What do you believe?

[CherubRam]

To add a little substance to the matter, consider,
Rashi comments,

"Our Rabbis said,
All who are stoned (by the court) must (afterwards) be hanged,
for the verse (23) says,
"a hanging (human corpse) is a blasphemy of God."

(Thus, we find that the sins of blasphemy is connected with hanging)
and a basphemer is punished by stoning.

(Consequently, our Rabbis taught that all those stoned must be hanged)
(San 45b)

Then of course the question arises,
what do we put into,"Stoning"?

What do we put into "being hanged out"?

It does not matter if Christ died before or during the hanging. Either way the prophecy is fulfilled.

 

[Robban]

It does not matter if Christ died before or during the hanging. Either way the prophecy is fulfilled.

No mate, you are not on.

You were making a point of Deut 21:23 as a "There you see."

But there was nothing to see.

It is like trying to connect dots that are not there.

 

[CherubRam]

No mate, you are not on.

You were making a point of Deut 21:23 as a "There you see."

But there was nothing to see.

It is like trying to connect dots that are not there.

The English language does not always translate well from Hebrew.

Deuteronomy 21:23 New International Version (NIV)
23 you must not leave the body hanging on the pole overnight. Be sure to bury it that same day, because anyone who is hung on a pole is under God’s curse. You must not desecrate the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.

 

[Robban]

It does not matter if Christ died before or during the hanging. Either way the prophecy is fulfilled.

Well, according to the story he spoke while hanging there,
so surely it must matter.

Unless it is just made up, then what does anything matter?

 

[A_Thinker]

What do you believe?


You become what you believe and your beliefs determine what you manifest in your life.

A ten question questionnaire

Place a bold X by what you believe to be true.


God is a Trinity.

God is not a Trinity.


There is a Hell.

There is no such thing as Hell.


Christ was hanged on a cross.

Christ was hanged on a stake.


The Sabbath Day is for the Jews.

The Sabbath Day is for Mankind.


There are angels.

There is no such thing as angels.


Satan is a real person.

Satan is a parable.


The commandments of God have been done away with.

The commandments of God have not been done away with.


Christ is God.

Christ is a god.


The bible does not teach Annihilationism.

The bible teaches Annihilationism.


Christ name is Jesus.

Christ name is Yahshua.

I like this question ... as it shows how varied christian beliefs are ... among even ardent followers of Christ. I would like to think that this means that some doctrines are not so necessary for Christ followers.

So let's see how I do ...

I believe that the Trinity is the best understanding of the nature of God which christians have formulated to-date. Do I think that it properly captures the essence of God ... probably not.

I believe that there is a regrettable consequence for not availing oneself of God's plan for self-actualization.

I stick with the belief that Jesus died on a cross ... because that's what the Romans were doing in that day.

I believe that the Sabbath is God's provision of REST for His people. I honestly don't believe that God cares about which day we choose to rest on.

I believe that there are angels (i.e. intelligent creations of God besides humanity).

I believe that, similar to how some humans choose to rebel against God, other intelligent creations of God have rebelled as well.

God has a desired expectation for lifestyle for His children ... that of LOVE for Him/God, and for our fellowmen.

Christ is "God with us" ...

I happen to favor Annihilationism. I believe that it has more scriptural backing than any other after-death future for non-saved humanity.

I don't believe that Jesus' name matters that much. I believe that if you call upon the Son of God in sincerity and truth, ... He will answer.

 

[ViaCrucis]

In order for Christ to have fulfilled the prophecy, he had to die on a stake, not a cross.

Again: If Christ died on a cross, then he did not fulfill the prophecy.

Deuteronomy 21:23
you must not leave the body hanging on the pole overnight. Be sure to bury it that same day, because anyone who is hung on a pole is under God’s curse. You must not desecrate the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

Galatians 3:13
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.”
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

And you continue to demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about.

At some point this stops being ignorance and becomes something else instead.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[CherubRam]

I like this question ... as it shows how varied christian beliefs are ... among even ardent followers of Christ. I would like to think that this means that some doctrines are not so necessary for Christ followers.

So let's see how I do ...

I believe that the Trinity is the best understanding of the nature of God which christians have formulated to-date. Do I think that it properly captures the essence of God ... probably not.

I believe that there is a regrettable consequence for not availing oneself of God's plan for self-actualization.

I stick with the belief that Jesus died on a cross ... because that's what the Romans were doing in that day.

I believe that the Sabbath is God's provision of REST for His people. I honestly don't believe that God cares about which day we choose to rest on.

I believe that there are angels (i.e. intelligent creations of God besides humanity).

I believe that, similar to how some humans choose to rebel against God, other intelligent creations of God have rebelled as well.

God has a desired expectation for lifestyle for His children ... that of LOVE for Him/God, and for our fellowmen.

Christ is "God with us" ...

I happen to favor Annihilationism. I believe that it has more scriptural backing than any other after-death future for non-saved humanity.

I don't believe that Jesus' name matters that much. I believe that if you call upon the Son of God in sincerity and truth, ... He will answer.

Your answers are very typical of most Christians. Are you interested in seeing Old Testament scriptures that prove God is not a Trinity?

 

[CherubRam]

And you continue to demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about.

At some point this stops being ignorance and becomes something else instead.

-CryptoLutheran

Wikipedia article
The cross is a pagan symbol that was adored in Egypt thousands of years before Jesus was born. The Roman Catholic Church adopted the cross symbol at least 600 years after Jesus was supposedly crucified. Even the early Christians of North Africa rejected the wooden cross after Tertullian condemned it.

Tertullian confessed that pagans worshipped crucified saviors hanging on a cross.
"Crosses, moreover, we Christians neither venerate nor wish for. You indeed who consecrate gods of wood venerate wooden crosses, perhaps as parts of your gods. For your very standards, as well as your banners, and flags of your camps, what are they but crosses gilded and adorned? Your victorious trophies not only imitate the appearance of a simple cross, but also that of a man affixed to it."
The pagan roots of Christianity are clearly indicated by this confession. Tertullian was a Christian who later became a Gnostic. He implies that Christians borrowed the sun-god myth.

 

[A_Thinker]

Your answers are very typical of most Christians. Are you interested in seeing Old Testament scriptures that prove God is not a Trinity?

I've read through the scriptures a couple times.

I don't recall any scriptures that would prove that God is not a trinity.

Similarly, I don't recall any scriptures that would prove that God is a trinity.

As I said, I think that the Trinity is a human way of trying to understand what the scriptures say about God.

In my thinking on this in the past, I think of the fact that my father and I are both part of the Smith family (for example), while we are, at the same time, two individuals.

My wife and I are two ... and one at the same time.

An organization is one, for instance we are all American, ... but we are individuals also.

 

[CherubRam]

The Emperor Constantine declared the Roman Sun-day to be the Christian Sabbath. He adopted the traditional birthday of the Sun-god, the twenty-fifth of December, as the birthday of Yahshua; borrowed the emblem of the Sun-god, the cross of light, to be the emblem of Christianity.

 

[CherubRam]

I've read through the scriptures a couple times.

I don't recall any scriptures that would prove that God is not a trinity.

Similarly, I don't recall any scriptures that would prove that God is a trinity.

As I said, I think that the Trinity is a human way of trying to understand what the scriptures say about God.

In my thinking on this in the past, I think of the fact that my father and I are both part of the Smith family (for example), while we are, at the same time, two individuals.

My wife and I are two ... and one at the same time.

An organization is one, for instance we are all American, ... but we are individuals also.

Is that a yes or no?

 

[A_Thinker]

Wikipedia article
The cross is a pagan symbol that was adored in Egypt thousands of years before Jesus was born. The Roman Catholic Church adopted the cross symbol at least 600 years after Jesus was supposedly crucified. Even the early Christians of North Africa rejected the wooden cross after Tertullian condemned it.

Tertullian confessed that pagans worshipped crucified saviors hanging on a cross.
"Crosses, moreover, we Christians neither venerate nor wish for. You indeed who consecrate gods of wood venerate wooden crosses, perhaps as parts of your gods. For your very standards, as well as your banners, and flags of your camps, what are they but crosses gilded and adorned? Your victorious trophies not only imitate the appearance of a simple cross, but also that of a man affixed to it."
The pagan roots of Christianity are clearly indicated by this confession. Tertullian was a Christian who later became a Gnostic. He implies that Christians borrowed the sun-god myth.

You might want to take a look at this article ...

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org...on-methods-reveal-the-history-of-crucifixion/

 

[A_Thinker]

Is that a yes or no?

Show me what you wish ...

 

[CherubRam]

The followers of Tammuz also marked the forehead with a cross!

The cross was a symbol of the Roman god Mithras and the Greek Attis, and their forerunner Tammuz, the Sumerian solar god, consort of the goddess Ishtar.

 

[A_Thinker]

Wikipedia article
The cross is a pagan symbol that was adored in Egypt thousands of years before Jesus was born. The Roman Catholic Church adopted the cross symbol at least 600 years after Jesus was supposedly crucified. Even the early Christians of North Africa rejected the wooden cross after Tertullian condemned it.

Tertullian confessed that pagans worshipped crucified saviors hanging on a cross.
"Crosses, moreover, we Christians neither venerate nor wish for. You indeed who consecrate gods of wood venerate wooden crosses, perhaps as parts of your gods. For your very standards, as well as your banners, and flags of your camps, what are they but crosses gilded and adorned? Your victorious trophies not only imitate the appearance of a simple cross, but also that of a man affixed to it."
The pagan roots of Christianity are clearly indicated by this confession. Tertullian was a Christian who later became a Gnostic. He implies that Christians borrowed the sun-god myth.

Also this from Wikipedia ...

Archaeological evidence

Although the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refers to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus. This was discovered at Givat HaMivtar, Jerusalem in 1968. It is not necessarily surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archaeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular individual a customary burial.

The remains were found accidentally in an ossuary with the crucified man's name on it, 'Jehohanan, the son of Hagakol'. Nicu Haas, an anthropologist at the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem, examined the ossuary and discovered that it contained a heel bone with a nail driven through its side, indicating that the man had been crucified. The position of the nail relative to the bone indicates that the feet had been nailed to the cross from their side, not from their front; various opinions have been proposed as to whether they were both nailed together to the front of the cross or one on the left side, one on the right side. The point of the nail had olive wood fragments on it indicating that he was crucified on a cross made of olive wood or on an olive tree. Since olive trees are not very tall, this would suggest that the condemned was crucified at eye level.

Additionally, a piece of acacia wood was located between the bones and the head of the nail, presumably to keep the condemned from freeing his foot by sliding it over the nail. His legs were found broken, possibly to hasten his death. It is thought that because in Roman times iron was rare, the nails were removed from the dead body to conserve costs. According to Haas, this could help to explain why only one nail has been found, as the tip of the nail in question was bent in such a way that it could not be removed.

Haas had also identified a scratch on the inner surface of the right radius bone of the forearm, close to the wrist. He deduced from the form of the scratch, as well as from the intact wrist bones, that a nail had been driven into the forearm at that position. However, many of Haas' findings have been challenged. For instance, it was subsequently determined that the scratches in the wrist area were non-traumatic – and, therefore, not evidence of crucifixion – while reexamination of the heel bone revealed that the two heels were not nailed together, but rather separately to either side of the upright post of the cross

 

[CherubRam]

The mark of the cross is made on the forehead with ash during lent.


Sign of the cross

The Byzantine sign of the cross made with the right hand.


The Byzantine sign of the cross is made with thumb and the first two fingers of the right hand joined at the tips. The third and fourth fingers are closed on the palm.


The Byzantine way of making the sign of the cross pre-dates the Latin style used by the Roman Catholics.


The sign of the Trinity and Cross are both in the right hand.


The Hebrew word for sin is "chet," which literally means "missing the mark.”


The sign of being forgiven.

During the ancient days of Israel, if a person was forgiven in a court, the person would receive a single ash mark on their forehead for everyone to see; that was done in remembrance of Moses’s snake on a pole.

 

[Robban]

Also this from Wikipedia ...

Archaeological evidence

Although the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refers to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus. This was discovered at Givat HaMivtar, Jerusalem in 1968. It is not necessarily surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archaeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular individual a customary burial.

The remains were found accidentally in an ossuary with the crucified man's name on it, 'Jehohanan, the son of Hagakol'. Nicu Haas, an anthropologist at the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem, examined the ossuary and discovered that it contained a heel bone with a nail driven through its side, indicating that the man had been crucified. The position of the nail relative to the bone indicates that the feet had been nailed to the cross from their side, not from their front; various opinions have been proposed as to whether they were both nailed together to the front of the cross or one on the left side, one on the right side. The point of the nail had olive wood fragments on it indicating that he was crucified on a cross made of olive wood or on an olive tree. Since olive trees are not very tall, this would suggest that the condemned was crucified at eye level.

Additionally, a piece of acacia wood was located between the bones and the head of the nail, presumably to keep the condemned from freeing his foot by sliding it over the nail. His legs were found broken, possibly to hasten his death. It is thought that because in Roman times iron was rare, the nails were removed from the dead body to conserve costs. According to Haas, this could help to explain why only one nail has been found, as the tip of the nail in question was bent in such a way that it could not be removed.

Haas had also identified a scratch on the inner surface of the right radius bone of the forearm, close to the wrist. He deduced from the form of the scratch, as well as from the intact wrist bones, that a nail had been driven into the forearm at that position. However, many of Haas' findings have been challenged. For instance, it was subsequently determined that the scratches in the wrist area were non-traumatic – and, therefore, not evidence of crucifixion – while reexamination of the heel bone revealed that the two heels were not nailed together, but rather separately to either side of the upright post of the cross

Does it say anywhere that the feet were nailed,

Were they not resting on a ledge?

What would be the point of breaking their legs?

Just wondering.

 

[CherubRam]

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/59039445091606321

 

[A_Thinker]

Does it say anywhere that the feet were nailed,

Were they not resting on a ledge?

What would be the point of breaking their legs?

Just wondering.

From the cited article ...

Nicu Haas, an anthropologist at the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem, examined the ossuary and discovered that it contained a heel bone with a nail driven through its side, indicating that the man had been crucified. The position of the nail relative to the bone indicates that the feet had been nailed to the cross from their side, not from their front; various opinions have been proposed as to whether they were both nailed together to the front of the cross or one on the left side, one on the right side. The point of the nail had olive wood fragments on it indicating that he was crucified on a cross made of olive wood or on an olive tree.

His legs were found broken, possibly to hasten his death.

 

[Robban]

From the cited article ...

Nicu Haas, an anthropologist at the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem, examined the ossuary and discovered that it contained a heel bone with a nail driven through its side, indicating that the man had been crucified. The position of the nail relative to the bone indicates that the feet had been nailed to the cross from their side, not from their front; various opinions have been proposed as to whether they were both nailed together to the front of the cross or one on the left side, one on the right side. The point of the nail had olive wood fragments on it indicating that he was crucified on a cross made of olive wood or on an olive tree.

His legs were found broken, possibly to hasten his death.

Did he not have hands?