The Quran gives the implication that Jesus was saved from the cross, the Noble Verse 4:157 says "They killed him NOT nor crucified it". IF the Quran is saying Jesus was put on the cross but DID NOT DIE then the Noble Verse would be redundant,
david is wrong, the "apostle" Paul believed in a spiritual resurrection, he DOES NOT mention any tombs, he always depicted Christ as a spiritual being! 'Paul and Gnosticism' on Wikipedia
david read, Pagan Origins of the Cross for dying rising gods
salaam, don't think the verse would be redundant, as the 1st part 'they killed him not' seems to mean they did not kill him in any other way u could think of, highlighting the other muslim beleif that he is alive and resurrected, and the 2nd part nor crucified, covers the common view, crucified would mean to be put on the cross and die, so being put on the cross and not dieing is technically not being crucified.
The very fact that Jesus' legs weren't broken clearly shows he must've survived, it wasn't broken because the Romans "saw" he was "dead". But they didn't have modern technology to know it that were true! So how did Jesus expire BEFORE the Romans could break his legs to hasten the death? He was poisoned or given a substance that led to the swooning (thus saving his life) while the thieves were NOT given any substance.
I recommend the debate between Shabir ally and mike licona on this topic
david won't accept the evidence that the NT isn't written by Jesus' followers, they are anonymous. Iraenus came 200 years later and Polycarp NEVER mentions he knew John! John was martyred in the 'Acts' long before Polycarp emerged. The Gospels remain anonynous
meant raised up by god not ressurected. lol. my bad.
frontl1ner 2 years ago
The Quran gives the implication that Jesus was saved from the cross, the Noble Verse 4:157 says "They killed him NOT nor crucified it". IF the Quran is saying Jesus was put on the cross but DID NOT DIE then the Noble Verse would be redundant,
david is wrong, the "apostle" Paul believed in a spiritual resurrection, he DOES NOT mention any tombs, he always depicted Christ as a spiritual being! 'Paul and Gnosticism' on Wikipedia
david read, Pagan Origins of the Cross for dying rising gods
muslim9x9x 2 years ago
salaam, don't think the verse would be redundant, as the 1st part 'they killed him not' seems to mean they did not kill him in any other way u could think of, highlighting the other muslim beleif that he is alive and resurrected, and the 2nd part nor crucified, covers the common view, crucified would mean to be put on the cross and die, so being put on the cross and not dieing is technically not being crucified.
frontl1ner 2 years ago
The very fact that Jesus' legs weren't broken clearly shows he must've survived, it wasn't broken because the Romans "saw" he was "dead". But they didn't have modern technology to know it that were true! So how did Jesus expire BEFORE the Romans could break his legs to hasten the death? He was poisoned or given a substance that led to the swooning (thus saving his life) while the thieves were NOT given any substance.
I recommend the debate between Shabir ally and mike licona on this topic
muslim9x9x 2 years ago
david won't accept the evidence that the NT isn't written by Jesus' followers, they are anonymous. Iraenus came 200 years later and Polycarp NEVER mentions he knew John! John was martyred in the 'Acts' long before Polycarp emerged. The Gospels remain anonynous
muslim9x9x 2 years ago
@muslim9x9x so you need modern technology to know if one was dead? What a joke!
MBI3030 1 year ago
@MBI3030
The only JOKE is your PATHETIC Man-Made religion called Christianity where 1+1+1 = 1 again LOLOLOL :PPP
BeholderGuard 1 year ago