Did Jesus died on a cross?

[c659smith]

Steve,

Any thoughts on what I said here? Specifically what is in bold.

I think I gave you my opinion as to idolatry and the crucifix.

I know that scripture, history, eyewitness accounts, Roman styles of execution, and common sense with definitions completely wipes out the JW account.

Yes I think that would be a good start.

 

[Ravyn_Guiliani]

it is incredible how much of a non-issue the Cross had become when I left JWs. And then when I became Catholic it took on a whole new significance. Rather than the instrument of torture and death it became my hope and the bridge between Heaven and earth where I meet God hanging in the center, loving me with an unsurpassed love I never knew before…

 

[Wildgraywolf]

Paarsurrey, what lurdes was referring to was:

’ whereas they slew him not, nor did they bring about his death upon the cross, but he was made to appear to them like one crucified

In other words an illusion of Jesus.

Only Atheists or Agnostics would say that GodAllahYHWH is an illusion. Muslims would never say such a thing.

That isn’t what lurdes said.

 

[Yerusalyim]

For the record, I’ve seen more than enough evidence to bring into serious question whether the shape of the execution instrument was a cross.

I have looked at many non-JW reference books and find that multiple sources indicate the word meant “stake”. Vine’s Expositary Dictionary of New Testament Words for one, is a book on my bookshelf. As far as I know this is a well respected reference book and it points to “stake”.

Like many things in life and the Bible in particular, there are “experts” that line up on both sides of the issue. I have seen very well documented articles that point to “stake” and I’ve also seen well documented articles that say “cross”.

I also observe various people bowing to the cross, kissing it, and venerating it as if it’s some special, magical thing.

In my opinion, that’s idolatry.

I’m sure others will disagree, but frankly, who would ever say: “Sure, I’m committing idolatry”… and yet, the Bible indicates there are those who do.

Steve,

I’ve seen most of the JW and non-JW “evidence” and it’s much less than convincing. I’m quite familiar with the Lipisius drawing and how it’s misrepresented by the WTBTS.

Here is the biggest question for you…if the greek starous means stake, and is used to ONLY indicate Stake…then what was the greek word used to indicate a traditional CROSS?

 

[tomshaikh]

Thanks for answering my question but I think the muslin way is more confusing to me it leaves me with more question then answers, like I know muslins don’t believe Jesus is the son of the Living God and now they say that Jesus didn’t die on the cross that it was a illusion! isn’t that the reason they kill him because he said he was the son of God and that will make him equal to God?
and if Jesus didn’t die on the cross the prophecies in the OT would have been a lie and I don’t think so.

---

Hello Lurdes,

Jesus never said that he is Son of God. If Jesus said in bible that he is Son of God show me verses from bible open challenge to Christians. And what prophecies in the OT are you talking about tell that also.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

---

Hello Lurdes,

Jesus never said that he is Son of God. If Jesus said in bible that he is Son of God show me verses from bible open challenge to Christians. And what prophecies in the OT are you talking about tell that also.

Hi tomshaikh,

I’ve recommended it to you before, and I’ll recommend it again, because it is a good book; You should read Theology for Beginners by Frank Sheed. The following is taken from that book…

[pg 26] Matthew (11:27) and Luke (10:22) give us one phrase: “No one knows the Son but the Father; and no one knows the Father but the Son.” Here are two persons put on one same level. “I and the Father are one” (Jn 10:30). They are two persons, yet one.

At the very end of St. Matthew’s Gospel, a third is brought in, still within the oneness - “Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” - three persons, but with one name, and therefore one nature, since God names things for what they are.

Thus when Philip the Apostle says (Jn 16:23), “Let us see the Father,” Our Lord answers, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.”

Similarly Our Lord says that he will answer our prayer (Jn 14:14) and that his Father will (Jn 16:23), that he will send the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7) and that his Father will (Jn 14:16).

Don’t think of “Son of God” as a parent and child relationship; But rather, think of Jesus as the “Son of God” because His divine nature makes Him in likeness to Yahweh/Allah.

 

[planten]

**

Hi tomshaikh,

I’ve recommended it to you before, and I’ll recommend it again, because it is a good book; You should read Theology for Beginners by Frank Sheed. The following is taken from that book…

Don’t think of “Son of God” as a parent and child relationship; But rather, think of Jesus as the “Son of God” because His divine nature makes Him in likeness to Yahweh/Allah.

[pg 26] Matthew (11:27) and Luke (10:22) give us one phrase: “No one knows the Son but the Father; and no one knows the Father but the Son.” Here are two persons put on one same level. “I and the Father are one” (Jn 10:30). They are two persons, yet one.

These are symbolic words (metaphorical). We also believe that Jesus was not an actual son of God as we understand the word “son”. God has no family and He has no son or daughter. From where this thing crept into the church theology is not known.

Please see:

][pg 26] Matthew (11:27) and Luke (10:22) give us one phrase: “No one knows the Son but the Father; and no one knows the Father but the Son.”

Who said that?? Did God say that or some men? If the above are the words of some men then christians should take heed and not wander into wrong fields.

I don’t see any specific preaching of Jesus (in the bible NT) that he was a God or son of God. He did not spend even a day on such thing. A few sentences here and there have no meaning. The general pubkic (people) knew him as a prophet of God.

When the Jewish leaders confronted Jesus and asked him if he was the son of God, he did not say “Yes, I am son of God”. He replied that it was nothing new. Every one had been, in the past, called the children of God. So in other words Jesus denied being any special son of God. He considered himself just as any other person and as a child of God.

No one knows the son but the father and no one knows the father but the son. It is all metaphoric. It does not make Jesus a son of God. It is only a lovely, respectable status of Jesus of nearness to God.**

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

…Who said that?? Did God say that or some men? If the above are the words of some men then christians should take heed and not wander into wrong fields…

I guess when you fail to see His mission, then His words would appear to be totally useless to you.

You see, the fundamental difference between us is that we believe Jesus died on the cross; It was perfect sacrifice - something that only God can do - for atonement of our sins. We didn’t invent it. It was foretold by prophets in prophecy. But if you can’t believe a simple historical fact - that Jesus died on the cross of Friday 3rd April 33AD - well then, I can only imagine how little importance you would place on what Jesus says.

 

[planten]

I guess when you fail to see His mission, then His words would appear to be totally useless to you.

You see, the fundamental difference between us is that we believe Jesus died on the cross; It was perfect sacrifice - something that only God can do - for atonement of our sins. We didn’t invent it. It was foretold by prophets in prophecy. But if you can’t believe a simple historical fact - that Jesus died on the cross of Friday 3rd April 33AD - well then, I can only imagine how little importance you would place on what Jesus says.

** What you have written above is true. That is your beliefs and my beliefs. We can remain on our beliefs. No harm. The problem here was what you had quoted from me. Were those words quoted the words of men or God?? You should have denied that or supported that. But you did not do it.

I present the words again;

Please see:
Quote:
][pg 26] Matthew (11:27) and Luke (10:22) give us one phrase: “No one knows the Son but the Father; and no one knows the Father but the Son.”

Who said that?? Did God say that or some men? If the above are the words of some men then christians should take heed and not wander into wrong fields.

Please tell me who said those words. Was it god or some man is telling… it is possible that these are the words of Jesus… It is possible. But what meaning any one can take out of that? If no one knows the father except the son, that is alright. It can be true. Specially Jesus knows the father… It is true because he is the right man of God and in his time, no one knows God more than him.

But you are trying to derive wrong meanings from that verse. It does not mean that he is the son or he is the god. In the time of Moses, no one knew more about God than Moses did. Same goes for Abaraham and same goes for Muhammad.

I know all about your beliefs and with all due respects, I would say that those beliefs are not justified and they are quite un-natural. If any are justified, I would not hesitate to admit them Thanks.**

 

[planten]

**
More on the same lines i.e. the topic, You have an assumption that Jesus died on the cross. We Muslims have our revealed book Quran which says that the enemies could not kill Jesus on the cross and God saved him from the death on the cross and we see many proofs in the bible as Jesus was walking about after the incident of the cross and we see that he disappeared completely from the area (walked away). And he had the same body and wounds and thirst and hunger and he was hiding from public. All these things are not in the Quran but they are in the bible NT.

When brought down from the cross he was almost dead. His other companions who were with him on the cross were alive when brought down so their legs had to be broken. But, Jesus out of respect, and help from Pilate was spared that ordeal of the breaking of his legs,

The Roman soldier said " Oh he was a true man of God" or “He was holy man” and the same soldier gave the verdict that Jesus had died. The Quran supports it and says that Jesus was made to appear to them as a dead man.

Please tell me that after what we have in the Quran and what we see in the bible NT, what can we Muslims do about it. We see that he was not killed on the cross. Moreover, it is an unhealthy, unholy death on the cross. The christians can believe jesus to be cursed person but the Muslims can never do that. And even Jesus did not want that. Please give your arguments to support your cause.**

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

… You have an assumption that Jesus died on the cross…

cough

**… When brought down from the cross he was almost dead…
**

That’s something paarsurrey would say. And paarsurrey would say it in a similar font colour and similar font size.

… Please tell me that after what we have in the Quran and what we see in the bible NT, what can we Muslims do about it…

Well, for me it’s quite simple; Give up the Qur’an. It’s historically wrong and really has no proof of being divinely inspired scripture.

But for everytime you proclaim on these forums that Jesus did not die on the cross, we’re going to proclaim that He did. Only the advantage is with us. Because our scripture foretold the crucifixion in prophecy. And history agrees that He was crucified on Friday 3rd April 33AD. And the crucifixion fulfills God’s will.

But Muhammad said it’s not true. As to why we should believe Muhammad is a bigger mystery than the Trinity.

Go figure.

 

[justinthemartyr]

only the jews who reject Christ believe that he did not die on a cross, they have to deny it in order to justify themselves.

The jews who saw it and believed it, became christians for the most part.

 

[lurdes]

only the jews who reject Christ believe that he did not die on a cross, they have to deny it in order to justify themselves.

The jews who saw it and believed it, became christians for the most part.

the muslims also denied it they say it was an illusion what the people saw, that it wasn’t Jesus but someone else, and the JW say it wasn’t a cross but a stake.

 

[paarsurrey]

And history agrees that He was crucified on .

Hi

Kind name the secular history book. The Secular Historians even don’t believe that Jesus existed historically. We Muslims only believe in Jesus as Quran has mentioned about him.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
Scholarly opinions on the historicity of the New Testament accounts are diverse. At the extremes, they range from the view that they are inerrant descriptions of the life of Jesus,[6] to the view that they provide no historical information about his life.[7] As with all historical sources, scholars ask: to what extent did the authors’ motivations shape the texts, what sources were available to them, how soon after the events described did they write, and whether or not these factors lead to inaccuracies such as exaggerations or inventions.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Thanks

I love Jesus and Mary only because Quran has mentioned them with respect.

 

[swariffin]

Dear Paar,

One secular historian confirmation of Jesus. His name is Josephus Flavius. Go ahead and take a look. His book in in the Amazon.com. Remember that Josephus was not a Christian and had never been a Christian.

 

[paarsurrey]

Dear Paar,

One secular historian confirmation of Jesus. His name is Josephus Flavius. Go ahead and take a look. His book in in the Amazon.com. Remember that Josephus was not a Christian and had never been a Christian.

Hi

I don’t think he saw Jesus.

Josephus Flavius

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_Flavius#cite_ref-0
Josephus (37 – sometime after 100 AD),[1], also known as Yosef Ben Matityahu, who became known, in his capacity as a Roman citizen, as Titus Flavius Josephus,[2] was a 1st-century Jewish historian and apologist of priestly and royal ancestry who survived and recorded the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70. His works give an important insight into first-century Judaism.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_Flavius#cite_ref-0

Thanks

 

[swariffin]

Hi

I don’t think he saw Jesus.

Josephus Flavius

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_Flavius#cite_ref-0
Josephus (37 – sometime after 100 AD),[1], also known as Yosef Ben Matityahu, who became known, in his capacity as a Roman citizen, as Titus Flavius Josephus,[2] was a 1st-century Jewish historian and apologist of priestly and royal ancestry who survived and recorded the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70. His works give an important insight into first-century Judaism.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_Flavius#cite_ref-0

Thanks

If Josephus is a historian and live within Jesus lifetime, it would be impossible for him not to know Jesus. Jesus movement was so shocking to the society, which should gain his attention. In his book, Josephus admitted that Jesus was a miracle maker. He would not have said it without seeing the miracle himself. If he saw the miracle, it would be unlikely if he had no intention to see that miracle maker himself.

 

[planten]

only the jews who reject Christ believe that he did not die on a cross, they have to deny it in order to justify themselves.

The jews who saw it and believed it, became christians for the most part.

** I believe that the above is wrong. The Quran does not support it. The Quran says that the jews and the christians all believe that Jesus was killed on the cross. So, as far as i know, the jews boast that they killed Jesus on the cross.

But justinthemartyr is hoping that the Jews do not believe that Jesus was killed on the cross.**

 

[planten]

the muslims also denied it they say it was an illusion what the people saw, that it wasn’t Jesus but someone else, and the JW say it wasn’t a cross but a stake.

**Some one tried to fool the Muslims into believing that it was some one else on the cross and that it was not Jesus. That is not true at all. It is no where in the Quran that it was not Jesus on the cross. It is also not in any Hadith that it was some one else on the cross.

So we can forget about that false idea now and we get on with the real things which are in the Quran. The Quran says categorically that the Jews could not kill Jesus on the cross and they could not kill him in any other way too… That is the truth. We should adopt that and discuss that please.

Even if it was some other person on the cross instead of Jesus, what use is that to the church theory. That would further harm the church theory that Jesus was killed on the cross. When he was not there on the cross then how could he be killed on the cross !!**

 

[planten]

If Josephus is a historian and live within Jesus lifetime, it would be impossible for him not to know Jesus. Jesus movement was so shocking to the society, which should gain his attention. In his book, Josephus admitted that Jesus was a miracle maker. He would not have said it without seeing the miracle himself. If he saw the miracle, it would be unlikely if he had no intention to see that miracle maker himself.

** If Josephus was born in 37 A.D. then how could he have seen Jesus??? Not possible.**