actually jesus was not crucified. for we know that the cross was actually a simlpe T shaped thing. so he was T-ed and not crucified.

also, he got his folowers by his speeches and not by doing miracles. the miracles where the kind of thing like: "yeah i know what you mean blahblah, hangon a sec i wannacure this poor little fella" kind of things...

also, you DO know that jesus had brown skin don´t you?

yeah, i knew the dark skin part, i dont know were your getting your t-shaped cross facts, not that i disagree, but I've never heard about that yet

Yeah, why do people say Jesus 'on the cross', instead of Jesus on the crusifix. He was crucified after all, not crossified. I think a crusifix is infact a t-shaped cross, although I'm not so sure what's derived from what when it comes to names and shapes/uses. ( a t-shape, not a T-shape )

Edit: a cross is an X, a crux is an t, we don't call it a 'Latin cross' for nothing. Our word 'cross' actually comes from a mix between the Latin 'crux' and the Greek 'stau-ros'. (by the way, when it comes to wikipedia on this, they need a clean-up. )
Still, you're right about the claim of the shape of the 'cross' and about this wikipedia seems to state popular beliefs as facts,

Cheers

What are you talking about?

Quote:

---

actually jesus was not crucified. for we know that the cross was actually a simlpe T shaped thing. so he was T-ed and not crucified.

---

There is no evideince one way or the otehr, so there is no way to make a such a statement. The fact is there are no contemporary historical records or accounts about Jesus at all. so there is no evidence any of this happened.

However, Romans did crucify poeple ...the term crucifify, crucifix, etc all derive from the latin word "crux" for "cross". it is the same word, and your etymology is silly.

Supposing Jeusus of Nazarth was a real historical figure and he was executed by the Roman governer of Jerusalem, he may well have been crucified in a manner similar to that recounted in the New Testament. The actual shape of the cross is entirely unknown, as no contempaorary accounts or records document it.

[quote
Either it is meant to be offensive, or you have little to no tact.

quote]

Agreed, even though I am not a religious guy I dont appreciate this thread

If you don't appriciate this thread thats fine.
I still don't regret posting it.
Because if anything that might in any way be someohow not liked by someone somewhere would not be said in fear of not beeing tactful then noone would be able to say anything at all.
It's the same with the Muhammed Carricatures.

I did not appreciate Muhammed Carricatures

I did not think so.

What was your point again?

You can discuss about everything without being offensive

A " caricature " of Jesus or Mohamed is , in my opinion , much more offensive for a Christian or a Muslin than a direct critic to their religion

Probably it was not your intention to be offensive but for sure you showed little tact or no tact at all

Your thread might have been " Did Jesus Christ really exist ? "

As far as I know the existance of Jesus Christ is out of discussion
An other matter is " Did He make miracles or at least something special ?"

The latin writer Plinius the old, gathered extraordinary events from all over the world, India and Cina included, but he never mentioned Jesus Christ even though Palestinia was under Romans' domination at the time