My Opinion: No Piercing At Jesus' Side

[WarriorAngel]

Ben, you simply cannot grasp that Paul was a servant who was humbled to preach the Gospels to the Gentiles…?

Paul also didn’t force the old Mosiac Laws on the Gentiles who were converting because those Laws didnt matter. And really they just don’t when it comes to salvation in the after life. Moses had to protect the ppl from illnesses.

Anyway - the Gentiles were being hammered by the converted Jews to follow the OT Laws when Paul said - no - dont let anyone tell you those laws matter - because they do not.

Let those who won’t eat meat - not eat meat and those who will - eat it.

Let those who are scandalized by doing something - not do it because it would be a sin to them…

So IE Ben, if you converted to Christian today to the Catholic Church - if you believed in all the doctrines but still required yourself not to eat pork, shellfish [etc] then don’t eat them if it scandalizes you.

Jesus came to give up His life for the SOUL’S life. To Him - our diet wasn’t going to affect judgement and so He sent Paul to the Gentiles - and Peter to the Jews [well, to the entire Church in fact]
And thus both Jew and Gentile were brought to Jesus by His Resurrection which was prooven…and into His Church - His Laws.

IN Christ we are neither Jew, nor Gentile, but we all become one in His Body.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Gabriel of 12, may I assure you that Pilate was working to save Jesus. That is abundantly clear from the passages of the bibleNT. When Pilate failed to satisfy the Jews, he washed his hands and gave up Jesus to be crucified.

The punishment for balsphemy was not crucifixion. It was stoning to death.

**Pilate had secret men working during the Crucifixion. He appointed special persons (Centurian and his squad) so as to protect Jesus. It was the Centurian who had said “Surely, he (Jesus) was a Man of God or a pious man.” **

It was the Centurian who gave the verdict that Jesus was dead. The plan of Pilate to crucify Jesus at a late hour on Friday when next day was a big Sabath, that was anothe rgood move by Pilate to save Jesus so that Jesus does no remain on the cross for too long time..

Not so certain - what you are saying.

I will say this - Pilate had Jesus scourged to appease the Jews so as to avoid giving Him the sentence to death.
But it didnt appease the Pharisees. They didnt think it was enough and so they choose Barabas over Jesus to be released since it was customary to let them choose which criminal they wanted to die.

Barabas was a murderer. But still they choose Jesus Who did not harm anyone.

It was the scourging which is unusual in this scenerio - to recieve both a scourging which always was supposed to lead to death AND crucifixion which leads to death…was unheard of. It was always one or the other.

WHICH is why the death of Jesus was so unique.
He received a scourging which should have been til His death but Pilate did it only to placate the Pharisees and not let it lead to His death] and then He was crucified YET DUE to the loss of blood from scourging, led to His expedient death.

No other man received both a scourging and a crucifixion. Which is why the prophecies to His death could NOT BE MISTAKEN for a false Messiah.

 

[Ben_Masada]

servant who was humbled to preach the Gospels to the Gentiles

Jesus came to give up His life for the SOUL’S life. To Him - our diet wasn’t going to affect judgement

 

[Bill_Pick]

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: /Q
Ben this is paste that I was read ing today we must both be going to the same site,I,ll look it up again and copy and paste it for you later today.peace…BTW you only copy a few why not all

 

[Bill_Pick]

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:

Nine pieces of evidence refute the swoon theory1) Jesus could not have survived crucifixion. Roman procedures were very careful to eliminate that possibility. Roman law even laid the death penalty on any soldier who let a capital prisoner escape in any way, including bungling a crucifixion. It was never done.(2) The fact that the Roman soldier did not break Jesus’ legs, as he did to the other two crucified criminals (Jn 19:31-33), means that the soldier was sure Jesus was dead. Breaking the legs hastened the death so that the corpse could be taken down before the sabbath (v. 31).(3) John, an eyewitness, certified that he saw blood and water come from Jesus’ pierced heart (Jn 19:34-35). This shows that Jesus’ lungs had collapsed and he had died of asphyxiation. Any medical expert can vouch for this.(4) The body was totally encased in winding sheets and entombed (Jn 19:38-42).(5) The post-resurrection appearances convinced the disciples, even “doubting Thomas,” that Jesus was gloriously alive (Jn 20:19-29). It is psychologically impossible for the disciples to have been so transformed and confident if Jesus had merely struggled out of a swoon, badly in need of a doctor. A half-dead, staggering sick man who has just had a narrow escape is not worshiped fearlessly as divine lord and conquerer of death.(6) How were the Roman guards at the tomb overpowered by a swooning corpse? Or by unarmed disciples? And if the disciples did it, they knowingly lied when they wrote the Gospels, and we are into the conspiracy theory, which we will refute shortly.(7) How could a swooning half-dead man have moved the great stone at the door of the tomb? Who moved the stone if not an angel? No one has ever answered that question. Neither the Jews nor the Romans would move it, for it was in both their interests to keep the tomb sealed, the Jews had the stone put there in the first place, and the Roman guards would be killed if they let the body "escape."The story the Jewish authorities spread, that the guards fell asleep and the disciples stole the body (Mt 28:11-15), is unbelievable. Roman guards would not fall asleep on a job like that; if they did, they would lose their lives. And even if they did fall asleep, the crowd and the effort and the noise it would have taken to move an enormous boulder would have wakened them. Furthermore, we are again into the conspiracy theory, with all its unanswerable difficulties (see next section).(8) If Jesus awoke from a swoon, where did he go? Think this through: you have a living body to deal with now, not a dead one. Why did it disappear? There is absolutely no data, not even any false, fantastic, imagined data, about Jesus’ life after his crucifixion, in any sources, friend or foe, at any time, early or late. A man like that, with a past like that, would have left traces.(9) Most simply, the swoon theory necessarily turns into the conspiracy theory or the hallucination theory, for the disciples testified that Jesus did not swoon but really died and really rose.

 

[Ben_Masada]

When they saw the Angels of the Lord. Jesus was resurrected that morning and, as God needed no-one to release Him from the tomb nor to open it.

Nice try, because Matthew in 28:1 says that when Mary Magdalene went to see the tomb it was at the end of that Saturday. The end of Saturday is at sunset and not in the morning of the following day. Stop rewriting the NT because it will convince only those who cannot think.

The Angel removed the stone when the women arrived so that they may see that the tomb was empty and that Jesus had been resurrectd from the dead on the third day as He had said He would be, and as the chief priests and Pharisses also said He would be.

Again I say: You cannot tell a Jew about Jewish things. You seem not to want to understand what I am telling you.
If the angel removed the stone when the women arrived, so that they could see the empty tomb, it was at sunset of that Saturday. It means that the guards never had even one night to spend in the tomb area. Can’t you see the fiasco of what you are saying?

Sunday morning actually, as the Gospel states, and the third day, as Christ said He would rise on the third day.

Do I need to repeat the same thing for the third time? It was not Sunday morning but at the sunset of that Saturday. Besides, take a look at Matthew 12:40. It says in there that Jesus would spend three days and three nights in the tomb. Now, try to find three days and three nights in less than 24 hours. But I guess that to do so, you must remove the patches of faith from your eyes.

Again you have even less belief than the chief priests and Phasisees had in Jesus’ statement that He would rise on the third day.

Jesus never said such a thing. It was all fabricated about 30 years later in order to plagiarize the story of Jonas in the belly of the fish. Too many contradictions to be true.

That was why the chief priests and Pharisees went to such elaborate measures to secure jesus’ tomb, remember. The chief priests and Pharisees knew what Jesus had said, they also knew, they said, that Jesus’ disciples knew that Jesus had said He would rise on the third day.

All Pauline fabrications.

As St Thomas said on seeing Jesus again; “My Lord and My God”

That’s not Jewish; therefore, not true. Thomas was Jewish, and a Jew would never call another man his God and Lord.

The guards told what they had seen: The Angels of the Lord appearing when the women arrived. The Angels rolling back the great stone in the door of the tomb with the sound of thunder to reveal an empty tomb. The guards were terrified and became like dead men. That is what they told. That is what the saw.

But they didn’t tell about the resurrection. It means that there was no eyewitness to it. Even the angel was not one, because when he removed the stone, the tomb was empty.

Here is the quote you asked for:

11 Who when they were departed, behold some of the guards came into the city, and told the chief priests all things that had been done. 12 And they being assembled together with the ancients, taking counsel, gave a great sum of money to the soldiers, 13 Saying: Say you, His disciples came by night, and stole him away when we were asleep. 14 And if the governor shall hear this, we will persuade him, and secure you. 15 So they taking the money, did as they were taught: and this word was spread abroad among the Jews even unto this day.

That’s proof that Joseph of Arimathea generously bribed the Centurion, so that the spear-piercing never happened.

The chief priest and Pharisees knew something that you don’t know. They needed a dead body in the tomb on Sunday morning to give lie to Christs’ prophesy that He would rise from the dead on the third day.

They didn’t need that, because there were not three days and three nights.

In spite of all of their safeguards Jesus rose from the dead, and now the chief priests had witnesses to deal with, in the figure of Roman guards, whom they felt the need to pay to get them to lie that they were asleep and the body stolen.

And you are still to prove the resurrection. It was not resurrection that happened, but resuscitation. Jesus was resuscitated and taken care of by Joseph of Arimathea. That’s the whole truth, nothing but the truth.

Ben:

 

[Mike_Dye]

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:

This post makes no sense whatsoever. It is in no way founded in truth. It is founded in idle speculation of a person with an agenda. An agenda that I believe is to confuse the truth, and bolster the posters own doubts, in other words Ben is full of it.
I did not come to this conclusion from this post alone. If you would track Ben’s posts in the past you will find that there is a complete lack of knowledge in all of his posts.
The real question is why we respond to these posts. It is silly to respond. Don’t you know that if you don’t respond that we will be rid of this minor irritation.

 

[adrift]

Nice try, because Matthew in 28:1 says that when Mary Magdalene went to see the tomb it was at the end of that Saturday. The end of

Saturday is at sunset and not in the morning of the following day. Stop rewriting the NT because it will convince only those who cannot think.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Nine pieces of evidence refute the swoon theory1) Jesus could not have survived crucifixion. Roman procedures were very careful to eliminate that possibility. Roman law even laid the death penalty on any soldier who let a capital prisoner escape in any way, including bungling a crucifixion. It was never done.

Your first piece is refuted by the fact that some of the crucified would remain on the crosses even for up to four days till they died. Jesus was removed by Joseph in the same day. High chance that he was still alive.

(2) The fact that the Roman soldier did not break Jesus’ legs, as he did to the other two crucified criminals (Jn 19:31-33), means that the soldier was sure Jesus was dead. Breaking the legs hastened the death so that the corpse could be taken down before the sabbath (v. 31).

Your second piece is refuted by the fact that the leg-breaking method was not Roman but Jewish. As far as the Romans were concerned the bodies could rot on the crosses. If the soldier was sure Jesus was dead he would not have opened an exception to do something that he was not on the habit to do.

(3) John, an eyewitness, certified that he saw blood and water come from Jesus’ pierced heart (Jn 19:34-35). This shows that Jesus’ lungs had collapsed and he had died of asphyxiation. Any medical expert can vouch for this.

Your third piece is refuted by the fact that John the Apostle was not the writer of the fourth gospel, but a Gentile disciple of Paul’s. John was a Nazarene and none of the writings of the Nazarenes was approved into the Canon of the NT by the Fathers of the Church in the Fourth Century, due to their controversial character vis-a-vis the writings of Paul.

(4) The body was totally encased in winding sheets and entombed (Jn 19:38-42).

This does not have anything to do with the issue at hand.

(5) The post-resurrection appearances convinced the disciples, even “doubting Thomas,” that Jesus was gloriously alive (Jn 20:19-29). It is psychologically impossible for the disciples to have been so transformed and confident if Jesus had merely struggled out of a swoon, badly in need of a doctor. A half-dead, staggering sick man who has just had a narrow escape is not worshiped fearlessly as divine lord and conquerer of death.

Your 5th piece is refuted by the fact that to appear alive is not proof of resurrection. In fact, Luke says that Jesus appeared alive for 40 days after his sufferings. (Acts 1:3) After one’s suffering is not after one’s death or resurrection.

(6) How were the Roman guards at the tomb overpowered by a swooning corpse? Or by unarmed disciples? And if the disciples did it, they knowingly lied when they wrote the Gospels, and we are into the conspiracy theory, which we will refute shortly.

Your 6th piece is refuted by the fact that the guards didn’t see Jesus rising, that the disciple who removed Jesus from that tomb, he did it when there were no guards at the site. I mean, Friday evening. And that such a disciple did not lie because he never wrote a thing about it.

(7) How could a swooning half-dead man have moved the great stone at the door of the tomb? Who moved the stone if not an angel? No one has ever answered that question. Neither the Jews nor the Romans would move it, for it was in both their interests to keep the tomb sealed, the Jews had the stone put there in the first place, and the Roman guards would be killed if they let the body “escape.”

Your 7th piece is refuted by the fact that you are not aware of your own NT. Read Matthew 27:60. The same man who rolled that huge stone unto the tomb alone, removed that stone when he returned in that same Friday evening to take Jesus out of there. His name was Joseph of Arimathea. Don’t forget to read Matthew 27:60. It means that the answer you claim has never been given by Romans or Jews was waiting for this Jew to give it.

(8) If Jesus awoke from a swoon, where did he go? Think this through: you have a living body to deal with now, not a dead one. Why did it disappear? There is absolutely no data, not even any false, fantastic, imagined data, about Jesus’ life after his crucifixion, in any sources, friend or foe, at any time, early or late. A man like that, with a past like that, would have left traces.

Your 8th piece is refuted by the fact that Jesus went to Galilee, and according to Luke (Acts 1:3) he appeared to the disciples for 40 days with convincing proofs that he was alive after his sufferings, by eating and drinking with his disciples just as he used to do before the cross. Then, after those 40 days, there was no more use to continue with the group in order not to endanger the lives of many others, including the lives of the Centurion and Joseph of Arimathea, who had removed him from the cross when he was still alive. Then, he left with his wife Mary Magdalene, and perhaps his mother too. Only his Appostles knew where to. But they kept the silence until Paul 30 years later showed up in scene and invented a completely strange story about Jesus.

(9) Most simply, the swoon theory necessarily turns into the conspiracy theory or the hallucination theory, for the disciples testified that Jesus did not swoon but really died and really rose.

Finally, your last piece is refuted by the fact that
Jesus’ disciples found the report of the resurrection a nonsense of an idle tale. Read Luke 24:11 Only later, interpolations were inserted to make up for the blunder to have written that pice of the truth.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

OK. So lets stick to our beliefs and re-state what the Gospel actually says about this:

Gospel According to Saint Matthew

The resurrection of Christ.

1 And in the end of the sabbath, ]when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre.

 

[planten]

** There was an item 9 in the post of Bill Pick as follows:

(9) Most simply, the swoon theory necessarily turns into the conspiracy theory or the hallucination theory, for the disciples testified that Jesus did not swoon but really died and really rose

**.

Could Bill please tell me which of the disciples were there at the scene of the site? I believe all had fled.

Now two three more points whci support Ben:

1. Perhaps I had learnt somewhere that Jesus was laid in an airy tomb soon after bringing down from the cross. He was very soon removed from that tomb to another place, for safety. That was on the same night that followed the crucifixion.

So the original tomb would be emrty very soon. Nobody was there.

1. It was known that a very good physician was at hand. I for get his name. He had brought lot of medicines to heal the wounds of Jesus. Perhaps it was 50 Kilo of herbs.

Does any one apply herbs to dead people?

1. The problem of Mary Magd coming at the tomb at the end of Sabath means she came at Saturday evening. At that time, the Sunday had started. Sunday is the first day of the week and it begins at evening. So the dawn of Sunday would be like our late Saturady evening.

I am more interested whether the body of Jesus was removed very soon from the tomb or not? I had read it somewhere. Also who was that doctor who brought medicines for Jesus.??

 

[Thing]

Nice try, because Matthew in 28:1 says that when Mary Magdalene went to see the tomb it was at the end of that Saturday. The end of Saturday is at sunset and not in the morning of the following day. Stop rewriting the NT because it will convince only those who cannot think.

Amazing Ben. For the first time in history Dawn comes just before Sunset. Its a miracle.

Heres the sequence:
Sunset Friday; Dawn Saturday; Morning Saturday; Afternoon Saturday; Evening Saturday; Dawn Sunday; Sunset Saturday.

1 And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre. 2 And behold there was a great earthquake. For an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and coming, rolled back the stone, and sat upon it.

Oops Thing, what was that again?..

…when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week,…

Dawn Equals Sky Getting Bright As The Sun Rises On A New Day.
Ben Masada:

Nothing of what you have said in this paragraph is written in your NT. You are contradicting your own Bible. The text says “after the Sabbath”. After the Sabbath is at sunset and not Sunday morning.

Sadly it is the other way around, - are you sure you should be lying to me - as it breaks one of the Ten Commandments.
I have done a little research on the subject for you, for your benefit, and I find that bearing false witness if forbidden in the Ten Commandment given to Moses by God. Now it is not my place to tell you, as a jew, how to live your religion, but I think this is for your own benefit.
Ben Masada:

That’s nonsense. Angels cannot be described.
Angels are incorporeal emanations. This is Christian stuff interpolated with the purpose to impress the naives of this world.

Ben:

From Genesis, indeed the angels could be described, they could also talk, wash, eat, etc, etc.

1 And the two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of the city. And seeing them, he rose up and went to meet them: and worshipped prostrate to the ground, 2 And said: I beseech you, my lords, turn in to the house of your servant, and lodge there: wash your feet, and in the morning you shall go on your way. And they said: No, but we will abide in the street. 3 He pressed them very much to turn in unto him: and when they were come into his house, he made them a feast, and baked unleavened bread and they ate:
Ben Masada:

Thing:

The guards told what they had seen: The Angels of the Lord appearing when the women arrived. The Angels rolling back the great stone in the door of the tomb with the sound of thunder to reveal an empty tomb. The guards were terrified and became like dead men. That is what they told. That is what the saw.

But they didn’t tell about the resurrection. It means that there was no eyewitness to it. Even the angel was not one, because when he removed the stone, the tomb was empty.

Ben Masada:

What was inside when the “angel” rolled back the stone? Nothing. The tomb was empty. Great proof of resurrection! An empty tomb is no proof of resurrection.

And the Angel said to Mary at the sepulchre:
6 He is not here, for he is risen, as he said. Come, and see the place where the Lord was laid.

 

[Thing]

** There was an item 9 in the post of Bill Pick as follows:

. **

Could Bill please tell me which of the disciples were there at the scene of the site? I believe all had fled.

Now two three more points whci support Ben:

1. Perhaps I had learnt somewhere that Jesus was laid in an airy tomb soon after bringing down from the cross. He was very soon removed from that tomb to another place, for safety. That was on the same night that followed the crucifixion.

So the original tomb would be emrty very soon. Nobody was there.

1. It was known that a very good physician was at hand. I for get his name. He had brought lot of medicines to heal the wounds of Jesus. Perhaps it was 50 Kilo of herbs.

Does any one apply herbs to dead people?

1. The problem of Mary Magd coming at the tomb at the end of Sabath means she came at Saturday evening. At that time, the Sunday had started. Sunday is the first day of the week and it begins at evening. So the dawn of Sunday would be like our late Saturady evening.

I am more interested whether the body of Jesus was removed very soon from the tomb or not? I had read it somewhere. Also who was that doctor who brought medicines for Jesus.??

1. The Gospels; which are the only accounts of the crucifixion and resurrection do not mention two tombs. Joseph of Arimathea placed Jesus’ body in his own tomb which had been newly made. Joseph rolled a great stone to the door and left. Jesus’ body remained in that tomb until Sunday morning.
   It is possible that Jesus’ body was wrapped in the linen and spices on a rock slab outside the tomb in an atrium before they placed the body on the ledge in the Sepulchre.
2. The Apostle St. Luke is known traditionally as a physician; but the man you are thinking of who brought the spices, 100 pounds weight of myrrh and aloes, and who helped Joseph bring Jesus’ body to the tomb was called Nicodemus.
   The same Nicodemus who came to Jesus one night and spoke about baptism.
   According to John 3:1, Nicodemus was “a ruler of the Jews” and hence probably a member of the Sanhedrin. The Babylonian Tamud [2] and the Midrash Rabbah [3] name one Nakdimon son of Gorion as one of the richest men in Jerusalem at the time the Romans destroyed the temple in A.D. 70. He may be the Nicodemus of John’s account or his grandson.

Does any one apply herbs to dead people?

Apparently yes.

1. Unfortunatly dawn is dawn, when the sun begins to rise.
   The two Marys set out for the tomb early on the morning of the first day of the week, Sunday, and they arrived at the sepulchre when the sun had risen.
   " 2 And very early in the morning, the first day of the week, they come to the sepulchre, the sun being now risen."

 

[swariffin]

No, Swariffin, the crucified could not remain on the crosses during the hours of the Sabbath and festivals. So, Passover included.

Good observation! You have just found an evidence that the gospel writers were not Jewish.

Ben:

Are you saying that Zachariah was not a Jew?

 

[swariffin]

Your own NT itself for the precedence given in Matthew 28:11-15. If you believe that the priests paid a large amount of money to the Roman soldiers to spread around that Jesus’ disciples had come by night and stolen the body while they were sleeping, there is no reason not to believe that Joseph of Arimathea paid even larger amount of money to the Centurion not to allow any more harm to be caused to Jesus.

Ben:

Ho ho ho… Ben. That is the proof that those soldiers really saw something awe and wonder. Do you think those Roman soldiers were chickens and afraid of the apostle of the Jesus? Do you think the Roman soldiers all fell to sleep during in their duty? If those Roman soldiers really were not that dicipline, they would not be able to destroy your temple in 70 AD.

 

[swariffin]

adrift;4850985:

adrift;4846088:

A Review:

Think of a Jew aware of Roman History defending
a Jewish issue and a Gentile who is only desperately trying to hold his non-Jewish religion from not cracking. I think that’s not too hard to see where the credentials are.

If there is a desperate here, it has to be you. When Christianity started, Judaism existed for thousands of years.

No, I am working on your beliefs. Jews are more intelligent than to believe such a slander.** First because when the
guards were set at the tomb area, Jesus was no longer in there.** No wonder when Mary Magdalene soon after sunset of that Sabbath went to see the sepulcher, the stone was removed and the tomb was empty. Second, what night did the guards spend watching that empty tomb if they were put in there Saturday morning and the tomb was empty at sunset? (Mat. 27:62) Last but not least, who would believe in the story of the guards if they were sleeping? (Mat. 28:13) Sometimes it helps to think. You should try for a change.

During those 40 days Jesus never exposed himself publicly. He would appear to his disciples in secret places. Then, you are assuming that Jesus was a celebrity. Many people even in Israel and even at that time had never seen or heard of such a man. Do you find that impossible?

Listen my friend, you should not put too much into this issue if Jesus was spear-pierced before or after he died
because if he died from that alleged piercing, he died of a stab wound and not from being crucified. Therefore, Christians can no longer claim that Jesus died from crucifixion. So, ponder on these
implications. I don’t think your Catholic authorities will approve this trend.

Ben:

How would Jesus was not there? Are you saying that the guards were guarding an empty tomb? Do you think the soldiers left Jesus away after the crucifixion because of the speculation that Joseph bribed the soldiers and fool Pilate?? It is too intelligent to be true.

 

[swariffin]

Ben there is a debate over the dates. The ones who put together the edition you have accept one date that does not mean the Bishops do. You will find a wide range of dates. They are not absolute. The Church does not officially teach any particular date.
Warren H. Carroll in his history 'The Founding of Christendom" says that Matthew was written in 40, Luke 61-62, Mark 55-57 and John he dates to 95. This book footnotes are chapters unto themselves. The dates you quote are of recent history.

Even the Ahmadi believe that the gospels were written hundreds of years after 33AD.

 

[swariffin]

**Gabriel of 12, may I assure you that Pilate was working to save Jesus. That is abundantly clear from the passages of the bibleNT. When Pilate failed to satisfy the Jews, he washed his hands and gave up Jesus to be crucified.

The punishment for balsphemy was not crucifixion. It was stoning to death.

Pilate had secret men working during the Crucifixion. He appointed special persons (Centurian and his squad) so as to protect Jesus. It was the Centurian who had said “Surely, he (Jesus) was a Man of God or a pious man.”

It was the Centurian who gave the verdict that Jesus was dead. The plan of Pilate to crucify Jesus at a late hour on Friday when next day was a big Sabath, that was anothe rgood move by Pilate to save Jesus so that Jesus does no remain on the cross for too long time.**.

The verdict was after Jesus being stabbed by a spear, Planten.

 

[swariffin]

Way to go, Planten! Your point is brilliant. But don’t expect too much understanding because the patches of faith
are too strong on the eyes of the faithful.

Ben:

I answered him. Jesus did not die from the stab wound. Jesus was a dead man when he was being stabbed.

 

[swariffin]

**
I am more interested whether the body of Jesus was removed very soon from the tomb or not? I had read it somewhere. Also who was that doctor who brought medicines for Jesus.??**

You believe that Jesus did not die, so you better answer your own question of the doctor who brought medicine to Jesus?