Jesus Crucified For Blasphemy Or Treason?

you did not present fact. you just parroted the notion that your own interpretation of circumstances reflects the legal charge for which jesus was crucified.
other than that you've managed to completely dodge the rebuttal and once again have successfully wasted my time.

congratulations again, champ

I presented the word of God.

You presented presumption.


Show me the word of God that says he was not put to death for blasphemy. The bible SAYS He was put to death for blasphemy. You keep quoting the "King of the Jews" line IMPLYING it was offensive to caesar because of the title of King, and not that He was a God man... like Caesar, but with direct lineage.

I have made my case. You see what you want to see.

So I take by your lack of reply you concede. Your bible flat out says he was put to death for blasphemy, and all the interpretation of what the term "King of the Jews" meant to a guy who died a couple thousand years ago does not change what the bible DOES say.

I know your religion better than you.

You are a bad Christian.

you will not waste any more of my time with your artful dodging.
better to be a 'bad christian' than some taunting internet trolltard.
i think jesus would forgive me first. later champ.

Don't get all pissy at me because you want to make up what is clearly written. I asked very clear, inoffensive questions... and made a very clear, inoffensive argument. The closest thing to impolite was to suggest that you see what you want to see instead of what is written.


You are relying on your interpretation of His title to Pilate and Caesar. If you told Caesar that you were the son of the One true God, which implies he is not a God, he would have you... well... crucified. You have been trying to duck the argument since you waged it. You attempted to correct me, then took shots and bowed out... twice now... and you call ME a troll?

Know what you are talking about before you correct someone. At BEST it is left to interpretation, and not worthy of correction... and in reality I am right... and you know it.

blasphmey, treason, same word almost, except one has religious connotations and the other political. the argument is mute and theres no need to preach scripture or get into debate. i am agnostic/Buddhist so i dont believe anything in the bible, its just a work of fiction that has been updated and censored over the years.

took your head out of the urinal what... huh?

It is a discussion about the crucifixion... from a religious perspective... and what lessons could be learned from it. The bible is the ONLY source of truth... in this debate.

If I introduced a book which contradicted what the bible clearly states... do you suppose that would be acceptable? If it is ambiguous sure.

64Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.

It isn't ambiguous.


The irony of Jesus being crucified through religious persecution, and His followers being perpetrators of the Salem witch trials, the inquisition, and countless wars and conquests is not a moot point. Imposing your beliefs on others is obnoxious... especially when they are poorly researched... and most especially delivered at the end of a sword.


That is really the issue... the guys who will shake that bible at you having never read the damned thing. It is the single most popular book ever written, sold more copies than any other book in history...

How many of them do you think get read like any other book?

Not many... they pick and choose the lines their pastor/vicor/priest tells them to look at, and preach on. The ONLY source of what they dedicate their lives to, and put ultimate faith in... unread. They get half way through the begatting of Gen, and start moving to new chapters... then give up.

It isn't ALL their fault. The churches don't typically recommend seeking answers in the book. They like to read pieces and interpret it for you. One day I will dedicate the time to a thread about Paul, and why the church works the way it does. I will absolutely demonstrate the church does not ask you to follow Jesus, they ask you to follow the church. Why the books that were canonized were, and weren't weren't.

We are talking about 80% of this country... 256,000,000 people... walking around, dedicating their lives to a book the overwhelming majority don't read. It is astounding.


Even urinal cakes loose their flavor eventually.

i think harry potter and the sorcerers stone out sold the bible one year

and i belive the original argument was a debate over the words describing the reason for Jesus's crucifixion, blasphemy, or treason, which is not worth arguing. anyone who has payed attention in history class or has read over the thread "religion dose more harm than good" knows that the church(you dont specify which church your talking about, ill assume catholic/christian as christ is the subject matter) is corrupt and has done alot of awful things. they have lost the followers who have opened their eyes and dont want to be told how to live their lives. not to mention pedophile priests and a nazi pope

The original debate was about the reason Jesus was crucified...

original sin right?

That was His reason. The reason He was tortured and put to death was for blasphemy... which is why it is silly to put people to death for blasphemy in His name. Religious persecution is bad mkay.

Christians tend to be a little imposing with their beliefs... as do athiests who are sick of it.

I am neither.

Jesus NEVER existed.

It is incredibly unlikely that Jesus didn't exist. There are texts from all over the world from that time period which mention this miraculous "healer" and mention him by name...

Whether or not he was the son of God, or David Koresh is arguable... but it is pretty clear he existed. Pontius Pilate too...

what... huh? said:

I asked very clear, inoffensive questions... and made a very clear, inoffensive argument. The closest thing to impolite was to suggest that you see what you want to see instead of what is written.

Click to expand...

what... huh? said:

I know your religion better than you.

You are a bad Christian.

Click to expand...

is that hypocrisy or just straight up idiocy?

you're an antagonist who needs to feel right and win on the internet, even if you claim is completely baseless. you have continuously behaved in an insulting manner and deny it. you claim to have refuted evidence yet you simply ignored it.

then the mother of all facepalms, you can't seem to grasp the difference between:

1 political motive for his execution

...AND...

2 pilate's charge. the charge for which roman law was carried out (roman law being represented directly through pilate's decision)

...and then go on to call your interpretation "the word of god". nice.

you did a wonderful job of dodging the factual point that jeruselum did NOT have the right of the sword and thus their own charges meant NOTHING to roman law. if a terrirory did not have the consent of rome to carry out capital trial and punishment, then those trials/punishments were a matter of state law and state protocol.

again, the jews had no right to charge jesus of a capital crime.
blasphemy to judaism was not a capital crime and christ was executed by rome (to keep the peace) under the charge of high treason


so come up with another worthless post to dissuade me. then you can give yourself another pat on the back and victory speech while declaring your intellectual superiority in front of an audience of...4.

what... huh? said:

It is incredibly unlikely that Jesus didn't exist. There are texts from all over the world from that time period which mention this miraculous "healer" and mention him by name...

Whether or not he was the son of God, or David Koresh is arguable... but it is pretty clear he existed. Pontius Pilate too...

Click to expand...

No there isn't.

Cite them.

tnrtinr said:

No there isn't.

Cite them.

Click to expand...

is your google search button broken?

http://www.ntcanon.org/table.shtml

http://www.carm.org/questions/about-bible/manuscript-evidence-superior-new-testament-reliability

http://www.carm.org/questions/about-bible/non-biblical-accounts-new-testament-events-andor-people

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/mq12.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

fish601 said:

is your google search button broken?

http://www.ntcanon.org/table.shtml

http://www.carm.org/questions/about-bible/manuscript-evidence-superior-new-testament-reliability

http://www.carm.org/questions/about-bible/non-biblical-accounts-new-testament-events-andor-people

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/mq12.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Click to expand...

You failed.

You have 4 links about the accuracy of the Bible and a Wiki link. If you type in the "authors" name and put fraud next to it you will see a volume of links that talk about the legitimacy of these texts.

Cite IRREFUTABLE HISTORICAL documents that talk about Jesus as a real person. It is not my job to debunk them. Do a little research to fact check YOUR sources before you try to insult me as to my ability to seek information.

Here is a link that DEBUNKS all of your Josephus quotes.
http://jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html
I find this rather insightful. "[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If Josephus really thought Jesus had been 'the Christ' surely he would have added more about him than one paragraph, a casual aside in someone else's (Pilate's) story?[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] In fact, Josephus relates much more about John the Baptist than about Jesus! He also reports in great detail the antics of other self-proclaimed messiahs, including Judas of Galilee, Theudas the Magician, and the unnamed 'Egyptian Jew' messiah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] It is striking that though Josephus confirms everything the Christians could wish for, he adds nothing that is not in the gospel narratives, nothing that would have been unknown by Christians already."[/FONT]


Try again. This time try not to insult me.

Pics or he didn't exist (to be crucified).

tnrtinr said:

You failed.

You have 4 links about the accuracy of the Bible and a Wiki link. If you type in the "authors" name and put fraud next to it you will see a volume of links that talk about the legitimacy of these texts.

Cite IRREFUTABLE HISTORICAL documents that talk about Jesus as a real person. It is not my job to debunk them. Do a little research to fact check YOUR sources before you try to insult me as to my ability to seek information.

Here is a link that DEBUNKS all of your Josephus quotes.
http://jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html
I find this rather insightful. "[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If Josephus really thought Jesus had been 'the Christ' surely he would have added more about him than one paragraph, a casual aside in someone else's (Pilate's) story?[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In fact, Josephus relates much more about John the Baptist than about Jesus! He also reports in great detail the antics of other self-proclaimed messiahs, including Judas of Galilee, Theudas the Magician, and the unnamed 'Egyptian Jew' messiah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is striking that though Josephus confirms everything the Christians could wish for, he adds nothing that is not in the gospel narratives, nothing that would have been unknown by Christians already."[/FONT]


Try again. This time try not to insult me.

Click to expand...

Try yahoo.com it works pretty good (just incase you didnt know )

tnrtinr said:

You failed.

You have 4 links about the accuracy of the Bible and a Wiki link. If you type in the "authors" name and put fraud next to it you will see a volume of links that talk about the legitimacy of these texts.

Cite IRREFUTABLE HISTORICAL documents that talk about Jesus as a real person. It is not my job to debunk them. Do a little research to fact check YOUR sources before you try to insult me as to my ability to seek information.

Here is a link that DEBUNKS all of your Josephus quotes.
http://jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html
I find this rather insightful. "[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If Josephus really thought Jesus had been 'the Christ' surely he would have added more about him than one paragraph, a casual aside in someone else's (Pilate's) story?[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In fact, Josephus relates much more about John the Baptist than about Jesus! He also reports in great detail the antics of other self-proclaimed messiahs, including Judas of Galilee, Theudas the Magician, and the unnamed 'Egyptian Jew' messiah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is striking that though Josephus confirms everything the Christians could wish for, he adds nothing that is not in the gospel narratives, nothing that would have been unknown by Christians already."[/FONT]


Try again. This time try not to insult me.

Click to expand...

Josephus really thought Jesus had been 'the Christ' surely he would have added more about him than one paragraph.

i think jesus is the christ i havent written much on him does that mean i dont believe?

*they mention Christ*

*Thallus (c. 50-75AD)

*Phlegon (First century)

* Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews, c.93)

* Tacitus (Annals, c.115-120)

* Suetonius (Lives of the Caesars, c. 125)

* Galen (various writings, c.150)

* Celsus (True Discourse, c.170).


* Mara Bar Serapion (pre-200?)

* Talmudic References( written after 300 CE, but some refs probably go back to eyewitnesses)

*Lucian (Second century)

*Numenius (Second cent.)

*Galerius (Second Cent.)


we can almost reconstruct the gospel just from early non-Christian sources





.