Cross is a symbol of terror/cruelty adopted by the Church

B

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/re-what-use-does-an-atheist-have-for-deities.221068/page-5#post-6119366

Luixxxxxxx said: ↑

From another thread, where I unfortunately can not post:

Deities (in this case, the Hindu Devas) are powerful symbols of certain ideals or doctrines.

It is not only possible for an atheist to make constructive use of them (at least if the misconception that we actually believe in their literal existence as deities proper can be avoided), it is in my opinion the proper way of using deity-concepts, even for theists.

I truly wonder if early theists ever expected people to go to the lengths that some modern theists go.

#94paarsurrey

Sorry, from my perspective, the deities are not real so belief in them is neither useful nor is of any use to anybody, be that person an Atheist or a Non-Atheist, please. Right, please?

Regards

crosxxxxx said: ↑
Is the cross a Christian ashtamangala?
Ashtamangala – Wikipedia

Luixxxxxx said: ↑

@paarsurrey , do you want to comment on this concept?

#113paarsurrey

Cross is a symbol of terror/cruelty adopted by the Church.
Cross should have not been used on the roof tops of the churches or worn in the neck by the peaceful Christians, of course one does not display the device (knife/dagger/sword) with which one’s loved one has been killed. It is most illogical and irrational to use this symbol for a religion. Is it necessary to continue the mistakes of the ancient people?

The scene of Christian God Father cutting throat of Jesus or putting Jesus of Bible on the Cross for imaginary salvation or atonement of the sins of the Catholics Protestants is most cruel form of terror.
I think it is for this that truthful Messenger Prophet Muhammad when he mentioned of Second Coming of Jesus, he also mentioned of rectification of this mistake of the Church continuing it without guidance from Jesus.

Muhammad mentioned that when Jesus Second Coming will take place, Jesus will break the Cross. Of course this would be done by Jesus with rational and logical reasons. Jesus in his Second Coming would expose the tricks of the cunning Paul who invented the Theological Philosophy of Jesus’ death on Cross. Later Church fixed the Cross as the symbol of the Modern Christianity so Jesus in Second Coming will point out mistake of the Church and its false creeds, never sponsored by Jesus at all.

This is my understanding of the symbol of “Cross”.
No intention to insult any people.

Regards

Luixxxxx said: ↑

I am hardly a Christian, @paarsurrey , but I feel confident that for many or most Christians the cross has no terror conotations, but is rather a symbol of necessary sacrifice and transcendence.

“Cross is a symbol of terror/cruelty” 

#196paarsurrey

I quote from a friend here:

“THE CROSS
I grew up in a Lutheran Church, where great emphasis was put on the crucifixion and resurrection. I was never quite sure of what they were trying to get at, so I just forgot about it. One day, years later, I read the bible all on my own, and I got a very different message than that which I was taught.

Everywhere around the world you see crosses on churches. Its a great symbol and easy to recognize. but the cross is more than just a neat symbol, it is the actual device used by the Roman Government to terrorize and control the masses by means of painful and humiliating execution.

The crucified were nailed to a cross in full view of the public and then left to die an agonizing death. Imagine the effect that this would have on friends and family. It would have been horrific and powerful tool. Thousands were crucified at the hands of the Romans. Just another day at the office for them. I don’t know which is worse, Crucifixion or Impalement.

If the method of the day had been a guillotine, would there be guillotines up on those roofs? How about if they executed people by hanging, would there be a hangman’s noose on front of the bible instead of a cross? How about a firing squad, would people then use the phrase, “the guns of Jesus?” What if he were drawn and quartered, or died on the electric chair … and so on.

The cross being an instrument of Government Power, adds a political flavor to the story of Jesus. Would his death carry the same weight if Jesus had fallen off of a cliff out in the wilderness? How about if he was bitten by a poison snake and died? If it were so important for him just die, so that he could come back to life again, then any death would have done. Drowning, eaten by a wild animal, or even Cancer. Any death would have done, but, he needed more than just to die. It had to be at the hands of the government, and it had to be during the busiest time of the year when the ‘Most’ numbers of people would hear, and hopefully talk about it, the Passover Festival.”
Jesus Exists

Regards

 

Thomas certified that Jesus did not die on the Cross

<www.religiousforums.com> <Thread : Gospel of Thomas>

Please click at post # below.

Post #94

Gospel of Thomas

Paarsurrey wrote:

The Church Councils canonized NT Bible unauthorized. Gospel of Thomas is no less reliable than other other gospels.

Thomas certified after the event of Crucifixion that Jesus did not die on the Cross by putting his hands in the wounds of the body of Jesus and seeing and observing with his own eyes that Jesus was in the same body as Jesus was before the crucifixion:

John 20:25
So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”
John 20:27
26After eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.”27Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.”​

Regards

Jesus was not raised from the (real) dead

The viewers are advised to visit the link given below to know the context of discussion and then form their own independent and sincere opinion.

http://aspiretofindtruth.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/begin-the-questioning-on-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection-of-jesus/#comment-73

paarsurrey
APRIL 1, 2014 AT 11:33 AM

@ratamacue0
“If Jesus was not raised from the dead, then what happened? What are alternate hypotheses of what really happened, and how Christianity came to exist?”

Jesus did not die on the Cross to start with; though he was put on the Cross but delivered from it near-dead never the less alive. For further detail, I suggest to read the following small book available on line:

“Jesus in India” by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

Click to access Jesus-in-India.pdf

Thanks and regards

http://aspiretofindtruth.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/begin-the-questioning-on-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection-of-jesus/#comment-75

paarsurrey
APRIL 1, 2014 AT 1:04 PM

@(Matt) Brisancian ; MARCH 15, 2014 AT 9:12 AM
“Recognize the level of the claim and the level of the needed support.”

I agree with you; resurrection from the dead is a big claim and the whole Christianity is based on this; so its proofs and evidences also must be very strong and certain.

Regards

Jesus did not die on the Cross: so “Christianity” in vain

Please view Paarsurrey comments on the blog “Is there a God?” for your valuable opinion, even if you differ.
“Is there a God?”
“Welcome to atheists (and others)”
http://www.is-there-a-god.info/blog/about/welcome-to-atheists-and-others/

http://www.is-there-a-god.info/blog/about/welcome-to-atheists-and-others/#comment-8755

paarsurrey
MAR 07, 2014 @ 21:32:03

Further to my post of MAR 07, 2014 @ 12:28:48 ; I have to state that only sinful Paul knew of his own own fabrication; it is for this that he had to admit:

14and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. 15Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised.…

http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/15-14.htm

So that is the focal point to be discussed here; if Jesus did not die on the Cross then Christianity the invention of Paul is in vain. Then Jesus’ core teachings become clear for those who have been trapped into believing Jesus was god or son of god; into the reality that there is only One-True-God and none else; and trinity is nothing else but idolatrous; it was neither believed by Jesus, nor by Moses, nor by the prophets as declared by Jesus himself unambiguously.

“Is the Resurrection the Best Explanation for the Rise of Christianity?”

There is a discussion going on the Christian “Reasonable Faith Forums” which could be accessed at the following link:

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/resurrection/is-resurrection-best-explanation-rise-christianity-6024196.msg1275224470.html#msg1275224470

Paarsurrey wrote as follows:
« Reply #17 on: Today at 02:13:14 PM »

Jesus did not die on the Cross; so there is no question of Jesus’ resurrection.

“Better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish”

Paarsurrey says:

Jesus did not die on the Cross; he could not die on it.

Isaiah 6:8

In the debate posting Tom said the following: “That sir, is sick! To murder an innocent child so I can get a reward.” I’ve heard others say that the cross amounts to, “cosmic child abuse.” This antigospel is taught in the emergent church movement as much as by atheists. The phrasing – “murder of an innocent child so I can get a reward,” shows a great distortion of the truth of the matter. If it was simply a matter of a reward (an extra goodie), and if Jesus was an infant killed without his consent (like in an abortion, which Tom thinks is okay), then it would be sick! It is just as sick to kill an unborn for convenience sake, but that doesn’t seem to be an issue with the same who make this child abuse claim about Jesus.

As I was listening to the sermon this morning at…

View original post 861 more words

to know why we believe what we believe: “Jesus did not die on the Cross”

I visited the blog<http://withalliamgod.wordpress.com/qa/> and commented there.

The relative posts are given below for the viewers. One may join the discussion on that blog or here to find the truth in the matter.

 

Prayson Daniel

December 3, 2012 at 07:03

Hej Matthew.

It is fine to doubt and lose faith. I were in your position when I were 15-22. The best part of this period is that we start searching to know why we believe what we believe.

I wrote a lot of atonement of Christ in my blog, if you would like to find them, I have a search box all the way at the bottom.

A simple answer is no. By Jesus rising from the dead, it showed that God affirmed His atonement, and that what Jesus claim to be is true is true. I think your atheist friend failed to understand the notion of atonement as described in both old and new testament. When Jesus died a cruel death(not just physical death, but away from God’s presence of His grace and love, to God’s presence of justices and wrath), He took away the just punishment to which those who He came to save rightly deserve. Resurrection does not cancel the payment but affirms it. You could reply to your atheist friend by asking if she understands what atonement is and how it works in Jesus of Nazareth.

Matthew, the only way to keep what you believe is to know what you believe and why you believe. Take online classes on critical think(introduction to logic), buy a book or two on philosophical foundations of Christianity and systematic theology. Doubt is a gift that enable you to dig deep. I would be glad to help you help yourself. Just let me know what you need.

Yours,
Prayson

 

paarsurrey

July 3, 2013 at 17:30

Quoting your words “By Jesus rising from the dead”; I would like to state that since Jesus did not die on the Cross in the first place and he was delivered from the Cross in near-dead position; so there is no case of resurrection of Jesus from the dead; hence, there is no reality in the Christian belief of atonement.

Thanks

 

Ephrem Hagos

July 4, 2013 at 14:23

I submit that there is complete misunderstanding concerning Christ’s death on the cross because of confusion in differentiating between the TWO SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT.

In the first, the Scriptures consistently testify about Jesus Christ’s perpetual demo, a.k.a., life-transforming “vision” of his divine identity and absolute authority, which “not even death will ever be able to overcome” (Matt. 16:18), about which Moses and Elijah witnessed in person at the Transfiguration (Ibid. 17: 1-13; Luke 9: 28-36), which were proved beyond doubt on the ground (Matt. 27: 50-56) and widely acknowledged on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2).

In the second, the so-called “near-dead position” is a speculative variant of the miracle of the apostate prophet, a.k.a., Jonah. (Matt. 12: 38-42)

 

paarsurrey

July 4, 2013 at 17:16

@ Ephrem Hagos

@ Prayson Daniel
The “near-dead position” in real terms is not speculative and fulfills the prophecy of Jesus of what was to happen to him and how the message of one true God was to be spread in future among the Israelites by Jesus.

Jonah was not dead in the belly of the fish and came out of it alive and spread the message entrusted to him by the one true God; similarly Jesus was not to die; neither on the Cross nor in the tomb he was put by his friends after the event of Crucifixion. Like Jonah went to his people after the incident of the “in the belly of the fish” and spread the message to his people; so was Jesus to go to the lost ten tribes of the Israelites who were residing in the region that fall in the present Afghanistan. KPK province of Pakistan, Kashmir; and history confirms that Jesus did go to India.

This way the prophecy of Sign of Jonah was fulfilled.

 

The hoax of Bible being inerrant

Bible is not written by Jesus or dictated by Him; it is written by anonymous and sinful scribes; so it is not in-errant.

One big example of its being errant is its failure to record that Jesus did not die a cursed death on the Cross. Jesus survived and migrated to India. This one example shatters the myth of the inerrancy of the Bible. Just with this truth the edifice of Christianity comes to the ground.

One could view the following documentaries in this connection:

1.        BBC Documentary

 

 

 2.       Jesus in Kashmir (India)-Documentary by Indian Govt.

 

How old was Jesus Christ when he died?

Jesus was though put on Cross, yet he was delivered from the cross in near-dead position.
There are some Muslim traditions which say Jesus died a natural and peaceful death in Srinagar, Kashmir, India, at the age of 120/125 years.

Jesus got a new life after the tribulations faced by him on the Cross. By the grace of God Allah YHWH he survived a cursed death on Cross. Without dying Jesus got a new life; this is a metaphoric usage, in my opinion, in all the language of the world. If one is sick with a deadly disease or faces a trauma in real life, when there is no hope for survival, it is commonly said that that person has got a new life. It is never taken as literal or physical life from the actually dead.

Please see the following documentaries which show that Jesus did not die on the Cross; he migrated to India.

BBC Documentary

Aloe and myrrh healed Jesus’ wounds inflicted on him on the Cross

 

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908- personage of Jesus’ Second Coming- the Promised Messiah notes.

The Promised Messiah says:

A piece of evidence of great value with regard to the escape of Jesus from the Cross, which no one can help admitting, is a medical preparation known as Marham-i-Isa or the ‘Ointment of Jesus’ recorded in hundreds of medical books.

Some of these books were compiled by Christians, some by Magians or Jews, some by Muslims. Most of them are very old. Investigations show that in the beginning the preparation came to be known as an oral tradition among hundreds of thousands of people. Then they recorded it.

At first, in the very time of Jesus, a little after the event of the Cross, a pharmaceutical work was compiled in Latin, in which there was a mention of this preparation along with the statement that the preparation had been prepared for the wounds of Jesus.

Next, this work was translated into several languages, until, in the time of Mamun-al-Rashid, it was translated into Arabic. It is, moreover, a strange result of divine intervention that eminent physicians of all religions — Christian, Jew, Magian, or Muslim — have all mentioned this preparation in their books, and have stated that it was prepared for Jesus by the disciples.

A study of books on pharmacology shows that this preparation is very useful in cases of injuries due to blows or falls, arresting immediately the flow of blood; and as it also contains ‘myrrh’ the wound remains aseptic.

The ointment is also useful in plague; it is good for boils and ulcers of all kinds.

It is, however, not clear whether the ointment was prepared, as a result of divine revelation, by Jesus himself after he had undergone the suffering of the Cross, or, that it was prepared after consultation with some physician.

Some of its ingredients are like specifics; especially ‘myrrh’ which is mentioned also in the Torah. In any case, the wounds of Jesus healed up in a few days by the use of this ointment. Within three days he recovered sufficiently to be able to march seventy miles on foot from Jerusalem to Galilee.

Hence, regarding the efficacy of this preparation it is enough to say that while Jesus healed others, this preparation healed Jesus!

The Books which record this fact number more than one thousand. To mention them all would be too long. As, moreover, the prescription is a famous one among the Yunani (i.e., those versed in ancient Greek medicine) physicians, I do not see any need to state the titles of all these books: I set down below the titles of only a few which are available here.

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch3.html

For fragrance a little quantity was sufficient; but in the garb of fragrances they bought in an unusual quantity of aloe and myrrh definitely not used for the injured or the near dead or for the funeral of a person neither now, nor by the first century Jesus of the time of Jesus. One could google or check/search the gospels for it (Please note, I am not adding any in credulity to the Bible; I am drawing your attention only what has been written in it; since you believe in it; and there is no compulsion to believe in Quran).

I love Jesus and Mary as I love Moses and his mother.