What The Bible Actually Says About Jesus' Crucifixion And Resurrection? Sunday, August 13, 2017

THE CRUCIFIXION AND RESURRECTION WERE NEVER PROPHESIED IN THE BIBLE'S OLD TESTAMENT

The sections of this article are:

1. Ample Prophesies in the Old Testament about the Messiah getting saved from crucifixion.

(a)  Psalm 91 is not just limited to the foot striking the rock!

(b)  The Crucifixion is Symbolic in the New Testament.

(c)  Indisputable errors and contradictions in the Crucifixion and Resurrection Accounts!

2.  Isaiah 53 and its mistranslations.

(a)  Isaiah 53's symbolic speeches - Detailed analysis on every verse. pulsar.gif (2171 bytes)

(b)  Isaiah 53:12.

3.  The crucifixion would've broken at least one bone and refuted John 19:30-40!

4.  Islam denies the crucifixion and much of the Bible agrees. Jesus was never "disfigured" to a point "beyond human likeness!"

5.  GOD Almighty Changed His Mind a lot throughout the Bible.

6.  The Jews' view on Isaiah 53.

7.  Conclusion. (Must read)

8.  Rebuttals.

(a)  Detailed rebuttal on Isaiah 53.

(b)  Rebuttal from the New Testament.

1.  Ample Prophesies in the Old Testament about the Messiah getting saved from crucifixion:

You would expect that major events such as the crucifixion and the resurrection of Christ, that make up the entire case for Christianity, to be at least prophesied in the Bible's Old Testament clearly, without any ambiguity, and without any deliberate mistranslations and lies.  But the Truth and the sad reality for the believers in the crucifixion, who are too also desperate to prove trinity even though the word itself, "trinity", doesn't even exist in the entire Bible, is that these major events, the crucifixion and the resurrection, were never mentioned in the entire Old Testament.

The following Biblical verses that further refute the crucifixion and resurrection lies:

Being lifted and saved

[Luke 4:10-12]

10 For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect and guard you.

11 And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.’”

12 Jesus responded, “The Scriptures also say, ‘You must not test the Lord your God.’”

[Matthew 4:5-10]

5 Then the devil took him to the holy city, Jerusalem, to the highest point of the Temple,

6 and said, “If you are the Son of God, jump off! For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect you. And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.’”

7 Jesus responded, “The Scriptures also say, ‘You must not test the Lord your God.’”

8 Next the devil took him to the peak of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.

9 “I will give it all to you,” he said, “if you will kneel down and worship me.”

10 “Get out of here, Satan,” Jesus told him. “For the Scriptures say, ‘You must worship the Lord your God and serve only him.’”

Please check: Psalm 91 clearly confirms that Jesus never got crucified.

There are few points to notice in these verses:

1.  Notice how satan referred to Psalm 91 regarding the protection of Jesus.

2.  Notice how Jesus confirmed that Psalm 91 was indeed speaking about him by saying "the Scriptures also say..." (Luke 4:12 and Matthew 4:7).

3.  As we will see in the sections below, Psalm 91 is not just concerned with preventing Christ or the Messiah from striking his feet against the ground.  This is the least point the chapter is concerned with.  The chapter concentrated heavily on:

(see the following sub-section's points)

Psalm 91 is not just limited to the foot striking the rock!

The following table contains all of Psalm 91 and detailed analysis about its key verses.  Notice how the New Testament in Luke 4:10-11 and Matthew 4:5-6 and in many other places completely misquoted and misunderstood Psalm 91.  Psalm 91 and its verses are not just concerned about Jesus' striking of his feet against a rock (Psalm 91:12).  That is a lie and a clear fabrication! [1] [2]  This piece is very minor in the chapter, because the chapter is more focused on:

• GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
• GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4).
• Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5).
• Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).
• No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion).
• GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13).  Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment.
• Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13).  No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified.
• His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children.  In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children).

[Isaiah 53:12] His life will overpower death 

"Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death.

Important Note:  Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place.  Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE.  Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock.  This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt. 

Here is Psalm 91 that Luke 4:10-11 and Matthew 4:5-6 link to Jesus:

Pay attention to the red text below, especially in Psalm 91:11-12, 15 and the others

[Psalm 91]

1. He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. [a]

2. I will say [b] of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust."

3. Surely he will save you from the fowler's snare and from the deadly pestilence.

4. He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

5. You will not fear the terror of night, nor the arrow that flies by day,

6. nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness, nor the plague that destroys at midday.

7. A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it will not come near you.

8. You will only observe with your eyes and see the punishment of the wicked.

(According to the Noble Quran and the original writings of the Disciples of Jesus, Jesus was not crucified, and he watched the crucifixion of the doomed person.

Also, according to the Apocalypse of Peter that was discovered in Egypt, Jesus sat on the tree and watched the crucified one getting crucified.  Peter witnessed this and wrote the Apocalypse.  Not only that, but while Christians insist that the book is a Gnostic one, but according to Wikipedia.org, "It is unclear whether this text advocates an adoptionist (Jesus was Divine) or docetist (Jesus' body and crucifixion were an illusion) christology". So there is no proof that the book is Gnostic.

9. If you make the Most High your dwelling— even the LORD, who is my refuge-

10. then no harm will befall you, no disaster will come near your tent.

11. For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways;

12. they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.

If Jesus died on the cross and got buried, then his feet would've struck the ground and the stones on it from bringing him down, throwing him on the floor and burying him.

13. You will tread upon the lion and the cobra; you will trample the great lion and the serpent.

14. "Because he loves me," says the LORD, "I will rescue him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.

15. He will call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honor him.

16 With long life will I satisfy him and show him my salvation."

Footnotes:

Psalm 91:1 Hebrew Shaddai

Psalm 91:2 Or He says

There is no question!

There is no question that the emphasized parts above, especially in Psalm 91:11-12, 15 and others, clearly and indisputably agree with the Noble Quran and Isaiah 52:13!  Jesus was neither crucified nor resurrected, and he was protected and lifted by GOD Almighty.  Also, the New Testament, again, confirms that Psalm 91 is referring to Jesus Christ.

• GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
• GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4).
• Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5).
• Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).
• No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion).
• GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13).  Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment.
• Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13).  No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified.
• His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children.  In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children).

His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12).

"Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death.

Important Note:  Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place.  Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE.  Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock.  This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt.

Lifting up those who bow down:

[Psalm 145:14]

The LORD upholds all those who fall and lifts up all who are bowed down.

[Psalm 146:8]

the LORD gives sight to the blind, the LORD lifts up those who are bowed down, the LORD loves the righteous.

[Isaiah 52:13]

13 See, my servant will act wisely; he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.

Please check: Jesus bowed down to GOD Almighty begging Him to save him from the crucifixion.

GOD Almighty Saving His annointed King and saving those who take refuge in Him:

[Psalm 20:6]

6  Now I know that the Lord saves his anointed king. He answers him from his holy heaven. The power of God's right hand saves the king.

[Psalm 17:7]

Show the wonder of your great love, you who save by your right hand those who take refuge in you from their foes.

[Psalm 18:3]

I call to the LORD, who is worthy of praise, and I am saved from my enemies.

[Psalm 9:13]

O LORD, see how my enemies persecute me! Have mercy and lift me up from the gates of death,

[Psalm 30:1]

[A psalm. A song. For the dedication of the temple. Of David.] I will exalt you, O LORD, for you lifted me out of the depths and did not let my enemies gloat over me.

Note:  The Psalms of David, while they are narrated by him, but they do contain many prophecies about the coming of Jesus Christ or the Messiah.  The New Testament had made many references to many of the Psalms verses and linked them to Jesus Christ.

It is also interesting to know that King David was never killed by his enemies.  Therefore, the speech in Psalm 9:13 and Psalm 30:1 refer to a live man and not a man who died.  Notice how David said:

1.  "I will exalt you, O LORD, for you lifted me out of the depths and did not let my enemies gloat over me."

2.  "Have mercy and lift me up from the gates of death".

The two quotes indicate that David cried out to GOD Almighty for help, and GOD Almighty lifted him from the enemies' defeat and death.  In other words, David was victorious and was never killed or put to death by them.  Remember that King David was never killed by his enemies.  He was lifted up by GOD Almighty and was made victorious over them.

Therefore, it is also safe to say that GOD Almighty's Commands about "saving" and " sending down the Angels to lift up" Christ from his enemies, in Psalm 91 and the rest of the Psalm verses above, also undoubtebly prove that Jesus Christ indeed never got crucified and was indeed saved from crucifixion and death.

For more on this please check:

Psalm 91 clearly states that Jesus Christ will never get crucified.

Psalm 116, 117 and 118 indesputably prove that Jesus Christ never got crucified.

Jesus in Hebrews 5:7-8 cried out to GOD Almighty to be saved and "he was heard".

[Source: Answering Christianity]

WHO IS THE SUFFERING SERVANT OF ISAIAH 53? Tuesday, September 29, 2015

Isaiah 53 – A Jewish Perspective

Wasn’t the Prophet, in fact, referring to Jesus in this chapter? And didn’t all Jews before the Middle Ages recognize this chapter as “messianic“? We hope to assist you in interpreting a chapter which has become a cornerstone of Christian evangelism to Jews.

Our Jewish sages teach that “whoever saves a single Jewish soul is considered as if he had saved an entire world.” How precious is the Jewish soul! Though the Bible study which follows is a lengthy one, we have prepared it in the belief that – as a Jewish soul – you are worthy of any method which may be required. We hope that you too will value your soul highly enough to prayerfully ponder that which follows. God’s truth is not always easy to discern, but we are possessors of a Divine promise; “you will find Him if you search after Him with all your heart and all your soul” (Deut. 4:29). As faithful Jews have attested for over 3500 years, it’s worth the effort. And now – on with the search!

A. PRELIMINARY ISSUES

Before engaging in an examination of Isaiah 53 itself, some preliminary issues must be considered. First is the issue of circular reasoning. Even if we interpret the chapter as the Christians do (forgetting for a minute the mistranslations and distortions of context which will be noted below), the most that could be said is this: Isaiah 53 is about someone who dies for the sins of others. People may have seen Jesus die, but did anyone see him die as an atonement for the sins of others? Of course not; this is simply the meaning which the New Testament gives to his death. Only if you already accept the New Testament teaching that his death had a non-visible, spiritual significance can you than go back to Isaiah and say, “see – the Prophet predicted what I already believe.” Isaiah 53, then, is in reality no “proof” at all, but rather a contrived confirmation for someone who has already chosen Christianity.

Second (and consistent with all Jewish teaching at the time), Jesus’ own disciples didn’t view Isaiah 53 as a messianic prophecy. For example, after Peter identifies Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 16:16), he is informed that Jesus will be killed (Matt. 16:21). His response: “God forbid it, lord! This shall never happen to you” (Matt. 16:22). See, also, Mk. 9:31-32; Mk. 16:10-11; Jn. 20:9. Even Jesus didn’t see Isaiah 53 as crucial to his messianic claims – why else did he call the Jews children of the devil for not believing in him before the alleged resurrection (Jn. 8:39-47)? And why did he later request that God “remove this cup from me” (Mk. 14:36) – didn’t he know that a “removal of the cup” would violate the gentile understanding of Isaiah 53?

And third, even if we accept the gentile Christian interpretation of Isaiah 53, where is it indicated (either in Isaiah 53 or anywhere else in our Jewish Scriptures) that you must believe in this “Messiah” to get the benefits?

B. CONTEXT

Since any portion of Scripture is only understood properly when viewed in the context of God’s revelation as a whole, some additional study will be helpful before you “tackle” Isaiah 53.

Look at the setting in which Isaiah 53 occurs. Earlier on in Isaiah, God had predicted exile and calamity for the Jewish people. Chapter 53, however, occurs in the midst of Isaiah’s “Messages of Consolation“, which tell of the restoration of Israel to a position of prominence and a vindication of their status as God’s chosen people. In chapter 52, for example, Israel is described as “oppressed without cause” (v.4) and “taken away” (v.5), yet God promises a brighter future ahead, one in which Israel will again prosper and be redeemed in the sight of all the nations (v.1-3, 8-12).

Chapter 54 further elaborates upon the redemption which awaits the nation of Israel. Following immediately after chapter 53’s promise of a reward for God’s servant in return for all of its suffering (53:10-12), chapter 54 describes an unequivocally joyous fate for the Jewish people. Speaking clearly of the Jewish people and their exalted status (even according to all Christian commentaries), chapter 54 ends as follows: “`This is the heritage of the servants of the L-rd and their vindication is from Me,’ declares the L-rd.”

C. ISAIAH 53

In the original Hebrew texts, there are no chapter divisions, and Jew and Christian alike agree that chapter 53 is actually a continuation of the prophecy which begins at 52:13. Accordingly, our analysis must begin at that verse.

52:13 “Behold, My servant will prosper.” Israel in the singular is called God’s servant throughout Isaiah, both explicitly (Isa. 41:8-9; 44:1-2; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3) and implicitly (Isa. 42:19-20; 43:10) – the Messiah is not. Other references to Israel as God’s servant include Jer. 30:10 (note that in Jer. 30:17, the servant Israel is regarded by the nations as an outcast, forsaken by God, as in Isa. 53:4); Jer. 46:27-28; Ps. 136:22; Lk. 1:54. ALSO: Given the Christian view that Jesus is God, is God His own servant?

52:15 – 53:1 “So shall he (the servant) startle many nations, the kings will stand speechless; For that which had not been told them they shall see and that which they had not heard shall they ponder. Who would believe what we have heard?” Quite clearly, the nations and their kings will be amazed at what happens to the “servant of the L-rd,” and they will say “who would believe what we have heard?“. 52:15 tells us explicitly that it is the nations of the world, the gentiles, who are doing the talking in Isaiah 53. See, also, Micah 7:12-17, which speaks of the nations’ astonishment when the Jewish people again blossom in the Messianic age.

53:1 “And to whom has the arm of the L-rd been revealed?” In Isaiah, and throughout our Scriptures, God’s “arm” refers to the physical redemption of the Jewish people from the oppression of other nations (see, e.g., Isa. 52:8-12; Isa. 63:12; Deut. 4:34; Deut. 7:19; Ps. 44:3).

53:3 “Despised and rejected of men.” While this is clearly applicable to Israel (see Isa. 60:15; Ps. 44:13-14), it cannot be reconciled with the New Testament account of Jesus, a man who was supposedly “praised by all” (Lk. 4:14-15) and followed by multitudes (Matt. 4:25), who would later acclaim him as a prophet upon his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Matt. 21:9-11). Even as he was taken to be crucified, a multitude bemoaned his fate (Lk. 23:27). Jesus had to be taken by stealth, as the rulers feared “a riot of the people” (Mk. 14:1-2).

53:3 “A man of pains and acquainted with disease.” Israel’s adversities are frequently likened to sickness – see, e.g., Isa. 1:5-6; Jer. 10:19; Jer 30:12.

53:4 “Surely our diseases he carried and our pains he bore.” In Matt. 8:17, this is correctly translated, and said to be literally (not spiritually) fulfilled in Jesus’ healing of the sick, a reading inconsistent with the Christian mistranslation of 53:4 itself.

53:4 “Yet we ourselves esteemed him stricken, smitten of G- D and afflicted.” See Jer. 30:17 – of God’s servant Israel (30:10), it is said by the nations, “It is Zion; no one cares for her.”

53:5 “But he was wounded from (NOTE: not for) our transgressions, he was crushed from (AGAIN: not for) our iniquities.” Whereas the nations had thought the Servant (Israel) was undergoing Divine retribution for its sins (53:4), they now realize that the Servant’s sufferings stemmed from their actions and sinfulness. This theme is further developed throughout our Jewish Scriptures – see, e.g., Jer. 50:7; Jer. 10:25. ALSO: Note that the Messiah “shall not fail nor be crushed till he has set the right in the earth” (Isa. 42:4).

53:7 “He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth. Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so he did not open his mouth.” Note that in the prior chapter (Isa. 52), Israel is said to have been oppressed and taken away without cause (52:4-5). A similar theme is developed in Psalm 44, wherein King David speaks of Israel’s faithfulness even in the face of gentile oppression (44:17- 18) and describes Israel as “sheep to be slaughtered” in the midst of the unfaithful gentile nations (44:22,11).

Regarding the claim that Jesus “did not open his mouth” when faced with oppression and affliction, see Matt. 27:46, Jn. 18:23, 36-37.

53:8 “From dominion and judgement he was taken away.” Note the correct translation of the Hebrew. The Christians are forced to mistranslate, since – by Jesus’ own testimony – he never had any rights to rulership or judgement, at least not on the “first coming.” See, e.g., Jn. 3:17; Jn. 8:15; Jn. 12:47; Jn. 18:36.

53:8 “He was cut off out of the land of the living.”

53:9 “His grave was assigned with wicked men.” See Ez. 37:11-14, wherein Israelis described as “cut off” and God promises to open its “graves” and bring Israel back into its own land. Other examples of figurative deaths include Ex. 10:17; 2 Sam. 9:8; 2 Sam. 16:9.

53:8 “From my peoples’ sins, there was injury to them.” Here the Prophet makes absolutely clear, to anyone familiar with Biblical Hebrew, that the oppressed Servant is a collective Servant, not a single individual. The Hebrew word “lamoh“, when used in our Scriptures, always means “to them” never “to him” and may be found, for example, in Psalm 99:7 – “They kept his testimonies, and the statute that He gave to them.”

53:9 “And with the rich in his deaths.” Perhaps King James should have changed the original Hebrew, which again makes clear that we are dealing with a collective Servant, i.e., Israel, which will “come to life” when the exile ends (Ez. 37:14).

53:9 “He had done no violence.” See Matt. 21:12; Mk. 11:15-16; Lk. 19:45; Lk. 19:27; Matt. 10:34 and Lk. 12:51; then judge for yourself whether this passage is truly consistent with the New Testament account of Jesus.

53:10 “He shall see his seed.” The Hebrew word for “seed“, used in this verse, always refers to physical descendants in our Jewish Scriptures. See, e.g., Gen. 12:7; Gen. 15:13; Gen. 46:6; Ex. 28:43. A different word, generally translated as “sons“, is used to refer to spiritual descendants (see Deut. 14:1, e.g.).

53:10 “He will prolong his days.” Not only did Jesus die young, but how could the days be prolonged of someone who is alleged to be God?

53:11 “With his knowledge the righteous one, my Servant, will cause many to be just.” Note again the correct translation: the Servant will cause many to be just, he will not “justify the many.” The Jewish mission is to serve as a “light to the nations” which will ultimately lead the world to a knowledge of the one true God, this both by example (Deut. 4:5-8; Zech. 8:23) and by instructing the nations in God’s Law (Isa. 2:3-4; Micah 4:2-3).

53:12 “Therefore, I will divide a portion to him with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty.” If Jesus is God, does the idea of reward have any meaning? Is it not rather the Jewish people – who righteously bore the sins of the world and yet remained faithful to God (Ps. 44) – who will be rewarded, and this in the manner described more fully in Isaiah chapters 52 and 54?

[Source: Jews for Judaism]

Tacitus, Did He Use Archives or Was His Works Altered? Tuesday, October 30, 2012

TACITUS AND NERO

Christians lie that Tacitus spoke of Jesus and so Jesus existed. That is just their scraping at the bottom of the barrel in a desperate question for corroboration that Jesus lived.

TACITUS
The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus who died in 117 AD condemned Christianity. In 115 AD he wrote his Annals and declared that Christ – he doesn’t call him Jesus - had been executed under Pontius Pilate, lived in Judaea and created a new system of pernicious superstition. Christians say he plucked this from the Roman legal records and sceptics counter that he was only taking for granted what Christians were saying which would mean he could not be used as proof for the existence of Jesus. Some historians even today take Christian yarns for granted.

Tacitus said, according to some translations of his work, that Christ had the extreme penalty or was executed. There is no reason to believe though some do that extreme penalty means crucifixion. Tacitus did not say that Christ was crucified. He wrote scathingly about the Christians trying to turn his readers against them and if Jesus had been crucified he would have said so for crucifixion was a disgrace and marked the victim as a criminal. It would have repulsed those who had heard of Jesus. The Tacitus Christ is not Jesus Christ.

Tacitus said that the death of Christ was a temporary setback for the Christians for Christianity exploded in Judaea and in Rome as if the Christians existed when Christ died. Everybody had turned against Jesus and there is no evidence that any of the handful who stood by Jesus believed in him at that time. They probably did not and proved it when they did not attend the execution. So it was a case of destruction of Christianity rather than a setback. He said that the superstition was “checked for a moment” when Jesus perished and then exploded again – but killing the ringleader and not the supporters is a strange kind of checking and the gospels say the Romans and Jews never went after the apostles even though it was feared that the people might come out in support of Jesus perhaps as a result of the apostles raising the alarm. Tacitus has to be saying that the whole group that followed Jesus was eliminated as well which makes the apostles and the New Testament authors to be serious liars and impostors. 

Tacitus says the Christian faith was a shameful and evil and dangerous religion during the spread afterwards. If he read that in the records he allegedly had then one wonders how Christians can insist upon the importance and reliability of these records. Why is he is trusted with Jesus who lived decades before and not trusted with his negative history of the Christian Church as a sect full of poison and evil though this history is more recent and the sect was intermingled with his society? Prejudice and wishful thinking are the answers! 

When Tacitus believed the slander – if that is what it was! - about the Christians perhaps he was depending on hearsay for all the information he gave on Christ and Christianity (which Turton admits to believing in his The Truth of Christianity, page 379) or perhaps he never believed that a Jesus existed but just wanted to say he was executed for that was considered to be a one sentence refutation of Christianity in those days as even Paul’s First Corinthians attests. People couldn’t believe that an executed man could be the Son of God. 

Obviously, if Christianity was so bad its supporters would have been killed as soon as they opened their mouths which contradicts the book of Acts which has them preaching with impunity for long enough. Tacitus is hinting that it was a secretive religion for only one that keeps its head low could be slandered like that. This makes sense if the Jews and Romans went to such trouble to get rid of Jesus for they would not have let a new cult get off the ground. Nobody trusts secret cults and their stories that much. The secrecy would suggest that it was not the resurrection that was responsible for the conversion explosion – if there was an explosion at that time which nobody apart from cranks believes now. The secrecy was useful if the Church sought to fabricate evidence for a Jesus of history.

Tacitus says that the superstition rose in Judaea. It did not. Mark says that Jesus lived in Galilee and launched his cult there in a huge way and went to Judea to preach the good news apparently after John had been jailed. Most of Jesus’ activities took place in Galilee (Galilee, Biblical Dictionary and Concordance, New American Bible). Why would Tacitus try to be accurate in relation to Christianity for it was the dirt, imagined and real, his audience wanted not the facts?

Tacitius never mentions Jesus but just Christ. Tacitus refers to Jesus as Christ thinking that Christ was Jesus’ name but it was only his job description (page 51, Jesus the Evidence). Lots of people were called Christ and were executed under Pilate so could there have been a mistake? Tacitus is depending on hearsay and so he cannot be accepted as evidence for Jesus. When he thinks the Christians are depraved and evil it shows that his source for the religion and Christ was or was probably gossip. It was all he had to go by. It was all anybody could go by in those days in relation to Jesus and his sect. If Tacitus had known about Jesus he would have called him the so-called Christ instead of giving him a royal title that implied that Rome had no business running Jesus’ country when he was crucified.

The gospels say poor Pilate was blackmailed by the Jews to kill Jesus. And why did Tacitus not exonerate Pilate being the whitewasher he was for Rome if Pilate was really forced by the Jews? 

And Tacitus calls Christ the founder of the name Christian. Jesus was not. The name started off decades later as a nickname. You don’t say that Jesus was the founder of the name Mormon even though Mormonism is supposed to be true Christianity unless he was there in 1829 when the Mormon Church was established. 

Jesus could not have been the only Christ crucified or at least executed under the maniacal Pilate so Tacitus who is writing for those who don’t know anything about this Christ would have named him if he meant Jesus or if there had been any decent reason to believe in the existence of Jesus. It could well be that Tacitus thought that Christ was somebody other than Jesus and the evidence supports that notion. Somebody who perhaps used the Roman name Chrestus and not Jesus. Perhaps it was somebody who had no name but Christ. This would not be Jesus who took the title Christ late in his ministry according to the gospels.

If you read Tacitus one thing is very strange. He says Nero cruelly persecuted a class of men called Christians and that Christus the founder of their name underwent the extreme penalty under Pilate and the pernicious superstition was stopped but broke out again in Judea and in the capital probably meaning Jerusalem. He then says the Christians were loathed for their hatred of the human race. He never says it is a religious sect but a superstition started by Christ. 

The question is, what superstition does Tacitus have in mind? Some say he meant the resurrection of Jesus. But Tacitus being a pagan would have believed Jesus could have risen from the dead. He could have thought that Jesus was just a wayward god like many of the other wayward gods of Rome. When he says the death of Jesus stopped the superstition for a while only for it to break out again he means the whole corpus of Christian teaching. Tacitus was suggesting that the Christian teaching was religious and full of vice and hatred and in that sense it was superstitious nonsense. Since he condemns the Christians for vices and hatred that is probably the superstition. 

The gospels themselves show us that Christianity is vice and encourage the idea that the more you sin the more you will love God when he forgives you. The claim that true Christians hate the human race is accurate for the Bible sees nothing but sin in the world and you can’t hate the sin and love the sinner for if you hate the sin that is personal and involves the sinner being hated. 

Jesus came to pretend to hate sin but his real purpose was to reward it by paying the price for it in our place so that we could come to him with weak and nearly useless repentance and still get away with it. But the intensity and ferocity of his condemnation of Christian immorality suggests that he had a dangerous and violent sect in mind. This would suggest that the sect was not that of Jesus Christ which wasn’t that bad. It suggests that he had the wrong messianic sect in mind. In other words, maybe there was a sect of violent zealots following some Christ who died under Pilate and by mistake he thought they were the Christian sect.

Tacitus is no help at all in verifying the historical Jesus. All he does is prove that this man’s existence is doubtful.

TACITUS – DID HE USE ARCHIVES OR WAS HIS WORK ALTERED?

Christians say that since Tacitus was senator that he must have had access to the best records and been using them to back up what he said about Christ. They were not very good records when he did not use more of them and to get Christians despised by accusing Jesus of being a rascal. This suggests that the records were either lost or never existed. What would records about Jesus be doing in Rome? They were probably destroyed in Palestine if they existed at all. But we have reason to believe that Tacitus depended on gossip for his data on Christ. We have no reason at all to think he had records.

The Christian hope that the Roman historians like Tacitus had studied the records which the Romans scrupulously kept is a false one. There must have been no Jesus in the records when the Church kept none. And when Christ was the founder of a sect that the Romans hated they would have had records for he was important but only if he had existed.

Christians argue that Tacitus complained of conflicts in his sources for other things and that he condemned absurd statements in them and when he reported a rumour he just said things like, “It is said”. So they think then he would have written “it is said” if he had been recording a rumour about Christ’s death. But why would he? It is said can mean a rumour yes but it can also means something the historical sources say. With history it is just a matter of what is said in records and by people who remember. All history books have a pile of rumour in them too. That’s life. Tacitus could not possibly have said its is said before reporting everything he thought was just a story that could be false.

The Christian story was more than a rumour by that stage and one can understand a historian taking it for granted that a Christ was crucified by Pilate if some books say so no matter how silly the books are for he would take that as a kernel of truth even if he never saw the books but only got good testimony about them. 

It is a fact that Tacitus did make records of events that never happened. He only occasionally referred to something as hearsay when he knew for sure that it was. Like all historians Tacitus would have intended to update his work when new information came to light. If he erred on Jesus perhaps he never got the chance. Tacitus made up a story to smear Livia and Tiberius (Josh McDowell’s Evidence for Jesus: Is it reliable?). And if Tacitus had been wrong about Christ it did not matter for he was only writing about Nero’s treatment of the Christians and their origin in Christ. That was the main point and the others including the existence and crucifixion of Jesus were merely incidental. That was why he might never have checked them out. It was too hard in those days to check out everything so it is most probable that Tacitus was just reported what he heard or thought he heard about Jesus and was not consulting any records. He hated Christians and would have written a bit more had he been using records. 

The standards of the time made allowances for a certain amount of assumption being incorporated into historical discussions and records. They had to. Tacitus might tell us when he thought something was a rumour but that was only when he knew for sure and it was obviously a false report. He would have taken rumours as true when they were good ones. Since he did make up things to incriminate people he might have been willing to say that Jesus was crucified which was as good as incriminating Jesus because the Romans would have thought, “Gee the wretch must have done something awful to deserve that.” Why would Tacitus investigate the existence of Jesus when it was not an issue in his day? No historian investigates everything. Nobody cared but the Christians if Jesus lived.

Tacitus did not like Christians and would have had no interest in the details about their Jesus so he did not go to the records and why would he when he only wrote two or three things about Jesus? You don’t visit the library in the next town looking for the whole life story of John F Kennedy when you just want to write when he was shot and where. Tacitus wrote that Christians were dying for being Christians which Christians use as proof that there was a Jesus but there is no evidence at all that they freely died for Jesus (Josh McDowell’s Evidence for Jesus: Is it reliable?). Moreover, some say that Tacitus’ interest in a man who claimed to be the resurrected Emperor Nero and who had great success in Parthia would have led Tacitus to investigate Jesus (See A Reply to J.P. Holding’s “Shattering” of My Views on Jesus, GA Wells). But this is speculation. Christians are often interested in religion but not in anybody else’s religion so Tacitus being interested in the new Nero does not imply he would have investigated Jesus too. 

Christians are keen on what he wrote about Christ but not so eager to accept his account of a miracle worked by the divine Emperor Vespasian (His. Lib. IV. C.81, Opp. Ed. Paris, 1819, III, p.490).

Tacitus called Pilate the procurator and some believe that this title was too uncommon before the middle of the first century to have been used by a man depending on written records. Wells argued that it shows that Tacitus got his data about Christ from Christian hearsay. He Walked Among Us observed that he called another man procurator and that he even called the Emperor something that was not his proper title (page 51). It says he was only using the layman’s vocabulary for it was for a lay readership. If so then why did he write so little about Jesus? The public would have wanted to know what this Christianity was about and who started it. And to say that using the wrong title for Pilate would mean that it came from hearsay and to say that doing this two or three more times means he wasn’t is simply ludicrous. 

If Tacitus were using records he would have said Jesus instead of just Christ. Some say if he had said Jesus Christ then he would have had to explain how Jesus is related to Christ because the followers of Jesus were called Christians! This is a ridiculous argument.

If Tacitus had been using Christian testimony he would have been most likely to have called him Jesus or Jesus Christ. The records would have to be specific so they would have been more likely to call him not Jesus or Christ but Jesus called Christ. 

Some say that Tacitus would have been likely to use Christ alone for it was common knowledge that a Christ was expected among the Jews and this would incite dislike of Christians. Rubbish. He would have used Jesus Christ in case anybody didn’t know who Christ was if that was his motive. 

TACITUS NOT GOING TO THE RECORDS SHOW THERE WERE NO RECORDS EXTANT IN HIS DAY --- Wells stated that Tacitus just got his info from the Christians and was biased towards accepting it for it gave Christianity a recent origin and the Romans hated new religions. He Walked Among Us rejects this on the basis that he reported about Jesus as a historical fact and not as something he heard (page 50). But history is not just about studying written records but also about oral tradition.

The unprofessional historian depends too much on oral tradition but the professional does not turn his back on it. The professional will use it to fill gaps for a lot of history comes from the need to avoid saying nothing. To say that Tacitus would have said if it was hearsay is simply a lie. Then He Walked Among Us says that Justin and others told their readers to research official documents about Jesus. But what has that got to do with Tacitus for we don’t know if he was meant? Who would recommend him when he only wrote a line or two? And besides Justin recommended an Acts of Pilate that sounds like a forgery. Justin said that the timetable of the Quirinius census which is reported in Luke still existed in his day (Josh McDowell’s Evidence for Jesus: Is it reliable?). Justin even went as far as to tell his readers to consult it.

This calls his Acts of Pilate references into question. Justin was not adverse to inventing back-up when he was stuck. He must have lied too that some of his works were written for the Emperor. We know that Pilate’s Acts or records would not have been sent to Rome for Jesus lived in a land that was under Rome but was largely an independent jurisdiction (ibid). It may be that Justin just took it for granted that the Acts existed and put two and two together and came up with twenty. I find the title of the alleged document to be suspect. Why call it the Acts of Pilate? A legal document would be unlikely to get an appellation like that. Justin could not recommend the gospels instead of the Acts of Pilate because the gospels were still being censored by the Church or perhaps still even being edited at the time.

Some believe that Tacitus could not have used records about Jesus because when Rome turned against Pilate it wanted all trace of Pilate forgotten (Wells Without Water). The references to Pilate in Josephus were probably tolerated for Josephus was very unflattering to him and Josephus’ writing was commissioned by Rome and it would not have tolerated any other for Josephus would have been employed to do away with the need for any other memorial. That would have made Pilate the perfect person for the Jesus mongers to blame for the fictitious crucifixion.

Rome of course might not have destroyed all the records of Pilate in Jerusalem for it did not care what the Jews thought. But the likes of Tacitus and the people in Rome would not have been allowed to mention him and there would have been no records in Rome. This would mean both that there were no records and no Christian gospels were tolerated so any gospels would have been kept secret. And above all that somebody interfered with the text about Jesus in Tacitus because it speaks of Pilate. When they went to the bother of putting in an unnecessary reference to Pilate they probably invented the whole thing. A forger would only put in a reference to Christ and his death if there were a need to fabricate evidence that Jesus lived because he didn’t live at all.

The mention of Jesus is of no worth even if we cannot rule out it having come from records – which we can. It would have to come from the ancient records to be trusted. Historians have sometimes mistaken fictitious characters for real ones. Records were sometimes muddled up and altered in the copying and sometimes entries were made too late. Sometimes it was impossible to tell if a record had the right information in it.

Some believe the data Tacitus gives about Christ was an interpolation because it calls him Christ and seems to say he was executed which is religious dogma. In response to this it is said that stating Jesus’ title and that he existed and was put to death is not religious dogma. Christ was a religious title and to say he was executed when the evidence of Paul indicates that this was revealed through visions means it is a religious dogma. To say it is not is as silly as saying that the existence of Adam and Eve is not a religious dogma. The idea that the Christ material is a statement of dogma cannot be disproved. So its authenticity cannot be proved either. Those who say the Christ material is dogma not history will have to accept that if it is not an interpolation then Tacitus did not access any records for he did not know Christ was a religious title and that the death of Christ was a dogma.

The passage is nearly exactly the same as one in the work of a man called Sulpicius Severus who died in 403 AD. This man was known for his credulity and tall stories. He did not copy from Tacitus because nobody seemed to know of the Tacitus passage in those days. There is no evidence that they knew. It appears then that the copyists copied the passage from Severus’s book into Tacitus. There is no evidence for the authenticity of the Tacitus text on Jesus (The Jesus of History, A Reply to Josh McDowell, Gordon Stein). If it is forged then it is proof that the Christians were manufacturing fabricated evidence for the existence of Jesus. 

The argument that Tacitus used records from Jesus’ day is worthless speculation and not only that it makes no sense. We are not sure that Tacitus mentioned Christ at all. Tacitus is no help when you want secular references to the historical Jesus.

TACITUS AND NERO

It was because Tacitus was discussing how Nero hated Christians and used them as scapegoats, that he seemed to mention Christ and his death under Pilate. We will see that this calls the reliability of the passage and the legitimacy of saying he said Jesus existed into serious question.

Tacitus stated that the Emperor Nero persecuted Christians. There is not a scrap of evidence that Nero did and there should have been tons. Origen the great apologist for Christianity stated in his Contra Celsum (Book 3, Chapter 8) that it was not hard to number the Christian martyrs (The Martyrdoms of Peter and Paul; How Did the Apostles Die?). There is no evidence that Nero started the fire in Rome and blamed the Christians. There were plenty of more suitable sects to choose from as scapegoats (see The Jesus of History, A Reply to Josh McDowell, Gordon Stein). 

There is no evidence that Nero persecuted Christians and there were only a few Christians in Rome at that time – indicating that there was no point in a persecution. This makes the reliability of the passage doubtful. Perhaps it is an interpolation or a lie. I would be happy enough if the passage was unreliable or doubtful for then you can’t use it to prove Jesus. Whether unreliable or an interpolation it still destroys the evidence for the existence of Jesus. 

Skeptic Gordon Stein’s belief that since Christian was not a common term in the first century and that Nero did not care what religions came to Rome is unfairly dismissed as irrelevant by Christians just because it destroys their case. When Tacitus is okay everywhere else except here an interpolation is the most probable implication. It’s the simplest explanation. The pro-authenticity argument is that the record is anti-Christian but it did not do the Christians any harm for it only repeated the gossip that was rife about them anyway. And it would have been too obvious the passage was forged if it was more positive. The way the passage fits the story proves nothing for you can put a new sentence or two in any text so that no awkwardness or anything gives you away.

One thing is certainly true, if Nero did attack Christianity it was for political reasons and not religious ones. The later Christian boast that he hated the Christians he killed because he wanted to destroy their faith just on religious grounds makes no sense for the Empire knew it had to tolerate many widely differing and eccentric cults and there is no evidence that Nero was that bigoted. The early Church liked to turn murdered Christians into martyrs for propaganda purposes. But there is as much difference as day and night as being murdered for your religion and being a martyr.

Nothing like persecution happened to the Christians until the time of Diocletian (The Martyrdoms of Peter and Paul). And Rome tolerated tolerant religions so if Christianity was persecuted it was because it stressed that other religions were all of the Devil and so the martyrs deserve to be regarded as fruitcakes rather than as heroes of God.

WORKS CONSULTED 

• A Concise History of the Catholic Church, Thomas Bokenkotter, Image Books, New York, 1979 
• Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, John W Haley, Whitaker House, Pennsylvania, undated 
• Asking them Questions, Various, Oxford University Press, London, 1936 
• Belief and Make-Believe, GA Wells, Open Court, La Salle, Illinois, 1991 
• Concise Guide to Today’s Religions, Josh McDowell and Don Stewart, Scripture Press, Bucks, 1983 
• Did Jesus Exist? GA Wells, Pemberton, London, 1988 
• Did Jesus Exist? John Redford, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1986 
• Documents of the Christian Church, edited by Henry Bettenson, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1979 
• Early Christian Writings, Maxwell Staniforth Editor, Penguin, London, 1988 
• Encyclopaedia of Heresies and Heretics, Leonard George, Robson Books, London, 1995 
• Encyclopaedia of Unbelief, Volume 1, Ed Gordon Stein, (Ed) Prometheus Books, New York, 1985 
• Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Vol 1, Josh McDowell, Alpha, Scripture Press Foundation, Bucks, 1995 
• Handbook to the Controversy With Rome, Volume 1, Karl Von Hase, The Religious Tract Society, London, 1906 
• He Walked Among Us, Josh McDowell and Bill Wilson, Alpha Cumbria, 2000 
• In Defence of the Faith, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1996 
• Introduction to the New Testament, Roderick A F MacKenzie, SJ, Liturgical Press, Minnesota, 1965 
• Jesus, AN Wilson, Flamingo, London, 1993 
• Jesus and the Goddess, The Secret Teachings of the Original Christians, Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, Thorsons, London, 2001 
• Jesus – God the Son or Son of God? Fred Pearce Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham, undated 
• Jesus – One Hundred Years Before Christ, Professor Alvar Ellegard Century, London, 1999 
• Jesus and the Four Gospels, John Drane, Lion, Herts, 1984 
• Jesus Hypotheses, V Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977 
• Jesus Lived in India by Holger Kersten, Element, Dorset, 1994 
• Jesus, Qumran and the Vatican, Otto Betz and Rainer Riesner, SCM Press Ltd, London, 1994 
• Jesus the Evidence, Ian Wilson, Pan, London, 1985 
• Jesus the Magician, Morton Smith, Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1978 
• Jesus under Fire, Edited by Michael F Wilkins and JP Moreland, Zondervan Publishing House, Michigan, 1995 
• Lectures and Replies, Thomas Carr, Archbishop of Melbourne, Melbourne, 1907 
• Let’s Weigh the Evidence, Barry Burton, Chick Publications, Chino, CA, 1983 
• Miracles in Dispute, Ernst and Marie-Luise Keller, SCM Press Ltd, London, 1969 
• Nag Hammadi Library, Ed James M Robinson HarperCollins New York 1990 
• On the True Doctrine, Celsus, Translated by R Joseph Hoffmann, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1987 
• Putting Away Childish Things, Uta Ranke-Heinemann, HarperCollins, San Francisco, 1994 
• Runaway World, Michael Green, IVP, London, 1974 
• St Paul versus St Peter, A Tale of Two Missions, Michael Goulder, Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky, 1994 
• St Peter and Rome, JBS, Irish Church Missions, Dublin, undated 
• Saint Saul, Donald Harman Akenson, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000 
• The Bible Fact or Fantasy, John Drane, Lion, Oxford, 1989 
• The Bible Unearthed, Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, Touchstone Books, New York, 2002. 
• The Call to Heresy, Robert Van Weyer, Lamp Books, London, 1989 
• The Case For Christ, Lee Strobel, HarperCollins and Zondervan, Michigan, 1998 
• The Case for Jesus the Messiah, John Ankerberg Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1989 
• The Early Church, Henry Chadwick, Pelican, Middlesex, 1967 
• The Encyclopedia of Heresies and Heretics, Leonard George, Robson Books, London, 1995 
• The First Christian, Karen Armstrong, Pan, London, 1983 
• The Gnostic Gospels, Elaine Pagels, Penguin, London, 1990 
• The Gnostic Paul, Elaine Pagels, Fortress Press, Philadelphia, 1975 
• The Historical Evidence for Jesus, G A Wells, Prometheus Books, New York, 1988 
• The History of Christianity, Lion, Herts 1982 
• The History of the Church, Eusebius, Penguin, London, 1989 
• The House of the Messiah, Ahmed Osman, Grafton, London, 1993 
• The Jesus Event and Our Response, Martin R Tripole SJ, Alba House, New York, 1980 
• The Jesus Hoax, Phyllis Graham, Leslie Frewin, London, 1974 
• The Jesus Inquest, Charles Foster, Monarch Books, Oxford, 2006 
• The Jesus Mysteries, Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, Thorsons, London, 1999 
• The MythMaker, St Paul and the Invention of Christianity, Hyam Maccoby, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London, 1986 
• The Reconstruction of Belief, Charles Gore DD, John Murray, London, 1930 
• The Search for the Twelve Apostles, William Steuart McBirnie, Tyndale House, 1997 
• The Secret Gospel Morton Smith Aquarian Press, Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1985 
• The Truth of Christianity, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905 
• The Unauthorised Version, Robin Lane Fox, Penguin, Middlesex, 1992 
• The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus, Raymond E Brown, Paulist Press, New York, 1973 
• Theodore Parker’s Discourses, Theodore Parker, Longmans, Green, Reader and Dyer, London, 1876 
• Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Kittel Gerhard and Friedrich Gerhard, Eerdman’s Publishing Co, Grand Rapids, MI, 1976 
• Those Incredible Christians, Hugh Schonfield, Hutchinson, London, 1968 
• Who Was Jesus? A Conspiracy in Jerusalem, by Kamal Salabi, I.B. Taurus and Co Ltd., London, 1992 
• Who Was Jesus? NT Wright, SPCK, London, 1993 
• Why I Believe Jesus Lived, C G Colly Caldwell, Guardian of Truth, Kentucky 

[Source: christisnotrisen.com]

The Crucifixion And Resurrection Were Never Prophesied In The Bible's Old Testament Tuesday, September 4, 2012

The sections of this article are:

1. Ample Prophesies in the Old Testament about the Messiah getting saved from crucifixion.

(a)  Psalm 91 is not just limited to the foot striking the rock!

(b)  The Crucifixion is Symbolic in the New Testament.

(c)  Indisputable errors and contradictions in the Crucifixion and Resurrection Accounts!

2.  Isaiah 53 and its mistranslations.

(a)  Isaiah 53's symbolic speeches - Detailed analysis on every verse. pulsar.gif (2171 bytes)

(b)  Isaiah 53:12.

3.  The crucifixion would've broken at least one bone and refuted John 19:30-40!

4.  Islam denies the crucifixion and much of the Bible agrees. Jesus was never "disfigured" to a point "beyond human likeness!"

5.  GOD Almighty Changed His Mind a lot throughout the Bible.

6.  The Jews' view on Isaiah 53.

7.  Conclusion. (Must read)

8.  Rebuttals.

(a)  Detailed rebuttal on Isaiah 53.

(b)  Rebuttal from the New Testament.

1.  Ample Prophesies in the Old Testament about the Messiah getting saved from crucifixion:

You would expect that major events such as the crucifixion and the resurrection of Christ, that make up the entire case for Christianity, to be at least prophesied in the Bible's Old Testament clearly, without any ambiguity, and without any deliberate mistranslations and lies.  But the Truth and the sad reality for the believers in the crucifixion, who are too also desperate to prove trinity even though the word itself, "trinity", doesn't even exist in the entire Bible, is that these major events, the crucifixion and the resurrection, were never mentioned in the entire Old Testament.

The following Biblical verses that further refute the crucifixion and resurrection lies:

Being lifted and saved

[Luke 4:10-12]

10 For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect and guard you.

11 And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.’”

12 Jesus responded, “The Scriptures also say, ‘You must not test the Lord your God.’”

[Matthew 4:5-10]

5 Then the devil took him to the holy city, Jerusalem, to the highest point of the Temple,

6 and said, “If you are the Son of God, jump off! For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect you. And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.’”

7 Jesus responded, “The Scriptures also say, ‘You must not test the Lord your God.’”

8 Next the devil took him to the peak of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.

9 “I will give it all to you,” he said, “if you will kneel down and worship me.”

10 “Get out of here, Satan,” Jesus told him. “For the Scriptures say, ‘You must worship the Lord your God and serve only him.’”

Please check: Psalm 91 clearly confirms that Jesus never got crucified.

There are few points to notice in these verses:

1.  Notice how satan referred to Psalm 91 regarding the protection of Jesus.

2.  Notice how Jesus confirmed that Psalm 91 was indeed speaking about him by saying "the Scriptures also say..." (Luke 4:12 and Matthew 4:7).

3.  As we will see in the sections below, Psalm 91 is not just concerned with preventing Christ or the Messiah from striking his feet against the ground.  This is the least point the chapter is concerned with.  The chapter concentrated heavily on:

(see the following sub-section's points)

Psalm 91 is not just limited to the foot striking the rock!

The following table contains all of Psalm 91 and detailed analysis about its key verses.  Notice how the New Testament in Luke 4:10-11 and Matthew 4:5-6 and in many other places completely misquoted and misunderstood Psalm 91.  Psalm 91 and its verses are not just concerned about Jesus' striking of his feet against a rock (Psalm 91:12).  That is a lie and a clear fabrication! [1] [2]  This piece is very minor in the chapter, because the chapter is more focused on:

• GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
• GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4).
• Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5).
• Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).
• No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion).
• GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13).  Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment.
• Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13).  No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified.
• His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children.  In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children).

[Isaiah 53:12] His life will overpower death 

"Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death.

Important Note:  Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place.  Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE.  Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock.  This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt. 

Here is Psalm 91 that Luke 4:10-11 and Matthew 4:5-6 link to Jesus:

Pay attention to the red text below, especially in Psalm 91:11-12, 15 and the others

[Psalm 91]

1. He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. [a]

2. I will say [b] of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust."

3. Surely he will save you from the fowler's snare and from the deadly pestilence.

4. He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

5. You will not fear the terror of night, nor the arrow that flies by day,

6. nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness, nor the plague that destroys at midday.

7. A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it will not come near you.

8. You will only observe with your eyes and see the punishment of the wicked.

(According to the Noble Quran and the original writings of the Disciples of Jesus, Jesus was not crucified, and he watched the crucifixion of the doomed person.

Also, according to the Apocalypse of Peter that was discovered in Egypt, Jesus sat on the tree and watched the crucified one getting crucified. Peter witnessed this and wrote the Apocalypse. Not only that, but while Christians insist that the book is a Gnostic one, but according to Wikipedia.org, "It is unclear whether this text advocates an adoptionist (Jesus was Divine) or docetist (Jesus' body and crucifixion were an illusion) christology". So there is no proof that the book is Gnostic.

9. If you make the Most High your dwelling— even the LORD, who is my refuge-

10. then no harm will befall you, no disaster will come near your tent.

11. For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways;

12. they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.

If Jesus died on the cross and got buried, then his feet would've struck the ground and the stones on it from bringing him down, throwing him on the floor and burying him.

13. You will tread upon the lion and the cobra; you will trample the great lion and the serpent.

14. "Because he loves me," says the LORD, "I will rescue him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.

15. He will call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honor him.

16 With long life will I satisfy him and show him my salvation."

Footnotes:

Psalm 91:1 Hebrew Shaddai

Psalm 91:2 Or He says

There is no question!

There is no question that the emphasized parts above, especially in Psalm 91:11-12, 15 and others, clearly and indisputably agree with the Noble Quran and Isaiah 52:13! Jesus was neither crucified nor resurrected, and he was protected and lifted by GOD Almighty. Also, the New Testament, again, confirms that Psalm 91 is referring to Jesus Christ.

GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).

GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4).

Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5).

Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).

No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion).

GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment.

Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified.

His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children).

His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12).

"Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death.

Important Note: Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt.

Lifting up those who bow down:

[Psalm 145:14]

The LORD upholds all those who fall and lifts up all who are bowed down.

[Psalm 146:8]

the LORD gives sight to the blind, the LORD lifts up those who are bowed down, the LORD loves the righteous.

[Isaiah 52:13]

13 See, my servant will act wisely; he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.

Please check: Jesus bowed down to GOD Almighty begging Him to save him from the crucifixion.

GOD Almighty Saving His annointed King and saving those who take refuge in Him:

[Psalm 20:6]

6  Now I know that the Lord saves his anointed king. He answers him from his holy heaven. The power of God's right hand saves the king.

[Psalm 17:7]

Show the wonder of your great love, you who save by your right hand those who take refuge in you from their foes.

[Psalm 18:3]

I call to the LORD, who is worthy of praise, and I am saved from my enemies.

[Psalm 9:13]

O LORD, see how my enemies persecute me! Have mercy and lift me up from the gates of death,

[Psalm 30:1]

[A psalm. A song. For the dedication of the temple. Of David.] I will exalt you, O LORD, for you lifted me out of the depths and did not let my enemies gloat over me.

Note:  The Psalms of David, while they are narrated by him, but they do contain many prophecies about the coming of Jesus Christ or the Messiah.  The New Testament had made many references to many of the Psalms verses and linked them to Jesus Christ.

It is also interesting to know that King David was never killed by his enemies.  Therefore, the speech in Psalm 9:13 and Psalm 30:1 refer to a live man and not a man who died.  Notice how David said:

1.  "I will exalt you, O LORD, for you lifted me out of the depths and did not let my enemies gloat over me."

2.  "Have mercy and lift me up from the gates of death".

The two quotes indicate that David cried out to GOD Almighty for help, and GOD Almighty lifted him from the enemies' defeat and death.  In other words, David was victorious and was never killed or put to death by them.  Remember that King David was never killed by his enemies.  He was lifted up by GOD Almighty and was made victorious over them.

Therefore, it is also safe to say that GOD Almighty's Commands about "saving" and " sending down the Angels to lift up" Christ from his enemies, in Psalm 91 and the rest of the Psalm verses above, also undoubtebly prove that Jesus Christ indeed never got crucified and was indeed saved from crucifixion and death.

For more on this please check:

Psalm 91 clearly states that Jesus Christ will never get crucified.

Psalm 116, 117 and 118 indesputably prove that Jesus Christ never got crucified.

Jesus in Hebrews 5:7-8 cried out to GOD Almighty to be saved and "he was heard".

[Source: Answering Christianity]