Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

Was a person called Jesus, ever really crucified?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1726-1750 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 00:04:02 BDT
Last edited by the author on 11 May 2012 00:41:54 BDT
richard - "so Blumrich suggested that we were visited by aliens in line with the popular 'god was an alien' trend"

No. Blumrich was sceptical when his son read Von Daniken, but read Daniken, read the Bible, and came up with several new patents, in particular one for an omnidirectional powered wheel.
Patents of Nasa Engineer. Josef F. Blumrich. Patent Title. Omnidirectional Wheel. U.S. Patent Number. 3789947. Date Issued. February 5, 1974
www.spaceshipsofezekiel.com/html/josef-blumrich-patents...
A list of U.S. patents issued to NASA engineer Josef F. Blumrich with links to PDF copies of the patents.

Omnidirectional wheel
Blumrich, J. F. NASA Center for AeroSpace Information
19740205 Feb 5, 1974
The apparatus consists of a wheel having a hub with radially disposed spokes which are provided with a plurality of circumferential rim segments. These rim segments carry, between the spokes, rim elements which are rigid relative to their outer support surfaces, and defined in their outer contour to form a part of the circle forming the wheel diameter. The rim segments have provided for each of the rim elements an independent drive means selectively operable when the element is in ground contact to rotatably drive the rim element in a direction of movement perpendicularly lateral to the normal plane of rotation and movement of the wheel. This affords the wheel omnidirectional movement.

Part of an Amazon customer review:
"I stumbled up the Ezekiel verses independently of this book, and was totally overwhelmed by what sounded like descriptions of plausible modern technology in the bible. I then googled the subject and came up with this book, which I read in one sitting. By the way, I am an accomplished scientist without any tolerance for pseudo-science (astrology, phrenology, etc). It is a fascinating if dry read, by a very accomplished aerospace engineer. It is so very easy to dismiss this out of hand, but don't. Time will tell: a day will come when this book will gain the serious attention that it deserves, since it's implications are astounding.
As for the reader who scoffed at the helicopter descriptions, consider this: the design back-engineered in the book is brilliant, efficient and very creative."

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 00:15:13 BDT
CAS - "Michael- please provide some evidence of this."

You could start by reading the Amazon customer reviews (2 by scientists) and if this catches your curiosity, you could try reading the book!

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 00:20:12 BDT
DB says:
Ah Harry.

Just couldn't do it could you?

You must know that good people and good things have happened because of christianity, but you just don't want to acknowledge them.
Our reason tells us that nothing is completely bad, but sometimes our prejudice overides that.

Ask yourself 'genuinely' why it is that you are afraid to mention anything that would put christianity in a good light.
( I am not asking you to answer this on here, just to do it privately)

How much have you really looked at what Christianity is today? Do you know anything about worldwide work done by christian groups? Are you aware of the community work done every day in just about every parish?
Of course you are.
Ask yourself why you are being led to only look for the bad? And why you don't really want to see the good.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 00:27:23 BDT
Harry - "1. God created the Heavens and the Earth

2. Now the Earth was without form... "

You are interpreting "now" as an adverb of time, but this is not its only grammatical function. It is commonly used as a conjunction, and pretty obviously is here, backed up by the source language for the translation.

The Bible may not be exactly written by the hand of God, but it contains some of the most ancient writings known to man (together with a rather archaic world-view), and is therefore early source material for the study of mankind.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 00:29:31 BDT
Last edited by the author on 11 May 2012 01:35:20 BDT
Ian M. - "At best, this is hearsay reporting of drivel. At worst, it is deliberate misrepresentation. "

Have you read Blumrich? Or even looked at his credentials?
Why not check your facts before you start accusing?

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 00:55:38 BDT
Harry W. - "Christianity is great if not followed properly. "

You mean like NOT OBEYING the commandment "Thou shalt not kill"?

Look at all the tremendous benefits that the world's continual succession of wars has brought to mankind, and the tremendous harm done in this context by all the little acts of charity inspired by Christian love for one's fellow man!!! LOL

Posted on 11 May 2012 01:20:28 BDT
MORE ON THE SHROUD
I just found this at
http://shroudstory.wordpress.com/
by a "sceptic"!

Starting in 2003, new evidence began to appear in secular, peer-reviewed, scientific journals that supported the Shroud of Turin's authenticity. From these journals we learn that the outermost fibers of the cloth are coated with a layer of starch fractions and various saccharides. In places, the coating has turned into a caramel-like substance, thus forming the images. This suggests a chemical reaction took place. We learn, also, of a faint second image of the face on the backside of the cloth. The second face supports the idea of a chemical reaction and adds more proof that the image is not a work of art or a photograph. And in 2005, we learned that the carbon 14 dating was flawed. In fact we learned that the cloth could very well be 2000 years old.
History and the Shroud of Turin

As science moved forward, new historical information was coming to light. Indeed, there is evidence that the cloth, now called the Shroud of Turin, really was a treasure of the early church; not the Pauline communities with which we are so familiar, but the Church in the East. Edessa, in the Fertile Crescent of the upper Mesopotamia, between the Tigris and the Euphrates, was a major city on the Silk Road and undoubtedly one of the earliest Christian communities. If you traveled from Jerusalem to Antioch, you were two thirds of the way to Edessa. Turn left to go to Tarsus, turn right for Edessa. There is some evidence and a strong tradition that Thomas and Thaddeus Jude (Thaddeus of the 70, Thaddeus of Edessa) went to Edessa as early as 33 CE. There is a legend that they carried with them a cloth bearing an image of Jesus. In 544 CE, a cloth, with an image believed to be Jesus, was found above one of Edessa's gates in the walls of the city, a cloth that Gregory Referendarius of Constantinople would later describe with a full length image and bloodstains. There is strong evidence that the Edessa cloth is in fact the Shroud of Turin. Numerous writings, drawings, icons, pollen spores and limestone dust attest to this.

How curious these poetic words from the apocryphal Thomasine literature of Edessa seem. They are from the "Hymn of the Pearl," a poem arguably as old as the first half of the first century. As a figure of speech, Jesus, in the poem, is musing in the first person:

But all in the moment I faced it / This robe seemed to me like a mirror,
And in it I saw my whole self / Moreover I faced myself facing into it.
For we were two together divided / Yet in one we stood in one likeness.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 01:30:59 BDT
Sam H. - ["(sin)" No such thing. Sin is just a religious concept. "need of forgiveness" No such need.]

If sin, or wrongdoing, is meaningless and just a religious concept, can you please explain to me why the concepts of guilt and forgiveness (at-onement) are so central to the infant sciences of psychology and psychiatry.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 02:25:04 BDT
Harry W - "semi-literate dessert dwelling tribes"

Says it all!!!

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 05:59:36 BDT
Which verses from Ezekiel are being referred to?

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 06:00:48 BDT
Sin isn't the same as wrongdoing. Sin is just disobeying Gods commands, which is meaningless.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 07:56:00 BDT
richard says:
well the bottom line is that i would consider it more likely that we have been visited by Aliens than by god. i did take a quick google and came up with;

Ronald Story in his book Guardians of the Universe? (1980)[13] stated "Blumrich doctors up his Biblical quotes just a smidgen to make them conform a little better to his spaceship interpretation", and "The Spaceships of Ezekiel, in all honesty, can only be described as an extreme form of rationalisation, with a good supply of technical jargon, charts, and diagrams, carefully designed to impress the general reader. The book does contain a good collection of impressive drawings which prove nothing more than that whoever prepared them is a good draughtsman." END QUOTE

AND,

Being a Catholic not knowledgeable about the Bible and whose native language was German, the Bible Blumrich had available was a German-language Catholic translation. Unfortunately, it was not an established translation respected by scholars for its accuracy-instead, it was a very recent translation that often only approximated the actual wording of the original languages. Blumrich read two significant mistranslations, accepted them as accurate, and ignored all subsequent indications that the first text he examined was wrong. END QUOTE.

as i said, i would find Alien visitation more likely than god but i think Alien visitation very unlikely.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 08:05:52 BDT
Sam H. - "Sin isn't the same as wrongdoing. Sin is just disobeying Gods commands, which is meaningless."

I see no difference between the two, and they are used somewhat interchangeably in the Bible
But you have sidestepped my question.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 08:38:11 BDT
That you see no difference between sin and wrongdoing is a fault of your thinking.

Guilt and forgiveness (terms used without religious implications) are real and so can be part of psychology and psychiatry. Forgiveness in the religious sense is meaningless as there's no God.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 09:00:38 BDT
Sam H. - "That you see no difference between sin and wrongdoing is a fault of your thinking."

Then there is no such thing as "sinning in the eyes of man"? Always had the impression these atheists were a lawless bunch of anarchists! :-)

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 09:10:21 BDT
Last edited by the author on 11 May 2012 09:19:59 BDT
Christianity of today; whatever you mean by that, is not the same as Jesus promoted.

Please read the bible. There are currently over 4000 sects of Christianity, so which one is the true one? Most would argue that Roman paganism is the correct way. But I sincerely doubt it.

Also, if there were a few good Nazi's who helped the Jews (which there were) should we allow Nazism to prevail?

Think about it.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 09:11:17 BDT
Last edited by the author on 11 May 2012 09:20:16 BDT
No the bits about treating women as they are inferior for a start.

St. Paul said it was better to shave the head of a woman than to allow her hair to be seen.

That's just one example. Want me to list more?

The slavery, the genocide, the multiple wives, the racism etc

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 09:27:14 BDT
There is such a thing as wrongdoing. I just wouldn't use the word sin.
I can only think that you're deliberately misunderstanding this.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 09:53:20 BDT
Oh and by the way.

The original Hebrew of the commandment is thou shalt not "murder".

You are allowed to kill for God, and for justice. Which according to the bible, is not the same.

King David, by the end of his life had a death count nearing half a million.

So please, pull the other one.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 10:40:56 BDT
"You are allowed to kill for God, and for justice. Which according to the bible, is not the same."

Indeed. Killing for imaginary gods is about as unjust as it gets.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 15:55:02 BDT
C. A. Small says:
Hi Ian- I did ask for evidence of this statement but so far -nothing.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 15:56:56 BDT
C. A. Small says:
Michael- you have clearly comprehended nothing. I am not searching for some spiritual drivel. I am content with the real world, as I suspect the rest of the atheists on here are. I loathe religion and the mystical new age nonsense that parallels it.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 15:59:20 BDT
C. A. Small says:
Michael- please give us the references from the bible, to see if it has any real relevence.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 16:06:13 BDT
C. A. Small says:
Or a good engineer realised he could make a shed load of bucks by writing nonsense. Look at the Da Vinci code.

Integrity balanced against a yacht in the Bahamas- maybe I might write my own book. Make it sound plausible, reference a few obscure and meaningless biblical verses and hey presto- retiring to somewhere wonderful.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 May 2012 16:07:54 BDT
C. A. Small says:
DB "Our reason tells us that nothing is completely bad, but sometimes our prejudice overides that."

And my brand new irony meter, complete with shock absorbers, surge protection capacitors, fuses, and an earthing rod has blown up!
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  85
Total posts:  3232
Initial post:  8 Mar 2012
Latest post:  27 Nov 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions