PC Pals Forum
General Discussion => The Buzz => Topic started by: GillE on May 29, 2009, 15:21
-
The Seven Last Words of Our Saviour on the Cross is the intriguing name of a programme being broadcast on BBC 4 tonight. It is not a theological broadcast as such - it is a work by Haydn.
Not my cup of tea, but the title got me thinking about what Christ's last (unreported) seven words on the cross might have been. Forgetting the inconvenient fact that he spoke Hebrew or Yiddish instead of English, how about, "This thing will be the death of me"?
Any other suggestions?
Any suggestions for other unreported comments which never made it past the editor into the bible?
-
"What time is lunch served around here?"
-
I think it was the ancient language of Aramaic that they spoke.
Didn't he call out to one of the disciples, saying, "I can see your house from here". :dunno:
-
seriously with all the pain he had to be feeling
he had to say
O My God what did I do this time
-
"I'm fed up of hanging around here".
-
"Are you sure you're a qualified osteopath?"
-
"Those acupuncture needles are a bit rusty!"
-
I thought it was "Always look on the bright side of life" ;D
-
Eight words, Sandra :devil: .
I'll let you have either "look on the bright side of life" or "Always look on the bright side of..."
;D
-
Not my cup of tea, but the title got me thinking about what Christ's last (unreported) seven words on the cross might have been. Forgetting the inconvenient fact that he spoke Hebrew or Yiddish instead of English, how about, "This thing will be the death of me"?
I thought of that then I re read your original post and counted your suggested phrase Gill, that has 8 words too :)x
I believe that when "Always look on the bright side of life" is translated into aramaic it comes out at 7 words exactly :P
-
Drat - you're right about my eight words :blush: .
Let me amend it to "This will be the death of me" :) .
When I'm feeling particularly irreverent, I sometimes think Christians should reflect on the track, Hanging Around by The Stranglers. After all lots of criminals were executed that day so it's more than likely Jesus literally found himself hanging around by the stranglers. I only wish I could have summed that up succinctly in seven words.
-
Into thy hands I commend my spirit.
-
I dont think they let him drink any alcohol while he was on the cross MB ;D
-
There you are, the last words distilled. ;D
-
They did give him vinegar, soaked into a bullrush so it would reach him. All of which is very interesting because...
"When a man is crucified, his arms are stretched along the horizontal bar of the cross, making breathing difficult. The breath comes in short inhalations and exhalations, since it is difficult and uncomfortable to take a deep breath in such a position. When the vinegar-soaked sponge was put against his face, Jesus, because of the shock of the pungent smell, must have inhaled deeply, which is the natural reaction under such circumstance. But having done so, it would have been very difficult for him to exhale once more. The muscular anatomy of the chest makes this effectively impossible. A painful death from asphyxiation would follow soon after. The last, loud cry of Jesus was probably the sudden, painful inhalation." (Dr Zakaria Erzinclioglu, "Forensics", London 2006).
So Jesus did not die from crucifixion but from asphyxiation. What makes this particularly interesting to Dr Erzinclioglu is that the gospels are religious tracts and were not produced as historical documentation. It made little difference to the authors if Jesus suffered for three days on the cross or died early. Yet the account given in the gospels describes an event which the authors were extremely unlikely to have been able to fabricate because they were laymen and not well enough informed to be able to include such detail. Dr Erzinclioglu sees this as proof that the descriptions of Jesus' death in the gospels were historically accurate.
The gospels also tell us it was normal practise for those being crucified to be pierced in the side with a sword and have their legs broken to precipitate death before the Sabbath started. Yet Jesus' legs were not broken - he was already dead. In fact, when Joseph of Arimathea approached Pontius Pilate for the body "Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. And when he knew it of the centurian, he gave the body to Joseph". (Mark, Ch 15, V 43- 45).
To Dr Erzinclioglu, this account lends credibility to the other testimony of the gospel writers.
-
Maybe he was only playing possum and did a runner after he had a bit of a rest and recovered when he was in that tomb. That would explain why hed buggered off when they went to look for him some time later :)x
-
That'd be a good trick, considering the Roman soldier pierced his side with his sword!
No, the point is that Dr Erzinclioglu is convinced from the documentary evidence that Jesus was dead when he was removed from the cross and that the witnesses who testified in the gospels were reliable. Now, what deceit might have been perpetrated on these reliable witnesses is another matter...
-
That'd be a good trick, considering the Roman soldier pierced his side with his sword!
I've seen conjurors sawing people in half Gill. They always come back to life too. :devil:
-
Who knows what really happened way back then. Hardly anyone could read and write and it was all passed on by word of mouth so was subject to "the chinese whisper effect".
The reliability of witnesses is often very suspect, even these days, if something happens and 10 people witness it then you get 10 different accounts of what happened and 10 different descriptions of who did what to whom.
Back then most people were ignorant, superstitous, illiterate and uneducated. They even believed in a god or gods of one form or another, so they were hardly credible witnesses. ::)
-
As you know, Sandra, I don't have much truck with religion. I'm most certainly not a christian trying to vindicate the gospels. I do, however, find it interesting that a report should appear in the gospels which a renowned modern forensic scientist can accept as being accurate by dint of logic. He is contradicting your opinion about the unreliability of the evidence because he finds the description of Jesus' death believable due to its unnecessary yet surprisingly accurate detail. In Chinese whispers, detail is soon lost.
It's for others to decide the importance of this testimony. Proof of death is a long way from proof of resurrection as far as I'm concerned, but that's my personal evaluation.
-
You cant always trust scientists Gill, look at all the global warming controversy. Some say its man made some say its not.
Most scientists now believe in evolution and that the world is more than 6,000 years old but some deny that the earth is older than the bible claims, believe in creation and think that dinosaurs lived at the same time as man :woot:
The ressurection thing takes some believing, maybe theyd been drinking too much when they thought that one up :)x
-
Interesting reply, Sandra. What you've done is to take a general assumption (scientists are unreliable) and used it to trash a specific point because the specific point casts doubt on the general assumption. That's very tortured logic.
-
Good fun though isnt it, dont you just love religous discussions as you can throw logic out of the window if you believe in god/s and apply it in anyway you wish if you know the real truth ;D
-
;D
But I bet you haven't had your last word on this thread yet ;) .
-
Sandra always has the last word, Gill. ;)
-
I try ;D