If Jesus didn't die on the cross then....

[MENTION=1098]randomsomeone[/MENTION]

I disagree that it is "extremely silly". There are those that propose that he didn't die and went off and lived in France - the Cathars, certain Gnostics etc. Yet, those that do so do not deny that he was still crucified. So, why the purpose of the crucifiction if he didn't die from it?
And no, I don't want to get into a discussion about whether or not he "factually" existed, was crucified, died, was resurrected etc as that isn't the point of the question.
However, since you have said it is "extremely silly" and very logically pointed out that crucifiction was a form of execution and most likely many people did die from it, I thought I would give a reason as to my asking this hypothetical question.
 
This is my question to you, who says Jesus didn't die on the cross?
 
Well Idk what the point is since he did die. I'm curious as to why you'd ask.
 
[MENTION=731]Hoggle[/MENTION]

Thanks for asking. I gave an answer to this in my previous response to randomsomeone.
I suppose also, given that there are questions like "If a tree falls in a forest, does it still make a sound if no-one is there to hear it?", one could ask "Why not ask this question?
 
brite said:
@Bird

You would probably get more information for that question from Google.
Click to expand...


You're insinuating he did not in this thread.
If I were interested in what google had to offer, I would
have started off asking there. However as this is the theme
of your thread I was hoping you'd elaborate on why you're
asking this question and offer your opinions on what happened
and what the crucifixion was about if not to kill Jesus.
This surely is not too much to ask, mr. advocate.

@brite
 
[MENTION=2926]Bird[/MENTION]
No, I am not insinuating that he did not. I don't know what happened. I wasn't there. I am asking a hypothetical question. I have simply pointed out that it cannot be answered from the viewpoint that he did die as it asks "If he didn't die..."
I have given a couple of reasons for asking the question in my previous responses to randomsomeone and hoggle. And as I replied to Hoggle, really "Why not ask this question?"
I have stated my appreciation of responses received.
 
brite said:
[MENTION=1939]StudebakerHawk[/MENTION] To fully endure the total human experience, including being forsaken by God Context: did die
Click to expand...

To be clear, God does not need anything, it is the human perception of God that is in wanting. Humans need God to become human.
 
brite said:
...@SpilledMilk
Someone asks a question you appear to take offence to, and you infer that they're trolling?
Click to expand...

No, I don't take offense. I just consider the leading question which assumes at least two debatable facts to be reflective of no genuine desire for debate.

Challenge unbelievers to believe in Jesus? How does the question do that? So far, I haven't received any conversions, so you may rest easy.
Click to expand...
What is the point of asking this question then...
Yes, clearly the question is based on the hypothesis that there was a Jesus. I could ask how many floating pink elephants has anyone ever seen, which would hypothesise their existence, without actually making their existence fact.
Yes, clearly the question is based on the hypothesis that there was a Jesus and he didn't die on the cross, which would assume there was a crucifixion on a crucifix of Jesus, and not a stake. Well done. Although I do find it interesting that you state that a word had a different meaning at that time compared to a later time, when really, how could you possibly know?
Err, since I am questioning whether or not Jesus died on the cross, and if not, what was the point of the crucifiction, I find it extremely amusing that it supposedly assumes "absolute truth in Christianity". And no, I don't need to look up the Nicean Council to ask the question, nor indeed to answer it.
How on earth is this question based on the assumption that the "OT and NT God(s) were the one and same"? And no, I don't need to look up Marcionism and gnosticism generally in order to ask, nor answer, this question.
Err, since I am questioning whether or not Jesus died on the cross, and if not, what was the point of the crucifiction, I find it extremely amusing that supposedly it assumes "the Bible is an original, reliable source". And no, I don't need to read Epic of Gigamesh to ask, nor answer, this question.
Click to expand...
...when clearly your responses to my counterarguments basically revolve around "I don't need to [look at your evidence]".

Thank you soooo much for your recommended further reading, but I'll decline, since it clearly hasn't helped you.
Click to expand...
Ditto. Your sarcasm is noted. Maybe you're not really a troll; just a frustrated individual who's wrapped him/herself in the cloak of self-righteousness.

I very much appreciate the responses to a hypothetical question. If it disturbs you, then you don't need to respond. But it cannot be answered from the position that he did die since it asks
Click to expand...
 
brite said:
There are those that propose that he didn't die and went off and lived in France - the Cathars, certain Gnostics etc. Yet, those that do so do not deny that he was still crucified. So, why the purpose of the crucifiction if he didn't die from it?
Click to expand...
Okay, in this case I admit the question you pose is somewhat less silly. :) However, I think the Cathars and the Gnostics, while they may have had a valid idea here and there, were overall pretty silly in their own right.

I guess if Jesus didn't die there was no real purpose, it was just a massive mix-up with the authorities who governed Jerusalem, and that the injuries suffered really bugged him in old age.
 
Jesus died on the cross but if he didn't die, the message of the crucifixion would still be the same - that we need redemption. But without dying, he couldn't suffer the penalty of our sins, and rise from the dead. His rising from the dead offers us the chance to be redeemed by conquering death and allowing to be redeemed without paying the ultimate penalty for our sins and have the chance to live with Him for eternity rather than suffer eternal torment. So, the message of the crucifixion is that we need redemption but without His death, we wouldn't have it.
 
Last edited:
Rite said:
Jesus died on the cross but if he didn't die, the message of the crucifixion would still be the same - that we need redemption. But without dying, he couldn't suffer the penalty of our sins, and rise from the dead. His rising from the dead offers us the chance to be redeemed by conquering death and allowing to be redeemed without paying the ultimate penalty for our sins and have the chance to live with Him for eternity rather than suffer eternal torment. So, the message of the crucifixion is that we need redemption but without His death, we wouldn't have it.
Click to expand...

^^^^What [MENTION=1669]Rite[/MENTION] said, and thus begins the Catholic overemphasis on sin/guilt.
 
after reading the entire thread, i don't think i understand the question. Are you asking if Jesus wasn't crucified at all... then what was the crucifixion about? or if Jesus was crucified and survived the process... then what was the crucifixion about? Or did your question mean something else all together?
 
  • Like
Reactions: acd
oo! OR are you asking if Jesus didn't die on the cross then why was this crucifixion story made up and how has it served the purposes of those that made it up?
OR are you asking if Jesus didn't die on the cross then why did people start thinking he did, rather than thinking he died in any other way (what significance does death by crucifixion hold over death by other means?)
 
Sensiko said:
the Catholic overemphasis on sin/guilt.
Click to expand...
You're right.....pity people glob onto this when the tradition around liberation and connection is equally present, undergirding all. Why do people like to access just the surface, skipping like pebbles across a pond?
 
brite said:
@Hoggle

That would be cheating. What do you think was the point of it, if he didn't die?
Click to expand...

If He didnt die there would be no point or there would be some major changes to the way things are supposed to be in that regard, spiritually speaking.
 
randomsomeone said:
You're right.....pity people glob onto this when the tradition around liberation and connection is equally present, undergirding all. Why do people like to access just the surface, skipping like pebbles across a pond?
Click to expand...

Control.
The Catholic schoolgirl in me remembers the feeling of guilt instilled very early on. Guilt is a very powerful tool to get people to do what you want.
 
You're presuming that everyone here is Christian. That, or people are amenable to religious discussion.

All I'm going to add is that I'm happy this hasn't erupted into a flamewar yet.
 
randomsomeone said:
Okay, in this case I admit the question you pose is somewhat less silly. :) However, I think the Cathars and the Gnostics, while they may have had a valid idea here and there, were overall pretty silly in their own right.

I guess if Jesus didn't die there was no real purpose, it was just a massive mix-up with the authorities who governed Jerusalem, and that the injuries suffered really bugged him in old age.
Click to expand...

Thanks for responding :) (Again, I'll rephrase for my understanding)

If Jesus didn't die on the cross, then the crucifixation was for no real purpose and due to a massive mix-up with the authorities.

"Injuries really bugged him in old age" :md:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top