BBC Documentry on Jesus's death

Did anyone watch it?

DID JESUS DIE?
*Sunday 24 August 2003 10.20pm-11.20pm; rpt 1.40am-2.40am *

This film investigates the variety of stories surrounding the New Testament account of the crucifixion, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, by interviewing historians, theologians and historical researchers. This exploration of the latest theories about what really happened to Jesus 2000 years ago uncovers some surprising possibilities.

At the heart of the mystery is the suspicion that Jesus might not actually have died on the cross. The film concludes that it was perfectly possible to survive crucifixion in the 1st Century - there are records of people who did. But if Jesus survived, what happened to him afterwards?

One of the most remarkable stories concerns the charismatic preacher Jus Asaf (Leader of the Healed) who arrived in Kashmir in around 30 AD. Just before he died at the age of 80, Jus Asaf claimed that he was in fact Jesus Christ and the programme shows his tomb, next to which are his carved footprints which bear the scars of crucifixion.

p.s: Before you start discussing Ahmadiyya beliefs right and left, let me make it clear that it’s about the documentary. If you watched it, please do give some feedback … I am planning to buy this one!

Very interesting, too bad I missed it. someone once posted a link here before of a website, all aobut Jus Asaf, it was interesting, but I still don't believe it personally.

There aremany other theories with 'prooves' as well, that he was in the US for example.

now if the whole world puts together a documentary on how and where Jesus died, we muslims r in no position to believe them....

Allah says in the Quran (in countless places) that this book (i.e. Quran) is free of doubts (regarding the accuracy of its contents) and when Quran says that Jesus was not killed, but raised above, we have to believe it....

Jesus survived the crucification (as the Quran says) but he did not wander about in the earth after that (also as the Quran says)....

so as a muslim be happy with that....

[QUOTE]
Jesus survived the crucification (as the Quran says) but he did not wander about in the earth after that (also as the Quran says)....
[/QUOTE]

Yes Quran does mention Jesus wandering about the earth.

23: 51. And WE made the son of Mary and his mother a Sign, and gave them shelter on an elevated land of green valleys and springs of running water.

the islamic belief is as following...

** Allah Ta'ala says in the noble Qur'aan, "And they did not kill him (Eesa - Alayhis salaam), neither did they place him on the cross but rather they were put into a doubt.'

It is clear from the above that Eesa (Alayhis salaam) was never crucified. The man that was crucified instead was from among the enemies of Esa (A.S) Was salaam....... **

So now Koran is the authoritative source of info about Jesus Christ also?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by TomSawyer: *
So now Koran is the authoritative source of info about Jesus Christ also?
[/QUOTE]

You sound skeptical...

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by TomSawyer: *
So now Koran is the authoritative source of info about Jesus Christ also?
[/QUOTE]

For some Muslims, it is. Just as the Bible is considered the authoritative source of info for some Christians.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by TomSawyer: *
So now Koran is the authoritative source of info about Jesus Christ also?
[/QUOTE]

It's the full works...

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Destino: *

Yes Quran does mention Jesus wandering about the earth.

23: 51. And WE made the son of Mary and his mother a Sign, and gave them shelter on an elevated land of green valleys and springs of running water.
[/QUOTE]

and Jesus was with Mary during this time????

on a much deeper study u will discover that this verse points to the time when Mary ran away from her town on to the mountain when she was pregnanat....
and she gave birth to Jesus on the elevated lands and was provided with food there....

it is not after the crucification thing....

let uz chat

the islamic belief is as following...

Allah Ta'ala says in the noble Qur'aan, "And they did not kill him (Eesa - Alayhis salaam), neither did they place him on the cross but rather they were put into a doubt.'

It is clear from the above that Eesa (Alayhis salaam) was never crucified. The man that was crucified instead was from among the enemies of Esa (A.S) Was salaam.......

=====================================

so how com Ahmadies believe tht Hazrat Isa AS is dead (NAuzobillah) dont they believe in quran aswell

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by armughal: *
Allah says in the Quran (in countless places) that this book (i.e. Quran) is free of doubts (regarding the accuracy of its contents) and when Quran says that Jesus was not killed, **but raised above
*
[/QUOTE]

tell me where in Holy Quran come Jesus was raised ABOVE! very intresting facts are coming out now after 1400 years :).

Apart from the first reply by sadya, I don't see any of the comments having any relevance to the documentary.

Anyway, here is an interesting interview with the director of the documentry. Some notable points in bold.

[Source]](http://www.bbc.co.uk/print/bbcfour/documentaries/features/did-jesus-die-interview.shtml)
RICHARD DENTON
Friday 11 July 2003

BBC Four: Your central question is did Jesus die on the cross rather than did Jesus die at all.
Richard Denton: It is really. I originally wanted to call it The Body of Christ because that seems to me to be the crucial question. Obviously he died at some point, but when and how is the question.

BBC Four: How do you think he might have survived crucifixion?
RD: Crucifixion took up to three days; the maximum he was on the cross for was nine hours, it might even have been six. And even if you read the gospels Pontius Pilate is clearly surprised that he’s already dead and wants to be reassured by the centurion that he really is dead. My personal take on it would be that he goes into a shock induced coma, and probably they thought he was dead.

BBC Four: If he did survive why do you think it’s not related in that way in the gospels?
RD: First of all, they would think it was a miraculous resurrection. You don’t have to think of that as a conspiracy theory or a lie, it’s just a mistake. What you then have to do is get him out of the way. The real question doesn’t hang over the resurrection, which I think is explicable. The real question hangs over him ascending into heaven.

**BBC Four: You make the point that the Ascension isn’t actually mentioned in the gospels.
RD: It’s not in any of the original versions of the gospels which is astonishing. It was in the last 16 verses of Mark, which were put in 300 years after and it’s inserted, in a sentence, into some versions of Luke because he was assumed to have written the Acts and it’s mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles. That I think is the lie, the cover story to get him out of the country.

BBC Four: If Jesus was revived in this way where then did he go?
RD: One story is that he gets out and goes to the South of France with Mary Magdalene, there is a certain amount of evidence that she went there. And the other is that he goes to India and there are a number of versions of this. One of which suggests that in fact he had already been to India during the missing years between 12 and 29.**

BBC Four: It was very interesting the parallel between the story of the three kings and the search for a reincarnated Lama…
RD: Absolutely, we explore that and the similarities between the miracles and the teachings of the Buddha and Jesus in the programme. And of course Buddha pre-dates Jesus by about 500 years, so it’s not unreasonable that he may have gone to India, learned Buddhist teaching and brought it back. Then when he returns to India after the crucifixion he carries on the ministry in Kashmir until he dies at the age of 80.

BBC Four: What actually prompted you to start exploring this topic?
RD: I was intrigued because most academic theologians and intelligent churchmen, or a very significant number of them, do not believe that the resurrection is the literal truth. It’s a metaphor to tell us that there is hope. Whilst not saying that it’s a literal truth they don’t actually say it’s a lie, but if you’re saying something’s not literal truth then you are saying it’s a lie. I was shocked that none of the people we interviewed, with the exception of the Cannon of Westminster, believed it was true. Yet if they don’t think it’s true what on earth do they think is the motivation behind writing the story in the Bible?

BBC Four: You say that the resurrection and the literal truth of the Gospel have in the past been the cornerstone of Christianity.
RD: Exactly. And the idea that you can go on preaching this to the ordinary stupid faithful while not believing it yourself seemed to me truly offensive. So what I was looking for was another version of the story that had the possibility of being historically true, that could have been misinterpreted by the people at the time, so that what they said was not a lie, it was the way they understood it.

BBC Four: And in the end have you found that the most credible account?
RD: Yes, I think so. On the other hand I am a person who does not find the idea of rising from the dead and ascending into heaven credible. I’m faced with the choice, do I believe that the gospel writers were cunning liars or do I think they were simple men who misunderstood things and were amazed by this man.

BBC Four: And did these feet in ancient times walk upon England’s mountains green?
RD: I personally don’t think they did walk upon England’s mountains green, I think they walked upon Kashmir’s mountains green. They may have walked in France for all I know.