RE: Crucifixion question
April 15, 2019 at 3:09 pm
(This post was last modified: April 15, 2019 at 3:16 pm by Drich.)
(April 15, 2019 at 12:37 pm)Lemon Curry Wrote:proof of what? you asked an in cannon question. by definition the book chapter and verse is proof that the answer I provided is supported by very good and well establish authority concerning the God of the bible.(April 15, 2019 at 12:31 pm)Drich Wrote: Sorry sport that is a quotation not an assertion.
Assertion:
Dictionary
as·ser·tion
/əˈsərSH(ə)n/
noun
here is the defination of quotation:
- a confident and forceful statement of fact or belief.
quo·ta·tion
/ˌkwōˈtāSH(ə)n/
noun
Now, since I quoted mat 27, mat 27 becomes the source material, therefore in of itself is indeed proof of the statement I quoted. such as: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=ERV
- 1.
a group of words taken from a text or speech and repeated by someone other than the original author or speaker.
do you understand? I am saying the proof of my quote can be determined by whether or not mat 27 say what I posted. Now if you seek verification to what mat 27 states that is another matter. but this one is closed.
I corrected you misidentification of assertion, by correctly identifying a quote and then provided proof the quote was quoted accurate.
That said if you want verification of this event then just make a request.
The babble is an assertion. It makes statements of belief. It contains no proof: the effect of evidence sufficient to persuade a reasonable person that a particular fact exists. 2 : the establishment or persuasion by evidence that a particular fact exists. So, christard, once again, we have heard the assertions, where's the proof?
If you want to ask about proof of God then man up think of a good question and ask that. Know even if you do not understand or simply refuse to understand that this question has been answered even you call to proof, know that it has. As i have very completely answered every technical facet your question would allow.
If you still have questions it is time to expand your ability to ask the question you intended to be answered.
(April 15, 2019 at 2:42 pm)Lemon Curry Wrote:(April 15, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: "Crucifixion was most often performed to dissuade its witnesses from perpetrating similar (usually particularly heinous) crimes. Victims were sometimes left on display after death as a warning to any other potential criminals. Crucifixion was usually intended to provide a death that was particularly slow, painful (hence the term excruciating, literally "out of crucifying"), gruesome, humiliating, and public, using whatever means were most expedient for that goal. Crucifixion methods varied considerably with location and time period.Do you know the address of any good money-changer ?
The Greek and Latin words corresponding to "crucifixion" applied to many different forms of painful execution, including being impaled on a stake, or affixed to a tree, upright pole (a crux simplex), or (most famous now) to a combination of an upright (in Latin, stipes) and a crossbeam (in Latin, patibulum). Seneca the Younger wrote: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet".[14]
In some cases, the condemned was forced to carry the crossbeam to the place of execution.[15] A whole cross would weigh well over 135 kg (300 lb), but the crossbeam would not be as burdensome, weighing around 45 kg (100 lb).[16] The Roman historian Tacitus records that the city of Rome had a specific place for carrying out executions, situated outside the Esquiline Gate,[17] and had a specific area reserved for the execution of slaves by crucifixion.[18] Upright posts would presumably be fixed permanently in that place, and the crossbeam, with the condemned person perhaps already nailed to it, would then be attached to the post.
The person executed may have been attached to the cross by rope, though nails and other sharp materials are mentioned in a passage by the Judean historian Josephus, where he states that at the Siege of Jerusalem (70), "the soldiers out of rage and hatred, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest".[19] Objects used in the crucifixion of criminals, such as nails, were sought as amulets with perceived medicinal qualities.[20]
While a crucifixion was an execution, it was also a humiliation, by making the condemned as vulnerable as possible. Although artists have traditionally depicted the figure on a cross with a loin cloth or a covering of the genitals, the person being crucified was usually stripped naked. Writings by Seneca the Younger state some victims suffered a stick forced upwards through their groin.[21][22] Despite its frequent use by the Romans, the horrors of crucifixion did not escape criticism by some eminent Roman orators. Cicero, for example, described crucifixion as "a most cruel and disgusting punishment",[23] and suggested that "the very mention of the cross should be far removed not only from a Roman citizen's body, but from his mind, his eyes, his ears".[24] Elsewhere he says, "It is a crime to bind a Roman citizen; to scourge him is a wickedness; to put him to death is almost parricide. What shall I say of crucifying him? So guilty an action cannot by any possibility be adequately expressed by any name bad enough for it."[25]
Frequently, the legs of the person executed were broken or shattered with an iron club, an act called crurifragium, which was also frequently applied without crucifixion to slaves.[26] This act hastened the death of the person but was also meant to deter those who observed the crucifixion from committing offenses."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion
I have too many jars of shekels.
(April 15, 2019 at 12:31 pm)Drich Wrote: [quote pid='1900690' dateline='1555341024']
Sorry sport that is a quotation not an assertion.
Assertion:
Dictionary
as·ser·tion
/əˈsərSH(ə)n/
noun
Quoting a mythological text, or a text that is nothing more that a statement of belief may be an assertion, but it's of no more truth value than quoting any other myth.
The average life-time at the turn of the millennium was 30 years. Two lifetimes later, a writer would have no clue what had actually happened, if indeed anything happened. The concept of "proceeding through" a "passion" to achieve forgiveness was a typical meme of the age, and was used for a number of savior-gods, in a number of the cults which sprung up at the time.. It was not at all unique to the Jesus figure. No Galilean peasants were ever brought in front of Roman aristocrats or afforded a trial. They were simply executed, by "standing order" during the Pax Romana. If indeed he had caused a ruckus in the temple, that's all that would have been needed to grab him, and execute him. One of the gospels said he was silent, (to meet the "lamb before the slaughter" idea), in another, (John), he gives a long-winded speech full of highly developed theological concepts (which of course, took the Christian Church decades, if not centuries to develop), and with every one of those it becomes more obvious that the concepts would not have and could not have been spoken by a Jesus person early in the 1st Century. And then of course, John is full of per-gnostic and gnostic ideas which are so similar to Philo's gnosticism, (50 CE) that Philo may as well have written John himself. The long speech that Jesus gives in John at the "Last Supper", (but with no institution of the Eucharist ??) is a Christian sermon given to an already long extant Christian Church, and not the speech of someone from before it even existed.
[/quote]
[/quote]
whoa whoa whoa oh, sport you are not even at a logical point to question the authority or the corrects of the bible yet. you have skipped about 1/2 a dozen talking points and have concluded none are valid, when you peer often times fail to geth through 2 point before they exhaust their ability to attack the bible using the stereotypes you littered your last post with..
Back up and ask the question we both know you want answered first. You assume the bible is the answer I will give you and it is not. or is that what you are afraid of?
You got allthis anti bible propaganda you are practiced up with and if I give you any answer besides the bible, you will be made a fool?
