Crucifixion of Jesus

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 kometa2 wrote:

facts facts facts

	The Historical Evidence

	#1. Eyewitness Sources
There are many evidences from which one can argue for the historicity
 of Christ�s death by crucifixion, of which I will use only a few.  The 
first evidence for Jesus� crucifixion is from the testimony of 
eyewitness sources.  Many Muslims do not believe there is eyewitness 
material in the accounts of the crucifixion of Jesus.  In fact, one 
Muslim claims that �Not a single one of the Christians was a witness 
with them [the Jews]. Rather the apostles kept a distance through fear, 
and not one of them witnessed the crucifixion.�
This argument is largely based upon Matthew 26:56
 which says, �Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.� Though the 
disciples forsook Jesus, some of them were still witnesses from a 
distance (Mark 14:54).  Also, there was an anonymous disciple whom Jesus, while on the cross, commanded to take care of Mary (John 19:26-27). 
 The Gospel of Luke reports that while Jesus was carrying the cross, �. .
 . there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which 
also bewailed and lamented him (Luke 23:27, emphasis mine).�  In addition to these people already mentioned the Gospels are scattered with references to Jewish leaders (Mt. 27:41; Mk. 15:31), Roman centurion (Mt. 27:54; Mk. 15:39; Lk. 23:47) and soldiers (Mt. 27:35; Mk. 15:24; Lk. 23:35; and John 19:18, 23)
 who all witnessed Jesus� crucifixion.  For Muslims to argue that the 
crucifixion is not historical simply does not square with the historical
 data because there were multitudes of witnesses to the fact that the 
Romans crucified Jesus.

	#2. Medical Evidence
In light of the eyewitness evidence from the gospels, there is strong
 medical evidence that confirms the historicity of Christ�s death as 
presented in the Gospels.  Before examining the medical evidence, as a 
general point the Romans knew how to crucify their victims.  To suppose 
that the Romans would have allowed Jesus to escape the cross, is 
nonsensical.  The Romans knew how to kill someone and they knew when 
someone was dead. 
Concerning the specific medical evidence, the gospels report specific
 conditions that a crucified victim would have experienced.  First, in 
Jesus� pre-crucifixion experience in the Garden of Gethsemane, the 
Gospel of Luke reports that Jesus sweated �great drops of blood� (Luke 22:44).  According to Alexander Metherell an M.D. and Ph.D., �This is a known medical condition called hematidrosis.�  He later acknowledges that tremendous stress like the kind that Jesus suffered could have produced this effect. 
Second, Jesus� desire, while on the cross, to receive a drink 
confirms the fact that he likely was experiencing another known medical 
condition called hypovolemic shock, which would have been caused by his 
beating. According to Metherell, hypovolemic schock �. . . does four 
things. First, the heart races to try to pump blood that isn�t there; 
second, the blood pressure drops, causing fainting or collapse; third, 
the kidneys stop producing urine to maintain what volume is left; and 
fourth, the person becomes very thirsty as the body craves fluids to 
replace the lost blood volume.�
Third, the evidence from the spear thrust confirms the idea that 
Jesus did indeed die on the cross.  Concerning this Matherell states 
that hypovolemic shock causes a rapid heart beat which results in fluid 
around the heart called a pericardial effusion.  The Gospel of John 
testifies to this fact in John 19:34
 which says, �. . . one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, 
and forthwith came there out blood and water.� Metherell continues, �The
 spear apparently went through the right lung and into the heart, so 
when the spear was pulled out, some fluid � the pericardial effusion and
 the pleural effusion � came out.  This would have the appearance of a 
clear fluid like water.� Therefore, given the above specific medical 
evidence, the Journal of the American Medical Association is justified 
to conclude, �. . . interpretations based on the assumption that Jesus 
did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical 
knowledge.�

I don't know why you are still having a hard time understanding this issue.  Muslims don't deny that a crucifixion occurred at the hands of the Romans!  What we believe is that the unbelievers boasted that they had killed Jesus, but in reality, the man they had crucified was not Jesus but someone else.  

And as for your cut and paste "evidence", I have already discussed the contradictory "eyewitness" accounts of the crucifixion on my blog.  Did you even bother to read the articles?  Contradictory "eyewitness" testimony would lead a to mistrial in a court, so why on earth would anyone believe the contradictory Gospels?    