Jesus cried to God when about to be crucified!

[mark kennedy]

I don’t know what Paul has to do with this, you do know the idea that Jesus was saved in heaven and someone was crucified in his place was directly copied and added into Islamic theology by pagan Arabs who invented the numerous stories of Jesus they got from Gnostic stories and mashed it into the religion now called Islam. Jesus suffered a disconnection with his Father in heaven, it doesn’t mean he didn’t want to die, it just means he was temporarily disconnected and in that moment he felt the feeling of the worlds sins upon himself. He was bearing our punishment and due to his human nature it made him feel abandoned and wrought with despair.

There is another very old heresy that says Jesus wasn't human, he just appeared to be human. In the Koran they teach something kind of similar, that Jesus just appeared to be crucified but had a spiritual body or some such. When Jesus cries out 'why have you forsaken me', that's kind of rhetorical and a fulfillment of prophecy. Indeed he did receive the curse of sin and the anguish had to be unimaginable, but I don't think it's despair. I still maintain it's a cry for deliverance.

 

[Godistruth1]

I already defended the question. I’m not attacking Islam, I’m just replying with facts during your attack on Apostle Paul. Can you possibly deny the similarities between Gnostic sects like Manichaeism and Islam?

By using that logic do you deny similarities between Mithras and Jesus. This is the same thing that we keep doing. I have always told you that its OK to question Islamic teachings but when you bring in the moon god or such lies, I've got lot of stuff against Jesus & Christianity that people/historians claim to be true. Now the reason I don't bring in that is because that's irrelevant. We discuss Quran/sahih hadith and bible.

 

[cloudyday2]

It seems unlikely to me that the historical Jesus said the phrase as some kind of emotional outburst. Most likely either the historical Jesus or some later storyteller wanted to ensure that people saw the crucifixion as a fulfillment of the Psalm.

Mark was written shortly after the Temple and Jerusalem were destroyed and many Jews must have been asking God "why hast Thou forsaken us" for that reason. Probably the Psalm was seen as being realized in the Crucifixion, and then again in the destruction of the Temple.

Mark is very symbolic from what I understand.

 

[Godistruth1]

It seems unlikely to me that the historical Jesus said the phrase as some kind of emotional outburst. Most likely either the historical Jesus or some later storyteller wanted to ensure that people saw the crucifixion as a fulfillment of the Psalm.

Mark was written shortly after the Temple and Jerusalem were destroyed and many Jews must have been asking God "why hast Thou forsaken us" for that reason. Probably the Psalm was seen as being realized in the Crucifixion, and then again in the destruction of the Temple.

Mark is very symbolic from what I understand.

So if Jesus was willingly dying on cross what has been said about him saying why God forsook him might not be true?

 

[Barney2.0]

By using that logic do you deny similarities between Mithras and Jesus. This is the same thing that we keep doing. I have always told you that its OK to question Islamic teachings but when you bring in the moon god or such lies, I've got lot of stuff against Jesus & Christianity that people/historians claim to be true. Now the reason I don't bring in that is because that's irrelevant. We discuss Quran/sahih hadith and bible.

Mithras didn’t die for the sins of the world, I never said moon god, the Islamic god can be any type of god I’m not limiting him to a moon god, he could have been a sky god or rock god who knows... Actually you yourself know the ridiculous allegations you put forth against Christianity are not true, yet you cannot refute any of my claims about Islam except dismiss them as non existent. Either way I have no problem going over everything all over again with you.

 

[cloudyday2]

So if Jesus was willingly dying on cross what has been said about him saying why God forsook him might not be true?

If the historical Jesus actually said those words he was clearly trying to remind people of the Psalm that would show that the Crucifixion was a fulfillment of prophecy.

In the ancient world, the title of literary works was usually the first line. For example, the Emancipation Proclamation would have been referred to as "the four score and seven years ago", because that is how the speech begins. The famous Sumerian creation story "Enuma Elish" begins with those words ("when on high" = "enuma elish"). … So a person in the time of Jesus would have used the first few words of a psalm as the title of a psalm. There were no numbers for psalms at that time.

EDIT: In other words, when Jesus in the gospel said "my God my God, why has Thou forsaken me", the meaning of what he said must be found in the ENTIRE psalm - not just that phrase that was quoted. The phrase was quoted, because that was the TITLE of the psalm. Jesus in the gospel was saying "to understand what is happening here, go read this Psalm."

 

[Barney2.0]

So if Jesus was willingly dying on cross what has been said about him saying why God forsook him might not be true?

Jesus willingly went on the cross and when he took the sins of the world upon himself he was disconnected from the Father, whats so hard to understand?

 

[Godistruth1]

Jesus willingly went on the cross and when he took the sins of the world upon himself he was disconnected from the Father, whats so hard to understand?

From now onwards I will choose to ignore your comments since you persist on lying about islam. For me your post will be like it was not made

 

[Barney2.0]

From now onwards I will choose to ignore your comments since you persist on lying about islam. For me your post will be like it was not made

If there are lies you should have no problem refuting them.

 

[cloudyday2]

If there are lies you should have no problem refuting them.

While we are on this subject, I've been thinking about starting a thread to discuss the early history of Islam as hypothesized by secular scholars (as opposed to the traditional Islamic history). I've been reading "The Death of a Prophet" by Shoemaker. It seems to be very interesting, but I know so little about Islam. Does that interest anybody? I don't want to get into arguments with Muslims though. I just want some more perspective.
The Death of a Prophet: The End of Muhammad's Life and the Beginnings of Islam by Stephen J. Shoemaker

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

“And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46, KJV)

Why did he cry if he was willingly getting crucified & he says God has forsaken him & why does he in many verses calls the father his God since he himself is claimed to be God?

Because.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

If there are lies you should have no problem refuting them.

They call lies the truth, and truth they call lies. They cannot thus refute any lie, nor can they recognize any lie.

 

[Barney2.0]

They call lies the truth, and truth they call lies. They cannot thus refute any lie, nor can they recognize any lie.

They should make people like you president of the United States.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

They should make people like you president of the United States.

Rather more like King David - more experience and wisdom and experiential knowledge how to lead the people, and called and chosen by Yahweh.

But no one honest is permitted to even get elected in politics in the united states for the last 150 years - dishonesty is required and especially protecting the deceiver of mankind.

At least they can't be openly honest publicly and reveal/expose the total corruption of the financial empire at work and the drug manufacturers control over most society.

 

[HypnoToad]

“And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46, KJV)

Why did he cry if he was willingly getting crucified & he says God has forsaken him & why does he in many verses calls the father his God since he himself is claimed to be God?

He was quoting Psalm 22, which contains Messianic prophecies, Jesus was pointing out those prophecies were being fulfilled. The Jews nearby would have recognized what Jesus was quoting.

So he was crying for help! I though God did not need help. This proves he did not die for the sins but was added later by Paul!

Jesus was true God *AND* true man. As man, He could feel pain, He could die (as the account specifically shows). There's nothing in that that "proves he did not die for the sins" - that's a complete non sequitur.

But I thought Jesus wanted to die & was happy & willing? The verses prove otherwise

No, He wasn't "willing & happy". He was "willing" in the sense that He allowed it to happen, He could have stopped it at any time He wanted. But He wasn't "willing" in the sense that it wasn't His preferred choice to do it. Jesus specifically said regarding His impending death, "NOT MY WILL, but yours" (Luke 22:42). None of that requires Him to be "happy" to be crucified.

By using that logic do you deny similarities between Mithras and Jesus.

What similarities would those be?

 

[Godistruth1]

While we are on this subject, I've been thinking about starting a thread to discuss the early history of Islam as hypothesized by secular scholars (as opposed to the traditional Islamic history). I've been reading "The Death of a Prophet" by Shoemaker. It seems to be very interesting, but I know so little about Islam. Does that interest anybody? I don't want to get into arguments with Muslims though. I just want some more perspective.
The Death of a Prophet: The End of Muhammad's Life and the Beginnings of Islam by Stephen J. Shoemaker

The question masihi asked is like saying prove Jesus was not an atheist. People do say it. Now I would not say only Bible is the only reliable source.

 

[Godistruth1]

There's nothing in that that "proves he did not die for the sins"

There is nothing that proves Jesus was not a magician

What similarities would those be?

 

[cloudyday2]

The question masihi asked is like saying prove Jesus was not an atheist. People do say it. Now I would not say only Bible is the only reliable source.

I agree that people ought to do their best to explain why they believe something as opposed to simply asking the other person to prove it wrong - especially if the views are not the norm. Of course what might seem to be a reasonable explanation to one person might not seem adequate to another person.

Of course I tend to agree with the view you oppose. It's hard to know the precise early history of Islam and the Quran, but it's clear to me that the official Islamic history is distorted to conform with later Islamic orthodoxy.

 

[Godistruth1]

Of course I tend to agree with the view you oppose. It's hard to know the precise early history of Islam and the Quran, but it's clear to me that the official Islamic history is distorted to conform with later Islamic orthodoxy.

Do you have any proof to support your claim?

 

[cloudyday2]

Do you have any proof to support your claim?

Just finished reading a book that makes this argument.
The Death of a Prophet: The End of Muhammad's Life and the Beginnings of Islam by Stephen J. Shoemaker

The book is somewhat scholarly, so there is a lot of "maybe this or maybe that ". That's the responsible position to take when there is uncertainty, but it makes it hard for me to summarize the book.

Apparently the early Muslims were somewhat illiterate, plus they routinely burned books when they conquered areas like Egypt and Mesopotamia. Eventually even the early Muslim religious texts were burned so that only the official versions would survive. All of this created a historical gap for the first 100 years of Islam.

The author of this book argues that the "Believers" (as the Muslims were originally called) was an ecumenical group of Jews, monotheistic Arabs, and even Christians. There was no Islamic religion. The "Believers" simply wanted to usher-in the Apocalypse, and they thought that driving the Romans out of the Holy Land was part of this process. Later as the Apocalypse failed to arrive, an Arab religion was created that differentiated itself from Judaism and Christianity.

It's a long book and hard to summarize...