The crucifixion

audible

un de plusieurs autres
Registered Senior Member
The crucifixion
The crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus is probably the single most important event in the xian religion. The crucifix itself, an instrument of torture and death, is the most common symbol associated with xians. It is found in their churches, in their houses and often hanging around their necks.

The inconsistencies and contradictions surrounding the Easter story are well known.

The problem I have is with the whole point of the crucifixion (assuming, for the sake of argument, that it actually happened). What was it all for? What good did it do?

The Death

How does crucifixion kill you? According to the Bible, it seems you can just hang there indefinitely until you feel like "giving up the ghost". In actual fact (correct me if I'm wrong) you die of asphyxiation. Hanging by your arms makes it more and more difficult to expand your chest until you can no longer draw air into your lungs. One of the reasons that the Romans would break the legs of the crucified was to speed up their death - they could not take any weight on their legs and the whole body was hanging by the arms.

( As an aside, it should also be noted that the Romans probably tied the wrists to the cross, and nailed the hands on to make sure the victim could not pull his hands free. If nails were used with no rope, the weight of the body would simply rip the nails through the hands. It has been mentioned that the nails were usually placed between the Radius and Ulna bones in the forearm, as they could support the weight. Presumably it was both the combination of the ropes and nails that held the victim in place. Interesting that you never see xian stigmatics showing rope marks on the wrist and nail marks on the fore-arms, and most images of jesus show him supported only by nails through the hand... )

The four gospels all give different accounts of (among many other things) Jesus' final words. Seems to me that he would hardly have been able to suck in a lungful of air, let alone make any sort of grand speeches.

The Sacrifice
I've read "The Lord sent his only son to die for me! How much more personal can you get?" ; also, I'm sure you've all heard "He died for our sins" and so on. It seems that some people almost celebrate the awful death of Jesus. Was it really some great selfless sacrifice, for the benefit of a world of sinners?

So the story goes, Jesus died and this somehow absolved all of humanity's sins, past, present and future. He then spent three days dead (some say He went to the underworld or Hell), came back to his physical body and then floated up to Heaven.

1. How was this a selfless sacrifice? He was marched up the hill by a bunch of heavily armed centurions. Was he really saying things like "No, it's okay, I want to do this. It's part of The Plan, you see."? (It has to be said that many human sacrifices do willingly go to their deaths, sure in the belief that they are doing it for the good of their people, and that their deity actually exists. They don't usually magically manipulate events to ensure that it happens, however...)
2. Maybe it somehow was a selfless sacrifice. In this case, why was it necessary for Jesus to be killed by the state? Why not just say to his disciples "Well guys, it's time to say Goodbye." and throw himself under the nearest chariot? Death is death. Did the manner in which jesus died actually make any difference?
3. It has never been adequately explained how this death freed us all from sin. If the death freed us from the consequences of sin (hell, or eternal oblivion), it is still unclear as to why it had to happen in this particular way. Why didn't God just sort it all out during Creation?
4. If Jesus is God, then how do we know he really suffered? Is it possible to inflict physical pain on an immortal, omnipotent entity? (see Suffering below) Maybe he was just faking it for the crowd...
5. If Jesus is God, then how was it a sacrifice? He only had to spend a few days "dead", then it was back home to Heaven (and he knew all this beforehand, being omniscient). A few days in the underworld can hardly have been a big deal for an eternal, omnipotent deity, can it? (And of course, being omnipresent as well, he would already have been there all the time anyway.)
6. What was he doing during those three days? (Some people say he was preaching to the lost souls in Hell.) Why three days anyway? Coming back to life after a couple of weeks would have impressed the superstitious locals much more.
7. If Jesus willingly went to the cross, was it then a suicide? Isn't suicide a Big Bad Sin? There seems to be a very fine line between sacrificing yourself and committing suicide... (Of course, in Jesus' case, he sacrificed himself to himself without actually dying, just to confuse matters further).
8. Why didn't he stay dead? Not much of a sacrifice if you spring back to life a few days later, is it (especially if that was your intention right from the start)?
9. If Jesus had it all planned from the start (if you believe in the older prophecies), then it certainly was not a sacrifice. He must have used his God-Magic to manipulate events and ensure that the crucifixion occurred. This would include making Judas betray him.
10. Why is Judas so reviled? If he acted with Jesus' blessing, or even under divine coercion from Jesus, why is he portrayed as a bad person? Either way, he helped the crucifixion take place, so surely christians should admire him. Without Judas they might not have been Saved, or Jesus might have lived a lot longer and they'd have a much less impressive ornament to hang round their necks as a symbol of his death. A runaway horse maybe, or a slippery banana-skin or perhaps a poorly cooked chicken leg.
11. Why didn't Jesus let the disciples in on the big secret beforehand?
12. If Judas had not given Jesus a big ol' smacker, would nobody have known who he was? Had he been preaching, healing and overturning tables with a mask on, so that the only way in which the "great multitude" who came for him could recognise him was through Judas' kiss? Perhaps Jesus had a twin brother, and only Judas could easily tell them apart? Perhaps the other disciples were all wearing "Jesus Masks" to throw the crowd off the scent? Judas' part in all this would seem to be quite redundant if Jesus were at all recognisable to his enemies...

We are told that Jesus died for our sins, and his death on the cross saved us all from Hell (or eternal death). So why do we still get all the sermons about sin, heaven and hell? If we are all going to Heaven anyway, why do priests keep pestering us? If our afterlife still depends on living a good christian life then what difference did Jesus' death make? How did it change anything?

If Jesus has already "paid the price" for our sins, then surely we can now sin as much as we like. If not, why not? Or, if he only paid for Original Sin, that still doesn't explain why God needed a blood sacrifice to sort out something that could easily have been avoided in the first place. (Remember though, that the first murder in the Bible occurred as a result of God preferring a sacrifice of flesh to one of vegetables, for some obscure reason.)

If our getting into Heaven depends solely on accepting jesus as our personal Saviour, what about all those people who died without even hearing about him (for whatever reason)? If they get into heaven anyway, then jesus's death is irrelevant. In which case, why shouldn't the same apply to everyone? If God had never sent jesus to Earth, everyone would get into Heaven and there would be a few less bloody wars in the history books...

The idea of God sacrificing himself to himself, in order to prevent himself sending us all to Hell for commiting sins because of the way he made us, and which he knew we were going to do anyway, is a little hard to swallow...

The Suffering
A big thing is made about how much jesus suffered on the cross. While certainly quite nasty, there are much worse ways to die (and the followers of jesus have been quite inventive in thinking up new ones over the last couple of thousand years). If jesus's suffering was somehow supposed to be for our benefit, wouldn't we benefit more if his suffering had been greater (e.g. he might have been hung, drawn and quartered; or keelhauled; or sent to a Maria Carey concert)? Or, if he had suffered less (maybe quickly stabbed) would it have made any difference? All the other people who were crucified (and there were certainly plenty - the Romans were very big on crucifixions) would have suffered to a similar degree, if not more. How was jesus's suffering any different to theirs?

Crucifixion is obviously a particularly horrific way to die. However, being God, Jesus would have known not only the pain involved in crucifixion, but also the pain involved in every other possible manner of dying. God would be perfectly aware of tortures, diseases and injuries that make crucifixion seem like a picnic on a warm summer day. When people go on about how terrible His death was, how much he suffered, and that it allowed Him to experience human suffering, I think "But if he was God, a few hours on the cross would have been utterly insignificant to Him and He would already know exactly what all possible forms of human suffering are like."

Some people argue that jesus suffered more than just physical pain - he suffered spiritual pain because he was taking all of our sins on himself. Unfortunately, this spiritual suffering didn't seem to make enough of an impression on the writers of the Gospels for them to note it down... This also begs the question - If He suffered "spiritual pain", why was it necessary for Him to also suffer physical pain? Couldn't He have atoned and suffered without being nailed to a stick first? At what point did the spiritual pain begin and end, and why?

Presumably this atonement includes the sins of people in the past and future (including, I guess, all those whom He mercilessly drowned in Noah's Flood), as well as at the time of the crucifixion. In that case, why did God have to come to earth at all and be sacrificed (to himself)? Why not just sort it all out right at the time of Creation? What happened to those who died before Christ did? Were they just sort of floating around in limbo, waiting for the time of the Atonement?

So jesust suffered horribly and died (temporarily) for His beliefs? So what?
How many people suffer far, far worse deaths every single year for no good reason whatsoever? (Ironically, sometimes at the hands of jesus's followers.) People who are brutally murdered because of the colour of their skin, or their sexuality, or their beliefs, or simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Original Sin

If it simply freed us from (or paid the price for) Original Sin (Adam and Eve bringing sin into the world), does that mean that all those people who died before Jesus didn't have a chance? Or did his death retro-actively Save them as well? In which case, why did he have to die at all? Why not just remove Original Sin right at the start?

Or, if God took Original Sin into account when judging people, and Jesus removed it, won't more souls go to Hell as a result? Before, God might have said "Well, you're a sinner but you're tainted by Original Sin, so I'll let you off lightly this time.", whereas now, a person who committed the same sins wouldn't stand a chance! Very fair...

A fatal flaw in the Original Sin argument is this :
There is no such thing as Original Sin.
Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil are mere mythology. The evolutionary origins of all life, including humans, are well understood. We did not magically pop into existence several thousand years ago in a luxurious garden, complete with talking reptiles and magic apples. We have evolved over millions of years to reach our current state. This is scientific fact, in the same way that gravity is. Like it or not, there was no Eve to commit an Original Sin in the first place. It seems a little more likely that after Jesus' death, his followers had to think up some sort of supernatural justification pretty quickly, and Original Sin seemed as good as any. Your Great-great-great..........great-great-grandparents were not called Adam and Eve.

In order to accept that Jesus' death washed away Original Sin (and therefore had any meaning at all), you are forced to subscribe to the young-Earth creationist view that the universe is about 6000 years old, and was created just as described in the Book Of Genesis. This would mean that almost all sciences (including the sciences that allow us to generate the electricity that is letting you read this document) are totally wrong about everything. This is one of the main reasons why creationists object so strongly to evolution. It implies (or demonstrates) that the basic concept behind xianity is simply false.

There was nothing for jesus to atone for, so the crucifixion was meaningless.


thanks A Barnett.
 
audible: Thank you for providing an excellent essay on the crucifixion, death and resurrection, of Jesus. Congratulations for sharing your wisdon on this Christian Holy Saturday.
 
If you consult only the Parables of Christ which presage the sense of murder, and consider that Christ put a Curse on Jerusalem for the atrocity they were committing against Him, and remember that Christ had prayed the entire evening before God would give him some Escape, then the Crucifixion can be seen only as a huge Crime against God and Morality.

The way the Christian Churches have come to understand the Crucifixian was largely from Paul's reconstruction and re-interpretation of the Event. No longer a crime and a murder, it became a Sacrifice for the universal forgiveness of Sin. It would be nice to believe such a thing, except it has been 2000 years now and never for a single moment in that expansive History has it ever seemed at all even remotely likely that God was not very offended and annoyed. If God had been somehow appeased by the 'sacrifice' of Christ, would we have seen the Destruction of Jerusalem, the Dispersion of the Jews, The Collapse of Civilization (both Roman and Persian), the Plagues of the 6th and 7th Centuries as well as the Plagues of the 14th, 15th, and 16th Century. Would we have had the defeat of Catholic Civilization and then the constant wars of Protestant Barbarism if God was indeed Smiling upon us because we 'sacrificed' Christ? I would say 'not'.

I think Christianity needs to reevaluate Paul's reconstruction of the Event in view of History. Even regarding the Saints, much of their Suffering can be seen in view of atoning not so much for their contempary mileau of Sins, but for the Sin that probably still angers God Almighty, that Humanity murdered the Gift of the Messiah. Seen this way, it becomes easier to explain why a considerable number of Saints had been inflicted with the Supernatural and still very painful Wounds of Christ. These Saints are accepting upon themselves some of the Collective Guilt Humanity still bears regarding this Messianic Murder.

Many of the Stigmatic Saints have told of their Initial Vision which Christ granted them prior to striking them with what would be permanent wounds, which would disappear only at the moment of their deaths. Christ gave them a choice -- "Do you want my Suffering or my Glory", and these well trained ghouls would answer out of Catholic Conditioning "Your Suffering, Lord". This is straightforward enough, but when has any Oracle ever been straightforward? The question may have been meant to say "Do you want Christ to Suffer, or do you want Christ to have His Glory?" It is a question as to whether Humanity is finally ready to admit its Guilt and to express its remorse. We need to acknowledge we made a horrible mistake, and that if God were to give us a Second Chance with a Second Coming, then it would be different the Next Time. It would be Glory and not Suffering.
 
'Jesus' --literally--is the 'pharmakos', the 'scapegoat'. this is also a patriarchal pagan notion which preceded the christian version. for example there exists depctions of the crucifixtion of Osiris-Dionysos (The Jesus Mysteries, by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy)

The punishment, banishment and even murder of A scapegoat is an ancient idea that was supposedly to rid the community of 'impurity'...hence the christian dogma that Jesus' death rid mankind of original sin. cause ..dig, they had concocted the story it was 'God' 'himself' that is 'sacrificed to himself'....though that idea has patriarchal origins as well. for example, the myth of Odin, etc.

but gettin RIGHt to the roots. what is really the crux of the 'sacrifice'..is the sacrifice of the rigid egoic boundary. This is the Earth religios insight. Not A human, animal sacrifice, but rrather the free will of the individual who wants to partake of hallucinogenic sacraments so as to expand the sense of hirself, thus 'sacrificing the limited IDEa of hirself

what THat will do is-maybe with integration, enliven and refreshen worldviews which simultaneoulsy enliven Nature. your sense of being Nature. a roots up approach.

The 'Harrowing in Hell' of 'Jesus', is not meant for some historical character in an historical past, but is for YOU, ME, HEr, HIM......hell is here, as is heaven. deep states of non-ordinary awareness CAN have you experiencing hellish visions. Therer you are harrowing in hell, and the process of that, and coming out of it is Direct spirituality in action!...this is the real meaning of myth, which is song/poetry. it is supposed to happen to YOU NOW if you are willing to experince. NOt to some long dead dude. THAt is literalism
 
Who or what was Jesus?

Could Jesus and God be engaged in a conspiracy to manipulate mankind.

Could God and JC predict what silly human beings would do and simply did what would manipulate people in the desired direction. What if the Crucifiction and Resurrection were theatrics for our benefit. If JC could raise the dead and walk on water and knew he would be resurrected in 3 days, maybe the crucifiction was no big deal. If he could walk on water couldn't he block pain. There are yogis who can stop there hearts. So maybe JC was putting on a charade for children.

He didn't so much intend to create a religion himself but he knew people who didn't really understand would create a religion and turn it into a religious power game.


If God created the universe doesn't he have to know about relativity and shouldn't he have the power to control the flow of time.

A few years ago I found that Encyclopedia Britannica says that the EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS is written in "the most sophisticated and cultured Greek" of any of the books of the New Testament. If the NT was inspired by God could this be an accident.

The number 7 appears a lot in the Bible. (rested on 7th day, Hebrews marched around Jericho 7 times, etc.) According to a numerology book I scanned long ago 7 is a number always associated with God. Strong's concordance shows the number 3 appears in the Bible even more than 7. 3 wise men showed up after JC's birth. 3 crosses on Calvary at death.

Hebrews 7:3 says Melchizedek was without father, without mother and genealogy.

How does a guy not have a mother?

In Genesis chap 5, Enoch disappears and walks with God.

Suppose Enoch hangs out with God for a day while 2000 years go by on Earth. God playing relativity games. God sends Enoch back to Earth and he tells everyone his name is Melchizedek. He would have arrived as an adult, without father and without mother, and Enoch was the 7th generation counting from Adam. There are two ancient texts not included in the Bible. The Book of Enoch and The Book of the Secrets of Enoch.

Happy 100th anniversary of Einstein's relativity.
 
Thank you for your an excellent essay on the crucifixion.
when you show these logical fallacys in the bible, it comes up wanting.
however the religious blinded by faith unfortunately will never see it.
 
Back
Top