+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 81 to 92 of 92

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,212

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    so instead of declaring god is holy man is not, it should have been simply, man is not holy!? thus we focus on what it means to be holy!? which is a waste of time unless thru playing with language we can gain insight to the holy 1!? the holy (es)state of mind!? is it man's eternal quest to find the lost holy state of mind!? :cwm2: :spin2: : :
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  2. #82
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    It doesn't matter to me. As a matter of semantics, I try not to say I KNOW. I used to say believe and then I slipped into the habit of saying I know. No use alienating folks because of word usage.

    I believe the crucifixion/resurrection story was part of a cover story that NT authors made up. When you have the son of God sacrificing to save humankind you have to make it DRAMATIC. He couldn't have been brutally murdered and left in the street. That's too common.
    What part of the crucifixion WASN'T uncommon? People were also executed in huge numbers of horrible ways from beheading to torture in a dungeon to burning alive at the stake to slowly being cooked to death inside a bronze bull. People were brutal back then and hundreds of people could be crucified at a time if they decided to make an example of a rebel group.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I did an historical research and found that death by crucifixion was not common during the period. Also, if it was used, it's highly unlikely that a man would be crucified for heresy, especially by the Romans for offenses against an alien religion. Although, Jesus declaration of divinity would definitely stir things up. The Romans found an easy way to dispose of the problem. All it took was two husky Roman soldiers. That's when Satan took revenge. "Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes from the abyss will attack them, and overp o w e r and kill them." (Rev. 11:7)
    Oh yes it was. Crucifixion was very common. There's a poor taste joke that suggests lines of crucified people were early phone lines... "Come over for dinner, pass it down"

    Crucifixion was in use particularly among the Seleucids, Carthaginians, and Romans from about the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Again, thanks for your interest. Most likely, this will be the last time I'll discuss what I "believe." It's contrary to Christianity values and I don't want to become the center of a storm. There's nothing to gain from that.
    I just hope that maybe discussing them might help you to view them critically. Perhaps then you will know why no one will ever believe your story.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Stow, OH SOL III
    Posts
    3,231

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    What part of the crucifixion WASN'T uncommon? People were also executed in huge numbers of horrible ways from beheading to torture in a dungeon to burning alive at the stake to slowly being cooked to death inside a bronze bull. People were brutal back then and hundreds of people could be crucified at a time if they decided to make an example of a rebel group.

    Oh yes it was. Crucifixion was very common. There's a poor taste joke that suggests lines of crucified people were early phone lines... "Come over for dinner, pass it down"

    Crucifixion was in use particularly among the Seleucids, Carthaginians, and Romans from about the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion
    Even through in the Hollywood version Spartacus (Kirk Douglas) (1960), Spartacus, was crucified. It is unknown historically what actually happen to him, however around 6,000 were crucified.

    See Wiki- Spartacus,
    Third Servile War
    The eventual fate of Spartacus himself is unknown, as his body was never found, but he is accounted by historians to have perished in battle along with his men. 6,000 survivors of the revolt captured by the legions of Crassus were crucified, lining the Appian Way from Rome to Capua.
    This took place in 71 BC.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance
    I did an historical research and found that death by crucifixion was not common during the period.
    Then your ability to do research about historical events is just as bad as you ability to do research in matters of science. Anyone that has seen the movie (6- nominations, won 4- Oscars) would have a pretty good idea that crucifixion was a form of punishment at least about a 100 years before Christ.
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    What part of the crucifixion WASN'T uncommon? People were also executed in huge numbers of horrible ways from beheading to torture in a dungeon to burning alive at the stake to slowly being cooked to death inside a bronze bull. People were brutal back then and hundreds of people could be crucified at a time if they decided to make an example of a rebel group.

    Oh yes it was. Crucifixion was very common. There's a poor taste joke that suggests lines of crucified people were early phone lines... "Come over for dinner, pass it down"

    Crucifixion was in use particularly among the Seleucids, Carthaginians, and Romans from about the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

    I just hope that maybe discussing them might help you to view them critically. Perhaps then you will know why no one will ever believe your story.
    I believe you are confusing crucifixion with just plan execution. Here is a reference to my claim that nailing one to the cross, as per dictionary definition, was not as common as Christians claim.

    Very few non-Christian sources refer to the crucifixion. The earliest non-Christian reference to the crucifixion is likely from Mara Bar-Serapion, a Syriac writer who refers only to a "wise King" executed by the Jews.[41] Roman historian Tacitus, in his Annals (c. A.D. 116), mentions only in passing that "Christus...suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators..."[42] Similarly, Greek satirist Lucian refers to Jesus only as "the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account."[43]

    There were many forms of execution, one was hanging one by a tree. Hanging on a cross, a form of a tree, was not as common as everyone believes.

    As for my story, I guess you forgot what I posted. I have never claimed that my story is believable, but neither is the Christian fairy tale about Jesus.

    So why do you waste your time responding to my postings?

    That however, doesn't mean it's not true. I will never deny what I know to be the truth about Jesus and God.

    I'm tired of being set up for ridicule.
    Last edited by Cnance; 08-22-2010 at 12:19 PM.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Even through in the Hollywood version Spartacus (Kirk Douglas) (1960), Spartacus, was crucified. It is unknown historically what actually happen to him, however around 6,000 were crucified.

    See Wiki- Spartacus,This took place in 71 BC.Then your ability to do research about historical events is just as bad as you ability to do research in matters of science. Anyone that has seen the movie (6- nominations, won 4- Oscars) would have a pretty good idea that crucifixion was a form of punishment at least about a 100 years before Christ.
    Why don't you complete your research. Crucifixion by the cross was not common, except according to Christians. Being nailed to a tree, not necessary a cross, was more common.

    What do you expect? Spartacus was a Hollywood movie, not an historical document.

    Don't insult me unless you know what your talking about.
    Last edited by Cnance; 08-22-2010 at 12:29 PM.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Stow, OH SOL III
    Posts
    3,231

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Why don't you complete your research. Crucifixion by the cross was not common, except according to Christians. Being nailed to a tree, not necessary a cross, was more common.

    What do you expect? Spartacus was a Hollywood movie, not an historical document.

    Don't insult me unless you know what your talking about.
    Oh, you don't need my help to insult yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance
    What do you expect? Spartacus was a Hollywood movie, not an historical document.
    This link is about the individual known as Spartacus and not a movie. Wiki-Spartacus

    This link, already given above also mentions a number of instances of crucifixion, Wiki- Crucifixion
    The gibbet on which crucifixion was carried out could be of many shapes. Josephus describes multiple tortures and positions of crucifixion during the Siege of Jerusalem as Titus crucified the rebels; and Seneca the Younger recounts: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet."

    At times the gibbet was only one vertical stake, called in Latin crux simplex or palus, or in Greek μόνος σταυρός (monos stauros, i.e. isolated stake). This was the simplest available construction for torturing and killing the criminals. Frequently, however, there was a cross-piece attached either at the top to give the shape of a T (crux commissa) or just below the top, as in the form most familiar in Christian symbolism (crux immissa). Other forms were in the shape of the letters X and Y.

    The first writings about the crucifixion of Jesus do not speak specifically about the shape of that cross, but all the early writings that do, from about the year 100 on, describe it as shaped like the letter T (the Greek letter tau) or as composed of an upright and a transverse beam, sometimes with a small ledge in the upright.
    Some other odd tidbits,
    Alexander the Great is reputed to have crucified 2000 survivors from his siege of the Phoenician city of Tyre, as well as the doctor who unsuccessfully treated Alexander's friend Hephaestion. Some historians have also conjectured that Alexander crucified Callisthenes, his official historian and biographer, for objecting to Alexander's adoption of the Persian ceremony of royal adoration.

    In Carthage, crucifixion was an established mode of execution, which could even be imposed on a general for suffering a major defeat.
    Most notable to the discussion at hand is the following;
    Crucifixion was used for slaves, pirates, and enemies of the state. It was considered a most shameful and disgraceful way to die. Condemned Roman citizens were usually exempt from crucifixion (like feudal nobles from hanging, dying more honorably by decapitation) except for major crimes against the state, such as high treason.
    Under ancient Roman penal practice, crucifixion was also a means of exhibiting the criminal’s low social status. It was the most dishonourable death imaginable, originally reserved for slaves, hence still called "supplicium servile" by Seneca, later extended to provincial freedmen of obscure station ('humiles'). The citizen class of Roman society were almost never subject to capital punishments; instead, they were fined or exiled. Josephus mentions Jews of high rank who were crucified, but this was to point out that their status had been taken away from them. The Romans often broke the prisoner's legs to hasten death and usually forbade burial.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance
    Being nailed to a tree, not necessary a cross, was more common.
    Odd, that there is no mention anywhere about using trees. Even through it seems very likely that trees could have been used since a simple pole would suffice. In some cases even cart wheels were used.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance
    I believe you are confusing crucifixion with just plan execution.
    Crucifixion is a form of execution, Christians have tried to make it into something special, it wasn't and was in use long before Christ. The Romans used it to execute slaves, pirates, and enemies of the state. Or are you going to try and argue that Rome didn't have a lot of slaves, pirates, and enemies to execute? What's next, people that weren't really hanged because you can only be hanged from a gallows and not a tree.

    Besides, crucifixion may still be practiced in some places,
    Crucifixion today
    In modern-day Saudi Arabia, the bodies of beheaded convicts may be tied to wooden displays for public viewing after the execution.

    In the 50th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights (1994), local bishops reported several cases of crucifixion of Christian priests. Sudan's penal code, based upon the government's interpretation of Shari'a, provides for execution by crucifixion. The sentence has been passed as recently as 2002, when 88 people were condemned.

    As of 2000, Yemen provides for non-lethal crucifixion of criminals, though this punishment is apparently reserved for those also condemned to death.
    If you want to research archaic methods of execution and torture, try reading up on the Wiki- Blood eagle
    Last edited by nomaxim; 08-22-2010 at 04:02 PM.
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    [quote]
    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Oh, you don't need my help to insult yourself.

    This link is about the individual known as Spartacus and not a movie. Wiki-Spartacus

    This link, already given above also mentions a number of instances of crucifixion, Wiki- Crucifixion
    Some other odd tidbits,Most notable to the discussion at hand is the following;Odd, that there is no mention anywhere about using trees. Even through it seems very likely that trees could have been used since a simple pole would suffice. In some cases even cart wheels were used.Crucifixion is a form of execution, Christians have tried to make it into something special, it wasn't and was in use long before Christ. The Romans used it to execute slaves, pirates, and enemies of the state. Or are you going to try and argue that Rome didn't have a lot of slaves, pirates, and enemies to execute? What's next, people that weren't really hanged because you can only be hanged from a gallows and not a tree.

    Besides, crucifixion may still be practiced in some places,

    If you want to research archaic methods of execution and torture, try reading up on the Wiki- Blood eagle
    I think we have a definition problem.

    From what I recall, from a reference I can't locate, it wasn't until about 100 A.D. that the cross was associated with the death of Jesus. It became a symbol of His death.

    The dictionary definition, which I referred to, stipulates crucifixion in association with the cross. I notice on WIKI that crucifixion is associated with any form of execution such as pole, tree, or board, not necessarily a cross.

    Therefore, it is possible that Jesus wasn't executed on a cross, but on a pole or some other means of execution. That is if that was the form of execution. I believe he was brutally beaten to death by Roman soldiers.

    I have no documentation for my case, so I withdrew from discussion.
    Last edited by Cnance; 08-23-2010 at 07:48 PM.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,212

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    you know, when i first heard your theory i was taken aback since it was so different yet plausible without my being able to actually contradict it!? but over time i have somehow seen it as having no real effect on 'what is', as they say!? can we actually know for ourselves what was!? exactly!? i also realize that we are totally invested in our deepest thoughts/impressions and we need this kind of certainty in our lives given the history of human behavior!?
    so we seek that which gives us certainty of existence/purpose, good or bad!? to be told things we cannot verify and yet are expected to act out can be potentially self defeating!? or at least the thoughts of such unrealistic behavior can somehow become a crisis of mind!? we need an OUT that satisfies our own deepest feelings!? via absorption, rejection, or RE-EVALUATION !? or a combination of all 3!? VIVID dreams can be a p o w e rful and active force in our self/world/reality evaluation!? especially if they are consistently subject specific!? i've heard that some people dont dream at all!? and others would claim anyone who takes dreams seriously is seriously losing it!? humans seem to be stuck in their own little world and live accordingly!? the 1's who are good at it seem happy while those that struggle with it can seem less than human or without respect or consideration!? if you know 1 thing for certain you are IN the respectable race so to speak!? you are a somebody!? of course the more the madding crowd considers your 1 thing of real importance determines your level of accomplishment, the status and ease of your living conditions!?
    how does 1 make up for missing the boat they never knew sailed!? it's not fair somehow!? SHOOT FOR THE MOON NOW!? unleash you imagination or just fade away slowly and perhaps bitterly or solemnly discontented!?.........harold!....yes dear,.......did you take out the trash?......yes dear..........dont make me come and check harold!.......yes dear...........:cwm2: :spin2: : :
    Last edited by lexx; 08-22-2010 at 11:00 PM.
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  9. 08-23-2010, 12:49 PM

    I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.


  10. #89
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Stow, OH SOL III
    Posts
    3,231

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I think we have a definition problem.
    Not at all.
    You just don't seem aware the Crucifixion of Christ should be capitalized for one thing.
    Merriam-Webster dictionary crucifixion,
    cru·ci·fix·ion
    \ˌkrü-sə-ˈfik-shən\ noun
    Definition of CRUCIFIXION
    1
    a capitalized : the crucifying of Christ
    b : the act of crucifying

    2 : extreme and painful punishment, affliction, or suffering

    Examples of CRUCIFIXION
    1. the crucifixion of the rebel Spartacus

    First Known Use of CRUCIFIXION
    15th century
    Crucifixion (capital "C") refers to the 'Crucifixion' of Christ (an event), crucifixion (lower case "c") refers to the punishment and other such events. Damn, there's that annoying Kirk Douglas Hollywood movie character again too.

    See britannica.com crucifixion (The publishers of one of your previous sources I believe),
    an important method of capital punishment, particularly among the Persians, Seleucids, Carthaginians, and Romans from about the 6th century bc to the 4th century ad. Constantine the Great, the first Christian emperor, abolished it in the Roman Empire in ad 337, out of veneration for Jesus Christ, the most famous victim of crucifixion.
    See also, Merriam-Webster dictionary crucify,
    cru·ci·fy
    \ˈkrü-sə-ˌfī\ transitive verb
    cru·ci·fied | cru·ci·fy·ing
    Definition of CRUCIFY
    1
    : to put to death by nailing or binding the wrists or hands and feet to a cross

    2
    : to destroy the p0wer of : mortify

    3
    a : to treat cruelly : torment
    b : pillory 2

    — cru·ci·fi·er\-ˌfī-ər\ noun
    Examples of CRUCIFY
    1. They crucified her in the newspapers for having an affair.

    Origin of CRUCIFY
    Middle English crucifien, from Anglo-French crucifier, from Late Latin crucifigere
    First Known Use: 14th century
    Note that in the Merriam-Webster dictionary the definition of 'crucifixion' does not mention a cross and that the definition of 'crucify' does not mention Christ. And that neither of these words were used until 13-1400 years after Christ. The Encyclopedia Britannica doesn't use the word cross anywhere in it's definition of 'crucifixion' either.

    The following links contain a number (9-10) of different definitions of the two words, including these two from the 1828 Websters dictionary, the Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913), and the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition (2003).
    The above links were taken from the website today.
    wordswarm.net dictionary CRUCIFIXION.
    Websters 1828 Dictionary
    Crucifixion CRUCIFIXION, n. [See Crucifix.] The nailing or fastening of a person to a cross, for the purpose of putting him to death; the act or punishment of putting a criminal to death by nailing him to a cross. crucifixion

    Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)
    Crucifixion \Cru`ci*fix"ion\ (kr?`s?-f?k"sh?n), n. 1. The act of nailing or fastening a person to a cross, for the purpose of putting him to death; the use of the cross as a method of capital punishment. 2. The state of one who is nailed or fastened to a cross; death upon a cross. 3. Intense suffering or affliction; painful trial. Do ye prove What crucifixions are in love? --Herrick. crucifixion

    Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition (2003)
    crucifixion noun Date: 15th century 1. a. capitalized the crucifying of Christ b. the act of crucifying 2. extreme and painful punishment, affliction, or suffering crucifixion
    wordswarm.net dictionary crucify,
    Websters 1828 Dictionary
    Crucify CRUCIFY, v.t. [L., cross, to fix.]
    1. To nail to a cross; to put to death by nailing the hands and feet to a cross or gibbet, sometimes anciently, by fastening a criminal to a tree, with cords.
    But they cried, crucify him, crucify him. Luke 23.
    2. In scriptural language, to subdue; to mortify; to destroy the ***** or ruling influence of.
    They that are Christs have crucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts. Gal 5.
    3. To reject and despise.
    They crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh. Heb 6.
    To be crucified with Christ, is to become dead to the law and to sin, and to have indwelling corruption subdued. Gal 2 and 6.
    4. To vex or torment. [Not used.] crucify

    Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)
    Crucify \Cru"ci*fy\ (-f?), v. t. [imp. & p. p. Crucified (-f?d); p. pr. & vb. n. Crucifying.] [F. crucifier, fr. (assumed) LL. crucificare, for crucifigere, fr, L. crux, crucis, cross + figere to fix, the ending -figere being changed to -ficare, F. -fier (in compounds), as if fr. L. facere to do, make. See Cross, and Fix, and cf. Crucifix.] 1. To fasten to a cross; to put to death by nailing the hands and feet to a cross or gibbet. They cried, saying, Crucify him, cricify him. --Luke xxiii. 21. 2. To destroy the ***** or ruling influence of; to subdue completely; to mortify. They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts. --Gal. v. 24. 3. To vex or torment. --Beau. & FL. crucify

    Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition (2003)
    crucify transitive verb (-fied; -fying) Etymology: Middle English crucifien, from Anglo-French crucifier, from Late Latin crucifigere Date: 14th century 1. to put to death by nailing or binding the wrists or hands and feet to a cross 2. to destroy the p0wer of ; mortify 3. a. to treat cruelly ; torment b. pillory 2 • crucifier noun crucify
    May I suggest a better more current dictionary. It's been at least seven years since Webster's had the word cross in their definition of 'crucifixion' and mentioned Christ in their definition of 'crucify'.

    The really odd thing is that Christ doesn't appear in the 1828 and 1913 Webster's definition for 'crucifixion'. It appears that somewhere between 1913 and 2003 Webster's substituted Christ for cross in the definition of 'crucifixion', but they did point out that it should be capitalized and is therefore a proper noun, as to a singular event.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance
    The dictionary definition, which I referred to, stipulates crucifixion in association with the cross. I notice on WIKI that crucifixion is associated with any form of execution such as pole, tree, or board, not necessarily a cross.
    Let me explain it this way.
    If you were going to build a small shed, would you?
    1.
    Build the frame on the ground, attach all the siding and the roof, and then hoist the whole thing up and set it into the holes you have dug for the frame.
    2.
    Would you put the frame pieces into the holes you dug and then attach the sides and roof.

    Now, apply the same thing to crucifixion. Would you?
    1.
    Dig the hole for the pole, attach the cross member to the pole, then attach the condemned to both and lift the whole thing up and place it in the hole in the ground. And then proceed to shore the pole up.
    2.
    Shore the pole up in the ground (maybe even leave it there for future use), attach the condemned to the cross member, and the hoist just the condemned and cross member up and attach it to the pole.

    Number 2 sure seems a lot more reasonable and efficient in both cases. It would also explain why many accounts describe a cross, some a 'T' shape, and some at odd angles. They didn't get the cross members up all the way or correctly. And if you are in a hurry and have a lot of crucifying to do that afternoon. Well, trees would work just fine. So would wheels off of carts, walls, any number of things. One things for sure, no one was up there with a T-square making sure everything was at the proper angles.

    Again, Wiki-Crucifixion (This is only the fourth time this link has been provided, try reading all of it),
    Details
    Crucifixion was often performed to terrorize onlookers into submission. Victims were left on display after death as warnings. Crucifixion was usually intended to provide a death that was particularly slow, painful (hence the term excruciating, literally "out of crucifying"), gruesome (hence dissuading against the crimes punishable by it), humiliating, and public, using whatever means were most expedient for that goal. Crucifixion methods varied considerably with location and time period.

    The Greek and Latin words corresponding to "crucifixion" applied to many different forms of painful execution, from impaling on a stake to affixing to a tree, to an upright pole (a crux simplex) or to a combination of an upright (in Latin, stipes) and a crossbeam (in Latin, patibulum).

    If a crossbeam was used, the condemned man was forced to carry it on his shoulders, which could have been torn open by flagellation, to the place of execution. A whole cross would weigh well over 300 pounds (135 kilograms), but the crossbeam would weigh only 75–125 pounds (35–60 kilograms). The Roman historian Tacitus records that the city of Rome had a specific place for carrying out executions, situated outside the Esquiline Gate, and had a specific area reserved for the execution of slaves by crucifixion. Upright posts would presumably be fixed permanently in that place, and the crossbeam, with the condemned person perhaps already nailed to it, would then be attached to the post.

    The person executed may have been attached to the cross by rope, though nails are mentioned in a passage by the Judean historian Josephus, where he states that at the Siege of Jerusalem (70), "the soldiers out of rage and hatred, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest." Objects used in the crucifixion of criminals, such as nails, were sought as amulets with perceived medicinal qualities.

    While a crucifixion was an execution, it was also a humiliation, by making the condemned as vulnerable as possible. Although artists have depicted the figure on a cross with a loin cloth or a covering of the genitals, writings by Seneca the Younger suggest that victims were crucified completely nude. When the criminal had to urinate or defecate, they had to do so in the open, in view of passers-by, resulting in discomfort and the attraction of insects. Despite its frequent use by the Romans, the horrors of crucifixion did not escape mention by some of their eminent orators. Cicero for example, in a speech that appears to have been an early bid for its abolition,described crucifixion as "a most cruel and disgusting punishment", and suggested that "the very mention of the cross should be far removed not only from a Roman citizen’s body, but from his mind, his eyes, his ears."

    Frequently, the legs of the person executed were broken or shattered with an iron club, an act called crurifragium which was also frequently applied without crucifixion to slaves. This act hastened the death of the person but was also meant to deter those who observed the crucifixion from committing offenses
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  11. #90
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    [quote]
    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Not at all.
    You just don't seem aware the Crucifixion of Christ should be capitalized for one thing.
    Merriam-Webster dictionary crucifixion, Crucifixion (capital "C") refers to the 'Crucifixion' of Christ (an event), crucifixion (lower case "c") refers to the punishment and other such events. Damn, there's that annoying Kirk Douglas Hollywood movie character again too.

    See britannica.com crucifixion (The publishers of one of your previous sources I believe),See also, Merriam-Webster dictionary crucify,Note that in the Merriam-Webster dictionary the definition of 'crucifixion' does not mention a cross and that the definition of 'crucify' does not mention Christ. And that neither of these words were used until 13-1400 years after Christ. The Encyclopedia Britannica doesn't use the word cross anywhere in it's definition of 'crucifixion' either.

    The following links contain a number (9-10) of different definitions of the two words, including these two from the 1828 Websters dictionary, the Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913), and the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition (2003).
    The above links were taken from the website today.
    wordswarm.net dictionary CRUCIFIXION.wordswarm.net dictionary crucify,May I suggest a better more current dictionary. It's been at least seven years since Webster's had the word cross in their definition of 'crucifixion' and mentioned Christ in their definition of 'crucify'.

    The really odd thing is that Christ doesn't appear in the 1828 and 1913 Webster's definition for 'crucifixion'. It appears that somewhere between 1913 and 2003 Webster's substituted Christ for cross in the definition of 'crucifixion', but they did point out that it should be capitalized and is therefore a proper noun, as to a singular event.

    Let me explain it this way.
    If you were going to build a small shed, would you?
    1.
    Build the frame on the ground, attach all the siding and the roof, and then hoist the whole thing up and set it into the holes you have dug for the frame.
    2.
    Would you put the frame pieces into the holes you dug and then attach the sides and roof.

    Now, apply the same thing to crucifixion. Would you?
    1.
    Dig the hole for the pole, attach the cross member to the pole, then attach the condemned to both and lift the whole thing up and place it in the hole in the ground. And then proceed to shore the pole up.
    2.
    Shore the pole up in the ground (maybe even leave it there for future use), attach the condemned to the cross member, and the hoist just the condemned and cross member up and attach it to the pole.

    Number 2 sure seems a lot more reasonable and efficient in both cases. It would also explain why many accounts describe a cross, some a 'T' shape, and some at odd angles. They didn't get the cross members up all the way or correctly. And if you are in a hurry and have a lot of crucifying to do that afternoon. Well, trees would work just fine. So would wheels off of carts, walls, any number of things. One things for sure, no one was up there with a T-square making sure everything was at the proper angles.

    Again, Wiki-Crucifixion (This is only the fourth time this link has been provided, try reading all of it),
    Thanks for the excellent analysis of crucifixion. It appears that the death of Jesus has defined crucifixion by the cross. However, according to Wiki, because of the various forms of crucifixion (pole, board, or tree), we don't know how Jesus was executed. We only have the gospels.

    Crucifixion by the cross is far more dramatic than by pole or board. If there was any fabrication, crucifixion by the cross would qualify.

  12. #91
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    [quote]
    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    you know, when i first heard your theory i was taken aback since it was so different yet plausible without my being able to actually contradict it!? but over time i have somehow seen it as having no real effect on 'what is', as they say!? can we actually know for ourselves what was!? exactly!? i also realize that we are totally invested in our deepest thoughts/impressions and we need this kind of certainty in our lives given the history of human behavior!?
    so we seek that which gives us certainty of existence/purpose, good or bad!? to be told things we cannot verify and yet are expected to act out can be potentially self defeating!? or at least the thoughts of such unrealistic behavior can somehow become a crisis of mind!? we need an OUT that satisfies our own deepest feelings!? via absorption, rejection, or RE-EVALUATION !? or a combination of all 3!? VIVID dreams can be a p o w e rful and active force in our self/world/reality evaluation!? especially if they are consistently subject specific!? i've heard that some people dont dream at all!? and others would claim anyone who takes dreams seriously is seriously losing it!? humans seem to be stuck in their own little world and live accordingly!? the 1's who are good at it seem happy while those that struggle with it can seem less than human or without respect or consideration!? if you know 1 thing for certain you are IN the respectable race so to speak!? you are a somebody!? of course the more the madding crowd considers your 1 thing of real importance determines your level of accomplishment, the status and ease of your living conditions!?
    how does 1 make up for missing the boat they never knew sailed!? it's not fair somehow!? SHOOT FOR THE MOON NOW!? unleash you imagination or just fade away slowly and perhaps bitterly or solemnly discontented!?.........harold!....yes dear,.......did you take out the trash?......yes dear..........dont make me come and check harold!.......yes dear...........
    As far as I know, you're the only one who has given serious thought to my bizarre ideas. I appreciate that. Your correct, it doesn't change "what is."

    Yes, everyday people seek certainty. In social psychology, it's called cognitive dissonance whereby people seek ideas to resolve ambiguity. For me, however, that has not been a motivator.

    A few years ago, I was a everyday Christian. Then, my dreams happened. After that, I began to research the New Testament. As I did, I had a series of dreams, most of which I've shared. The most significant one was about the gospels. There was a strawberry on a stick next to three other sticks. At the time, I was member of a church called Strawberry Fellowship. A hand came down and fingers touched the strawberry. A voice said "I do not feel myself here." My interpretation was that God doesn't associated with the gospels. Then, when I factored in the fact the Jesus might not be the son of God, it made sense. God doesn't identify with the gospels because Jesus was God and not his son.

    I had a dream that displayed in vivid detail God as a spherical being and within that sphere were two beings, both equal to one another, except both were unique and different. Apparently, angels revel in their differences. That's when I concluded that when Jesus (God) talked about himself and heaven, he revealed his dual nature. Men couldn't accept the concept. After Jesus was murdered, they concluded that he must have been the son of God. Thus, we have father and son instead of God's dual nature.

    After my dream about two Roman soldiers beating Jesus with their fists, I stumbled on Rev. 11. That's where I am now. The consequences of Rev. 11 for Christian are mind boggling. No one in the Christian community will accept the two witnesses as God and Jesus. As a matter of fact, they'll oppose the idea with their dying breath. After all, if it were true, the whole resurrection idea of salvation would be in doubt. I've already confronted a pastor with my theory about the two witnesses. As expected, he said he'd pray for my salvation. According to Christian belief, if you don't believe in the son of God, your doomed.

    I don't believe I'll post any more about my dreams. There are too many attackers out there.
    Last edited by Cnance; 08-25-2010 at 02:11 PM.

  13. #92
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2

    Re: God is Holy and we are not.

    The pope is not holy. He claims to be. But he's not. Wanna know how I know? Because he sits behind 4 inch thick, bullet proof glass when he's riding the popemobile.

    Who has the faith again?

Similar Threads

  1. Holy $hit - Melaleuca is now saying...
    By SuperUltraJulie in forum MLM Scams
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 08-02-2011, 01:44 PM
  2. Holy spider!
    By Lord_jag in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-23-2008, 05:59 PM
  3. Holy Crap!!
    By Passing Gas in forum Mail Order Scams
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-05-2008, 11:06 PM
  4. Holy Excavation
    By jacksaw_hacksaw in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-20-2006, 10:34 AM
  5. The Holy Grail
    By Amitola in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-17-2006, 10:16 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •