(who was Jesus) wasRoman records

Derek Pomery errancy@infidels.org
Tue, 20 Apr 1999 10:37:15 -0400 (EDT) (00924637035, Pine.LNX.3.95.990420102925.8929A-100000@helix.cs.cuc.edu) 


> J.

> >Following is another tidbit that shows something was a little off kilter, it 

> >seems

> >that the good savior died long before the other two. 

> >One might make a prophesy that if resurrected he could not walk away with two

> >broken legs.

> >

> >TEXT

> >19:31 The Jews, therefore, that the bodies might not remain on the cross on 

> >the sabbath, since it was the preparation, (for that sabbath day was a great 

> >one,) asked of Pilate that their legs may be broken, and they taken away.

> >19:32 The soldiers, therefore, came, and of the first indeed they did break 

> >the legs, and of the other who was crucified with him,

> >19:33 and having come to Jesus, when they saw him already having been dead, 

> >they did not break his legs;

> 

> Ed

> 

> Again, you're begging the question of the historicity of the gospels.  Who

> says that they didn't break Jesus' legs?  Only the gospels.  It seems

> obvious that the narrative element you cite was the product of "prophecy

> historicized."  John has invented this element so that he can claim that

> the crucifixion fulfilled the prophecy that no bone of the Messiah would be

> broken.

 
DEREK
The scripture referred to is in Exodus I believe, correct?  Therfore, it
is a bit of a stretch already to connect the rule about not cracking open
the bones of the passover lamb (to get at the marrow?) with the Messiah.
And let's not forget the lamb is to be utterly burned by morning.  I would
have been interested in seeing the explanation for that bit's fulfillment.

And my bible commentary refers me to Zechariah 10 for the side piercing
episode that follows - the connection there I hardly see at all (except
for the fact that both involved the wounding of someone).

The Torah (pentateuch to be precise), then on to the prophets, quite a
jump.