Archive for the ‘Jesus’ death on Cross’ Category

THE CRUCIFIXION by An Eyewitness

December 26, 2008

With the courtesy of:
http://www.harisingh.com/news2C4.htm

Now it so happened that after the earthquake, and many of the people had gone away, Joseph and Nicodemus arrived at the cross. They were informed of the death of the crucified, in the garden of our Brethren, not far from Calvary.

Although they loudly lamented his fate, it nevertheless appeared strange to them that Jesus, having hung less than seven hours, should already be dead. They could not believe it, and hastily went up to the place. There they found John alone, he having determined to see what became of the beloved body.

Joseph and Nicodemus examined the body of Jesus, and Nicodemus, greatly moved, drew Joseph aside and said to him: “As sure as is my knowledge of life and nature, so sure is it possible to save him.”

But Joseph did not understand him, and he admonished us that we would not tell John of what we had heard. Indeed, it was a secret, which was to save our Brother from death.
Nicodemus shouted: “We must immediately have the body with its bones unbroken, because he may still be saved”; then, realizing his want of caution, he continued in a whisper: “saved from being infamously buried.”

He persuaded Joseph to disregard his own interest, that he might save their friend by going immediately to Pilatus, and prevailing upon him to permit them to take Jesus’ body from the cross that very night and put it in the sepulchre, hewn in the rock close by, and which belonged to Joseph.

I, understanding what he meant, remained with John to watch the cross and prevent the soldiers from breaking the bones of Jesus.
No corpse is allowed to remain on the cross over night, and the next day being Sunday, they would not take him down and bury him early.

The Jewish council had already demanded of Pilate an order to the soldiers to break the bones of the crucified, that they might be buried.

Soon after Joseph and Nicodemus had departed, each one on his sacred mission, a messenger arrived bringing the order to the Centurion to take down the corpses and bury them. I myself was greatly agitated by this information, for I knew if he were not handled with great care he could not be saved, and still less if his bones were to be broken.

Even John was dismayed, though not from fear of the plans being frustrated, for of these he did not know. But he was deeply grieved at the thought of seeing the body of his friend mutilated. For John believed that Jesus was dead.

As the messenger arrived, I hastened to him, thinking and hoping that Joseph already might have seen Pilate, a thing of which there in reality was no possibility.

“Does Pilate send you?” I asked of him.
And he answered, “I come not from Pilate, but from his secretary, who acts for the governor in such unimportant matters.”

The Centurion observing my anxiety, looked at me, and in the manner of a friend, I said to him: “You have seen that this man that is crucified is an uncommon man. Do not maltreat him, for a rich man among the people is now with Pilate to offer him money for the corpse, that he may give it a decent burial.”

My dear Brethren, I must here inform you that Pilate often did sell the bodies of the crucified to their friends that they might thus bury them.
And the Centurion was friendly to me, inasmuch as he had conceived from the events that Jesus was an innocent man. And therefore, when the two thieves were beaten by the soldiers with heavy clubs and their bones broken, the Centurion went past the cross of Jesus, saying to the soldiers: “Do not break his bones, for he is dead.”

And a man was seen rapidly approaching along the road from the castle of Antonia to Calvary. He advanced to the Centurion and brought to him the order that he should quickly come to Pilate.
The Centurion then questioned the messenger to learn what Pilate wanted of him at so late an hour of the night. The messenger answered that Pilate desired to know if Jesus was indeed dead.

“So he is”, said the Centurion, “therefore we have not broken his bones.”

To be more sure of it, one of the soldiers stuck a spear into the body in such a manner that it passed over the hip and into the side. The body showed no convulsions, and this was taken as a sure sign that he was actually dead; and he hurried and went away to make his report.

But from the insignificant wound flowed blood and water, at which John wondered and my own hope revived. For even John knew, from the knowledge of our Brotherhood that from a wound in a dead body flows nothing but a few drops of thickened blood; but now there flowed both water and blood.

I was deeply anxious that Joseph and Nicodemus should return. At last some Galilean women were seen approaching on their return from Bethania, whither they had brought Mary, the mother of Jesus, in the care of the Essene friends.

And among the women was also Mary, the sister of Lazarus, who had loved Jesus and she wept loudly. But before she could pour out her grief and while John was gazing intently at the wound in Jesus’ side, heeding naught else, Joseph and Nicodemus returned in great haste. Joseph through his dignity had moved Pilate, and Pilate, having information as to the death of the crucified, gave the body to Joseph, and without taking pay therefore.

For Pilate had a great reverence for Joseph, and secretly repented of the execution. When Nicodemus saw the wound, flowing with water and blood, his eyes were animated with new hope, and he spoke encouragingly, foreseeing what was to happen.

http://www.harisingh.com/news2C4.htm
I love Jesus, Mary, Joseph and Nicodemus

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

of 32,000+ denominations of the Christians

December 1, 2008

Adding sense to Christianity
http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=4491226&postcount=3

Originally Posted by mark a
The 32,000+ bothers Catholics too, since we are not a denomination. You’ve been on these forums long enough to know that.

What’s the count on Muslim denominations?

Thanks.

Paarsurrey says:

Hi

Thanks for your input in the thread. My emphasis was not on the denominations; though I came to know of the denominations of the Christians in this forum for the first time. In fact every single denomination from the Christian denominations; considers themselves as the truthful Christianity, exclude themselves as a denomination.

If anyone has a doubt on this; then one could ask from the JWs- the only true Christians, as they say or one can ask from the Protestants. I may relax it for the Catholics; as my intention is to unite them in One Christendom; my intention is not to divide them, in the least.

My emphasis, excuse me to rephrase it, was on all such religions that base their faith on the tenet “Jesus died a cursed death on Cross” invented by Paul at Rome when Jesus was traveling to India with Mary his mother.

We Muslims don’t take pride in having largest number of denominations; that pride may rest with the Christians only, if they like.

We stop at the number of 72 to which the Traditional Islam was to divide as prophesized by Muhammad until the advent of Second Coming 1835-1908.

If one as a Catholic believes that “Jesus died a cursed death on Cross”; Second Coming 1835-1908 addressed him to review his opinion. One can refute him with reasonable, rational and logical arguments.

No compulsion, whatsoever.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna.

Regards

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim:

A misconception “Muslims must fight Jews ” clarified

November 26, 2008

http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=4474283&postcount=24

Hi

It is just a misconception of our friend Euharisted that:

Muslims must fight Jews

Quran is the primary source of guidance for Muslims. Islam/Quran/Muhammad are peaceful and humanitarian, there are no instructions from Quran to kill Jews indiscriminately and for nothing.

At least I don’t see any.

Islam is not a racial oriented religion and is not against any race/color/nation and respects every human being. It is only against the wrong concepts.

Please quote from Quran to establish your viewpoint.
I think it were not the Muslims who did the holocaust.

The Second Coming 1835-1908 had refuted such misconceived thoughts; of the CatholicsProtestantsJWs and also of the TraditionalMuslims. In fact, the Advent of Second Coming was necessitated to eradicate such wrong thoughts about Religion. Please read the “introduction” of his book “Jesus in India”: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/intro.html. I only give two excerpts from it:

1. “I have written this book, so that, by adducing proofs from established facts, from conclusive historical evidence of proved value and from ancient documents of non-Muslims, I might remove the serious misconceptions which are current among Muslims and among most Christian sects regarding the earlier and the later life of Jesus (on whom be peace) – misconceptions, the dangerous implications of which have not only injured and destroyed the conception of Divine Unity, but the unwholesome and poisonous influence of which has for long been noticed in the morals of the Muslims of this country.

Spiritual maladies, i.e., want of good morals, evil thoughts, callousness, want of sympathy, are spreading among most Islamic sects, being the result of beliefs in unfounded stories and anecdotes of this kind. Human sympathy, pity and love of justice, humility and humble-mindedness – all good qualities – are disappearing day by day, as if they will soon bid a last farewell to this community. This callousness and this immorality make many a Muslim appear no better than the beasts of the jungle.

A Jain or a Buddhist is afraid of and avoids killing even a mosquito or a flea, but, alas! there are many among us Muslims who, while they kill an innocent man or commit wanton murder, are not afraid of the powerful God, who rates human life higher than that of all the animals. What is this callousness and cruelty and want of sympathy due to? It is due to this – that from their very childhood, stories and anecdotes and wrong views of the doctrine of Jihad are dinned into their ears and inculcated into their hearts, the result being that gradually they become morally dead and cease to feel the heinousness of their hateful actions; nay, rather, the man who murders another man unawares and thus brings ruin to the murdered man’s family thinks that he has done a meritorious deed; or rather, that he has made the most of an opportunity to win favour with his community.” Unquote

2. “Let it be known that most Muslims and Christians believe that Jesus (on whom be peace) went alive to the heavens; both these people have believed for a long time that Jesus (on whom be peace) is still alive in the heavens, and will sometime in the latter days come down to the earth. The difference in their views, i.e. the view of the followers of Islam and that of the Christians, is only this, that the Christians believe that Jesus (on whom be peace) died on the Cross, was resurrected, and went to the heavens in his earthly body, seated himself on the right hand of his Father, and will come to the earth in the latter days for judgment; they also say that the Creator and the Master of the world is this Jesus the Messiah and no one else; he it is who, in the latter days of the world, will descend to the earth with a glorious descent to award punishment and reward; then, all who will not believe in him or his mother as God, will be hauled up and thrown into hell, where weeping and wailing will be their lot.” Unquote

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Mohammed the peace maker

November 19, 2008

Paarsurrey says:

I write on a Catholic Forum. I yesterday wrote a post:
http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=4439238&postcount=6
in the thread:
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=4439238#post4439238

Quote from Charlie Zeiter, a member of the esteemed forum:
“I believe Jesus was crucified and he (Muhammad) denied this historical fact”.

Paarsurrey:

I don’t think that Jesus was crucified on Cross. This is only a mythical concept invented by Paul at Rome; and the Catholic Church only towed his line. History does not prove that Jesus died on Cross.

I don’t think that it has a direct bearing on peace making efforts of Muhammad – the Khatamun Nabiyyeen. Jesus not dieing on Cross and dieing a natural and peaceful death in India is more peace promoting than dieing on Cross at hands of the errant Jews of his time.

The Krishna/Christ Second Coming 1835-1908 has elaborated these points in his famous book:

http://www.alislam.org/library/books…dia/index.html.

1. Introduction: This mentions as to how Jesus not dieing on Cross is peace promoting in the world.

2. Chapter-1: gives arguments from deep study of Bible that Jesus did not die on Cross.

3. Chapter-2: is on the evidence of the Holy Quran and authentic traditions in proof of Jesus’ survival from the Cross.

4. Chapter-3: evidence derived from the books of medicine of that time that Jesus survived death in cosequence of crucifixion.

5. Chapter-4: Evidence from books of history:

SECTION 1: Evidence from ancient Islamic books which contain a mention of Jesus’ journey towards India.

6. SECTION 2: Evidence from books on Buddhism.

7. SECTION 3: On the evidence from books of history which show that the coming of Jesus to the Punjab and neighboring territories was inevitable.

One may read the book as a whole, a short book, or the chapter one feels most interested.

I love Jesus and Mary as I love Buddha and Krishna.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics:

Who started the Christian Church? Jesus did not start it.

November 18, 2008

Paarsurrey says:

I write posts on a Catholic discussion forum. Today I wrote a post on the thread :Who started the Christian Church?by CHRISTINE77:

http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?=4438952&postcount=23

Leaving a quote from the post of the opener of the thread, I give here my thought on the subject which I wrote there.

Hi

I agree with you that the present Catholicism is invented by the deviant Paul at Rome.

Jesus was on his way from Galilee towards India; escaping death on Cross, then Paul seized the oppurtunity and made Jesus’ teacings topsy turvy, in my opinion. Perhaps this was a clever way to avenge his animosity towards Jesus and Mary.

On his journey toward India, Jesus took along Mary and only his trusted disciples; he left Peter and Paul etc behind. They were not, in my opinion, his trusted followers.

I love Jesus and Mary as I love Buddha and Krishna

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi ? a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics:

The *whole* of scripture and the Catholics/Protestants/JWs

November 17, 2008

The *whole* of scripture http://forums.catholic.com/showpost….56&postcount=4

Please ascertain true meaning by taking the Bible (OT and NT) as a whole* as one of our Catholic friends (TomaszA) has suggested in a later post here.

*We have to consider the Bible as a *whole*- TomaszA.

Please excuse me for a little editing of my above post.

I do agree that one should always take meanings that are deducible from the whole Revealed Books; be it Vedas, or Bible (Jews don’t believe the NT; but for Christian, I would be a little or more lenient to include OTBible and NTBible to make a whole) or Quran or any other revealed Book for that matter.

But for the NTBible one should always have following points in mind:

The ultimate truth about Jesus is that:

1. JesusYeshuaIssa did not leave the Word of God or anything in writing revealed on him from GodAllahYHWH in the form of stone tablets as was in the case of Moses.

2. Or anything written by JesusYeshuaIssa himself as a biography when he left from Galilee, after the incident of Crucifixion, along with his mother Mary in search of the lost ten tribes of the house of Israel, he died natural and peaceful death in Kashmir, India.

3. Jesus left nothing behind authenticated by him, in possession of the Church, as there was none in existence.

4. We do respect the NTGospels which have a little account of Jesus life, but it does not have much utility for a non-Catholic except that we may treat it as a book of history subject to scrutiny, internal as well as external, for each bit of event for finding truth in it on merit.

120+ writers

There are about 120+ writers who wrote a sort of history books about the time of Jesus, that could be logically accepted as a historical source and truth could be searched/extracted out of it like we do from other sources of history on merit of each bit of event unbiased.

All these 120+ books must be treated at par but unfortunately some have been selected by the clergy arbitrarily and are known as NTBible while others have been discarded. This shows their bias, in my opinion.

I don’t want to be off-topic.

But I must conclude here that Jesus was a Jew and one of their most intelligent one, apart form his being a Messenger of GodAllahParmesherYHWH.

His duty was only to confirm the OTBible and to enforce its teachings. So logically anything mentioned in the NTBible must be in principle truly deducible from OTBible in unequivocal and straight forward terms. The words/texts/meanings (in NTBible) which do not conform to the usage in the OTBible should therefore be not paid, in my opinion, any worthwhile attention.

This would be against Jesus’ mission set for him by GodAllahParmesherYHWH.

This is my sincere opinion; others are not bound by it, and they may believe freely what they think is the truth with reasonable, logical and rational arguments.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics:
https://paarsurrey.wordpress.com/

He does not beget; nor is He begotten

November 16, 2008

“HE DOES NOT BEGET”

In the Bible, it is obvious that the words, “children of your Father”, have been used metaphorically.

“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

“That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven; for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust”. (Matthew 5:44-45)

Jesus was not a physical son of God. The Bible refers to Jesus as the son of David:

“The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham”. (Matthew 1:1)

At another place, Jesus presented himself as the son of man:
“And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head”. (Matthew 8:20)

In the present day Bible, not only Jesus but also Jacob has been called the son of God. Jacob, moreover, has been referred to as “first born” son.

“And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my first born:” (Exodus 4:22)

Jesus was not a partner in the Godhead, as was not Jacob. Both of them were beloved prophets of God.

“NOR IS HE BEGOTTEN”

That Jesus was born without a father does not make him a son of God in any physical sense. Adam had neither father nor mother. The King of Salem, according to the Bible, was born without father and without mother.

“To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all, first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually”. (Hebrew 7:2-3)

By Aminullah Khan, Ahmadiyya Muslim Missionary, Bradford, Yorks

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/true-christianity-leads-to-islam.html

Jesus is neither Son of God nor God in physical/literal sense but in metaphoric sense as per usage of Bible

November 15, 2008

Our learned friend R H Kelkar, who has translated New Testament into Marathi, a language in South India, has made following observations in his write-up titled “The Meaning of ‘Nava Karar “which could be viewed in entirety at :

http://marathibible.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/the-meaning-of-nava-karar/

We only give here only one point mentioned by him:

The New Testament or ‘Nava Karar’ portrays God as a loving and forgiving father, who sent His son Jesus Christ to this world in human form with an offer of salvation for all humanity.

Paarsurrey says:

The above point is not correctly derived by him from the OTBible; and hence it is not supported by Quran- the pristine and most secure Revealed Book among the Revealed Religions and hence incorrect. God is not a physical being; He has rather created the whole physical phenomenon as He willed. Nobody shares this or other of his attributes. Hence God is nobody’s physical or literal father.

God is father of the humans in a metaphoric sense, nothing could get created without his order/will; and this is the theme of the OTBible. God has no literal wife or He needs no sex that his off-shoots are called Sons of God. This is only in the metaphoric sense otherwise it does not carry any meaning literally and physically. GodAllahYHWH needs no wife or son; this is only a phenomenon of the mortal beings and a sort of extension of life given by the Creator to one’s species. GodAllahYHWH is immortal. Quran is very clear in this aspect:

[112:1] In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
[112:2] Say ‘He is Allah, the One!
[112:3] Allah the Independent and Besought of all.
[112:4] ‘He begets not, nor, is He begotten,
[112:5] And there is none like unto Him.
http://www3.alislam.org/showChapter.jsp?ch=112

We can agree with R H Kelkar if he reconciles to the above explanation.

Jesus did not pay any debt of any human beings as maintained by R H Kelkar. Jesus never died a cursed death on Cross as incorrectly invented by Paul at Rome to misguide the Christian sheep. Jesus was not a scapegoat of Paul and his associated i.e., the Catholic Church.

If anybody has any debt, he shall have to pay it himself. When Paul propounded this philosophy, Jesus was at that time traveling in India, happily among his Jewish lost sheep of which he was also a shepherd. He was never a shepherd of the Gentiles; this is a concept wrongly ascribed to Jesus; this debt Paul shall have to pay for.

OTBible Says:

Son of God

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. JOHN 3.16

A DESCRIPTIVE TERM:
And they made a proclamation in Judah and Jerusalem unto all the children of captivity. EZRA 10.7

Then said he, These are the two sons of oil, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth. ZECHARIA 4.14

Behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial [satin], beset the house round about. JUDGES 19.22

The good seed are the children of the kingdom. MATTHEW 13.38

JESUS NOT THE FIRST BORN SON:

ANGELS
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan was among them. JOB 1.6 & 2:1

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy. JOB 38.7

CHILDREN OF RIGHTEOUS:
That the sons of god saw the daughters of men that they were fair. GENESIS 6.2

THE ISRAELITES:

And thou shalt say to Pharaoh. Thus said the Lord, Israel is my son, even my first born. EXODUS 4.22

And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me. EXODUS 4.23

You are the children of the Lord, your God. DEUTERONOMY 14.1

Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea. Ye are the sons of the living God. HOSEA 1.10

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/biblical/chapter_4.html

Ahmadiyya under guidance of the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 Says:

• The Term “Son of God”

While the term “Son of God” has been used in reference to Jesus, it should be noted that God has used this title for many of His chosen ones.

For example, God, in the Old Testament refers to David: “I will proclaim the decree of the LORD: He said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you’” * (Psalm 2:7)

Furthermore, in a New Testament genealogy, Adam is listed as the “Son of God” (Luke 3.38).

In fact, some may argue that Adam could have a greater claim over the “Sonship of God” because, unlike Jesus, he had neither an earthly father nor mother.

In order to reconcile these references and many others, it is not unreasonable to conclude, that the Biblical usage of the term “Son of God” does not necessarily connote a literal “sonship to God” but a metaphorical one instead.

The Nature of Jesus

This metaphorical understanding is furthered by Jesus’ own words and actions. Jesus is known to have engaged in many human devotional activities such as fasting and praying. But perhaps the most significant evidence is that Jesus claimed to lack knowledge of the future because, as he claimed, only the Father possessed perfect knowledge. (Mark 13:32).

This is especially notable since Christian doctrine holds the view that Jesus’ nature is a “hypostatic union”. That is, he was “fully divine” and “fully man” at the same time. If this were true, then he should have at no point denied his own omniscience.

These, in addition to other philosophical considerations, lead one to question the biblical term “Son of God” and its literal application to Jesus.

http://www.alislam.org/topics/jesus/

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Ask paarsurrey:When did the concept of atonement begin?

November 14, 2008

WordPress has reported today in Search Engine Terms: “These are terms people used to find your blog”, and have asked from me : “When did the concept of atonement begin?”

Paarsurrey says:

The fact is that sin existed from the time the first human being was named a human being. To err is human and only God is divine. The person who errs or sins cannot be God. There cannot be a perfect man and perfect God in one personage, which is only mythical and not real. Is there a possibility of a perfect horse as well as a perfect human? No possibility at all. They are different species.

This is a thing which could only come to the mind of a clever Paul and his likes in others religions. When a religion is mislead and becomes deviant from believing in ONENESS of GodAllahParmesherYHWH, such mythical and paradoxical notions somehow get into their minds. The source of such notions cannot and is never divine.

Some times ago I wrote a post in my blog which I copy paste here for viewers of this blog:

https://paarsurrey.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/the-concept-of-sin-and-atonement-not-based-on-anything-jesus-said-did-or-taught/

The Concept of Sin and Atonement not based on anything Jesus said, did or taught

The Muslim thinking on atonement is broad based and is not literally linked to the story of Adam and Eve as narrated by the Jewish/Christian scriptures:-

• All human beings are born innocent. After birth or more pertinently after the age when a person is mature enough to distinguish right from the evil, every person is responsible for his actions sinful or otherwise. If he repents before God for his sins and resolves before Him that he would not do it again; God in his mercy and in his sole discretion could pardon him. If God pardons then the person is like the one who has done no sin.

• All prophets -the perfect men; are innocent and not sinful and that is why they are chosen by God as His messengers to humanity (from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Jesus, from Krishna to Buddha to Muhammad) all prophets of God are respectful persons and innocent and not sinful.

My present submissions are not intended against the real person Jesus s/o Mary -the perfect human being; but it is intended against the mythical Orthodox/Catholic Christian faith who deify Jesus and present him as Son of God or God. This is solely done to bring such persons to realize the points where they made the mistakes so that they could update their faith based on facts, scientific knowledge, reason and rationality.

I agree on many points with the views of certain moderate Christians who believe that God does not play favorites. He loves all His children equally. No just parent would hold their children accountable for what the children did not know .But unlike the orthodox/Catholic Christians, the moderate Christians do not believe that people who are not Christians are condemned automatically. Their thinking is very close to the human psyche that has not changed much from the time of Adam to date.

To elaborate the point I present what Mirza Tahir Ahmad has stated on the issue:

Muslims believe that all divine books are based on eternal truth and none can make any claims contrary to that. When we come across inconsistencies and contradictions in any so called divinely revealed book, our attitude is not that of total denial and rejection but that of cautious and sympathetic examination. Most of the statements of the Old Testament and the New Testament, which we find at variance with the truth of nature, we either try to reconcile by reading some underlying cryptic or metaphoric message, or reject part of the text as the work of human hands rather than that of God.

While Christianity itself was true, it could not have contained any distortions, unacceptable facts or beliefs giving a lie to nature. That is why we started not with the textual examination but with the fundamentals themselves, which through centuries of consensus have become indisputable components of Christian philosophy. Rudimentary among them are the Christian understanding of Sin and Atonement. I would much rather believe that someone, somewhere during the history of Christianity, misunderstood things and tried to interpret them in the light of his knowledge and misled the following generations because of that.

The reader must be reminded here that this concept of inherited sin is only a Pauline misinterpretation. It cannot be rightfully attributed to the teachings of the Old Testament. There is an over-whelming evidence t to the c contrary in many books of the Old Testament.

In the fifth century, Augustine the Bishop of Hippo; was involved in a confrontation with the Pelagian movement, concerning the controversy of the nature of the fall of Adam and Eve. He proclaimed the Pelagian movement as being heretical because it taught that Adam’s sin affected only himself and not the human race as a whole; that every individual is born free of sin and is capable in his own power of living a sinless life and that there had even been persons who had succeeded in doing so.
Those in the right were labeled as heretics. Day was denounced as night and night as day. Heresy is truth and truth heresy.

From the above, it becomes comfortingly clear that the concepts of Inherited Sin and of Crucifixion are based only on the conjecture and wishful thinking of Christian theologians at a later date. It is quite likely that it was born out of some pre-Christian myths of a similar nature, which, when applied to the circumstances of Jesus Christ, tempted them to read close similarities between the two and create a similar myth. However, whatever the mystery or paradox, as we see it, there is no evidence whatsoever that the Christian philosophy of Sin and Atonement was based on anything which Jesus might have said or done or taught. He could never have preached anything so contrary to, and so diametrically opposed to human intellect.

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/christianity_facts_to_fiction/index.html

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/revelation/index.html

http://www.alislam.org/

Thanks
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

A physician medical specialist by profession in practical life; turns purely mythical in religious life

November 14, 2008

Hi

I have read the article: “http://www.christchurchreformed.com/SwoonTheoryStrobel.htm” written, perhaps by Lee Strobel in which he has interviewed Dr. Alexander Metherell, M.D., Ph.D. on the subject of “Swoon Theory”. It has been mentioned by the interviewer at the end of the article:
“Please email me if you have any comments, questions or corrections.” The e-mail address, I understand, is of the christchurch@christchurchreformed.com and not of Lee Strobel or of Dr. Alexander Metherell, M.D., Ph.D.

Dr. Alexander Metherell, M.D., Ph.D., in my opinion, gives only mythical evidence on: Jesus death on Cross or Jesus’ survival from death on Cross.

The interview is of no medical significance as throughout in the interview Dr. Alexander Metherell, M.D., Ph.D., had failed to bring forth any medical data available with him acceptable to the norms of the physicians, necessary to issue a death certificate. He has blindly towed the same old lineregarding Jesus mythical death on Cross as propounded by Paul and his associates i.e., the Catholic Church.

A doctor/physician is supposed to give evidence, if ever he gives, strictly on the basis of physical medical data of a person. If it is not supported by the physical data, and gives evidence on the basis of a mythical data; then that could be termed only mythical evidence and his own personal opinion as a layman’s only. It is a very strange phenomenon.

How a physician could give evidence without surfacing of any new medical data with him two thousand years after the death of Jesus.

Sometimes ago I read a similar article with reference to The Journal of the American Medical Association, March 21, 1986, Volume 256,Copyright 1986, American Medical Association.

I wrote a post which I think is also valid for this mythical evidence:

What is this American Medical Board; that verifies Jesus’ cursed death on Cross, without a medical data, after two thousand years?

Can a Medical Board verify a cursed death of Jesus on Cross; without an authentic medical record of Jesus?

Can a Medical Board verify a cursed death of Jesus on Cross; from a mythical data of Jesus provided by Church?

Can a Medical Board verify a cursed death of Jesus on Cross; without an authentic historical medical record of Jesus?

Is some Christian Church Medical Board working in the garb of an American Medical Board? True or false!

Such questions and many more came into Paarsurrey’s mind when someone pinged on my blog from the following Christian websites:

http://www.brainshavings.com/supplements/crucifixion/

ON THE PHYSICAL DEATH OF
JESUS CHRIST

William D. Edwards, MD; Wesley J. Gabel, MDiv; Floyd E Hosmer, MS, AMI
Reprinted from JAMA – The Journal of the American Medical Association
March 21, 1986, Volume 256

ABSTRACT

Jesus of Nazareth underwent Jewish and Roman trials, was flogged, and was sentenced to death by crucifixion. The scourging produced deep stripelike lacerations and appreciable blood loss, and it probably set the stage for hypovolemic shock, as evidenced by the fact that Jesus was too weakened to carry the crossbar (patibulum) to Golgotha. At the site of crucifixion, his wrists were nailed to the patibulum and, after the patibulum was lifted onto the upright post (stipes), his feet were nailed to the stipes.

The major pathophysiologic effect of crucifixion was an interference with normal respirations. Accordingly death resulted primarily from hypovolemic shock and exhaustion asphyxia. Jesus’ death was ensured by the thrust of a soldier’s spear into his side. Modern medical interpretation of the historical evidence indicate that Jesus was dead when taken down from the cross.

Unquote

Paarsurrey: I wanted to ask these questions to the websites that had pinged on my Blog, but I could not do so as there was no provision for any comments there.

Is there somebody here who could answer such questions on his own or on their behalf in the matter?

Any peaceful response is welcome here.

I am just a lay man, not a medical doctor, in search for truth.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim