My Opinion: No Piercing At Jesus' Side

[allhers]

allhers;4877158:

To me, it means that Jesus was not the only Jew crucified by the Romans, and what came out of the wounds of the other Jews was also blood and water. And at the foot of the cross was not only the blessed mother of Jesus, but also his wife Mary Magdalene. Don’t forget about that.

The problem with you, Christians, is that you all think that Jesus was the only Jew crucified by the Romans. You need to read Josephus the most famous Jewish Historian of the First Century.

The Romans crucified thousands of Jews in the same manner as they did Jesus. My question is: Does the blood shed by the other
Jews do not count? Does it have no significance to you, for example? Didn’t they suffer the same pain? Didn’t they have nerves to feel? Well, I hope you have got the idea.

Ben:

Well surely you know that we don’t believe that Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ wife. We also know that Jesus was not the only Jew crucified by the Romans. I have read some of what Josephus wrote, even he wrote about Jesus.

One other thing, we believe that Jesus took the pain, sins and suffering of the entire world upon Himself, not just his own like other people do. Surely you’ve also read Isaiah, no?

At any rate, you didn’t answer what I asked so I’ll just ask someone else, thanks anyway.

However, you did mention that there were at least two witness’ at the foot of the Cross now, didn’t you?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

**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.**.

Sir, you gotta stop watching Hollywood mystery movies. Remember Hollywood movies are for entertainment, they are not to be taken as fact or “Truth”. I will put it to you very simply. The Romans did not like the Jews. It made no difference to them if Jesus had his legs broken or speared after his death. The Romans preferred to mock the corpse of Jesus being a Jew. The Centurian gave the order to break the legs, and when he checked on Jesus corpse, he ordered the Spearing of his dead corpse. Now, if the Roman Centurian had any simpathy for Jesus as you propose, but is very unlikely, then his spearing of Jesus body was a merciful gesture, instead of breaking his legs.

You know your theories of the passion and crucifixion of Jesus only support that these events took place. How they took place, you or I can determine this, only to hear it from the first century eyewitnesses, and Hollywood was not around then to go by. So I guesse we are to accept the “Truth” from the Gospel accounts, the Jewish and Pagan Roman historical accounts. Not your mistery guesses.

Peace

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I really do not know who is the confused here. Why don’t you pick up a Saint Joseph’s edition of the New American version of the Bible? The people who wrote those prefaces to the gospels are Bishops from the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine. Why don’t you blame them with all this confusion? I am not the one making up the things here. I am sorry pal, I know how you feel. But I can’t do anything to help you.
with all this confusion.

Ben:

The Catholics biblical scholars are not confused Ben; You are confusing biblical scholary dating of the books with "All Catholics are united in that the bible books as a matter of faith are all inspired of God. Dont confuse this with scholary dates or differences, for the Catholic church is not divided on this because dating the books has no significant bearing on these bible books to be taken as a matter of faith. In my second attempt to explain this, I hope you can begin to grasp of your confusion that the Catholic church is not divided on the bible books.

 

[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:

Ben. Do you seriously think that you arguments are first brought forth by your superior intelligence or has these same questions been asked and answered for the last 2000 years?
Well, They have been asked and answered Ben. Just because you don’t get it why make all of us suffer with your silliness?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

But they were not the Apostles. Those were the converts of the Apostles. Nazarenes, that is, whom Paul would invade their synagogues and reconvert them back into being Christians. They were not eyewitnesses of the Messiah, because
Jesus was not the Messiah. The Messiah of Christianity was Paul. I mean, by proxy.

Gabriel of 12;

Paul was not converting Jews to “The Way”, the Jews sought to kill Paul because he a learned Jew converted to the “The Way”. Paul was converting Gentiles to Christianity. James the brother of the Lord was in charge of the Jews converting to “The Way” and maintained some of their Jewish customs as long they did not hinder their belief in the Messiahship of Jesus Christ. Mostly every Jew in Jerusalem eyewitnessed Jesus coming and going into Jerusalem.

Paul was never conidered a Messiah, only an apostle to the Gentiles because Paul went to the Jews first, but they kept stoning him, and trying to kill him, until finally Paul shook the dust off his feet to the Jews, and went out to convert the Gentiles to “The Way” of Christianity.

Ben;
As soon as we have our Temple rebuilt, you are going to see those practices back.

Gabriel of 12;

The Jews tried to rebuild the temple with the Romans help, but God prevented them. Do you believe God will allow you to rebuild him another temple? when the prophecies have come to pass, that God now lives in the hearts and minds of men and made his dwelling with the human race. Why would God need a building temple when God has made us to dwell in? What good would a building be to God when he does not desire blood of goats and bulls, but a body prepared for by him? Wait this might be to much for you to digest? What would God need a building or temple for made out of stone?

Ben;
This reminds me of the Book of Mormon. A complete plagialism of the Scriptures.

Gabriel of 12:

Yes, it would be if we had a temple where we offered blood and flesh of goats, bulls and other animal sacrifices, that have no lineage to the “Throne of David”, where God has promised his reign will never end, and has not ended in the Messiah, Son of David, Jesus the Lord of Lord and King of Kings.

Ben
This is what Gabriel of 12 says. How about Jeremiah, what does he say on behalf of God Himself? Take a look at Jeremiah 46:28. I will make a end of all the nations to which I have driven you. But of Israel I will not make an end. I will only chastise them as they deserve. Can you tell me again who according to the Prophets are close to disappear? Now, you tell me whom should I pick: Gabriel of 12 or Jeremiah? Not too hard to choose, don’t you agree?
Ben:

Gabriel of 12:

Jeremiah also buried the Ark of the Covenant, and John the apostle located the New Ark of the Covenant, that Jeremiah prophecised about will only get revealed when God shows his Mercy. This my friend is what God has done through his Son Jesus the Christ (anointed one of God). Where there is a new High Priest there also comes a change of Law.

Jesus has fulfilled every Letter of the Law of God, and has brought about the prophetic High Kingly Priesthood according to Melchezideck, this my friend is what the Prophets, the Essenes, Nazerens spoke of; Jeremiah is speaking about a New Israel and a New Jerusalem, where the old one is close to disappearing.

Ben, since when do the Prophets of God ever conflict with each other? Ben; your reading deals with the flesh of the Law and Prophets, whereby my rendering deals with the Spirit of the Law and Prophets. Now which is eternal the flesh, or the Spirit? I rest my case; to understand which is close to disappearing according to Jeremiah and all the other prophets those things of the flesh, will be fulfilled in the Spirit of the Lord.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben. Do you seriously think that you arguments are first brought forth by your superior intelligence or has these same questions been asked and answered for the last 2000 years?
Well, They have been asked and answered Ben. Just because you don’t get it why make all of us suffer with your silliness?

They might have been answered for the last 2000 years by others who asked. Now, our turn has arrived. I am asking, and if you cannot answer, it’s because even yourself do not know that they have ever been asked before.

Ben:

 

[inJESUS]

The problem with you, Christians, is that you all think that Jesus was the only Jew crucified by the Romans. You need to read Josephus the most famous Jewish Historian of the First Century

 

[Ben_Masada]

Gabriel of 12:

Where there is a new High Priest there also comes a change of Law.

 

[Ben_Masada]

.
with or without Josephus, the Bible mentions 2 people crucified with Jesus.

 

[Ben_Masada]

The Catholics biblical scholars are not confused Ben; You are confusing biblical scholary dating of the books with "All Catholics are united in that the bible books as a matter of faith are all inspired of God. Dont confuse this with scholary dates or differences, for the Catholic church is not divided on this because dating the books has no significant bearing on these bible books to be taken as a matter of faith. In my second attempt to explain this, I hope you can begin to grasp of your confusion that the Catholic church is not divided on the bible books.

If you want me to accept your testimony as credible, stop contradicting the Bishops.

Ben:

 

[inJESUS]

joke and fact are things you twist. Fact is that the Bible does not portray Jesus as the only crucified in history. Joke is that the NT says He did not die.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4877192:

Well surely you know that we don’t believe that Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ wife. We also know that Jesus was not the only Jew crucified by the Romans. I have read some of what Josephus wrote, even he wrote about Jesus.

And you have all the right in the world to believe whatever you please.

One other thing, we believe that Jesus took the pain, sins and suffering of the entire world upon Himself, not just his own like other people do. Surely you’ve also read Isaiah, no?

That’s Pauline rhetoric. But about Isaiah yes, I have read a lot. It has nothing in this book about Jesus. But let get more specific and go to chapter 53. If you believe that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah, Isaiah identifies that
Servant with Israel by name in Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4. Take a look at those quotations and tell me what do you think.

However, you did mention that there were at least two witness’ at the foot of the Cross now, didn’t you?

Yes, I did. And it was to his mother that Jesus recommended his wife, and to his wife that Jesus recommended his mother. Being a religious Jew, it would never make sense to recommend his mother to a male disciple and vice-versa. It means
that John was not there.

Yes, there were two witnesses but they never said anything. Therefore, where did the guy who wrote the fourth gospel get the idea that Jesus was spear-pierced? You don’t know, and that’s why I am going to tell you: From Zechariah 12:10 as a plagiarism of something that has nothing to do with literal piercing of one’s side.

Ben:

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

How about a quotation for that one? Because what Jesus said is that he didn’t come to change anything of the Law. (Mat. 5:17-19)

Gabriel of 12:
Sure my friend, I will give you two scriptures for your review;

**Hebrews 7:11 **
8 If, then, perfection came through the levitical priesthood, on the basis of which the people received the law, what need would there still have been for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not reckoned according to the order of Aaron?
12
**When there is a change of priesthood, there is necessarily a change of law as well. **

Hebrews 8:7 **
3 For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second one.
8
But he finds fault with them and says: 4 “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. **
9
It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took them by the hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt; for they did not stand by my covenant and I ignored them, says the Lord.
10
But this is the covenant I will establish with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord:** I will put my laws in their minds and I will write them upon their hearts. I will be their God, and they shall be my people. **
11
And they shall not teach, each one his fellow citizen and kinsman, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know me, from least to greatest.
12
For I will forgive their evildoing and remember their sins no more.”
13
5 **When he speaks of a “new” covenant, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing. **

Ben;
Now, read Matthew 5:19. It says in there that we are all supposed to do exactly the same. To observe every letter of the Law. That’s what Jesus said himself.

Gabriel of 12:

Ben, Ben, did you know the Laws Jesus commanded us Christians to follow fulfill the Law and the Prophets? which are Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and strength, and the second is just like the first, Love your Neighbor as yourself:

To what letter of the Law are you subscribing that Catholic Chrisitans do not subscribe too?

Ben:
Nevertheless, the same Jeremiah says that if Israel ever disappears, the natural laws will cease to exist. Then, general catastrophe will hit the Universe.

Gabriel of 12:

Ben dont you remember when the time ran out for the old covenant in 70 a.d. Also remember the natural catastrophic event that destroyed the temple when the sinners crucified Jesus Christ? All these events took place on a small scale, the final one will take place when Jesus returns again not to save, but to bring eternal salvation to the saved.

Ben;
Since the day Christians started interpreting them according to Christianity.

Gabriel of 12:

Sorry Ben; it was the "Jewish “Rabbi” Messiah Jesus who taught us and revealed all these things to the Catholic church; Here is Jesus speaking after his resurrection;

Luke24:26
Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer 8 these things and enter into his glory?"
27
Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in **all **the scriptures.

Ben:
That’s not what Jesus said. When he confirmed the Law, he meant literally according to the letter. (Mat. 5:17-19)

Gabriel of 12:
And yeeaas, Jesus fulfilled both the Law and the Prophets according to the letter, Jesus did not abolish them. What part do you need more clarification on?

Here is Paul a Jewish Lawyer of the Law: He can explain the Hebrew principle of the Spirit and the flesh alot better than I can;

1Cor.2:10
this God has revealed to us through the Spirit.**For the Spirit scrutinizes everything, even the depths of God. **
11
Among human beings, who knows what pertains to a person except the spirit of the person that is within? **Similarly, no one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God. **
12
**We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God. **
13
And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms.
14
**Now the natural person 8 does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually. **
15
The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgment 9 by anyone.
16
For “who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to counsel him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

 

[Ben_Masada]

joke and fact are things you twist. Fact is that the Bible does not portray Jesus as the only crucified in history. Joke is that the NT says He did not die.

He died. Who said that he did not die? It’s just that he did not die on the cross. He survived the cross. The problem is that the patches of your faith are so tight on your eyes that you can’t see the evidences given by Luke himself in Acts 1:1-3 He even enhances the fact that Jesus showed by many convincing ways after his sufferings that he was alive just like anyone else, eating and drinking and etcetera. “After his suffering” does not mean that he died or resurrected. Sometimes it pays to think.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

How about a quotation for that one? Because what Jesus said is that he didn’t come to change anything of the Law. (Mat. 5:17-19)

Gabriel of 12:
Sure my friend, I will give you two scriptures for your review;

**Hebrews 7:11 **
8 If, then, perfection came through the levitical priesthood, on the basis of which the people received the law, what need would there still have been for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not reckoned according to the order of Aaron?
12
**When there is a change of priesthood, there is necessarily a change of law as well. **

All the above is Pauline rhetoric. Don’t forget that Paul was an apostate from Judaism when he decided to found Christianity. In fact, Paul contradicted Jesus himself with regards to the Law. Jesus said he didn’t come to abolish and Paul insisted that he did as if Jesus was lying. Read Ephesians 2:15.

Ben;
Now, read Matthew 5:19. It says in there that we are all supposed to do exactly the same. To observe every letter of the Law. That’s what Jesus said himself.

Gabriel of 12:

Ben, Ben, did you know the Laws Jesus commanded us Christians to follow fulfill the Law and the Prophets? which are Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and strength, and the second is just like the first, Love your Neighbor as yourself:

Jesus never commanded Christians anything. Christians started about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. The only obligation of Christians is to observe the Noahite laws.

Ben:
Nevertheless, the same Jeremiah says that if Israel ever disappears, the natural laws will cease to exist. Then, general catastrophe will hit the Universe.

Gabriel of 12:

Ben dont you remember when the time ran out for the old covenant in 70 a.d. Also remember the natural catastrophic event that destroyed the temple when the sinners crucified Jesus Christ? All these events took place on a small scale, the final one will take place when Jesus returns again not to save, but to bring eternal salvation to the saved.

You are completely out of tune with reality. The
The Covenant of God with Israel is as eternal as the natural laws.

Ben;
Since the day Christians started interpreting them according to Christianity.

Gabriel of 12:

Sorry Ben; it was the "Jewish “Rabbi” Messiah Jesus who taught us and revealed all these things to the Catholic church; Here is Jesus speaking after his resurrection;

Luke24:26
Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer 8 these things and enter into his glory?"
27
Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in **all **the scriptures.

Ben:
That’s not what Jesus said. When he confirmed the Law, he meant literally according to the letter. (Mat. 5:17-19)

Gabriel of 12:
And yeeaas, Jesus fulfilled both the Law and the Prophets according to the letter, Jesus did not abolish them. What part do you need more clarification on?

Here is Paul a Jewish Lawyer of the Law: He can explain the Hebrew principle of the Spirit and the flesh alot better than I can;

1Cor.2:10
this God has revealed to us through the Spirit.**For the Spirit scrutinizes everything, even the depths of God. **
11
Among human beings, who knows what pertains to a person except the spirit of the person that is within? **Similarly, no one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God. **
12
**We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God. **
13
And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms.
14
**Now the natural person 8 does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually. **
15
The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgment 9 by anyone.
16
For “who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to counsel him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

 

[ralphinal]

Just one was a Historian, Josephus. Rashi was a Bible Commentator; and Maimonides was a Jewish Philosopher.

And they all write about Joseph bribing guards?

And what does it give to you, the right to teach something that tempers with Judaism and to expect that a Jew will settle for it?

I think you need to see how the two faiths ended up separate. Gentile converts to Judaism did not have to follow the law. Jewish ones did. You guys kicked us out when we would not get destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. following a false messiah. After that, we were no longer a Jewish sect.

You can count them with the fingers of your hand.

Ben:

I live in Alabama. I only know about 30 Jewish people. Of them, a good dozen are outirght goofy. Another five or so no little of thier faith. Simply being Jewish does not mean you are mentally superior, no matter what your mother tells you

 

[Valke2]

inJESUS;4877278:

He died. Who said that he did not die? It’s just that he did not die on the cross. He survived the cross. The problem is that the patches of your faith are so tight on your eyes that you can’t see the evidences given by Luke himself in Acts 1:1-3 He even enhances the fact that Jesus showed by many convincing ways after his sufferings that he was alive just like anyone else, eating and drinking and etcetera. “After his suffering” does not mean that he died or resurrected. Sometimes it pays to think.

Even if one were to believe Jesus survived crucifixion and the torture that preceded it, how would you explain (assuming that you don’t believe Jesus is divine) that he not only survived but appeared good as new for a luncheon date with his followers?

I’m a little older than Jesus was when he was crucified. But I’m more or less healthy. I played two hours of tennis yesterday and my shoulder hurts and I’m limping a little from a sore knee. I would imagine that if instead of playing tennis, I let someone whip me mercilessly and then drive nails through my hands and feet and leave me hanging on a stake for a few hours, that people might notice that I was a little worse for wear for the next few days.

 

[LilyM]

Ben Masada;4877310:

inJESUS;4877278:

Even if one were to believe Jesus survived crucifixion and the torture that preceded it, how would you explain (assuming that you don’t believe Jesus is divine) that he not only survived but appeared good as new for a luncheon date with his followers?

I’m a little older than Jesus was when he was crucified. But I’m more or less healthy. I played two hours of tennis yesterday and my shoulder hurts and I’m limping a little from a sore knee. I would imagine that if instead of playing tennis, I let someone whip me mercilessly and then drive nails through my hands and feet and leave me hanging on a stake for a few hours, that people might notice that I was a little worse for wear for the next few days.

Thank you, Valke. A bit of common sense prevails at last.

 

[Ben_Masada]

And they all write about Joseph bribing guards?

No, but the guy who wrote the first gospel does. He says the Jewish priests bribed the guards with a large amount of money, and nobody asks him to prove his theory. (Mat. 28:11-19) Why do I have to prove that Joseph of Arimathea bribed the guards in the Calvary?

I think you need to see how the two faiths ended up separate. The Gentiles did not have to follow the law. Jewish ones did. You guys kicked us out when we would not get destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. following a false messiah. After that, we were no longer a Jewish sect.

When Gentiles convert to Judaism, they are no longer Gentiles but Jews. What false messiah was this in 70 CE?
I don’t get it. Was there a messiah in 70? Christianity was never a Jewish sect. Christianity was born already a Gentile religion…

I live in Alabama. I only know about 30 Jewish people. Of them, a good dozen are outirght goofy. Another five or so no little of thier faith. Simply being Jewish does not mean you are mentally superior, no matter what your mother tells you

How do you explain that God chose the most stupid People on earth?

Ben:

 

[firstmode]

Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?, a Jewish historian) mentions John the Baptist and Herod - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 5, par. 2​

1. “Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness.”

Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions Jesus - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 3, par. 3.​

1. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
   1. There is debate among scholars as to the authenticity of this quote since it is so favorable to Jesus. For more information on this, please see Regarding the quotes from the historian Josephus about Jesus

Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions James, the brother of Jesus - Antiquities, Book 20, ch. 9.​

1. “Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done.”