My Opinion: No Piercing At Jesus' Side

[Ben_Masada]

No Piercing At Jesus’ Side

Here are three reasons why Jesus was never pierced at his side on the cross:

1- The custom to rush the death of all the Jews crucified by the Romans was Jewish and not Roman; and the practice was done only on Fridays, so that the bodies would not be left hanging during the hours of the Sabbath. And the method was leg-breaking and not spear-piercing. The Romans wouldn’t care less if the Jewish Sabbath got desecrated by the bodies on the crosses.

2 - There is a tradition that the Centurion was richly bribed by Joseph of Arimathea, who was a very rich man in Israel, to just let him - Joseph - take Jesus off the cross and report back to Pilate that Jesus was indeed already dead.

3 - That Centurion and his men could never by their own accord pierce Jesus after their recognition that Jesus was indeed the son of God. This is for lack of any other option, a confession that they had converted themselves to the Cause of Jesus. That’s in Matthew 27:54. Besides, there was no such a Roman custome to spear-pierce a crucified to check if he was dead.

The first and third reasons dispense with any other evidence that the piercing of Jesus’ side by a Roman spear was an interpolation by either the writer of the Gospel 50+ years after Jesus had been gone or by the Fathers of the Church in 327 CE, when they selected the books into the Canon of the NT.

Ben:

 

[po18guy]

Interesting opinions, but you completely discount the scriptural references to both the incident, as well as the eyewitnesses. Under the Mosaic Law, two or more witnesses established a fact. There were many more than two witnesses to this. There is written record of the synagogue officials trying to cover up the Resurrection, for example. Aside from the positive evidence, consider also the negative: I know of no record involving any other innocent man so crucified. I know of no record of Pilate washing his hands in any other case. Since this execution was so unusual from the very beginning, what is so unusual about an unusual ending?

Knowing what we do of human nature, how do you then explain the thousands of souls willingly martyred over centuries for this belief? Mass hysteria does not explain it. It is either true, or is a massive conspiracy, involving many persons over an extended time frame - not one of which ever recanted. Occam’s razor applies here.

 

[paarsurrey]

The first and third reasons dispense with any other evidence that the piercing of Jesus’ side by a Roman spear was an interpolation by either the writer of the Gospel 50+ years after Jesus had been gone or by the Fathers of the Church in 327 CE, when they selected the books into the Canon of the NT.

Ben:

Hi

This appeals to my mind; though it might be only my opinion.

Thanks

 

[Eucharisted]

You know, the spear that pierced Jesus’ side actually dose exist, and you can read about it here.

 

[paarsurrey]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4827901&postcount=321
The Wedding of Jesus

Originally Posted by Ben Masada:
LilyM, that spear-piercing at Jesus’ side was never done. I am not going to repeat here, but I request that you read my thread on that wound which was never done. Be the first!
I have just posted it.

Ben:

Hi

Sorry, I didn’t know that LilyM was to be the first to post in your new thread; not knowingly I posted earlier. Nevermind, her posts whenever she writes should be considered with preference over mine. I am not jealous of her.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

 

[planten]

You know, the spear that pierced Jesus’ side actually dose exist, and you can read about it here.

** It is written in the gospel that the soldier pierced the body of Jesus. So every one has to believe that. Otherwise that may not be true. With the Centurian present there, no soldier could act on his own to do any damage o Jesus.

Does any one say that piercing killed Jesus? Please reply**.

 

[Eucharisted]

** It is written in the gospel that the soldier pierced the body of Jesus. So every one has to believe that. Otherwise that may not be true. With the Centurian present there, no soldier could act on his own to do any damage o Jesus.

Does any one say that piercing killed Jesus? Please reply**.

Please quote where it says in the Bible Jesus didn’t die until He was pierced. Thank you.

 

[planten]

Please quote where it says in the Bible Jesus didn’t die until He was pierced. Thank you.

** Eucharisted, I did not say that Jesus died due to being pierced by a spear. The matter is being discussed. I wanted to know if Jesus died by that wound. You have not replied one way or the other.

Anyhow, perhaps the piercing by the spear did not hurt Jesus at all. Is that so?**

 

[Eucharisted]

** Eucharisted, I did not say that Jesus died due to being pierced by a spear. The matter is being discussed. I wanted to know if Jesus died by that wound. You have not replied one way or the other.

Anyhow, perhaps the piercing by the spear did not hurt Jesus at all. Is that so?**

Jesus died before being pierced. And what is being discussed is whether or not Jesus was pierced at all. Since the lance which pierced His side is still around, I think anyone would have to say Yes, he was pierced. But people who doubt Jesus was crucified must doubt he was pierced, or else come up with an unhistorical account of the piercing (otherwise known as a lame excuse).

 

[Reuben_J]

We can speculate but it is unmistakably written in the Bible. Christians will fall back to the word of God when there is doubt and to stand by it.

John 19:33-37

33But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. 35The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe. 36These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken,” 37and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.”

John 20:24-30

24Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!”

  But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."

26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

29Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

30Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31But these are written that you may[a] believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

 

[paarsurrey]

We can speculate but it is unmistakably written in the Bible. Christians will fall back to the **word of God **when there is doubt and to stand by it.

Hi

The Catholics are more than welcome to fall on Word of God; yes OK, but NTBible is a Word of Paul only.

I will defend Jesus my beloved Messenger against strange teachings of Paul.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

 

[dolphinlove]

Hi

The Catholics are more than welcome to fall on Word of God; yes OK, but NTBible is a Word of Paul only.

I will defend Jesus my beloved Messenger against strange teachings of Paul.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

Its not a ‘strange’ teaching of Paul.
Paul learnt from the people who are around Jesus, why would he make up his own version of things?

 

[paarsurrey]

Since the lance which pierced His side is still around, I think anyone would have to say Yes, he was pierced.

Hi

How you know for one that it is the same spear/lance?

Kindly mention the source.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

 

[dolphinlove]

Hi

How you know for one that it is the same spear/lance?

Kindly mention the source.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

The Holy Lance
here

 

[Ben_Masada]

We can speculate but it is unmistakably written in the Bible. Christians will fall back to the word of God when there is doubt and to stand by it.

The Word of God? I wish Jesus was alive for you to ask him what was the Word of God. He would definitely tell you because the only Scriptures he ever saw or knew was the Tanach.

John 19:33-37.

33But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.34Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. 35The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe.

 

[Ridgerunner]

If no crucified person was ever pierced, it would have been an unacceptable anomaly no one could have missed 50-300 years after the fact, when they were still crucifying people.

Leg-breaking was a practice utilized to hasten the death of those who were clearly alive. It served no other purpose. In itself, it was a cruel practice, adding to the torture nothwithstanding that it did hasten death. If, as the gospel account goes, the Romans believed Jesus was already dead, but simply wanted to make certain of it, it would be a lot quicker and easier to pierce His heart with a thrust from the side; a death-dealing blow in which Roman soldiers were trained.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Interesting opinions, but you completely discount the scriptural references to both the incident, as well as the eyewitnesses. Under the Mosaic Law, two or more witnesses established a fact. There were many more than two witnesses to this.

Eyewitnesses! Who were they? Can you mention one at least? Don’t say there were many out there that day. No Judge on a Court of Law would accept such “there were many eyewitnesses.” Okay, under the Mosaic Law, two or more witnesses would be enough to establish a fact, and only the fourth gospel reports such a case without eyewitness. Sorry guy
because your client would be convicted without witnesses.

 

[Ben_Masada]

If no crucified person was ever pierced, it would have been an unacceptable anomaly no one could have missed 50-300 years after the fact, when they were still crucifying people.

Leg-breaking was a practice utilized to hasten the death of those who were clearly alive. It served no other purpose. In itself, it was a cruel practice, adding to the torture nothwithstanding that it did hasten death. If, as the gospel account goes, the Romans believed Jesus was already dead, but simply wanted to make certain of it, it would be a lot quicker and easier to pierce His heart with a thrust from the side; a death-dealing blow in which Roman soldiers were trained.

The opposite is true Ridgerunner; if the Romans were on the habit to do this to rush or to check if a crucified was dead or not, I could give it a shot and believe Jesus’ spear-piercing. But it was not a Roman custom and they wouldn’t give a damn to do this. They didn’t care the least if the Jews would get annoyed with Jews hanging from crosses on the Sabbath. Sorry Ridgerunner, but it didn’t happen.

Ben:

 

[Ridgerunner]

The opposite is true Ridgerunner; if the Romans were on the habit to do this to rush or to check if a crucified was dead or not, I could give it a shot and believe Jesus’ spear-piercing. But it was not a Roman custom and they wouldn’t give a damn to do this. They didn’t care the least if the Jews would get annoyed with Jews hanging from crosses on the Sabbath. Sorry Ridgerunner, but it didn’t happen.

Ben:

It was most certainly a standard Roman killing blow, taught to the military. Romans were very much inclined to allow native religious practices to continue in conquered territories, to avoid pointlessly fomenting disorder. They did it precisely because they “didn’t give a d–n” about peoples’ religions at the time. But they did care a lot about wasting men and resources on avoidable disorders. If they believed Jesus was dead, but wanted to make sure, that would be the most efficient way to do it; rather like the bullet in the back of the head more modern torturer/executioners employ to ensure their victim is dead once they’re through with him. You don’t further torture a dead man you are charged with torturing to death; you just make sure he’s really dead at the end.

Again, if that was strange and unacceptable, people would not have found it credible back when they were still crucifying people. Just because you choose to doubt it does not mean people in the first through third centuries did. They knew a lot more about it than you do.

But since it is your purpose here to cause people to doubt Christianity, I have no expectation that you will accept a single thing I, or anyone else, says in support of the Christian gospels.

 

[cthulhubryan]

Hi

The Catholics are more than welcome to fall on Word of God; yes OK, but NTBible is a Word of Paul only.

I will defend Jesus my beloved Messenger against strange teachings of Paul.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

Hmm interesting. Are you familiar with the writings of the 8th century warrior Zoronostrah who traveled with Mohamed. His writings have only recently been uncovered. Here is part of the translation.

This being the word of Zoronostrah captain of men and general of armies, read ye my words and know the truth. I was with Mohammed, blessed prophet during his missions of mercies to the people of Ashkelon where Mohammed healed 10,000 of leprosy with just a word. I was with our glorious prophet when he laid down his scimitar and bound the wounds of infants harmed by the wars. I was there when he spared 6,000 virgins from rape and set them aside to be protected by his arm.

Know now that as I sit here, in the accursed lands of the unknown peoples, where the word of Mohammed has never been brought I die in a misery both physical and spiritual. For you see, I have learned through the wars that Mohammed did not receive any words from Angels, but rather from the foul D’jinn. It was not an angel who helped him to write these words, for Mohammed is great but is unlettered. It was his most loathsome mother who wrote those words. All of the glorious Q’ran is but a lie and I have lived my life for this lie. I can only pray to the God of my childhood that I can be forgiven but sure even loving father Abraham will turn his back on me after all I have done to the children of Moses, most beloved of God.

So, the bible is the only revealed word of God.