Comments on: Did Jesus even die on a cross?

By: TechnoBrit

TechnoBrit — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:35:46 +0000

Christians trying to find reasoning in their religion make me facepalm. If gays are unnatural then how do they explain talking snakes, a man walking on water, a virgin giving birth and a bearded man who lives in a cloud?

By: Clint Burky

Clint Burky — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 14:07:18 +0000

I read the first 3 comments …. credulous, credulous & asinine.

I think this article is misleading and is a false dichotomy. Instead of trying to find evidence of the device that was used to kill Jesus – shouldn’t they at first get evidence of the existence of Jesus, then attempt to obtain evidence that he was executed, and then go from there? I mean, it’s like trying to investigate what type of food was in the banquet the invisible unicorns ate last Tuesday, without establishing the existence of invisible unicorn first.

By: AT

AT — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 02:18:06 +0000

Any unbiased researcher will find there is no evidence to support Christianity’s rather unique claim that their god actually walked this earth. Rather, historical records demonstrate clearly how the ‘Messiah’ in the Bible is just the latest and most successful of a long line of practically identical ‘savoirs’ – with almost identical stories, often times down to the finest details.

The simple explanation is that the story of Christ is the culmination of thousands of years of astrological sun worship. Born on the winter solstace, dies on the spring equenox and is ‘resurrected’ as the sun appears to be reborn three days later. These are not coincidences, but evidence of how immensly important the solar sycle was to primitive humans. Jesus is basically a modernized sun-god.

Sadly, such simple truths are not widely known. Otherwise we might not have wasted so much of our energy on this nice but ultimately irrelevant fairytale.

By: Keith Pascal

Keith Pascal — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 15:36:04 +0000

My 84-year old father is a Professor Emeritus of Latin and Ancient Greek. He reads Hebrew, too.

Anyway, he has told me for years that there is no evidence that Jesus died on a Cross. None whatsoever.

It really is hard to distinguish the historical from religious, especially if you focus on the fact that
Jesus was born, raised, and died a Jew. All of the “Christian Stuff” was created loooooong
after his death.

Keith

PS And the person who bawled over “The Passion” needs to realize that it was very
inaccurate. Moving, sure … but a representation of … ahem.

-=-=-=-

By: spiderabc1

spiderabc1 — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 23:07:08 +0000

And what is with the artist having nails through palms and feet not wrists and ankles and what made similar marks on the back?

By: spiderabc1

spiderabc1 — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:49:41 +0000

There is a story about a man who we can argue over his place of birth, pronounciation of forename, (and what was his surname?) skin colour, age at death and even cause. People are asked for money and some happy to have questions unanswered. Some written words made years after the apparent death by people who didn’t know him is not proof. Until I have physical evidence (archaeological for example) I doubt his existence. Surprised nobody has mentioned Brian yet. Be funny to see folk worshipping poles.

By: Berber Anna

Berber Anna — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 20:24:02 +0000

I think there probably was a fairly charismatic cult leader named Jesus/Josue with some followers that were very good at PR, as Jess said.

Too bad they weren’t too good at creating a logically consistent story. I mean, come on.
We have an omniscient God, who creates two beings with curiosity and a mind of their own, then creates a garden with a booby trap (aka the Tree) that he KNOWS (omniscient, anyone?) they’ll fall into. Aha, Catholic dogma says, but now we know the reason! He did that so that a few millennia later, their children’s children’s children (ad infinitum) could be redeemed by his son (who was really another aspect of him, like a God in a human suit). Then they’d see how great he was!

Uh, yeah, overly complicated much? That’s bad writing if I ever saw it…

By: Raoul

Raoul — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:00:18 +0000

As it is with all stories .. they change over time … at times .. the end result is pretty different from the original version ..

By: Don

Don — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:55:47 +0000

An interesting take on the whole crucifixtion thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzuxyq3ltls

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ksa5FNQLrA

By: Jess xxx

Jess xxx — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:13:51 +0000

Actually, @Seb is right…ish. There is just as much written evidence to support the historical existence of Jesus as there is of someone like, say, Alexander the Great (The only reason we know of Alexander’s existence is because – similar to Jesus – of some written accounts from people who knew him, and, in some cases, accounts only based on the lost accounts of people who knew him.) But its unlikely that Jesus was any more special than the hundreds of other wandering religious teachers around at that time, who preached very similar messages. What Jesus did wasn’t ‘radical’, he was part of a common movement. And I don’t believe for a second that he was the ‘Son of God’. His particular name only survived because some of his disciples were well educated, and were good publicists.