Quran and Crucifixion
Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Interfaith Dialogue
Forum Description: It is for Interfaith dialogue, where Muslims discuss with non-Muslims. We encourge that dialogue takes place in a cordial atmosphere on various topics including religious tolerance.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4865
Printed Date: 26 November 2024 at 2:03pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Quran and Crucifixion
Posted By: Alibaba
Subject: Quran and Crucifixion
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 10:41am
|
Frankly, I was rather shocked to read that the Quran refers to crucifixion - but seemingly out of place historically. These verses our fairly anachronistic, wouldn't you say: "Surah 7:120-124 120: And the wizards fell down prostrate, 121: Crying: We believe in the Lord of the Worlds, 122: The Lord of Moses and Aaron. 123: Pharaoh said: Ye believe in Him before I give you leave! Lo! this is the plot that ye have plotted in the city that ye may drive its people hence. But ye shall come to know! 124: Surely I shall have your hands and feet cut off upon alternate sides. Then I shall crucify you every one. Surah 12:41 41: O my two fellow-prisoners! As for one of you, he will pour out wine for his lord to drink; and as for the other, he will be crucified so that the birds will eat from his head. Thus is the case judged concerning which ye did inquire." Anyone who has studied crucifixion knows that it was invented by the Romans - who nailed a person on a cross bar and then placed the person and the cross bar on an upraised stake or tree. It seems rather out of place in the Quran, especially its implication that the Egyptians used this method of execution. There is no archeological evidence to support this. |
Replies:
Posted By: Alibaba
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 11:31am
|
I found some good historical documentation of crucifixion (not impalement, by the way), but crucifixion and its origin and history:
4. Crucifixion 1400 years too soon! Encyclopedia Britannica reports that crucifixion did not exist any earlier that about 500 BC, yet the Koran has passages that speak of crucifixion as early as 1900 BC. Muslim scholar Malik Farid, in his translation of the Koran, says in footnote 1033, "Incidentally, the verse shows that even as early as in the time of Moses the punishment of death by crucifixion was in vogue" (The Holy Qur�an, Arabic Text And English Translation With Commentary, Edited by Malik Ghulam Farid, Comment on 7:125, footnote 1033) Rather than admit that the perfect Koran makes a huge historical blunder, Muslim's merely re-write history and in spite of the universal record of history and archeology, say the Egyptians practiced crucifixion.Although crucifixion did not exist any earlier that about 500 BC, the Koran has passages that speak of crucifixion as early as 1900 BC. First, in 1500 B.C. when Moses turned Aaron�s rod into a snake before Pharaoh of Egypt in Ex 7, the Koran says in 7:124; 26:49, that Pharaoh's magicians believed in the God of Moses. Pharaoh angrily responds by threatening to crucify these magicians. The Koran 12:41, in a different story 400 years earlier, that echoes Gen 40, Joseph interpreted the baker�s dream to mean that Pharaoh would crucify him, whereas scripture say he was hung. Britannica reports that the first historical record of Crucifixion was about 519 BC when "Darius I, king of Persia, crucified 3,000 political opponents in Babylon" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, crucifixion) |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 11:33am
|
Ali Baba, There are two words available. One is Crucifixion and the other is Crucification. Crucifixion was not a Roman invention. It was practised by various ancient peoples like the Persians, Romans and Carthegians. This form of punishment was extended to slaves and others with no civil rights.There was nailing done in the case of crucifixion as the word suggests. However, crucification was simply hanging up a person bodily and fastening him up, leaving him to die. Pharoahs used to hang up people onto trees and wooden crosses (not the cross of the christians or Jesus). Various versions of the New Testament use the term Crucification. This form had some whipping but did not not have whipping with steel chains, balls and spikes, etc. Pharoahs were the worst in the sense that they ordered chopping off say, the right hand and the left leg to render the person invalid and then hung the person on a cross or a tree by fastening him with ropes. Please note that the NT mostly uses the term Crucification and that is different from the Roman Crucifixion. The most important point to note is that Jesus was not a murderor or a bandit or a person with a heinous crime record. As such the Romans would not have inflicted the procedure of crucifixion. Paul, a Jew himself said that they hung him up a tree. Now I don't need to know that the Tree could mean a cross because the timber comes from a tree. Paul's statement is quite clear. That is the only second statement I like from Paul. |
Posted By: Mishmish
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 11:36am
|
"Anyone who has studied crucifixion knows that it was invented by the Romans" I would think you would have studied this before starting the thread. Especially in light of the other crucifixion threads where there is the ongoing confusion of cross and tree, which both were used. Apparently the Romans didn't invent crucifixion, there is even mention of it, or hanging from a tree in Deuteronomy, the OLD Testament: 21:22 "If a man has committed a sin (P)worthy of death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, 21:23 (Q)his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for (R)he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you (S)do not defile your land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance. History of crucifixionPersia, Alexander and other pre-Roman statesPunishment by crucifixion was widely employed in ancient times. It is known to have been used by nations such as those of Assyria, Pharaonic Egypt, Achaemenid Persia, by the Greeks, Carthaginians, Macedonians, and from very early times by the Romans. The earliest recording of a crucifixion was in 519 BC when Darius I, the Persian King of kings, crucified 3,000 political opponents in Babylon. It has been thought, too, that crucifixion was also used by the Jews themselves, and that there is an allusion to it (Deuteronomium xxi. 22, 23) as a punishment to be inflicted, though this reference is commonly associated with lynching. There is evidence that captured pirates were crucified in the port of Athens around the 7th Century BC. Alexander the Great is reputed to have executed 2000 survivors from his siege of the Fenician city of Tyre, as well as the doctor who unsuccessfully treated Alexander's friend Hephaestion. Some historians have also conjectured Alexander crucified Callisthenes, his official historian and biographer, for objecting to the adoption by Alexander of the royal Persian ceremony of adoration. In Carthage, crucifixion was an established mode of execution, which could even be imposed on a general for suffering a major defeat. Source: Wikipedia ------------- It is only with the heart that one can see clearly, what is essential is invisible to the eye. (The Little Prince) |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 11:39am
|
Ali Baba, Thanks for making my point easier by writing: "Gen 40, Joseph interpreted the baker�s dream to mean that Pharaoh would crucify him, whereas scripture say he was hung." That is exactly what I explained. To crucify or hang up a person on a tree or a post is the same. As you said, then the Scripture should accept Paul's view that they hung Jesus up a tree.
|
Posted By: Alibaba
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 12:37pm
|
Mishmish, you are speaking here of impalement, not crucifixion. It's interesting to note that Paul did apply this OT curse to Christ, "cursed is any man hung on a tree." However, the Romans added the innovation of the cross bar. Crucifixion refers to a cross, or two intersecting objects - in the case of Christ's crucifixion, we have the cross bar inserted onto the tree (upright stake). Impalement, on the other hand, was not crucifixion, and the reference to it by Mohammed in the Quran is obviously anachronistic (out of place).
By the way, Mishmish, the Wikipedia was the source stating that there is no known use of crucifixion in Egypt, other than that mentioned in the Quran. You cannot use the Quran to verify the Quran - bad polemics. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 2:24pm
where exactly is the proof that the pharaohs practised crucifixion? - also that alexander was a muslim? ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Mishmish
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 2:26pm
|
By the way, Mishmish, the Wikipedia was the source stating that there is no known use of crucifixion in Egypt, other than that mentioned in the Quran. You cannot use the Quran to verify the Quran - bad polemics. Why not, you use the Bible to verify the Bible all of the time. Where else does it state that Jesus is God? No wait, it doesn't even really state that in the Bible, does it? My bad.... ------------- It is only with the heart that one can see clearly, what is essential is invisible to the eye. (The Little Prince) |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 2:29pm
|
bmz - in your second last post - we have crucification, crucifixion and crucixion also where in the new testament does it speak of "crucification" - would that be singapuri for "crucifiction"? ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Mishmish
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 2:36pm
|
It has been http://www.answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Contra/h005.html - claimed by the Christian missionaries that the Qur'an is in error when it mentions crucifixion as a form of punishment in Egypt. They say:
The Qur'an talks about crucifixion as a method of punishment in Egypt during the time of Joseph and Moses. In the story of Joseph, Joseph interprets the dream of his companion in the prison and says:
As for the mention of crucifixion in the time of Moses, when the Pharaoh's magicians believed in the message of Moses, the Pharaoh threatened them by saying:
The Qur'an also supplies a very important piece of information concerning the Pharaoh. The Pharaoh is addressed as the Lord of the Stakes.
A key tool of Qur'anic exegesis is the internal relationships between material in different parts of the Qur'an, expressed by Qur'anic scholars as: al-Qur'an yufassiru ba`duhu ba`dan, i.e., different parts of the Qur'an explain each other. In other words, what is given in a general way in one place is explained in detail in another place. What is given briefly in one place is expanded in another. Using this principle, we can see that the Pharaoh, who is addressed as the Lord of Stakes, perhaps used stakes for crucifying people. Also why is the Pharaoh called the Lord of the Stakes in the Qur'an? Was it because he was the one who had the supreme authority over who meted out the punishment of crucifixion? Did the mutilation of a person precede his crucifixion? This is something that we would like to investigate in this essay. 2. What Is Crucifixion? What Is A Cross? The terms 'Crucifixion' and 'Cross' are widely used but what do they really mean? In the sections which follow we shall attempt to define these terms as accurately and as concisely as possible. Although crucifixion did not originate with the Romans, many reference works tend to discuss only the Roman method of crucifixion used in the time of Christ. To avoid such a limited understanding, numerous references were consulted in order establish the correct meaning and interpretation of these terms. Crucifixion is the act of nailing, binding or impaling a living victim or sometimes a dead person to a cross, stake or tree whether for executing the body or for exposing the corpse. Crucifixion was commonly practiced from the 6th century BCE until the 4th century CE, when it was finally abolished in 337 CE by Constantine I. It was intended to serve as both a severe punishment and a frightful deterrent to others and was unanimously considered the most horrible form of death. The Oxford Companion to the Bible defines "Crucifixion" as:
Similarly, the Anchor Bible Dictionary defines "Crucifixion" as:
This is completely opposite to the Christian missionary Vargo's definition of crucifixion, who http://answering-islam.org.uk/Responses/Saifullah/crucifixion.htm - claimed that it is a method of "putting a living person on a cross in order to kill him". The New Catholic Encyclopaedia defines "Crucifixion" as:
And in discussing the Christian belief in the crucifixion of Christ, Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary defines "Crucifixion" as:
The word cross is the translation of the Greek stauros. The cross (Greek stauros; Latin crux) was originally a single upright stake or post upon which the victim was either tied, nailed or impaled. Regarding the meaning of this word Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary defines the "Cross" as:
Vine's Expository Dictionary Of New Testament Words defines the Greek word stauros as:
According to A Dictionary of Bible, Dealing With Its Language, Literature And Contents, Including The Biblical Theology, in New Testament usage the word stauros seems only to refer the true "cross":
The opinion is that the New Testament usage of stauros refers only to the true "cross" is not strictly true. The term stauros actually has a much wider application, being used to refer to both a single stake and a crossbeam. In Hastings' Dictionary Of The Bible he states:
In New Testament usage stauros primarily refers to an upright stake or beam used as an instrument for punishment:
The word stauros had at least three different meanings in the New Testament alone. The plank which supports the arms of the victim (patibulum in Latin) was itself called stauros (Luke 23:26); the stake or tree trunk on which the patibulum was nailed was also called stauros (John 19:19); and the whole complex together (patibulum and stake) was also called stauros (John 19:25).[10] The Catholic Encyclopaedia (under " http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04517a.htm - Archaeology of the Cross and Crucifix ") mentions that a primitive form of crucifixion on trees had long been in use, and that such a tree was also known as a cross:
ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH WORDS "CRUCIFIXION" & "CROSS" The Greek word for cross stauros (Latin crux) refers primarily to an upright stake or pole.[11] The noun "crucifixion" does not occur in the New Testament, but the corresponding verb "to crucify" appears frequently.[12] In Classical Greek usage the root verb stauroo actually means "to impale" or "to fence with pales" (Liddell-Scott-Jones Lexicon of Classical Greek). However, there appears to be no common word for the "cross" in the Greek, as the word crux (cross) is Latin. The Concise Dictionary Of The Bible states under "Cross":
Concerning the origin of the Latin crux Merriam-Webster's Word Histories states:
Lewis & Short Latin Dictionary also mentions the same meanings:
Furthermore, the word crux is the core of several English words including "crucifixion":
Crucifixion is the act of nailing, binding or impaling a living victim or sometimes a dead person to a cross, stake or a tree, whether for executing the body or for exposing the corpse. Crucifixion was intended to serve as both a severe punishment and a frightful deterrent to others. It was unanimously considered the most horrible form of death. The procedure of crucifixion was subject to wide variation according to the whim of the executioner, but victims were often executed by being impaled on a stake. The cross (Greek stauros; Latin crux) was originally a single upright stake or post upon which the victim was either tied, nailed or impaled. This simple cross was later modified when horizontal crossbeams of various types were added. Scholars are not certain when a crossbeam was added to the simple stake, but even in the Roman period the cross would at times only consist of a single vertical stake. From ancient Greek and Roman writers (such as Herodotus and Seneca) we learn of several forms of crucifixion. Some forms being impalement rather than what we would today describe as crucifixion.[17] In many cases, especially during the Roman period, the execution stake became a vertical pole with a horizontal crossbar placed at some point, and although the period of time at which this happened is uncertain, what is known is that this simple impalement became known as crucifixion. Whether the victim was tied, nailed or impaled to the stake, the same Greek words were still used to described the procedure. Although in New Testament usage the Greek word stauros (cross) is said to refer to a crossbeam, the term actually has a much wider application, being used to refer to both a single stake and a crossbeam. The four most popular representations of the cross are: (i) crux simplex |, a "single piece without transom"; (ii) crux decussata X, or St. Andrew's cross; (iii) crux commissa T, or St. Anthony's cross; and (iv) crux immisaa or Latin cross upon which Jesus was allegedly crucified.[18] A primitive form of crucifixion on trees had long been in use, and such a tree was also known as a cross (crux). Different ideas also prevailed concerning the material form of the cross, and it seems that the word had been frequently used in a broad sense. The Latin word crux was applied to the simple pole, and indicated directly the nature and purpose of this instrument, being derived from the verb crucio, "to torment", "to torture." The practice of crucifixion was finally abolished in 337 by Constantine I out of respect for Jesus Christ, whom he believed died on the cross. According to the Christian missionaries, their http://answering-islam.org.uk/Responses/Saifullah/crucifixion.htm - evidence that the Qur'an is in error when it mentions crucifixion in Egypt is based on "archaeology and history". If one reads http://answering-islam.org.uk/Responses/Saifullah/crucifixion.htm - their material, it is neither based on any archaeological evidence nor any historical investigation! Another example of the missionary's unparalleled arrogance about the historical investigation on this issue can be seen http://www.answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Contra/h005_d1.html - here and http://www.answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Contra/h005.html - here . So much for their "crucifiction" theories! Rather ironically, the missionaries have even managed to misrepresent the evidence used to forward their own "facts". The missionaries, referring to the famous Encyclopaedia Britannica, proclaimed they were providing "one authoritative reference":
By the use of [] brackets, the missionaries hoped to convey that the first recorded incidence of crucifixion was in 519 BCE during the reign of Darius I, King of Persia. All they managed to convey however was their own distortion of source material. Let us see what Encyclopedia Britannica actually says:
So this "one authoritative reference" championed by the missionaries turns out to be a reference to their own misunderstanding and distortion. Now that it is abundantly clear that Encyclopaedia Britannica does not provide information in relation to the first recorded instances of crucifixion in world history, let us now deal with the issue of crucifixion in Egypt using the information obtained from Egyptology. HIEROGLYPH FOR CRUCIFYING OR IMPALING A PERSON UPON A STAKE The first thing to establish is whether there exist any hieroglyph that mentions impaling people on stakes. The best place to start is Die Sprache Der Pharaonen Gro�es Handw�rterbuch �gyptisch, a concise Egyptian-German dictionary. The hieroglyph depicting impalement on a stake is shown below.[20]
Figure 1: Hieroglyph writing for "Stake. rdj hr = To put on the stake (for punishment)"; det. = determinative, hieroglyph for classifying Egyptian words. Here it shows an impaled man bent upon a stake.[21] A recent edition of Die Sprache Der Pharaonen Gro�es Handw�rterbuch �gyptisch gives even more information on the hieroglyphs showing impalement as shown below.[22]
Figure 2: Hieroglyph writing for Pfahl, i.e., "Stake". The interesting ones of 2, 3, 5, and 6. Also see "Pf�hlen". This is the clearest example that people in Egypt were crucified by impaling them on stakes. What about the times in which this punishment was imposed in Egypt? EVIDENCE OF IMPALEMENT IN ANCIENT EGYPT In order to understand the evidence of crucifixion by impaling people on a stake in Egypt, we present a simplified chronology of ancient Egyptian history containing royal names associated with the period for easy reference. Unless otherwise stated, specific dates for particular Dynasties and Kings that we quote within this paper are taken from Nicolas Grimal's book, A History of Ancient Egypt.[23] Please note that the exact Egyptian chronologies are slightly uncertain, and all dates are approximate. The reader will find slightly different schemes used in different books.
Table I: Chronology of Egyptians Dynasties Keeping this in mind, let us now look at the evidence of crucifixion by impaling people on a stake in Egypt. The evidence is arranged in chronological order. A. Theban Account Papyrus (Papyrus Boulaq 18) Papyrus Boulaq 18 is dated to the early Second Intermediate Period reign of Chendjer / Sobekhotep II; both of them kings from the 13th Dynasty. The account in Papyrus Boulaq is given below.[24]
Figure 3: Mentioning of impalement in the Theban account papyrus (Papyrus Boulaq 18).
B. Stela Of Amenophis IV (Akhenaten) Amenophis IV or Akhenaten was known as the Heretic King. He was the tenth king of the 18th Dynasty in the New Kingdom Period. This is an interesting stela showing the Nubian prisoners of war being impaled.
Figure 4: Excerpts from the Stela of Amenophis IV, showing impalement of Nubian prisoners of war.
Interestingly, The New International Dictionary Of The Bible says:
C. Abydos Decree Of Sethos I At Nauri, Year 4. Sethos I belonged to the 19th Dynasty in the New Kingdom Period. His rule preceded the rule of Ramesses II. Below is his interesting decree at Nauri.
Figure 5: Excerpts from the Abydos Decree of Sethos I at Nauri, Year 4.
D. Amada Stela Of Merenptah: Libyan War (Karnak) Merenptah, son of Ramesses II, defeated the threat posed by the Libyans. He belonged to the 19th Dynasty in the New Kingdom Period. Here the prisoners were impaled on the stake on the South of Memphis.
Figure 6: Excerpts from the Amada Stela of Merenptah; Libyan War (Karnak).
E. The Abbott Papyrus This is an account of the Great Tomb Robberies of the 20th Dynasty in the New Kingdom Period. Notice that the oath includes mutilation before the actual impalement.
Figure 7: Excerpts from the Abbott Papyrus that deals with the oath on pain of mutilation and impalement.
F. Papyrus BM10052 This is an account of the Great Tomb Robberies of the 20th Dynasty in the New Kingdom Period. Notice that the oath includes mutilation before the actual impalement.
Figure 8: Excerpts from Papyrus BM10052.
These hieroglyphs are by no means the only ones. There exist others from the New Kingdom Period showing impalements.[31] CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN ANCIENT EGYPT Ancient Egypt was known for some of the worst kinds of capital punishments. The ancient Egyptians understood the necessary deterrent that these punishments provided. It appears that punishment in ancient Egypt became more severe with the times, especially with the advent of the New Kingdom Period. The punishments in the New Kingdom Period were very brutal and included beatings, mutilation, impalement, and being treated as a slave. The Lexikon Der �gyptologie - an encyclopaedia of Egyptology, gives a brief overview of the different forms of punishment in Egypt under the heading "Strafen" (i.e., punishment / penalties). It says:
Similarly Lurje in his Studien Zum Alt�gyptischen Recht (Studies In The Ancient Egyptian Law) states:
It is clear that one of the severest penalties in ancient Egypt included mutilation, mutilation and then impalement especially in the New Kingdom Period. The mutilation includes cutting off hands, tongue, nose and ears or even castration. Harsh penalties such as crucifying by impalement would be imposed only by either the King or the Vizier. John Wilson had discussed the authority of the King or the Vizier to impose punishments which the interested readers might find useful.[34] Thus the Qur'anic address of referring to Pharaoh as "Lord of Stakes" certainly fits very well with the available evidence. It also adds irony due to the fact that even though the Pharaoh claimed to be god, the greatest act of his lordship was confined to killing people by putting them on the stake. When did Joseph and Moses enter Egypt? As far as the missionaries are concerned, they had http://www.answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Contra/h005.html - claimed the dating provided by them is "conservative".
The "conservative" dating of the missionaries correspond quite closely with the New Chronology proposed by David Rohls in his book A Test of Time.[35] This is the revisionist dating not the "conservative" dating. Fortunately, we have http://members.aol.com/Ian%20Wade/Waste/Index.html - A Waste of Time homepage on the internet that includes a collection of articles written by scholars of Egyptology such as Professor Kenneth Kitchen as well as amateurs refuting many of the claims of Rohl. Even the evangelical Christians http://abr.christiananswers.net/rohl.html - do not take Rohls' work seriously . We wonder why the missionaries insist on using such discredited scholarship to advance their fictitious arguments. The majority of scholars say that Joseph http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/josephdetail.html#Joseph%20Egypt - entered Egypt during the time of the Hyksos. The Hyksos belonged to a group of mixed Semitic-Asiatics who infiltrated Egypt during the Middle Kingdom and became rulers of Lower Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period. They formed the 15th and 16th Dynasties. The generally accepted theory appears to be that Moses http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/josephdetail.html#Moses%20Egypt - lived during the reign of at least two kings, Rameses II and his successor Merneptah in the New Kingdom Period. Let us now gather the evidence that we have acquired so far about crucifixion in Egypt. Table II shows the ruler of Egypt when people were crucified by impaling on stakes as well as the time when Joseph and Moses entered Egypt.
Table II: This Table provides information about the ruler of Egypt when people were crucified by impaling on stakes and the time when Joseph and Moses entered Egypt. What is interesting to note is that the earliest available evidence of the occurrence of crucifixion in Egypt is seen in the Papyrus Boulaq 18 from the time of Sobekhotep II / Chendjer of the 13th Dynasty in the Second Intermediate Period. Joseph, according to majority of scholars, entered Egypt during the rule of the Hyksos who formed the 15th and 16th Dynasties in the Second Intermediate Period. This means that crucifixion happened in Egypt even before Joseph entered Egypt. Crucifixion also happened before Moses came to Egypt, during the Amenophis IV (Akhenaten). It also happened after the event of Exodus as seen in the papyri related to the Great Tomb Robberies of the 20th Dynasty. This completely refutes the claim of the Christian missionaries that the mention of crucifixion in the Qur'an during the time of Joseph and Moses is historically inaccurate. Contrary to the missionaries' own imaginative definition, crucifixion, as attested in a variety of sources, can be understood as the act of nailing, binding or impaling a living victim or sometimes a dead person to a cross, stake or tree, whether for executing the body or for exposing the corpse. Consequently, the cross was originally a single upright stake or post upon which the victim was either tied, nailed or impaled. Accordingly, as we have demonstrated, it would not only be inappropriate but also historically inaccurate to restrict our understanding of the scope and application of crucifixion as it was practiced during Roman times, especially throughout the early Christian period. With regard to ancient Egyptian history, we can observe a progression in the 'cruelty' of punishments with time, acutely so during the New Kingdom period (c. 1552 � c. 1069 BCE). Without delving into the intricacies of ancient Egyptian criminal law, we can undoubtedly observe that one method of punishment was crucifying people by impalement. The earliest extant evidence for this severe form of punishment is found during the reign of Sobekhotep II / Chendjer in the Second Intermediate period (c. 1674 � c. 1553 BCE), as indicated by the Papyrus Boulaq 18. Moving forward to the New Kingdom period (c. 1552 � c. 1069 BCE), we have numerous papyri, including the Abbot Papyrus and Papyrus BM10052, as well as numerous stele including the Stela of Amenophis IV, Abydos Decree of Sethos I at Nauri and Amada Stela of Merenptah, indicating the punishment of crucifixion by impalement. These dates correspond well with the dates the majority of scholars attribute to Joseph and Moses entry into Egypt. Therefore, based on this historical appreciation of ancient Egyptian history, crucifixion, as evidenced in a variety of hieroglyph papyri manuscripts and stela, was practiced as impalement, and, this form of punishment was already well established by the time Joseph entered Egypt. In sum, the story as narrated in the Qur'an correlates very well with the available evidence. Equipped with an academically accepted chronology of ancient Egyptian history and an accurate historical understanding of what the words 'cross' and 'crucifixion' actually mean, once again, we find the missionaries making unsubstantiated claims.[36] Their "facts" are based on unproven ancient Egyptian chronologies that have received scathing reviews from fellow academics not to mention their own theologians. Combined with a superficial understanding regarding the concepts of "cross" and "crucifixion", and how this form of punishment was expressed by different cultures and civilisations (both ancient and modern), the missionaries struggle to form any type of cogent argumentation and instead distort source material and make extensive use of soundbites. In fact, the only thing in error here is the missionaries' "research methodology", which, in this particular instance, can properly be characterised as lightweight and schizophrenic. Perhaps it is best to conclude with H.S. Smith's observation in his book The Fortress Of Buhen: The Inscriptions:
------------- It is only with the heart that one can see clearly, what is essential is invisible to the eye. (The Little Prince) |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 2:43pm
|
Check your language and comply with guidelines, and engage yourself in appropriate interfaith dialogue. --Peacemaker ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Angela
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 2:49pm
|
Now Mishmish, that's what I call a rational adult debate. I need time to read and respond. But thanks for showing others how its done. You, George and BMZ could make this one interesting. |
Posted By: AbRah2006
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 10:47pm
I found some good historical documentation of crucifixion (not impalement, by the way), but crucifixion and its origin and history: 4. Crucifixion 1400 years too soon! Encyclopedia Britannica reports that crucifixion did not exist any earlier that about 500 BC, yet the Koran has passages that speak of crucifixion as early as 1900 BC. Muslim scholar Malik Farid, in his translation of the Koran, says in footnote 1033, "Incidentally, the verse shows that even as early as in the time of Moses the punishment of death by crucifixion was in vogue" (The Holy Qur�an, Arabic Text And English Translation With Commentary, Edited by Malik Ghulam Farid, Comment on 7:125, footnote 1033) Rather than admit that the perfect Koran makes a huge historical blunder, Muslim's merely re-write history and in spite of the universal record of history and archeology, say the Egyptians practiced crucifixion.Although crucifixion did not exist any earlier that about 500 BC, the Koran has passages that speak of crucifixion as early as 1900 BC. First, in 1500 B.C. when Moses turned Aaron�s rod into a snake before Pharaoh of Egypt in Ex 7, the Koran says in 7:124; 26:49, that Pharaoh's magicians believed in the God of Moses. Pharaoh angrily responds by threatening to crucify these magicians. The Koran 12:41, in a different story 400 years earlier, that echoes Gen 40, Joseph interpreted the baker�s dream to mean that Pharaoh would crucify him, whereas scripture say he was hung. Britannica reports that the first historical record of Crucifixion was about 519 BC when "Darius I, king of Persia, crucified 3,000 political opponents in Babylon" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, crucifixion) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Here is my response to refute the Alibaba's wild allegation against Quran: What is the definition of crucify? (1) Crucify means to kill by nailing onto a cross (Source: TheFreeDictionary ).....(2)To put (a person) to death by nailing or binding to a cross. (Yahoo education) Crucifixion is an ancient method of execution, where the victim was tied or nailed to a large wooden cross and left to hang there until dead.(Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) Two methods of Crucifixion were followed in the infliction of the punishment of crucifixion. In both of these the criminal was first stripped naked, and bound to an upright stake, where he was scourged. After this, the victim was dressed again, and if able was made to drag the cross (usually weighing 150 lbs or more) to the place of execution. At this point he was again stripped naked, and was either fastened to it, or impaled upon it, and left to die. In this method, the crux simplex of Justus Lipsius, a single stake was used. The other method: after the scourging at the stake, the criminal was made to carry a gibbet, formed of two transverse bars of wood, to the place of execution, and he was then fastened to it by iron nails driven through the outstretched arms and through the ankles. Sometimes this was done as the cross lay on the ground, and it was then lifted into position. In other cases the criminal was made to ascend by a ladder, and was then fastened to the cross. Probably the feebleness, or state of collapse, from which the criminal must often have suffered, had much to do in deciding this. However the writers of Acts wrote about the so-called crucifixion of Jesus : Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree. The writers of Mark wrote about the so-called crucifixion of Jesus: Mark 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him. Note: (1)The tree and the cross are not the same thing! (ii) The NT contradicts itself by saying that Jesus was crucified on the TREE or CROSS so the contradiction has invalidated the so-called crucifixion of Jesus! Contradictory statements are not acceptable to prove that Jesus was crucified! If you bring your case to the court and giving contradictory testimonies, your case will be thrown out of the court! CRUCIFIXION [crucifixion] hanging on a http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/c/cross.asp - cross , in ancient times a method of http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/c/capitalp.asp - capital punishment . It was practiced widely in the Middle East but not by the Greeks. The Romans, who may have borrowed it from Carthage, reserved it for slaves and despised malefactors. They used it frequently, as in the civil wars and in putting down the Jewish opposition. Crucifixion was probably at first a modification of hanging on a tree or impaling on a pole, and from such a connection come the synonyms tree and rood (i.e., rod or pole) . The Romans used mostly the T cross, the Latin cross, or St. Andrew's cross. It was common practice among the Romans to scourge the prisoner and to require him to carry his cross to the place of crucifixion. The prisoner was either nailed or tied to the cross, and, to induce more rapid death, his legs were often broken.(Source: Encyclopedia.com) There are some verses of Quran and of the Bible about the the earliest known crucifixion: Quran 7: 124 . Said Pharoah: "Surely I shall have your hands and feet cut off upon alternate sides. Then I shall crucify you every one." Quran 12:41: O my two fellow-prisoners! As for one of you, he will pour out wine for his lord to drink; and as for the other, he will be crucified so that the birds will eat from his head. Thus is the case judged concerning which ye did inquire." Joseph is one of the best-known figures in the Hebrew Bible, famous for his coat of many colours and his God-given ability to interpret dreams. Owing to jealousy from his brothers, he was sold as a slave, eventually working under the Egyptian Potiphar, but was later freed, and became the chief adviser (vizier) to the Egyptian Pharaoh around 1600 BC. Those verses of the Bible and Quran prove that the crucifixion happened during Joseph's era that was around 1600 BC . Therefore the Holy Quran is right about the crucifixion!
------------- God does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. God loves just dealers. (Quran, 60:8) |
Alibaba wrote:Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 17 May 2006 at 11:38pm
|
Question of the Day? I don't understand why must we go to the extent of crucifixing a man who has already been been crucified! All from NKJV: Matthew 27:35 Then they crucified Him,....... Mark15:24: And when they crucified Him........ Luke23:33 And when they ........Calvary, there they crucified him..... John10:23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus...... The NIV version titles Crucifixion but crucifies him. It is thus established that he was crucified which means hung up on the post or cross by fastening him, not by nailing him to the cross. Having established this, we can now move onto the next stage presenting reasonable doubts, showing that Jesus escaped or was made to escape. BMZ
|
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 8:43am
|
Question of the Day? I don't understand why must we go to the extent of crucifixing a man who has already been been crucified! All from NKJV: Matthew 27:35 Then they crucified Him,....... Mark15:24: And when the crucified Him........ Luke23:33 And when they ........Calvary, there they crucified him..... John10:23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus...... The NIV version titles Crucifixion but crucifies him. It is thus established that he was crucified which means hung up on the post or cross by fastening him, not by nailing him to the cross. Where is these Scriptures does it say that Jesus was not nailed to the cross? Crucifixion is a noun crucify is a verb. [/QUOTE] John 20: 20 When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. 24 Now Thomas, called the Twin, one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said to him, �We have seen the Lord.� Do you think the disciples were looking at rope burns, BMZ? Notice they mention the wound in Jesus' side where he was thrust with a sword.
Having established this, we can now move onto the next stage presenting reasonable doubts, showing that Jesus escaped or was made to escape. Not so fast. Nothing has been established. Peace |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 8:48am
|
Fredi, I have fixed that up. Have no desire to quote you on that here again. Scholars have guessed that it could have been Alexander, the one who put on a two-horn safety helmet. But when I read Alexander's record, turned out he was bad. Thus he cannot be Zulqarnain. Must have been some other "two-horned" noble man who travelled in the way of Lord God. |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 8:49am
|
You mean Crucifixion instead of Crucification, don't you? http://www.bible.ca/d-history-archeology-crucifixion-cross.htm - http://www.bible.ca/d-history-archeology-crucifixion-cross.h tm
Although in the Old Testament the corpses of blasphemers or idolaters punished by stoning might be handged "on a tree" as further humiliation (Deut. 21:23), actual crucifixion was not introduced in Palestine until Hellenistic times. The Seleucid Antiochus IV Epiphanes crucified those Jews who would not accept hellenization (Josephus Ant. xii.240-41; cf 1 Macc. 1:44-50). Historical findings have substantiated the traditional cross. One finding is a graffito1 dating to shortly after 200 A.D., taken from the walls of the Roman Palatine. It is a drawing of a crucified ass; a mockery of a Christian prisoner who worships Christ. The Romans were no doubt amused that Christians worshiped this Jesus whom they had crucified on a cross. In the days of the OT, people were put to death and then hung on a tree, or crucified. In other words, it was not the hanging on the tree that killed them. They were already dead and hung up on a tree as a warning to others not to make the same mistake the one hanging on the tree made.
However, crucification was simply hanging up a person bodily and fastening him up, leaving him to die. Pharoahs used to hang up people onto trees and wooden crosses (not the cross of the christians or Jesus). See above.
Various versions of the New Testament use the term Crucification. This form had some whipping but did not not have whipping with steel chains, balls and spikes, etc. Pharoahs were the worst in the sense that they ordered chopping off say, the right hand and the left leg to render the person invalid and then hung the person on a cross or a tree by fastening him with ropes. Care to quote the NT Scriptures where the term "Crucification" is used?
Please note that the NT mostly uses the term Crucification and that is different from the Roman Crucifixion. The most important point to note is that Jesus was not a murderor or a bandit or a person with a heinous crime record. As such the Romans would not have inflicted the procedure of crucixion. Jesus was crucified on a cross for claiming his divinity according to the Jews and a threat to Rome. And, now you are using the word " crucixion." What is up with that?
Paul, a Jew himself said that they hung him up a tree. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=1&verse=17&version=50&context=verse - 1 Corinthians 1:17 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=1&verse=18&version=50&context=verse - 1 Corinthians 1:18 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=5&verse=11&version=50&context=verse - Galatians 5:11 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=6&verse=14&version=50&context=verse - Galatians 6:14 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=56&chapter=2&verse=16&version=50&context=verse - Ephesians 2:16 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=57&chapter=2&verse=8&version=50&context=verse - Philippians 2:8 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=57&chapter=3&verse=18&version=50&context=verse - Philippians 3:18 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=58&chapter=1&verse=20&version=50&context=verse - Colossians 1:20
Now I don't need to know that the Tree could mean a cross because the timber comes from a tree. Paul's statement is quite clear. You are referring to Galatians 3:13?
13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, �Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree�), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Paul is referring to Deuteronomy 21:22-23
22 �If a man has committed a sin deserving of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, 23 his body shall not remain overnight on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day, so that you do not defile the land which the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance; for he who is hanged is accursed of God. (from the Greek) 21:22 When a man is legally sentenced to death and executed, you must then hang him hang him on a gallows. 21:23 However, you may not allow his body to remain on the gallows overnight, but you must bury it on the same day. Since a person who has been hanged is a curse to God, you must not [let it] defile the land that God your Lord is giving you as a heritage. Paul did not say that Jesus was not crucified on a cross. Notice the above Scriptures say that the person was put to death and then hung on a tree. See explanation above. Death on the cross was the means of death.
Do you like it even better now that I have explained it to you?
The first being that he never called Jesus God. Like Peter, Paul also called him only son of God. Kind of a funny comment coming from you since you credit St. Paul for "inventing" the Trinity. You are inferring that you like the expression "Son of God" when spoken by Paul and Peter. Funny again. I would think you would have a problem with that, since Allah has no sons. Peace |
Posted By: Patty
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 8:50am
|
Dear BMZ, the act of "crucifying (verb) is crucifixion (noun). I think we have a language problem here with English being spoken. I don't believe you are intentionally mixing the words to mean different things. God's Peace, Patty ------------- Patty I don't know what the future holds....but I know who holds the future. |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 9:04am
|
George, I am not good at American English. I feel I am more towards the Queen's. If "Crucifixion" is a noun, then the verb will be "to crucifix". When "Crucification" is a noun, then the verb will be "to crucify". English is my 3rd language after my mother tongue. Yes, I know about the doubting Thomas. But have you ever thought that the doubting Thomas is always used to make a point. How can one believe that doubter's testimony when he was always full of doubts from day one? have you noticed that question is only accredited to the doubting Thomas? Mary Magdalene saw him first, believed and never did she doubt. I suspect he was presented that way to make points. OK! We will go slow on the topic. |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 9:10am
Don't try, BMZ. Just listen to me and Patty. |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 9:23am
|
Hi Patty, I may be wrong. Crucification is also a noun. "To crucify" looks more appropriate to me. In fact I am not mixing. I am trying to separate the two. BR BMZ |
Posted By: AbRah2006
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 9:40am
I found some good historical documentation of crucifixion (not impalement, by the way), but crucifixion and its origin and history: 4. Crucifixion 1400 years too soon! Encyclopedia Britannica reports that crucifixion did not exist any earlier that about 500 BC, yet the Koran has passages that speak of crucifixion as early as 1900 BC. Muslim scholar Malik Farid, in his translation of the Koran, says in footnote 1033, "Incidentally, the verse shows that even as early as in the time of Moses the punishment of death by crucifixion was in vogue" (The Holy Qur�an, Arabic Text And English Translation With Commentary, Edited by Malik Ghulam Farid, Comment on 7:125, footnote 1033) Rather than admit that the perfect Koran makes a huge historical blunder, Muslim's merely re-write history and in spite of the universal record of history and archeology, say the Egyptians practiced crucifixion.Although crucifixion did not exist any earlier that about 500 BC, the Koran has passages that speak of crucifixion as early as 1900 BC. First, in 1500 B.C. when Moses turned Aaron�s rod into a snake before Pharaoh of Egypt in Ex 7, the Koran says in 7:124; 26:49, that Pharaoh's magicians believed in the God of Moses. Pharaoh angrily responds by threatening to crucify these magicians. The Koran 12:41, in a different story 400 years earlier, that echoes Gen 40, Joseph interpreted the baker�s dream to mean that Pharaoh would crucify him, whereas scripture say he was hung. Britannica reports that the first historical record of Crucifixion was about 519 BC when "Darius I, king of Persia, crucified 3,000 political opponents in Babylon" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, crucifixion) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Here is my response to refute the Alibaba's wild allegation against Quran: What is the definition of crucify? (1) Crucify means to kill by nailing onto a cross (Source: TheFreeDictionary ).....(2)To put (a person) to death by nailing or binding to a cross. (Yahoo education) Crucifixion is an ancient method of execution, where the victim was tied or nailed to a large wooden cross and left to hang there until dead.(Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) Two methods of Crucifixion were followed in the infliction of the punishment of crucifixion. In both of these the criminal was first stripped naked, and bound to an upright stake, where he was scourged. After this, the victim was dressed again, and if able was made to drag the cross (usually weighing 150 lbs or more) to the place of execution. At this point he was again stripped naked, and was either fastened to it, or impaled upon it, and left to die. In this method, the crux simplex of Justus Lipsius, a single stake was used. The other method: after the scourging at the stake, the criminal was made to carry a gibbet, formed of two transverse bars of wood, to the place of execution, and he was then fastened to it by iron nails driven through the outstretched arms and through the ankles. Sometimes this was done as the cross lay on the ground, and it was then lifted into position. In other cases the criminal was made to ascend by a ladder, and was then fastened to the cross. Probably the feebleness, or state of collapse, from which the criminal must often have suffered, had much to do in deciding this. However the writers of Acts wrote about the so-called crucifixion of Jesus : Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree. The writers of Mark wrote about the so-called crucifixion of Jesus: Mark 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him. Note: (1)The tree and the cross are not the same thing! (ii) The NT contradicts itself by saying that Jesus was crucified on the TREE or CROSS so the contradiction has invalidated the so-called crucifixion of Jesus! Contradictory statements are not acceptable to prove that Jesus was crucified! If you bring your case to the court and giving contradictory testimonies, your case will be thrown out of the court! CRUCIFIXION [crucifixion] hanging on a http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/c/cross.asp - cross , in ancient times a method of http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/c/capitalp.asp - capital punishment . It was practiced widely in the Middle East but not by the Greeks. The Romans, who may have borrowed it from Carthage, reserved it for slaves and despised malefactors. They used it frequently, as in the civil wars and in putting down the Jewish opposition. Crucifixion was probably at first a modification of hanging on a tree or impaling on a pole, and from such a connection come the synonyms tree and rood (i.e., rod or pole) . The Romans used mostly the T cross, the Latin cross, or St. Andrew's cross. It was common practice among the Romans to scourge the prisoner and to require him to carry his cross to the place of crucifixion. The prisoner was either nailed or tied to the cross, and, to induce more rapid death, his legs were often broken.(Source: Encyclopedia.com) There are some verses of Quran and of the Bible about the the earliest known crucifixion: Quran 7: 124 . Said Pharoah: "Surely I shall have your hands and feet cut off upon alternate sides. Then I shall crucify you every one." Quran 12:41: O my two fellow-prisoners! As for one of you, he will pour out wine for his lord to drink; and as for the other, he will be crucified so that the birds will eat from his head. Thus is the case judged concerning which ye did inquire." Joseph is one of the best-known figures in the Hebrew Bible, famous for his coat of many colours and his God-given ability to interpret dreams. Owing to jealousy from his brothers, he was sold as a slave, eventually working under the Egyptian Potiphar, but was later freed, and became the chief adviser (vizier) to the Egyptian Pharaoh around 1600 BC. Those verses of the Bible and Quran prove that the crucifixion happened during Joseph's era that was around 1600 BC . Therefore the Holy Quran is right about the crucifixion! Therefore I dare to say that the crucifixion was practised long before 1600 BC. The Bible places the birth of Moses around 1527 BC so crucifixion happened during Moses' era so once again Islam is correct about the crucifixion! Therefore it is you Alibaba who make a huge historical blunder ! ------------- God does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. God loves just dealers. (Quran, 60:8) |
Posted By: Alibaba
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 9:44am
|
I note that the words "is it a lie?" have been removed from the title of this thread. Are we agreed, therefore, that we will no longer use the word "lie" and "lies" to refer to one another's beliefs, or to title threads? For instance, the closed thread: The Crucifixion of Jesus is a Lie. Perhaps the moderators should remove the word "lie."
|
Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 9:47am
|
Alibaba, Your request will be complied. And I hope that you would also comply with guidelines by appropriately engaging yourself in Interfaith dialogue. Peace ------------- Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? Qur'an 55:13 |
Posted By: Alibaba
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 10:17am
| peacemaker: Also, I would point you to the slanderous statements made by this Abrah2006 fellow against the United States on the thread titled "no complsion." Why do you allow such viscious attacks against America? Surely you would not allow the same against Saudi Arabia or Iran, etc. And, I have attempted to comply with your rules as you could see if you read my threads. |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 10:31am
|
Ali Baba & ABrah, Please learn from yours truly. See, I never show or display any displeasure or anger to George, when he writes an unnecessary long post to me! Okay! Here is a test for you, guys: I have just learnt (learned) that in American English, crucify is a verb and crucifixtion is a noun. I also happen to know that crucification is also a noun. What verb would you use to indicate crucification? Every year, I see a live crucifixion in the Philippines but the man is allowed to live. Of course, I know that he does that to show how Jesus suffered. |
Posted By: Alibaba
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 10:58am
| bmz: Why should you use nasty language to George or threats, as this Arbah character does - George is quite the gentleman and such an excellent debater. I notice he always bests you. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 11:24am
peacemaker- please tell me what is wrong with my language in this post ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 11:35am
|
fredifreeloader, When someone puts effort to post, and you rightaway, use the term "dump" in your response without giving any logic or evidence in support of your claim, it it not interfaith dialogue. It is mockery of dialogue. Next time, when you refuse to accept anything, give your evidence from reliable sources. And don't talk out of context stuff here. And yes, for example, see how Sister Angela beautifully responded. Sister Angela: "Now Mishmish, that's what I call a rational adult debate. I need time to read and respond. But thanks for showing others how its done. You, George and BMZ could make this one interesting. Peace ------------- Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? Qur'an 55:13 |
"Posted By: Patty
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 11:39am
|
Dear BMZ: You asked this: "What verb would you use to indicate crucification?" It would also be grammatically correct to use the verb "crucify" (Does you head sometimes hurt when you read these posts?) Peace Be With You, Patty ------------- Patty I don't know what the future holds....but I know who holds the future. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 11:46am
i did not make any claim, i asked a question. "dumping" is posting a lengthy quotation from someone else. i have done it myself. as far as i know there is nothing derogatory in the term. if it is the actual work of the poster then of course i apologise. i assumed it was a quotation from someone elses work ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 12:14pm
|
bmz - "crucification" does not appear in my online dictionary - where did you get it? ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 5:24pm
|
Fredi, Then look for it in an offline dictionary. Are you suggesting the word "Crucification" does not exist in the written and spoken English? I got it from the people writing all over the internet. I did not create the word before me. |
Posted By: Angela
Date Posted: 18 May 2006 at 6:19pm
|
BMZ, I too have been searching for the word crucification, I have consulted several internet dictionaries and had my grandmother consult her dictionary which is literall about 10 inches thick. I cannot find this word anywhere in a dictionary. I had found the word used by people on forums but I'm wondering if its just not a widely used mispelling. If you can find a site that actually has this word as a definition. A dictionary. I would appreciate it. |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 19 May 2006 at 2:45am
|
Hi Angela, Greetings From you: "BMZ, I too have been searching for the word crucification, I have consulted several internet dictionaries and had my grandmother consult her dictionary which is literall about 10 inches thick. I cannot find this word anywhere in a dictionary. I had found the word used by people on forums but I'm wondering if its just not a widely used mispelling. If you can find a site that actually has this word as a definition. A dictionary. I would appreciate it." In fact I have heard the word Crucification since I was a young boy and heard it more than Crucifixion. Bible has been edited many times in order to improve translation. The translators (I don't know who they are and where do they sit, as no one knows), for years, have been trying to get as close as possible to the original Greek text (please allow me to It is my gut feeling that the word Crucification was also changed gradually to Crucifixion to show that Jesus was nailed on to the cross, instead of tied or fastened. The word Crucification is still in use and I could only find some pages which have used that. All the pages are unIslamic. Personally, I hate quoting links and submitting long posts but was necessary and I hope this would help the disbelievers of the Word, Crucification: Christian teaching of the crucification of Jesus took place on Friday afternoon about 3 P.M., He was buried about 6 P.M. and rose from the dead early Sunday morning. It is derived from Roman Catholic doctrine and most Christian religions follow it. The only thing that is right in this is the times of 3 and 6 P.M. All the rest is wrong according to our Bibles. By this teaching Jesus is only dead 2 nights and 1 day, clearly not what the Bible and Jesus states. The proper teaching of the Crucification was maintained for about 100 years after the event. Then the Roman Catholic Church changed the entire time periods. This most likely came about because they did not understand Jewish Holy Days and Passover and Sabbaths or simply refused to believe them. In any case they changed it. Any minister/church who follows or teaches this doctrine is deceiving you and is following the Antichrist. Any young child can easily count to 3, and there is no way you can get 3 days and 3 nights in the ground from Friday evening until Sunday morning. No statement in the Bible says He died on Friday, or that He was buried on Friday or that He rose on Sunday. Jesus stated to the Pharisees, "An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas; For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." MATT.12:39,40. Jesus clearly states he must be dead 3 days and 3 nights before He rises, not 1 day and 2 nights. Read the Book of Jonas, it's only 2 pages long. "Now the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonas was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights." JONAH.1:17. In the Book of Jonah it says God prepared a "large fish." To show that such a large fish could exist I will give you the following examples. A Mediterranean fish was caught several years ago, and exhibited in Beirut which had a head that weigh 6 tons. A man standing on the lower jaw could not reach the upper jaw, and it had a mouth opening 8 feet across. Source: http://www3.sympatico.ca/bibleprophecy/crucifixion.html Please note that the title is Crucifixion but the writer uses the old word crucification. Another: http://www.kiddyhouse.com/Holidays/Easter/Easter.html - http://www.kiddyhouse.com/Holidays/Easter/Easter.html http://www.dollsofindia.com/product/PE71/ - http://www.dollsofindia.com/product/PE71/ This one is interesting: On the Physical Death of Jesus ChristWilliam D. Edwards, MD; Wesley J. Gabel, M Div; Floyd E. Hosmer, MS, AMI
Link:http://holytrinity.ok.goarch.org/Interesting%20Stuff/Sp ecial%20Communication%20Plus%20Picture.html Thus we know that there is and always was a Word in English, known as Crucification. We are not discussing the contents. Now the question is where did the Word go? My understanding is that Crucification means to hang up a person on a cross, tie up his hands and legs, leaving him to die. But perhaps, the translators wanted a word that could make the crucification look more and more horrible and dreadful and came up with the word Crucifixion. In the Hebrew and other Semitic and Oriental languages, "Crucify him" simply means "Hang him up" on something, not hanging with a rope tied around the neck. Important Note to any Wannabe Polemic Best Regards BMZ |
Posted By: Patty
Date Posted: 19 May 2006 at 7:08am
|
The word crucification is still around, and used interchangeably with crucifixion. They mean the very same thing. The word "crucification" is used a lot by Phillipino Catholics, but by others as well. It is the same as crucifixion, and it is still used today, but not as often as the more preferred term for the same tortorous death, crucifixion. http://www.kriyayoga.com/english/on_your_wings/crucification_of_jesus.html - http://www.kriyayoga.com/english/on_your_wings/crucification _of_jesus.html (I don't know what the problem is...these two words mean the same thing, and they are still in use today. It's just that crucifixion is used more. A personal preference.) God's Peace, Patty ------------- Patty I don't know what the future holds....but I know who holds the future. |
Posted By: Angela
Date Posted: 19 May 2006 at 7:57am
|
Patty, I agree. The interchangeable nature does not mean they are two separate things. The bodies were not allowed to stay on the cross during the Sabbath, so the Roman Soldiers had to make sure they were dead before they removed the bodies. Therefore (whoever) was on the cross was very dead. Now, the Quran challenges that it was Jesus Christ upon the cross and that it was actually someone else. They say God does not require a blood sacrifice for all men. Then I ask this question. Why would God need to kill a man in the likeness of Christ when he could just spare him as he did so many other Prophets to prove his Glory? (examples are Daniel, Isaiah, Moses, the 3 Hebrews....) What is the purpose of the deception? It certainly proved nothing about his ministry and teachings if he was secreted away to India to never be heard from again? It only proved his words false that he would be party to a deception and the death of another man. Sacrifice is a concept in all three faiths. Murder is a concept condemned by all three. Executing a man in the place of another is wrong and no God I worship would need such a deception. |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 19 May 2006 at 9:00am
|
Angela, You really asked a very good question: "Why would God need to kill a man in the likeness of Christ when he could just spare him as he did so many other Prophets to prove his Glory? (examples are Daniel, Isaiah, Moses, the 3 Hebrews....)" I would ask more than that. Why would God let such a loving and nice soul, whom God created without a human father, be humiliated, mocked, tortured and killed ruthlessly, specially when he was so dear to God? How could God abandon him when he rescued Daniel and others? Qur'aan does not say that God got another man killed in place of Jesus. Qur'aan also does not say that that another man's face was made to look like that of Jesus and that is how Jesus was saved. Qur'aan says no such thing. We thus believe that Jesus was saved by God. There was no deception. There was no killing of any other innocent man as there were only criminals and murderers who were being punished. We have to keep in mind that Pilate knew well that the man had done nothing wrong and he was innocent. Signora Pilate had her dream and warned him. The dream is on record. Although Pilate had washed his hands off, he knew he had to do something to save innocent Jesus. The Jews have been made to appear screaming too much "crucify him, crucify him" but they weren't any free and strong nation. They were under military occupation of the most powerful army of the world at that time. It wasn't an appeasement exercise for the Jews. We have to start spinning this story from here. That is a very forceful appeal and we know God had to come to his rescue and we know how mysteriously God works. BR & Good Night BMZ |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 20 May 2006 at 4:51am
|
Another point, Angela From you: "Sacrifice is a concept in all three faiths. Murder is a concept condemned by all three. Executing a man in the place of another is wrong and no God I worship would need such a deception." But Human Sacrifice is not a concept in all the three faiths. Human sacrifice was never required by God Almighty. I have heard of only animal sacrifice, that too, for feeding to the poor and the needy. Could you let me have your thoughts on this, please? For God wasn't like the godess Kalimata of the Hindus. Best Regards BMZ |
Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 22 May 2006 at 9:27pm
BMZ: Keep up the good work for holding the fort  Angela: According to Quran >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>4:157 And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture ; they slew him not for certain, The story of Jesus 's life available is uncertain at best. We are not even sure what his original name was. The time of birth is uncertain, his bio data barely covers more than couple or three years of his life. Why can't some one present his complete bio? The sources Matthew and Luke give completely different versions of his last words; both of these vesions incidentally, are direct quotes fron the OT. In view of all haphazard circumstances even the plan to crucify Jesus does not look like job of pros. And then Allah's plan comes into play. He made the whole drama to appear so, so he could take him up. So no one was murdered or executed in reality. My question is why was n't all this officially recorded by the Roman Government, it was supposed to be a major event in Roman's history, wasn't it. All that burial and rising from dead would be an illusion. Then Allah is the best of the planner>>Quran 3:54 And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah. He did the same thing for his beloved Prophet, when the enemies plotted & planned to slay him in his bed, he was told by Allah a plan that let Ali take his place while he was to get himself and his helping friend Abu Bkr on road to Madina. And then deal with the Meccans on on Allah and his terms. No body died during his escape then but later yes few hundred on the battle fields. You don't need to call it deception, you call it Allah's critical planning, when he wanted to save say--Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhummad he set his system in motion. You know baby Moses got saved but countless others did not at the hands of Pharaoh's executioners. >>>>.8:30 Remember how the Unbelievers plotted against thee, to keep thee in bonds, or slay thee, or get thee out (of thy home). They plot and plan, and Allah too plans; but the best of planners is Allah. According to Enc--ia Britannica--One can not expect the tradition of the Passion to provide historically accurate reports, for it has been formed from the view point of the church and its faith in christ-- Jesus has to come back sooner or later to finish his job. He has taken too long a vacation. I think if Iran is nuked by US or Israel, his vacation should be terminated. ------------- Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction. |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 22 May 2006 at 10:20pm
|
Sign*Reader, "BMZ: Keep up the good work for holding the fort The fort is built on the most solid rock of them all. You wrote something very interesting: "According to Enc--ia Britannica--One can not expect the tradition of the Passion to provide historically accurate reports, for it has been formed from the view point of the church and its faith in christ--" And now please read this: "The noun Crucifixion has one meaning: Meaning #1: the death of Jesus on the cross" I could not find Meaning #2 (Courtesy: http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?dsid=2222&dekey=Cruc ifixion&linktext=crucified - http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?dsid=2222&dekey=Cruc ifixion&linktext=crucified From the same site, here is something very interesting: ������� (Arabic) For readers who cannot read Arabic, the second line, translated in English would be: "They hung up our Lord Messiah". They could not find a word in Arabic to show that barabaric Crucifixion, since the Arabs never crucifixed people like the Romans and the Jews did. Need I write anymore? A man can survive without water for seven days and without any food for forty days. Here people were hung up for a few hours and died before sabbath began! The reason given is strange that the legs were broken. To expedite Jesus' death before the sundown, a spear was thrust to let the blood and water flow while to expedite the death of others, their legs were broken, all done to keep the "prophecy on bones" intact and the Commandment, not broken (to bury before sunset). Note that in Roman crucifixion, the man would take days to die. By the way, before I forget, do you know who killed the first animal in the history of the Universe? Best Regards & Salaam Aalikum BMZ |
"Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 23 May 2006 at 1:43am
Sorry, the Arabic came well when I inersted in the reply. What have we got here? 
|
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 23 May 2006 at 1:56am
|
"The reason given is strange that the legs were broken. To expedite Jesus' death before the sundown, a spear was thrust to let the blood and water flow while to expedite the death of others, their legs were broken, all done to keep the "prophecy on bones" intact and the Commandment, not broken (to bury before sunset)." no, jesus died before the soldier thrust the spear into his side ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 23 May 2006 at 4:54am
|
Fredi: "no, jesus died before the soldier thrust the spear into his side" You are right. They just wanted to make sure he was "dead" according to John only. Tell me Fredi, why was Pilate surprised to hear that Jesus was dead? This is found only in Matthew. |
Posted By: Apple Pie
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 3:41pm
Indeed the Koran refers to (and confirms) the Crucifixion of Jesus. Sura 86 tells us without a doubt that it occurred... |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 5:24pm
|
well, tell us more apple pie....... ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 5:25pm
because normally it would have taken much longer to die by crucifixion ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 5:30pm
The Nightly VisitantIn the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. [86.1] I swear by the heaven and the comer by night;[86.2] And what will make you know what the comer by night is? [86.3] The star of piercing brightness; [86.4] There is not a soul but over it is a keeper. [86.5] So let man consider of what he is created: [86.6] He is created of water pouring forth, [86.7] Coming from between the back and the ribs. [86.8] Most surely He is able to return him (to life). [86.9] On the day when hidden things shall be made manifest, [86.10] He shall have neither strength nor helper. [86.11] I swear by the raingiving heavens, [86.12] And the earth splitting (with plants); [86.13] Most surely it is a decisive word, [86.14] And it is no joke. [86.15] Surely they will make a scheme, [86.16] And I (too) will make a scheme. [86.17] So grant the unbelievers a respite: let them alone for a while. ok so what on earth is all this about then? ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Apple Pie
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:15pm
|
The sura title alone tells us that it is about Jesus (i.e. The Morning Star)... |
Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:24pm
|
Apple Pie: "Indeed the Koran refers to (and confirms) the Crucifixion of Jesus. Sura 86 tells us without a doubt that it occurred... Once again you are speading lies without any evidence. Sura 86, which verse? Can you explain that? Peace ------------- Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? Qur'an 55:13 |
"Posted By: Apple Pie
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:29pm
First off, we don't lie. Period. Calling others "liars" is the last recourse of an individual that has no defensible position. We would hope that this does not apply to you. Secondly, please explain the sura title for us - just so that we understand why this sura was named as it was...
Thanks... |
Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:35pm
|
Apple Pie: Which verse is it in surah 86? Would you answer it to prove that you are not spreading lies? Peace ------------- Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? Qur'an 55:13 |
Posted By: Apple Pie
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:39pm
86.7....refers to Jesus' Crucifixion 86.8....refers to Jesus' Resurrection
|
Posted By: Andalus
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:51pm
For those not aquainted with Apple, he is somewhat of an oddball evangelical well known for his long winded, juvenile tirades. He spends a great deal of time producing really bad pieces, coming across as some sort of "independent researcher". A warning to all (including Christians): He will waste your time like no other as you will soon discover he will obfuscate and twist verse interpretations to make outlandish conclusions such as the Quran confirms the doubtful church work known as Revelations, or that the Quran confirms the church's views on Jesus, or other nonsensical notions. Apple will circumvent every rule of debate and critical thinking and on other forumns where he is known he is simply ignored or banned. Apple has no real intent on debate or discussion, and he will simply waste your time. Keep in mind that Apple takes his work very serious, regardless of the rules of logic that he breaks, or the basic notions of honest rhetoric. The second shock that will hit you is when one ultimately understands that he truly feels his work is "serious". If interested, I can paste links from another forum to all of the material he has trashed the forum with now, and I could save him time by pasting the links to the future bits of silliness he will no doubt place here. ------------- A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah http://www.sunnipath.com http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/ http://www.pt-go.com/ |
Posted By: Apple Pie
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:54pm
Now that we all know your true feelings...how about refuting our exegesis'...? Or....perhaps you are unable.... |
Posted By: Mishmish
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:55pm
|
This Surah is speaking of the Word, the Revelation of God. The lowliness of man, created from a single drop of sperm, and the Day of Judgement when all souls will be resurrected. 86:1 By the Sky and the Night-Visitant (therein);- 86:2 And what will explain to thee what the Night-Visitant is?- 86:3 (It is) the Star of piercing brightness;- 86:4 There is no soul but has a protector over it. 86:5 Now let man but think from what he is created! 86:6 He is created from a drop emitted- 86:7 Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs: 86:8 Surely ((Allah)) is able to bring him back (to life)! 86:9 The Day that (all) things secret will be tested, 86:10 (Man) will have no power, and no helper. ------------- It is only with the heart that one can see clearly, what is essential is invisible to the eye. (The Little Prince) |
Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 28 May 2006 at 6:56pm
|
Apple Pie, 086.001 086.002 086.003 086.004 086.005 086.006 086.007 086.008 086.009 086.010 086.011 086.012 086.013 086.014 086.015 086.016 086.017 The 86:7 talks about creation of man, and 86:8 talks about that we all, everyone of us will be brought back to life on the day of judgement. This shows you are here only to spread lies about Islam with no interest for interfaith dialogue. Many posters in this thread have very clearly showed with evidence from Qur'an that crucifixion of Jesus ( peace be upon him ) never took place, that he didn't die on the cross. Yet, you stand your position against this without any reason or evidence. Enough has already been explained, I am now being forced to close this thread, the very creation of which was to create false impression about Qur'an. And you are warned again not to spread lies about Islam here. Peace
------------- Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? Qur'an 55:13 |