being revived due to clever and knowledgeful firstaiders. You just have to look beyond all the blood and understand that being naked in let's say 5 degrees celcius helps you a great deal from suffering amnesia. Jesjuah, or your Jesus certainly didn't die from blood loss. He "died" from amphyxiation as the text explains, only he didnot die, all the text says is he stopped breathing for a while.

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic



You said yourself that all of your points were backed by Scripture so tell me even one place where it says "he stopped breathing for a while. "

reply to post by Soldier of God


The text says he stopped breathing while crying out "It is done". The next moment we meet him he is breathing end even eating a fish. Haven't you read the story?

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
And he would loose about two liters of blood, since the body would stop bloodflow when the pressure drops. Are you a doctor since you now so much about bloodloss from looking at a meseaval picture?

So your theory is that it's impossible to bleed to death? Okay, whatever. Dead is dead, doesn't matter what the process happened to be.

And for your information, you could have cut off Jesjusah's four main limbs, and still he wouldn't die from blood loss.

Not sure how you come up with that one, sorry. Are you now claiming him to be the son of Jor-El, rather than the Son of God?

I have no idea about who is Jor-El, (is that some god you are praying to in the hidden?)

Actually, it's a bit of a joke at your expense, sorry -- Superman is the "Son of Jor-El", and your claim that one can't bleed to death, regardless of injury, kind of implies that Superman might be one of the few that might fit the bill.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
And he would loose about two liters of blood, since the body would stop bloodflow when the pressure drops. Are you a doctor since you now so much about bloodloss from looking at a meseaval picture?

So your theory is that it's impossible to bleed to death? Okay, whatever. Dead is dead, doesn't matter what the process happened to be.

No, but it is unlikely that anyone dies from bloodloss in what has been replicated by Indonesians for quite a while. The Bible tells us he died since he stopped breathing, and the text goes on further to explain how his pierced thorax would indicate he was dead, which is all fine, only noone becomes braindead and DEAD from loosing ones breath.

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by Soldier of God

 

The text says he stopped breathing while crying out "It is done". The next moment we meet him he is breathing end even eating a fish. Haven't you read the story?

Give me the chapter and verse, I feel we may be reading two very different "Books".

Originally posted by adjensen
Actually, it's a bit of a joke at your expense, sorry -- Superman is the "Son of Jor-El", and your claim that one can't bleed to death, regardless of injury, kind of implies that Superman might be one of the few that might fit the bill.

The injuries explained in detail in the Gospel will not leave the poor sod dying from bloodloss. That's your brainchild while seeing you cannot refute any of my five points, having to bring in your own torch, that he might have died from blood loss. Not much supports your idea, but if you'd like to revive a person who has no more blood inside instead of routinely reviving a "son of the gods", be my guest.

Originally posted by Soldier of God

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by Soldier of God

 

The text says he stopped breathing while crying out "It is done". The next moment we meet him he is breathing end even eating a fish. Haven't you read the story?

Give me the chapter and verse, I feel we may be reading two very different "Books".

OK, hee you are: John 19:30 (he takes his "last breath") and John 20:15 (he is speaking, and breath is needed to speak). You have to think too you know....

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
The injuries explained in detail in the Gospel will not leave the poor sod dying from bloodloss. That's your brainchild while seeing you cannot refute any of my five points, having to bring in your own torch, that he might have died from blood loss. Not much supports your idea, but if you'd like to revive a person who has no more blood inside instead of routinely reviving a "son of the gods", be my guest.

Like I said, dead is dead, doesn't matter how it happened. The Bible clearly says that he was dead, so he was dead. End of story.

Your continued statement of "you cannot refute any of my five points" is pointless -- as I (and others) have asserted, there is nothing to refute, because you've provided nothing but baseless speculation. Your wanting it to be true, for whatever reason, does not make it so, any more than my wanting it not to be true does not make it so.

It's just that there is no support in scripture or history for your claims, so the likelihood that you are right is, effectively, zero.

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
OK, hee you are: John 19:30 (he takes his "last breath") and John 20:15 (he is speaking, and breath is needed to speak). You have to think too you know....

What is the point of this? You do understand that Christians believe in the resurrection of the body, right? Christ was dead, and he was resurrected in his body. He demonstrated that he was not a spirit by eating, speaking, letting them poke things in the holes in his flesh, and so on.

Ergo, yes -- he breathed his last (aka: died, it's not like he had an asthma attack or something) and later was found to be breathing quite nicely. Because he was resurrected, not because he'd faked his death.

reply to post by adjensen


Jesjuah was treated with 40 minus one, or 39, sweeps with the whip. A terribly hurtful and possibly damageing treatment, but only leaving SUPERFICIAL wounds, in addition to any internal wounds, like punctured lung for instance which is quite common from such sweeps, as seen from Iran and elsewhere where they still carry out this kind of punnishment...

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
The injuries explained in detail in the Gospel will not leave the poor sod dying from bloodloss. That's your brainchild while seeing you cannot refute any of my five points, having to bring in your own torch, that he might have died from blood loss. Not much supports your idea, but if you'd like to revive a person who has no more blood inside instead of routinely reviving a "son of the gods", be my guest.

Like I said, dead is dead, doesn't matter how it happened. The Bible clearly says that he was dead, so he was dead. End of story.

And like I explained earlier the Bible leaves us with two scenarios. Christians are baptised, and in baptism we die. This is the first death. Secondly we might die the second death, meaning we die in all respects of the word, and that, my friend is the death of the soul, from where bnoone can rise, unless some God came and ressurrected us from our dry bones in order to judge us. This last type didn't happen back then.

Your continued statement of "you cannot refute any of my five points" is pointless -- as I (and others) have asserted, there is nothing to refute, because you've provided nothing but baseless speculation. Your wanting it to be true, for whatever reason, does not make it so, any more than my wanting it not to be true does not make it so.

So when you are unable to use scripture against my claims, I am the one who needs to support evidence. When I discuss these things here, I gather that if anyone makes claims against my presumptions or claims, they are able to understand my story scritually, and are also able to provide scripture to dispose of my claims. However, none has been able so far. All you have managed to do is to claim I don't have the scripual proofs I need, without bringing in any news ofcourse. So as for now, none of you have been able to as much as rock the boat. None has provided evidence that Jesjuah died the second death other than perhaps quoting Shaul Paulus explaining in his ususal Pharicean way how "Jesus died for us on the cross".

It's just that there is no support in scripture or history for your claims, so the likelihood that you are right is, effectively, zero.

OK, good for you you are no bookie then hah?

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by adjensen

 

Jesjuah was treated with 40 minus one, or 39, sweeps with the whip. A terribly hurtful and possibly damageing treatment, but only leaving SUPERFICIAL wounds, in addition to any internal wounds, like punctured lung for instance which is quite common from such sweeps, as seen from Iran and elsewhere where they still carry out this kind of punnishment...

I'm still wondering where you keep coming up with superficial wounds resulting from scourging.

Victims condemned to the cross first underwent the hideous torture of the scourge, and this was immediately inflicted on Jesus...He was beaten at the pleasure of the soldiers, with knots of rope, or plaited leather thongs, armed at the ends with acorn shaped drops of lead, or small sharp pointed bones. In many cases not only was the back of the person scourged cut open in all directions, but even the eyes, the face, and the breast were torn...Under the fury of the countless stripes, the victims sometimes sank-amidst screams, convulsive leaps, and distortions-into a senseless heap; sometimes died on the spot; sometimes were taken away, an unrecognizable mass of bleeding flesh, to find deliverance in death, from the inflammation and fever, sickness and shame.

- "The Life and Words of Christ" by Cunningham Geikie

That sure doesn't sound like superficiality to me. This was a society that relished violence -- it seems that the above description is reasonable.

Originally posted by adjensen
I'm still wondering where you keep coming up with superficial wounds resulting from scourging.

Scourging wasn't practised by the Jews back then, and what we do know is that the toughest punnishment the Sanhedrin could demand back then was 40 minus one whip-stokes. So much for scorging. Can you please point ot where in the Greek source (well the best we've got anyway) where Jesjuah was scourged? Meaning his skin was removed from his back and laces were made from the skin underneath, which is scourging. He was whipped with what the Torah demanded, and that would be 40 minus one whoopies. And trust me, that one is tough enough, and it might just kill you. However, Jesjuah was still alive hours later. Jesjuah was hurt, he wasn't killed.