- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Did Jesus or Simon of Cyrene carry the cross?
Matthew 27:31-32; Mark 15:20-21; Luke 23:26 and John 19:17Simon of Cyrene
(Matthew 27:31-32) – “And after they had mocked Him, they took His robe off and put His garments on Him, and led Him away to crucify Him. 32And as they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross.”
(Mark 15:20-21) – “And after they had mocked Him, they took the purple off Him, and put His garments on Him. And they *led Him out to crucify Him. 21And they pressed into service a passer-by coming from the country, Simon of Cyrene (the father of Alexander and Rufus), to bear His cross.”
(Luke 23:26) – “And when they led Him away, they laid hold of one Simon of Cyrene, coming in from the country, and placed on him the cross to carry behind Jesus.”
Jesus
(John 19:17) – “They took Jesus therefore, and He went out, bearing His own cross, to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha.”The accused carried their own cross to their crucifixion. The accepted view is that Jesus started to carry the cross but couldn’t bear it after a while due to injuries he had sustained earlier. So Simon of Cyrene was drafted to carry the cross the rest of the way.
It is not a contradiction for example if I drove a car and someone else drove the same car. So long as it was not at the exact same time.
Who carried the cross? Jesus was not crucified!
Hi BD,
Please be specific as to what you are trying to say. Are you trying
to imply that Simon of Cyrene was crucified instead of Jesus,
because he carried Jesus’ cross the last part of the way?Ed J
I think he is trying to make out that the scriptures are unreliable. If he believes that Jesus Christ did not die for his sins, then the only conclusion to draw is he is still in sin. He needs to repent and turn to the messiah for the forgiveness of sins. God sent his son into the world to die for our sins. Jesus is the Lamb of God that was slain, but he rose from the dead and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
Hi T8,
As you know BD is a muslim and not a Christian.
In the quran in sura 4.157 it says…quran 4.157 “That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-“
As a muslim BD has a problem, and I will spell it out for you.
1. The quran says it is “a conformation of what went before”.
Meaning that it confirms BOTH the Torah and Gospel, but it does neither!
What it actually does is contradict BOTH of them in some very substantial ways.3. And in it, it says that Christians are suppose to judge by the Gospel,
and if Christians don’t then we are no better than an unbeliever.
The problem is: when we do this we must judge islam false.4. And no-where in ‘the quran’ is “The bible” ever said to be corrupted; period!
5. They believe the bible to be true, because that is what the quran teaches.
But knowing that it contradicts their holy book, islamist’s have concocted the claim
the bible has been corruption. but they fail to claim “when” “Where” or “How” it happened.6. They believe the book of fraud gets to trump whatever the bible says;
and no-one gets to question their false prophet or off with their head…quran 5.101
“Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble.7. So BD cannot say the bible (according to islam) is wrong.
So you see that is why BD is in such a pickle. He keeps trying to
insinuate wrongness to the bible where it contradicts the quran, BUT
he cannot say it is wrong, because the quran says the bible is God’s word.8. Contradictions upon contradictions upon contradictions,
what a by-polar religion – that’s the reason BD is so confused about God.
BD wants to believe the deception. We need to pray that the real God will open his eyesThe scriptures don’t have both carrying the cross ever. John says Jesus CARRIED his cross period and the other 3 Gospels say Simon carried the cross there is no scripture that has this scene of them carrying the cross together or Jesus being too injured to carry it himself ALL OF THAT IS MADE UP, RIGHT?
The scriptures don’t have both carrying the cross ever. John says Jesus CARRIED his cross period and the other 3 Gospels say Simon carried the cross there is no scripture that has this scene of them carrying the cross together or Jesus being too injured to carry it himself ALL OF THAT IS MADE UP, RIGHT?
Hi BD,
WRONG, Luke clearly states Simon carried Jesus’ cross AFTER JESUS.
“And as they led him away, they laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country,
and on him they laid the cross, that he might bear it after Jesus.” (Luke 23:26)Either you believe Scripture or you don’t. If you don’t believe Scripture,
all you have to follow is conjecture; like that presented in the book of fraud.B’shem
YHVHHi BD,
Please be specific as to what you are trying to say. Are you trying
to imply that Simon of Cyrene was crucified instead of Jesus,
because he carried Jesus’ cross the last part of the way?Ed J
Are you suggesting Simon of Cyrene was crucified instead of Jesus? … (<– please answer )
Hi BD,
Please be specific as to what you are trying to say. Are you trying
to imply that Simon of Cyrene was crucified instead of Jesus,
because he carried Jesus’ cross the last part of the way?Are you suggesting Simon of Cyrene was crucified instead of Jesus?
Simon of Cyrene
(Matthew 27:31-32) – “And after they had mocked Him, they took His robe off and put His garments on Him, and led Him away to crucify Him. 32And as they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross.”
(Mark 15:20-21) – “And after they had mocked Him, they took the purple off Him, and put His garments on Him. And they *led Him out to crucify Him. 21And they pressed into service a passer-by coming from the country, Simon of Cyrene (the father of Alexander and Rufus), to bear His cross.”
(Luke 23:26) – “And when they led Him away, they laid hold of one Simon of Cyrene, coming in from the country, and placed on him the cross to carry behind Jesus.”Jesus
(John 19:17) – “They took Jesus therefore, and He went out, bearing His own cross, to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha.”
Bd, believe John. John was not John, but was closest to Jesus, and his testimony is true.
When Adam and Eve “realized their shame” they covered them selves with fig leaves. When God came along he covered them with animal skins. So the official first sacrifice of an animal for sin was done by God himself. Then it become the norm.
Has anyone ever thought why it went from animal to human sacrifice?
The first man, Adam, sinned. The wages of sin was death. That’s when death entered life. Yeshua was the only sinless man, so Yeshua changed death into life, not only for himself but for anyone who believes in him, and practice what He teaches. His death opened a doorway so to speak to set many of the dead free. So, it was a spiritual doorway he opened, and a spiritual battle he fought. The practice of animal sacrifices was really to show that there was no way to cover sin, until a man who was sinless ended that. Thats why God said in Isaiah 1.11, “What are the multitude of your sacrifices to me?”, and in Hosea 6.6, “I desire mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings”, or in Psalms 51, “You don’t delight in sacrifice, or else I would give it. You have no pleasure in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit. A broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise”. The burnt offerings, for example are now prayer. The belief that Jesus was some sort of blood sacrifice is apparently an idea of the west, rather than the eastern church.
“The practice of animal sacrifices was really to show that there was no way to cover sin, until a man who was sinless ended that” But the OT seems to think they did cover sin upon God’s command;and of course it all supported the priests and made them wealthy.
And just how did a sinless man end it? was it not that he became a sacrifice for sin? It’s really not a western idea but a biblical idea.And does not the eastern church practice the Eucharist at every service? The difference is they’re not quite as dogmatic on the specifics as the Roman church and most protestants for that matter.But yes they do believe Christ was a sacrifice for our sin.
“Has anyone ever thought why it went from animal to human sacrifice?” perhaps because a human is actually a greater sacrifice than an animal,especially a firstborn son which the Canaanites,including the Hebrews all practiced to seek the blessings of God.
When Adam and Eve “realized their shame” they covered them selves with fig leaves. When God came along he covered them with animal skins. So the official first sacrifice of an animal for sin was done by God himself. Then it become the norm.
Has anyone ever thought why it went from animal to human sacrifice?
God says two things that prohibit the idea of Jesus dying for the sins of people 1. God hates Human sacrifice God calls it an abomination and 2. God calls shedding the blood of the innocent an abomination
“Has anyone ever thought why it went from animal to human sacrifice?” perhaps because a human is actually a greater sacrifice than an animal,especially a firstborn son which the Canaanites,including the Hebrews all practiced to seek the blessings of God.
It is unlawful to sacrifice a firstborn son they were to all be redeemed
Shedding innocent blood is a terrible thing. But God paid the ultimate price (a terrible price) in order to bring many sons to glory. But your religion teaches that God has no son at all, thus you are not a son as your religion states. If you are a son, then you cannot hold to the views of Mohammed.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
