The Empty Tomb

[edge]

Well of course devotional crucifixion is a much milder version compared to an actual Roman scurging and crucifixion, but then again, you've only cited just one person among many that have survived crucifixions. I'd also point out that the Romans did apparently use a 'hypopodium' (foot support) in crucifixions, in order to prolong a victim's suffering. But, putting the devotional crucifixions aside for a moment, the Romans were apparently very good at keeping a crucifixion victim alive for quite a long time, probably in order to get the maximum of suffering out of them. It would often take up to a few days for them to die, yet Jesus is said to have 'died' relatively shortly after being nailed to the cross.
His legs were not broken because he was apparently already considered to be dead by people who may either have been mistaken or could possibly even have been followers of Jesus themselves and were attempting to save him. The piercing of his side is reported only in the Gospel of John and not in any of the Synoptic Gospels, and it's also worth pointing out that the Gospel of John is considered to be the last of the four biblical Gospels to be written, often contradicts the three Synoptic Gospels, is generaly dated to around 100 AD and the majority of New Testament scholars do not believe that John or one of the Apostles actualy wrote it, so the piercing of Jesus side could very easily be completely ficticious, but that said, even if it did happen, all that the Gospel of John says about it is;

"One of the soldiers pierced his side with a lance, and immediately there came out blood and water."
—John 19:34

...which obviously tells us very little about the seriousness of this wound, if it even happened.

Then of course we have the evidence from Josephus (kindly provided by Craig B earlier in the conversation) which says;

"as I [Josephus] came back, I saw many captives crucified; and remembered three of them as my former acquaintance. I was very sorry at this in my mind, and went with tears in my eyes to [Roman general, later Emperor] Titus, and told him of them; so he immediately commanded them to be taken down, and to have the greatest care taken of them, in order to their recovery; yet two of them died under the physician’s hands, while the third recovered."

Wouldn't you agree that this is a period historical record of a person 'surviving' a Roman crucifixion?
If you do agree, doesn't that make it a possibility that Jesus also survived being crucified?
If it does make that a possibility, doesn't it make more rational sense to consider that he possibly survived his crucifixion rather than believing that he died and miraculously came back to life three days later?

In yellow:
Well you guys brought it up?
You say they used this, 'hypopodium' yes they sometimes used one but it was at an angle. They crucified people in many different postures also as mockery or parody.
Skeptics in the past argued over the water coming out of the wound in a crucifixion event, they said this against the idea as: highly improbable, till modern forensics proved it to actually be a quit accurate statement if a person is pierced in this way on a cross. So you have to ask yourself how they knew that back then when we had to actually figure that part out with today’s science unless witnessed by them directly? This is one of the only times they used a spear instead of breaking the leg bones as far as they knew or we know. The thing that I give them is they were scared, horrified that their leader was killed so brutally and the fact that they thought they might be next may account for addendums and writing these things down later.

The evidence from Josephus doesn't matter it was 66 to 100 years later.
The two that were crucified next to Christ didn't take the same beating and either one of them could have been taken down and saved.

Judas also wanted that but that is not what happened and he could not force Christ’s hand to do so. But I can safely say he watched the whole ordeal to see if indeed did so. you have to remember that the Romans were pushed to finish this because of the time of the week and at this time there were these strange weather and earth related things happening, they only broke the legs of those still appearing alive, it is written that Jesus already appeared dead he probably passed out so they stabbed him to be sure.
These solders had done these crucifixion thousands of times and they knew without a doubt when a person was dead. The way I see it is they were sadistic and wanted to make the victims suffer while alive so the order of the day would have been the rules they followed. So it might have went like this:
Those two are still alive, protocol says break their legs but this one is dead so make sure and stick him and let’s see.

 

[Craig B]

... The evidence from Josephus doesn't matter it was 66 to 100 years later.

The later Gospels are at that distance from Jesus. Anyway it's hard to believe that the Romans changed their crucifixion practices in those years.

you have to remember that the Romans were pushed to finish this because of the time of the week and at this time there were these strange weather and earth related things happening,

Can you please tell me what strange things, and what is your source of information about them.

 

[edge]

Replying to a question of mine about Judas Iscariot's death


Thanks for the answer, edge.
This idea is new to me and yes, I'd like to learn more about it.
Could you post up the specific verses you feel point to these possibilities, please?

I copied from that post: But then again... There’s this from John:
Quote:
20 Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” 21 Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, “But Lord, what about this man?”
22 Jesus said to him, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.”
23 Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?”
It seems to me that Judas is still around; he had to do his part. I think he was even forgiven and it’s possible his death was contrived for his own protection.
Then this: Quote:
24 This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.
25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.

It is obvious the writer talking about Judas. I think that if Jesus didn't walk out of the grave that Judas would have blown the whistle and we wouldn't be here today talking about this. But first Judas thought that it wouldn't even go that far before Jesus did something drastic.
Judas watched the whole event because he was waiting for Jesus to rid them of their enemies, but that's not what happened.
He also knew about the prophesies and that Jesus emphasized that one in particular and hung around, (Pun not intended) to at least see if that part was true and maybe then Jesus would punish their enemies, but that didn't happen either at this point Jesus set him straight as he did with the rest of the disciples. if Judas seen the ascension he would have known better than to kill himself and I also believe just as in the past his name was changed again so he could live out his life and keep preaching the word safely. He would have once again listened to the master and killing himself wasn't an option. If he was dead no one would have looked for him, for revenge.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Can you please tell me what strange things, and what is your source of information about them.

Oh, the usual. Earth quaking, graves opening up, dead rising and preaching in the cities. It was such a common occurrence that the Romans didn't even mention it in their records.

 

[aggle-rithm]

It is obvious the writer talking about Judas. I think that if Jesus didn't walk out of the grave that Judas would have blown the whistle and we wouldn't be here today talking about this. But first Judas thought that it wouldn't even go that far before Jesus did something drastic.
Judas watched the whole event because he was waiting for Jesus to rid them of their enemies, but that's not what happened.
He also knew about the prophesies and that Jesus emphasized that one in particular and hung around, (Pun not intended) to at least see if that part was true and maybe then Jesus would punish their enemies, but that didn't happen either at this point Jesus set him straight as he did with the rest of the disciples. if Judas seen the ascension he would have known better than to kill himself and I also believe just as in the past his name was changed again so he could live out his life and keep preaching the word safely. He would have once again listened to the master and killing himself wasn't an option. If he was dead no one would have looked for him, for revenge.

Can't argue with that logic. All you can do is back away slowly.

 

[TimCallahan]

If he did kill himself, he did it after the ascension. He obviously was there for the whole event and might have been the unnamed one that entered the tomb with Peter. The question is was he being protected, In John he seems to be and forgiven even though peter still seems to be angry about the whole ordeal Jesus sets them stright.

Concerning the first hilited area: And your reasoning behind these two assertions is . . . ?

Concerning the second hilited area: Please quote chapter and verse to support the idea that, in the Gospel of John, Judas seems to have been forgiven.

 

[edge]

The later Gospels are at that distance from Jesus. Anyway it's hard to believe that the Romans changed their crucifixion practices in those years.
Can you please tell me what strange things, and what is your source of information about them.

I think even those solders were scared at this point, because it was reported that darkness fell on them for hours and that the earth quaked and shook. The soldiers were in a hurry to get out of there and get cover.

Matthew 50-55:
50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.
51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.
54 So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God!”
55 And many women who followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to Him, were there looking on from afar, 56 among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses,[l] and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.

 

[TimCallahan]

I copied from that post: But then again... There’s this from John:
Quote:
20 Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” 21 Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, “But Lord, what about this man?”
22 Jesus said to him, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.”
23 Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?”
It seems to me that Judas is still around; he had to do his part. I think he was even forgiven and it’s possible his death was contrived for his own protection.
Then this: Quote:
24 This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.
25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.

It is obvious the writer talking about Judas. I think that if Jesus didn't walk out of the grave that Judas would have blown the whistle and we wouldn't be here today talking about this. But first Judas thought that it wouldn't even go that far before Jesus did something drastic.
Judas watched the whole event because he was waiting for Jesus to rid them of their enemies, but that's not what happened.
He also knew about the prophesies and that Jesus emphasized that one in particular and hung around, (Pun not intended) to at least see if that part was true and maybe then Jesus would punish their enemies, but that didn't happen either at this point Jesus set him straight as he did with the rest of the disciples. if Judas seen the ascension he would have known better than to kill himself and I also believe just as in the past his name was changed again so he could live out his life and keep preaching the word safely. He would have once again listened to the master and killing himself wasn't an option. If he was dead no one would have looked for him, for revenge.

Again, concerning the hilited areas: What is your evidence? It most certainly isn't obvious that the author of John was referring to Judas (first hilited area).

 

[edge]

Concerning the first hilited area: And your reasoning behind these two assertions is . . . ?

Concerning the second hilited area: Please quote chapter and verse to support the idea that, in the Gospel of John, Judas seems to have been forgiven.

John:
Quote: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9260576#post9260576

It right above here in that post?

 

[edge]

Again, concerning the hilited areas: What is your evidence? It most certainly isn't obvious that the author of John was referring to Judas (first hilited area).

Read it carefully. What did Jesus say about Judas in the past, how he felt about him? I have to go and do some things now, I have been here too long today.

 

[TimCallahan]

. . . (snip) . . . Skeptics in the past argued over the water coming out of the wound in a crucifixion event, they said this against the idea as: highly improbable, till modern forensics proved it to actually be a quite accurate statement if a person is pierced in this way on a cross. So you have to ask yourself how they knew that back then when we had to actually figure that part out with today’s science unless witnessed by them directly? This is one of the only times they used a spear instead of breaking the leg bones as far as they knew or we know. The thing that I give them is they were scared, horrified that their leader was killed so brutally and the fact that they thought they might be next may account for addendums and writing these things down later.

The evidence from Josephus doesn't matter it was 66 to 100 years later.
The two that were crucified next to Christ didn't take the same beating and either one of them could have been taken down and saved.

Judas also wanted that but that is not what happened and he could not force Christ’s hand to do so. But I can safely say he watched the whole ordeal to see if indeed did so. you have to remember that the Romans were pushed to finish this because of the time of the week and at this time there were these strange weather and earth related things happening, they only broke the legs of those still appearing alive, it is written that Jesus already appeared dead he probably passed out so they stabbed him to be sure.
These solders had done these crucifixion thousands of times and they knew without a doubt when a person was dead. The way I see it is they were sadistic and wanted to make the victims suffer while alive so the order of the day would have been the rules they followed. So it might have went like this: Those two are still alive, protocol says break their legs but this one is dead so make sure and stick him and let’s see. . . . (snip) . . .

First hilited area: They might have known it back then, if it was common practice to spear crucified people in the side as a test of whether or not they were still alive. Also, this was a brutal enough time period that any author of that day might have witnessed killings and would have seen what would happen when someone was speared in the side.

Second hilited area: What is your basis for saying that Judas witnessed the Crucifixion?

Third hilited area: Well, maybe. However, as I noted in an earlier post. John likely fabricated this incident, along with the episode of Pilate personally writing the Titulus.

 

[Craig B]

I think even those solders were scared at this point, because it was reported that darkness fell on them for hours and that the earth quaked and shook. The soldiers were in a hurry to get out of there and get cover.

Matthew 50-55:
50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.
51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.
54 So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God!”
55 And many women who followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to Him, were there looking on from afar, 56 among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses,[l] and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.

why don't we quote further?

57 As evening approached, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who had himself become a disciple of Jesus. 58 Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body, and Pilate ordered that it be given to him. 59 Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, 60 and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away. 61 Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were sitting there opposite the tomb.

The Roman soldiers were afraid, but the Maries sit bravely in a cemetery presumably full of tombs, which have broken open, but whose occupants have decided to remain inside them until Jesus is resurrected, whereupon they will wander about in the city. Do you believe this?

 

[TimCallahan]

John:
Quote: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9260576#post9260576

It right above here in that post?

Quote:
20 Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” 21 Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, “But Lord, what about this man?”
22 Jesus said to him, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.”
23 Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?”

I see no reference here to Judas. What are you talking about?

 

[TimCallahan]

Read it carefully. What did Jesus say about Judas in the past, how he felt about him? I have to go and do some things now, I have been here too long today.

Okay, here's the passage in John (Jn. 13:23 - 27, emphasis added):

One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was lying close to the breast of Jesus; so Simon Peter beckoned to him and said, "Tell us who it is of whom he speaks." So lying thus, close to the breast of Jesus, he said to him "Lord, who is it?" Jesus answered, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it." So when he had dipped the morsel he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. Then after the morsel, Satan entered him. Jesus said to him, "What you are going to do, do quickly."

It's quite obvious from this passage that the disciple jesus loved is not Judas Iscariot, particularly since the area I've hilited says that Judas was possessed by Satan.

 

[aggle-rithm]

I haven't been paying attention, has this been mentioned?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Judas

 

[SlackerBabbath]

In yellow:
Well you guys brought it up?

And you have still only cited just one person among many that have survived crucifixions.

You say they used this, 'hypopodium' yes they sometimes used one but it was at an angle. They crucified people in many different postures also as mockery or parody.

Do you have evidence to support that statement? Because as far as I'm aware no 2000 year old crucifixion hypopodium has been found in order to be able check your claim against an example and no period record states that the hypopodium was angled either, experiments have shown however that without a flat hypopodium death would come quicker than the 6 hours that Jesus apparently lasted

Skeptics in the past argued over the water coming out of the wound in a crucifixion event, they said this against the idea as: highly improbable, till modern forensics proved it to actually be a quit accurate statement if a person is pierced in this way on a cross. So you have to ask yourself how they knew that back then when we had to actually figure that part out with today’s science unless witnessed by them directly? This is one of the only times they used a spear instead of breaking the leg bones as far as they knew or we know. The thing that I give them is they were scared, horrified that their leader was killed so brutally and the fact that they thought they might be next may account for addendums and writing these things down later.

The evidence from Josephus doesn't matter it was 66 to 100 years later.

You're seriously stating that the evidence from Josephus doesn't matter because it was 66 to 100 years later while at the same time citing the anonymous Gospel of John as evidence of the spear wound (which isn't mentioned in the synoptic gospels) which is dated to being written around 100 AD? Does that mean that non of the Gospel of John matters too?

Could I ask what evidence you have that Roman crucifixion techniques changed so much over the following 66 to 100 years after Jesus' crucifixion?

Also, what evidence is there that Jesus actualy recieved such a sever beating? I mean, yes, it's mentioned that he was scourged in three of the Gospels, but the beating apparently took place behind closed doors, so how exactly did the authors of those three gospels manage to witness it in order to be able to report it as a first hand account?

The two that were crucified next to Christ didn't take the same beating and either one of them could have been taken down and saved.

They could have been saved? But doesn't that contradict your earlier statement claiming that 'nobody' could walk away from a Roman crucifixion? Also, how do you know that they didn't take the same beating that Jesus took? Can you cite someone who witnessed the beatings of the trio of Jesus and the two criminals and wrote down what happened and which one of them recieved ther most severe beating?

Judas also wanted that but that is not what happened and he could not force Christ’s hand to do so. But I can safely say he watched the whole ordeal to see if indeed did so.

That's not what the Gospels say about him. According to the Gospels, after Jesus was arrested at Gethsemane, "all" of his desciples, which would naturaly include Judas, "deserted him and fled", (Matthew 26:56) so if we are to believe the same Gospels that you are using as evidence, there is no way that Judas could have watched the ordeal of Jesus' scurging which we must obviously include as a part of the 'whole' ordeal.

you have to remember that the Romans were pushed to finish this because of the time of the week and at this time there were these strange weather and earth related things happening, they only broke the legs of those still appearing alive, it is written that Jesus already appeared dead he probably passed out so they stabbed him to be sure.
These solders had done these crucifixion thousands of times and they knew without a doubt when a person was dead. The way I see it is they were sadistic and wanted to make the victims suffer while alive so the order of the day would have been the rules they followed. So it might have went like this:
Those two are still alive, protocol says break their legs but this one is dead so make sure and stick him and let’s see.

So if Jesus was actualy stabbed with a spear while on the cross, why is this important detail of his crucifixion ommited from all three synoptic Gospels and is only mentioned in the anonymous Gospel of John that was written about 70 years later which, according to yourself, means that it 'doesn't matter' as evidence?

 

[pakeha]

Even the elite knew this happened why would they have gone looking for more proof they already knew what the military had to say about it in the records? ...

The Report of Pilate the Procurator Concerning Our Lord Jesus Christ. Sent to the August Cæsar in Rome.

Here: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0809.htm

And this PDF:
Another version:

Why do you think this is a true account of those events? ...

It is an outside source, seems to be what everyone wants.

Not exactly, edge.
I wasn't familiar with this document and think it's of interest to see the sort of things that were circulating at the time.
In any case, why do you think this is a true account of those events?

I copied from that post: But then again... There’s this from John:
Quote:
20 Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” 21 Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, “But Lord, what about this man?”
22 Jesus said to him, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.”
23 Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?”

It seems to me that Judas is still around; he had to do his part. I think he was even forgiven and it’s possible his death was contrived for his own protection.
Then this: Quote:
24 This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.
25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.

It is obvious the writer talking about Judas. I think that if Jesus didn't walk out of the grave that Judas would have blown the whistle and we wouldn't be here today talking about this. But first Judas thought that it wouldn't even go that far before Jesus did something drastic.
Judas watched the whole event because he was waiting for Jesus to rid them of their enemies, but that's not what happened.
He also knew about the prophesies and that Jesus emphasized that one in particular and hung around, (Pun not intended) to at least see if that part was true and maybe then Jesus would punish their enemies, but that didn't happen either at this point Jesus set him straight as he did with the rest of the disciples. if Judas seen the ascension he would have known better than to kill himself and I also believe just as in the past his name was changed again so he could live out his life and keep preaching the word safely. He would have once again listened to the master and killing himself wasn't an option. If he was dead no one would have looked for him, for revenge.

Your conjectures are interesting, of course. But as it is written
Matthew 26:24
24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.
Mark 14:21
21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

King James Version (KJV)

Or were Matthew and Mark part of the cover-up?
I also think it's clear that Judas was NOT the disciple Jesus loved from a more complete citation of John's account.

21 When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

22 Then the disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spake.

23 Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.

24 Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake.

25 He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?

26 Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.

27 And after the sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly.

28 Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him.

29 For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor.

30 He then having received the sop went immediately out: and it was night.


If you're using John as a point on which to base the idea Judas was the beloved, how it it John goes on to demolish such an idea?
Was John part of the cover-up, too?

 

[edge]

I haven't been paying attention, has this been mentioned?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Judas

Not yet but thanks for posting it.
From your link that makes some sense in accordance to what I see.

Elsewhere in the manuscript, Jesus favours Judas above other disciples by saying, "Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom," and "Look, you have been told everything. Lift up your eyes and look at the cloud and the light within it and the stars surrounding it. The star that leads the way is your star."

In the New Testament, Judas is said to have died by hanging himself (Matthew 27:3-10), or by bursting open after a fall (Acts 1:16-19). The Gospel of Judas does not specify the fate of Judas, although in the gospel, Judas tells Jesus he has had a vision where he is stoned to death by the eleven remaining apostles.

You all are getting ahead of the discussion.
pakeha you are posting stuff from before at the last supper, I am post things that were said after the resurrection and before the ascension.Quote:
20 Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” 21 Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, “But Lord, what about this man?”
22 Jesus said to him, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.”
23 Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?”

Peter in John wants to be the favored and asks about it.
But the disciple that Jesus still loves is hanging back, 'that man' as he wrote.
The dream he, ‘Judas’ had as written above in the gospel of Judas seems to be on his mind. Peter is also being a smart ass about it but then Jesus reprimands him, basically saying don't touch him. It is also a confirmation that was the plan that Jesus wanted someone had to play it out, and according to the gospel of Judas he was the one with that destiny, and possibly the only one with a destiny.

All of the disciples know at the last supper who it is when Jesus revels it, so they now know who it is when they see him again and from that we can safely assume that Judas witnesses what occurred during the whole trial and crucifixion and is trailing the rest of the party holding back to afford an escape route.
Changing the names of the disciples is nothing new and possibly is what really happened to Judas along with misinformation about his suicide to keep him safe. You can’t hurt a man who is already dead.
He knew the prophesies concerning the death of the son of man so it doesn't make sense that he would kill himself right after the death of Christ without seeing the outcome. Then seeing this come true, Judas is still not convinced that the others won't kill him because they will still have to see the rest of the outcome of the prophesy which is the ascension, their faith is at that point locked in and all but one will be martyred in horrible ways which is what was highly feared even in the garden before all took place.

 

[edge]

And you have still only cited just one person among many that have survived crucifixions.

Do you have evidence to support that statement? Because as far as I'm aware no 2000 year old crucifixion hypopodium has been found in order to be able check your claim against an example and no period record states that the hypopodium was angled either, experiments have shown however that without a flat hypopodium death would come quicker than the 6 hours that Jesus apparently lasted

You're seriously stating that the evidence from Josephus doesn't matter because it was 66 to 100 years later while at the same time citing the anonymous Gospel of John as evidence of the spear wound (which isn't mentioned in the synoptic gospels) which is dated to being written around 100 AD? Does that mean that non of the Gospel of John matters too?

Could I ask what evidence you have that Roman crucifixion techniques changed so much over the following 66 to 100 years after Jesus' crucifixion?

Also, what evidence is there that Jesus actualy recieved such a sever beating? I mean, yes, it's mentioned that he was scourged in three of the Gospels, but the beating apparently took place behind closed doors, so how exactly did the authors of those three gospels manage to witness it in order to be able to report it as a first hand account?

They could have been saved? But doesn't that contradict your earlier statement claiming that 'nobody' could walk away from a Roman crucifixion? Also, how do you know that they didn't take the same beating that Jesus took? Can you cite someone who witnessed the beatings of the trio of Jesus and the two criminals and wrote down what happened and which one of them recieved ther most severe beating?

That's not what the Gospels say about him. According to the Gospels, after Jesus was arrested at Gethsemane, "all" of his desciples, which would naturaly include Judas, "deserted him and fled", (Matthew 26:56) so if we are to believe the same Gospels that you are using as evidence, there is no way that Judas could have watched the ordeal of Jesus' scurging which we must obviously include as a part of the 'whole' ordeal.


So if Jesus was actualy stabbed with a spear while on the cross, why is this important detail of his crucifixion ommited from all three synoptic Gospels and is only mentioned in the anonymous Gospel of John that was written about 70 years later which, according to yourself, means that it 'doesn't matter' as evidence?

The disciples only seem to write about what they witnessed they weren’t all at the crucifixion but one or two of them might have and I am sure that Judas with his role to play would be.
There is evidence that they actually nailed the heels to the upright post on either side, this would have been the most painful thing to go through at that moment and would have caused extreme shock, I know what it is like to break one heel and the shock after, shock alone can kill you depending on how good of shape you’re in.

My bolding above: What I am saying is it wasn't the crucifixion of Jesus, he wasn't even born till after; the circumstance of him saving his friends isn’t about what we are talking about. If allowed which usually it wasn't, pulling someone off the cross could save a person but that is not what happened with Jesus, so it's irrelevant. Also you odds seem to be one out of three might make it, 1: 3.
I’m sure that scourging was a semipublic event, what would be the point if it was held in private?
Not all people that got scourged were crucified. What about if it was political, wouldn’t you want to make an example?

You say:

the beating apparently took place behind closed doors, so how exactly did the authors of those three gospels manage to witness it in order to be able to report it as a first hand account?

Even if it did don't you think they could tell? I doubt that it did.

 

[Craig B]

.. If allowed which usually it wasn't, pulling someone off the cross could save a person but that is not what happened with Jesus, so it's irrelevant. Also you odds seem to be one out of three might make it, 1: 3

Agreed. He wasn't taken down by friends. In any case if Jesus was crucified I don't think he survived. The Josephus account was intended to refute the idea that nobody ever could walk away from the cross. But people could in the most unusual circumstances survive it, because there was nothing in the fixing of the victim to the wood that necessarily killed him. We also have an account that the soldiers were surprised to find Jesus dead so soon, and they then abstained from finishing him off in the normal way. I don't believe that either, but if I were ever persuaded that Jesus left his tomb and started walking about (which I'm sure I won't be!) then I would believe he had been entombed alive, on the above grounds, rather than that he had awakened from the dead.