Board index ‹ Jesus

[Spandex]

If Jesus is God, then he is omnipotent and therefore didn't have to suffer at all on the cross.

He could have made it so that all he felt was a slight tickling session, or he could have zoned out and watched the entire works of Mad Men until it was over.

We only have his word for it that we went through anything undesirable.

[jimwalton]

First of all, we have historical evidence that Jesus suffered on the cross. Josephus, Tacitus, Ignatius, Lucian, Thallus, the Babylonian Talmud, and possibly Mara bar Sarapion, along with the four Gospels, write of his crucifixion, as does Saul of Tarsus, a one-time hostile to Christianity. John Crossan, a skeptic who denies the authenticity of just about everything in the Gospels, says, "That he [Jesus] was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus...agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact."

Second, Jesus suffering on the cross has nothing to do with his omnipotence. John 10.17-18 say that Jesus volunteered to die on the cross. He specifically refused to use his power to stop it (Matthew 26.53).

> We only have his word for it that we went through anything undesirable.

Third our knowledge of crucifixion, combined with the description in the Gospels, makes your statement false. Flogging was a brutal Roman punishment that tore the skin right off the back, often leaving the intestines and inner organs exposed. Many prisoners died from the flogging itself. Crucifixion is known in history as one of the most brutal execution methods ever devised. Since we have historical record that Jesus was crucified, we have far more than just "his word" that he went through anything undesirable.

[Spandex]

Not if he has complete command of creation. He has the option to not feel anything when he is being crucified.

Quoting the Bible as evidence that Jesus gave up his powers is literally just saying "God says so, so it must be true". Which brings me back to "we only have his word for it."

[jimwalton]

> Not if he has complete command of creation.

You make the mistake of thinking that God controls everything that happens, which is not a biblical teaching. There are many times and in many ways God chooses not to use his power, and there are many times and in many ways God cannot use his power (for instance, to change the past or to act contrary to his own nature in self-contradiction). Omnipotence doesn't mean God can do anything (he can't be self-contradictory) or that God's power is always "on full strength." There are many times God withholds his power. So you can't just assume God has complete command of creation and can't help but overrule and overwhelm anything and everything with his blow-out power.

> He has the option to not feel anything when he is being crucified.

I assume he had that option, but since by his own testimony he came to suffer for the sins of humanity (Lk. 9.22 et al.), we can also assume he didn't opt out of the pain part.

> Quoting the Bible as evidence that Jesus gave up his powers is literally just saying "God says so, so it must be true". Which brings me back to "we only have his word for it."

You must be aware that the Bible is the only place we have any recording of Jesus's words. If you're going to rule out the Bible when asking a biblical question, it would seem there's no sense in asking the question. We only have his word for what he said, but since we have extrabiblical evidence that Jesus was crucified, we have plausible reason to believe he suffered. We may have only his word for it that he experienced suffering, but in rebuttal you have only your opinion that he did not.

[Sonogram]

A) Crossan is wrong. There are many events of ancient history that are better attested than the crucifixion of Jesus which is not well attested at all. And Josephus and Tacitus give historical evidence of Christians, not Jesus.

B) You totally missed OP's point. God has the power to do anything, including go through a crucifixion without suffering no matter how much his avatar is brutalized.

[jimwalton]

> Crossan is wrong.

I can certainly agree that Crossan used a bit of hyperbole to make his point, but I still consider his point to be valid: the crucifixion of Jesus is authentic history.

> Josephus

Antiquities 18.33: "He was Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggesting of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross..."

> Tacitus

Annals XV 44: "The founder of the sect, Christus, had been put to death by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, when Tiberius was emperor."

> You totally missed OP's point. God has the power to do anything, including go through a crucifixion without suffering no matter how much his avatar is brutalized.

This is just the point: God does not have the power to do anything. That's not what omnipotence means.

* God can't do what is logically absurd or contradictory (like make a square circle or a married bachelor)
* God can't act contrary to his nature. He can only be self-consistent and not self-contradictory.
* God cannot fail to do what he has promised. That would mean God is flawed.
* God cannot change the past. Time by definition is linear in one direction only.

Since by his own testimony Jesus came to suffer for the sins of humanity (Lk. 9.22 et al.), we can also assume he didn't opt out of the pain part, which means all the evidence we have (extrabibilical corroboration of his suffering in crucifixion, and biblical evidence of his suffering in crucifixion) leads us to the conclusion that he didn't go through a crucifixion without suffering.

[Laughing]

> Babylonian Talmud

No, sorry the Babylonian Talmud says that he was stoned and puts his lifetime about 75 years earlier that does the NT.

[jimwalton]

> Babylonian Talmud

Tractate Sanhedrin 43a: "Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously the herald had cried, 'He is being led out for stoning, because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy. Whosoever has anything to say in his defense, let him come and declare it.' As nothing was brought forward in his defense, he was hanged on Passover Eve."

The Talmud states he was "hanged," an expression used for crucifixion (Acts 5.30; 10.39).

> and puts his lifetime about 75 years earlier that does the NT.

I don't know where you get this. The reference, please?

[Laughing]

> Tractate Sanhedrin 43a: "Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously the herald had cried, 'He is being led out for stoning, because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy. Whosoever has anything to say in his defense, let him come and declare it.' As nothing was brought forward in his defense, he was hanged on Passover Eve."

> The Talmud states he was "hanged," an expression used for crucifixion (Acts 5.30; 10.39).

The practice was that after stoning they would hang the body for cases of idol worship and cursing G-d's Name. That is why you see both here.

> I don't know where you get this. The reference, please?

That's understandable. Only one of us is meant to be familiar with Jewish source texts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_ben_Perachiah#Yeshu

[jimwalton]

> The practice was that after stoning they would hang the body for cases of idol worship and cursing G-d's Name. That is why you see both here.

Then we have a problem. There was no herald crying out 40 days previous to Jesus' death. He was arrested by suddenly by cover of night and executed the next morning. There is no known public announcement of his death as is here alleged. So though the tractate mentions the death of Jesus as a historical event, we have wonder about the accuracy of the telling. Since it was written 3rd-5th c., we have to weigh its historicity.

> Only one of us is meant to be familiar with Jewish source texts.

Hmm. Sounds snarky to me. I looked at the link and noticed there seems to be more scholars against the idea that this refers to Jesus (Dalman, Jeremias, and others) than in favor of it (Dunn). So your assertion of "and puts his lifetime about 75 years earlier that does the NT" is questionable.