BreezeWood
VIP Member
- Oct 26, 2011
- 17,628
- 1,428
- 85
.
or at least an alternative in reality.
their need for the crucifixion was to prove divinity ... not to dissuade their own beliefs.
what consensus are you talking about. the crucifixion by certain accounts and the resurrection were initiated by the prosecutors as a means to prove whether Jesus (according to christianities claim) was the son of divinity and would return to life after death - because there is no record from the prosecution of a return to life the proof is persuasive that Jesus indeed died on the cross satisfying their contemptuous, misguided minds.
it is simply coincidental christianity was able to use that occasion to further their religion, original sin by misconstruing a tragic death and especially egregious when not one of their members was willing to stand by the side of Jesus before his death.
.
It is prevalent that without the concept of The Original Sin there would be no need for crucifixion, salvation or atonement to take place.
or at least an alternative in reality.
their need for the crucifixion was to prove divinity ... not to dissuade their own beliefs.
what consensus are you talking about. the crucifixion by certain accounts and the resurrection were initiated by the prosecutors as a means to prove whether Jesus (according to christianities claim) was the son of divinity and would return to life after death - because there is no record from the prosecution of a return to life the proof is persuasive that Jesus indeed died on the cross satisfying their contemptuous, misguided minds.
it is simply coincidental christianity was able to use that occasion to further their religion, original sin by misconstruing a tragic death and especially egregious when not one of their members was willing to stand by the side of Jesus before his death.
.