Dateline Hit Piece on NOW - 'How did Jesus really die?'

Dateline ^ | 2/20/04 | Dateline NBC

[jstolzen]

Great point. The "experts" on the Dateline special lacked all credibility with me, because they rendered OPINION and never gave hard, solid cross-reference evidence.

Like the point about Caesar. (He "wasn't this way"). How in the heck do they know this? They won't take the Bible's word. I'm sure they must have SOME other cross-reference, but this was never stated.

It came across more as slanted opinion, presented to fulfill an agenda of discrediting the Bible, Jesus very existence, and anything else that they wanted to attack.

[Cvengr]

My apologies, I meant Passover, not Pentecost.

[h.a. cherev]

Perhaps you are unaware that you apologized for the wrong thing. Passover or Pentacost, Jews do not have a

"tradition of dousing the door lintels with blood to protect them from Judgment ever since Egypt"

Where do you get this stuff? Do you know any Jews who do this?

[Buggman]

I appreciate your answers. I do suggest that you read Mauck's work, as I don't have the time right now to make his case for him, and it's a fascinating study.

But I'm still confused by why you assume that Acts has a "tail" that was lost, since you don't supply any historical reasons that I can investigate.

[Chris Talk]

For the very reason you yourself state. The Acts is really basically a biography of Paul. It drops him in 60 or 61 somewhere. Totally in midstream. It does not even tell us of the dismissal of his charges, or whether he ever got to Spain. For that we must turn to tradition.

Luke lived until c87-90, probably the latter year. There is no way he would have left this story hang IMHO. He was not in need financially, and he lived in Antioch where many sources and helps would be available from the Christian center there.

If you wish to call it a tail of Acts, and I want to call it a lost third volume, which actually there IS a tradition of, BTW... fine. Or switch them, YOU can call it a third volume, and I will call it a tail. One reason for seeing it in the latter light, is my own view that all 3 volumes date to the 85/95 era. If we go with alternative earlier dates, it becomes still less explicable as to why the book was never written. The hypothesis that it WAS written, and lost, becomes more tenable than the null hypothesis.

With that let us let that matter go, QED.

[middie]

I know less than nothing about religion or the Gospels. I know what I don't know and avoid commenting on those things. Hanging my abject ignorance out on a public site is not something I would engage in.

[NittanyLion]

Fair enough - your honestly is refreshing. LOL. I'm a bigtime novice compared to many folks on this site as well, but I found the theory plausible...

[joebuck]

"If you believe that the death of Christ was for the purpose of atonement for mankind (if not, you are hardly a Christian) then YOU MUST believe that whatever group (be they Jewish; Roman; or just one, two, a handful, or a mob of unidentifiable people) that was "responsible" for the act of crucifixion, was serving G-d's purpose.'

And perhaps this is why Jesus forgave them as one of his last acts, because "they know not what they do."

Whoever was responsible for the killing of Jesus, if my Savior saw fit to forgive them I can do no less.

[Cvengr]

"Where do you get this stuff?"

Ex 12:21-27 provides sufficient background on the tradition.

[7thson]

I think the movie is aimed at those Christians who have a shallow belief. They believe in Jesus but have no conception of what He actually went through for us. They think that just being polite and nice will get them in Heaven. I think this movie will shock millions of people out of their stupor.

[h.a. cherev]

If you think that we mark the doorposts of our houses with blood, you're sadly mistaken.