7 replies to this topic

[sereihan]

Here we shall examine the historical documents inside the New Testament to see how reliable is the story of the crucifixion of Jesus (PBUH) and to we shall see that this story is only a fiction story not based on any reliable account! As the Quran testifies:

a) The reliability of the Bible as a historical document

Most Christian biblical scholars do not accept the content of the bible today to be close enough to the original Greek text:

Bible preface of RSV "Sometimes it is evident that the text has suffered in transmission, but none of the versions provides a satisfactory restoration. Here we can only follow the best judgment of competent scholars as to the most probable reconstruction of the original text"

Even the original Greek manuscripts were not written by the disciples who were eye witnesses, they were written by unknown gentile Christians who lived remote from the place& the time Jesus (PBUH) & his disciples lived, though they claim as also other opposing Christians groups claim to carry the true tradition of Jesus (PBUH) & his disciples but there is no true link between these gentile Christians and the disciples of Jesus (PBUH):

New Testament Letters, New American Bible "The genuine letters of Paul are earlier in date than any of our written gospels. The dates of the other New Testament letters are more difficult to determine, but for the most part they belong to the second and third Christian generations rather than to the first."

Gospel & Gospels, Catholic Encyclopedia "the New Testament differ from its apocalyptic and epistolary literature, as those of the Old Testament differ from its prophecy, in being invariably anonymous… Prophecies whether in the earlier or in the later sense, and letters, to have authority, must be referable to some individual; the greater his name, the better... it thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evangelists themselves."

Gospel , The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition 2008 "Though the Gospels of the New Testament are all anonymous, since the 2d cent. they have been named Matthew , Mark , Luke , and John ."
Bible, Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language 1998 "Although there are names attached to most of them (such as the OT Book of Job, the NT Gospel according to Mark), there is no firm evidence of authorship for most of them and little indication of how they were edited into their present forms."

In the opening passage of Luke there is clear evidence that the author is not an eye witness because he was editing previous written materials and that he was not reporting the events as an eye witness and he does not tell us what his sources were? Which makes his writings with unacceptable authority?

Luke 1:1-4 "Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed"

b) Internal evidence shows no eye witnesses to the crucifixion story!!

None of the disciples witnessed the crucifixion of Jesus (PBUH) to report it to us, they all fled& ran away!

Mark 14:50& Matthew 26:56 "Then all the disciples forsook Him and fled"

So, who reported the sayings of Jesus (PBUH) on the cross??

c) Irreconcilable contradictions in the accounts of the crucifixion prove that this story is unreliable!

1-Jesus (PBUH) in the first three gospels, before his arrest, in very submissive way prays to God to save him& shows no indication that he knows that the central part of his mission is to be crucified!

Matthew 26:39 "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup [the cube of death& suffering] be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will"

He actually continues to pray not knowing how the events will unfold!

Matthew 26:42 "My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done."

What would happen if God will answer this prayer? There will be no sacrifice& no salvation! Jesus (PBUH) here is contradicting his Christian mission!

In John Jesus is different! He is very consistent with his Christian mission! He is not submissive at all, he even refuses to pray to God to ask God to save him, in John he says what every orthodox Christian would like to hear, but this contradict Matthew!

John 12:27 "what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? No, it was for this very reason I came".

2- What was the fate of Judas Iscariot? We have two contradictory stories!!

Matthew 27:5 "So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself."

Acts 1:18 " With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, "his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out."

3- Jesus (PBUH) carried his own cross in John (19:17); in the first three gospels the cross was carried by Simon of Cyrene (Mark 15:21, Matthew 27:32, Luke 23:26).

4- Jesus(PBUH) depictions on the cross are inconsistent in each gospel!

Luke portrays him submissive, calm& knowing what will happen:

Luke 23:34 "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing ", (23:43 )"I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise", (23:46) "Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit"

But Matthew 27:46& Mark 15:34 depicted him completely different!

"Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me"!

5- While Jesus (PBUH) is on the cross extra ordinary phenomena happened in the first three gospels:

Matthew 27:45,51" From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land… At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split."

But in the account according to John everything was normal; he missed to report all of these amazing things! Or otherwise, he knew but is not interested in reporting them!!

6- The accounts about the reaction of the Roman soldier are inconsistent!

In the first three gospels the Roman soldier became terrified believer& proclaimed:

"Surely he was the Son of God!"

But in John the Roman soldier did not become a terrified believer proclaiming "Surely he was the Son of God!" but was a confident blasphemer giving Jesus a spear thrust to make sure he is dead!

John 19:33-34 "But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear".

7- The unique story of the resurrected mysterious holy people is reported only by Matthew! Is a clear evidence of fabrication:

Matthew 27:52 "The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people."

Imagine this huge news witnessed according to the author of the gospel of Matthew by many people is missed by all other gospel authors including the great preacher of the resurrected Jesus (Paul) who wrote probably half of the NT! This should have been a great evidence for anyone who doubt the resurrection of Jesus! Yet no one speak of it except the one wrote the Gospel according to Matthew!

We need to know more about these many holy people who came back to life! Did Abraham or Moses or John the Baptist (PBUT) for example resurrect? Matthew gave no account of their names, or what happened to them? What was the fate of those important many holy people?? Did they join the Christian movement? They could have changed history! But the author of Matthew chose to leave it as mystery!

If it is story is true it should have echoed throughout the NT! This proves it is fiction!

d) The empty tomb story& post resurrection appearances

1- Mark's gospel is the first written Gospel around the year 70C.E it is too remote from the alleged event of crucifixion, it was written 40 years after the event, but yet it is the first account of the passion narrative which includes the story of the crucifixion of Jesus!

The original written gospel of Mark does not have the story of the resurrection or the appearances of the risen Jesus (PBUH)! The verses that follow chapter 16 verse 8(called the longer ending of Mark)which include the resurrection story& the appearances of the risen Jesus (PBUH) is all a later addition (interpolation!) to make it consistent with other gospels:

Gospel of Mark in NIV verse 16:9 starts with the statement "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20."

resurrection of Jesus, A Dictionary of the Bible 1997 "It was not an observable occurrence. Hence the gospel of Mark ends at 16: 8 without any account of the act of resurrection or of an appearance of the risen Jesus"

This shows that this part of story is a fiction created to complement the crucifixion story! And shows how these Greek Christians can change the manuscript to support their desirable believe!

2- The empty tomb in the Easter& the post resurrection appearances in the four gospels are inconsistent irreconcilable accounts:

Resurrection of Christ, New Catholic Encyclopedia 2003 "The accounts of the women's visit differ considerably in detail, and the appearance stories in each Gospel are entirely different from the same type of stories in the other three Gospels."

For example, in Matthew the women found the tomb empty, informed by the angel that Jesus (PBUH) was risen& in the way back the women saw the risen Jesus (PBUH) himself, so the women had two confirmations that Jesus (PBUH) was raised from the dead:

Matthew 28:5-10 "The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.” So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me."

But in John something quite different happened, the women ran to the disciples after seeing the empty tomb not knowing that Jesus(PBUH) was raised from the dead, no angel to tell them anything& in the way back they did not see Jesus(PBUH)& instead the women thought that someone has taken his body away!

John 20:2 "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!"

In Mark the women report was also completely different, after they fled the tomb they remained silent, they said nothing to anyone!

Mark 16:8 "Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid"

3- Paul the greatest preacher of the risen Christ fails to explicitly mention the empty tomb not even once! This proves that the empty tomb story is another fiction& legendary story developed even after Paul to support Jesus death& resurrection:

Resurrection of Christ, New Catholic Encyclopedia 2003 "Scholars disagree as to whether 1 Cor 15.3–5 alludes to, or shows that, Paul was aware of the tradition of the empty tomb. His text certainly makes no clear allusion to this tradition. The fact that the Jewish conception of the human person required both body and spirit and that on this basis the Apostle would naturally have assumed an empty tomb, does not constitute an argument for a reference in 1 Cor 15.4 ("he was buried") to the specific tradition of the empty tomb in the resurrection narratives. It seems to be a necessary inference that in Paul's understanding, the apostolic preaching of the resurrection of Christ did not incorporate the datum of the empty tomb".

e) The trial story has indications that it was shaped over time to serve certain agenda.

For example, the statement in Luke 23:17 "for it was necessary for him to release one to them at the feast" was added later probably to unify the story in the four gospels& now taken out as interpolation in modern bibles like NIV& others!

Besides, there is no historical evidence for a Jewish custom to release a prisoner in the Passover:

Barabbas, A Dictionary of the Bible 1997 "Mark and Matthew report that there was a custom to release a prisoner at Passover (John calls it a Jewish custom which Pilate accepted, John 18: 39) but there is no other evidence for such an arrangement."



By Sereihan Alshammari

[Benedict]

Ok in reading the first part I am going to respond to this one bit at a time. I see some inaccuracy in how things are being presented.

[Benedict]

Here we shall examine the historical documents inside the New Testament to see how reliable is the story of the crucifixion of Jesus (PBUH) and to we shall see that this story is only a fiction story not based on any reliable account! As the Quran testifies:

a) The reliability of the Bible as a historical document

Most Christian biblical scholars do not accept the content of the bible today to be close enough to the original Greek text:

Bible preface of RSV "Sometimes it is evident that the text has suffered in transmission, but none of the versions provides a satisfactory restoration. Here we can only follow the best judgment of competent scholars as to the most probable reconstruction of the original text"

Even the original Greek manuscripts were not written by the disciples who were eye witnesses, they were written by unknown gentile Christians who lived remote from the place& the time Jesus (PBUH) & his disciples lived, though they claim as also other opposing Christians groups claim to carry the true tradition of Jesus (PBUH) & his disciples but there is no true link between these gentile Christians and the disciples of Jesus (PBUH):

New Testament Letters, New American Bible "The genuine letters of Paul are earlier in date than any of our written gospels. The dates of the other New Testament letters are more difficult to determine, but for the most part they belong to the second and third Christian generations rather than to the first."

Gospel & Gospels, Catholic Encyclopedia "the New Testament differ from its apocalyptic and epistolary literature, as those of the Old Testament differ from its prophecy, in being invariably anonymous… Prophecies whether in the earlier or in the later sense, and letters, to have authority, must be referable to some individual; the greater his name, the better... it thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evangelists themselves."

Gospel , The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition 2008 "Though the Gospels of the New Testament are all anonymous, since the 2d cent. they have been named Matthew , Mark , Luke , and John ."
Bible, Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language 1998 "Although there are names attached to most of them (such as the OT Book of Job, the NT Gospel according to Mark), there is no firm evidence of authorship for most of them and little indication of how they were edited into their present forms."

Take all protestant Bibles and put them away. The Church has a accurate translation. End of story. I do not care what Columbia Encyclopedia has to say. Give the link to the Catholic Encyclopedia that you quote above. I want to verify its context.

[Benedict]

In the opening passage of Luke there is clear evidence that the author is not an eye witness because he was editing previous written materials and that he was not reporting the events as an eye witness and he does not tell us what his sources were? Which makes his writings with unacceptable authority?

Luke 1:1-4 "Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed"

first off here is all of Luke 1:1-5 [1] Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a narration of the things that have been accomplished among us; [2] According as they have delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word: [3] It seemed good to me also, having diligently attained to all things from the beginning, to write to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, [4] That thou mayest know the verity of those words in which thou hast been instructed. [5] There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zachary, of the course of Abia; and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name Elizabeth.

You do realize this is a letter and is to be written in chronological order. You do realize that this person wirting has to be a scribe. And just because he is compiling accounts does not mean that he did not witness anything.

[Benedict]

b) Internal evidence shows no eye witnesses to the crucifixion story!!

None of the disciples witnessed the crucifixion of Jesus (PBUH) to report it to us, they all fled& ran away!

Mark 14:50& Matthew 26:56 "Then all the disciples forsook Him and fled"

So, who reported the sayings of Jesus (PBUH) on the cross??

You do realize the Mark 14:50 and Matthew 26:56 is well before Jesus was put on the cross don't you. It was in the garden where Jesus was arrested. Yes it does say the disciples fled. It also goes on to say in Mark 14:54 [54] And Peter followed him from afar off, even into the court of the high priest; and he sat with the servants at the fire, and warmed himself. Or how about this in Matthew 26 :58 [58] And Peter followed him afar off, even to the court of the high priest. And going in, he sat with the servants, that he might see the end. So lets get the event correct and the whole context of the story. Not just a picked verse.

[Benedict]

c) Irreconcilable contradictions in the accounts of the crucifixion prove that this story is unreliable!

1-Jesus (PBUH) in the first three gospels, before his arrest, in very submissive way prays to God to save him& shows no indication that he knows that the central part of his mission is to be crucified!

Matthew 26:39 "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup [the cube of death& suffering] be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will"

He actually continues to pray not knowing how the events will unfold!

Matthew 26:42 "My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done."

What would happen if God will answer this prayer? There will be no sacrifice& no salvation! Jesus (PBUH) here is contradicting his Christian mission!

In order for you to understand this passage of the prayer in the garden you need to understand the God nature and Human nature of Jesus. You do realize Jesus prayed several times there. He was pleading with God for another way for it to be done. If there was no other way then God's will be done.
In

In John Jesus is different! He is very consistent with his Christian mission! He is not submissive at all, he even refuses to pray to God to ask God to save him, in John he says what every orthodox Christian would like to hear, but this contradict Matthew!

John 12:27 "what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? No, it was for this very reason I came".

Once again you are trying to prove something from a different event and at a different point in time. To help you with context here is more from John 12:21-30
[21] These therefore came to Philip, who was of Bethsaida of Galilee, and desired him, saying: Sir, we would see Jesus. [22] Philip cometh, and telleth Andrew. Again Andrew and Philip told Jesus. [23] But Jesus answered them, saying: The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified. [24] Amen, amen I say to you, unless the grain of wheat falling into the ground die, [25] Itself remaineth alone. But if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world, keepeth it unto life eternal.
[26] If any man minister to me, let him follow me; and where I am, there also shall my minister be. If any man minister to me, him will my Father honour. [27] Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour. But for this cause I came unto this hour. [28] Father, glorify thy name. A voice therefore came from heaven: I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. [29] The multitude therefore that stood and heard, said that it thundered. Others said: An angel spoke to him. [30] Jesus answered, and said: This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.

[Benedict]

2- What was the fate of Judas Iscariot? We have two contradictory stories!!

Matthew 27:5 "So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself."

Acts 1:18 " With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, "his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out."

This is not contradictory at all he hung himself in the field. then when he fell his body burst open. Not that it is really all that important.

Edited by workingman, 09 August 2012 - 12:38 AM.

[Benedict]

3- Jesus (PBUH) carried his own cross in John (19:17); in the first three gospels the cross was carried by Simon of Cyrene (Mark 15:21, Matthew 27:32, Luke 23:26).

I will leave you this from the Haydock commentary
Ver. 17.
St. John makes no mention of what took place on the way to Calvary, when Jesus, being worn out by fatigue, could not proceed any farther, and they were obliged to relieve him of his burden, and to give it to a man, named Simon, of Cyrene, to carry for him, as is related in St. Matthew xxvii. 32. and St. Mark xv. 21. (Calmet) --- For the honour paid in the early ages to the holy cross see St. Cyril, lib. vi. cont. Julian.; St. Jerome, ep. xvii.; St. Paulin. ep. xi.



You can do further research from the sources provided in the haydock commentary.